forums

The following players should not be on 2015 roster

rok

rok

Great Poster
Joined
Nov 4, 2011
Messages
23,325
C. King
H. Wells
G. Crow
J. O'Donnell
D. Jones

For a team that has scholarship reduction issues there's still too much dead weight.
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
By my count, we're at 81 on the rooster without these five players. I heard Blake James say we're still on probation through 2016 but are we not still dealing with the 9 scholarship reduction? Is Nice Guy Al going to continue letting these teachers pets drag everyone down or will he grow a set and tell them to **** off? What does everyone think?
 
Might want to delete this thread and deny it ever existed. No matter the brain power of our illustrious posters, not sure that any of us should be commenting on which 19, 20, 21 years should or shouldn't be on scholarship. Seems demeaning to the kids and their family. Leave such decisions for the coaches to quietly resolve.
And just stick to ****ing all over the program, the uniform manufacturer, the stadium, the coaches, and presidents and athletic directors past and present.
 
Advertisement
bacane said:
Might want to delete this thread and deny it ever existed. No matter the brain power of our illustrious posters, not sure that any of us should be commenting on which 19, 20, 21 years should or shouldn't be on scholarship. Seems demeaning to the kids and their family. Leave such decisions for the coaches to quietly resolve.
And just stick to ****ing all over the program, the uniform manufacturer, the stadium, the coaches, and presidents and athletic directors past and present.
Click to expand...
:fistbump2:
 
bacane said:
Might want to delete this thread and deny it ever existed. No matter the brain power of our illustrious posters, not sure that any of us should be commenting on which 19, 20, 21 years should or shouldn't be on scholarship. Seems demeaning to the kids and their family. Leave such decisions for the coaches to quietly resolve.
And just stick to ****ing all over the program, the uniform manufacturer, the stadium, the coaches, and presidents and athletic directors past and present.
Click to expand...

No, no I disagree.

Take your skirt off and understand that college football is a business just like any other. If this type of thread hurts your feelings then perhaps you should delete your existence instead of telling others what to do on a college football message board you...you Hurricane Athletic Department apologist man.
 
rokulika said:
bacane said:
Might want to delete this thread and deny it ever existed. No matter the brain power of our illustrious posters, not sure that any of us should be commenting on which 19, 20, 21 years should or shouldn't be on scholarship. Seems demeaning to the kids and their family. Leave such decisions for the coaches to quietly resolve.
And just stick to ****ing all over the program, the uniform manufacturer, the stadium, the coaches, and presidents and athletic directors past and present.
Click to expand...

No, no I disagree.

Take your skirt off and understand that college football is a business just like any other. If this type of thread hurts your feelings then perhaps you should delete your existence instead of telling others what to do on a college football message board you...you Hurricane Athletic Department apologist man.
Click to expand...

It's not their fault they got offered the scholarship and ended up signing it. Blame Golden. They might know they don't belong but it's like being offered a promotion at work and you accept it even though you know you aren't qualified. Are you going to turn down a pay raise? No.
 
rokulika said:
By my count, we're at 81 on the rooster without these five players. I heard Blake James say we're still on probation through 2016 but are we not still dealing with the 9 scholarship reduction? Is Nice Guy Al going to continue letting these teachers pets drag everyone down or will he grow a set and tell them to **** off? What does everyone think?
Click to expand...

rooster.jpeg
 
Advertisement
The problem with offering kids who aren't full grown scholarships is that some don't work out. Gray Crow is the only one who didn't at least have some potential coming out of high school based on measurables.

Five players seems like a pretty small amount of dead weight to me on an 81 man roster. There are a handful of programs across the country that are stacked top to bottom but I would guess that most have at least that many scholarship scout team players. Golden has been fairly proficient at cutting dead weight for a presumed "nice guy." Complaining about these 5 seems like a stretch.

Also, for the 50 thousandth time, regardless of sanctions, our numbers are limited by how many we can bring in as freshman. Getting rid of these upperclassmen would not allow us to sign more than 25 this next year.
 
bacane said:
Might want to delete this thread and deny it ever existed. No matter the brain power of our illustrious posters, not sure that any of us should be commenting on which 19, 20, 21 years should or shouldn't be on scholarship. Seems demeaning to the kids and their family. Leave such decisions for the coaches to quietly resolve.
And just stick to ****ing all over the program, the uniform manufacturer, the stadium, the coaches, and presidents and athletic directors past and present.
Click to expand...

What a great post.
 
umhurricano said:
The problem with offering kids who aren't full grown scholarships is that some don't work out. Gray Crow is the only one who didn't at least have some potential coming out of high school based on measurables.

Five players seems like a pretty small amount of dead weight to me on an 81 man roster. There are a handful of programs across the country that are stacked top to bottom but I would guess that most have at least that many scholarship scout team players. Golden has been fairly proficient at cutting dead weight for a presumed "nice guy." Complaining about these 5 seems like a stretch.

Also, for the 50 thousandth time, regardless of sanctions, our numbers are limited by how many we can bring in as freshman. Getting rid of these upperclassmen would not allow us to sign more than 25 this next year.
Click to expand...

This seems like hyperbole
 
Advertisement
rokulika said:
bacane said:
Might want to delete this thread and deny it ever existed. No matter the brain power of our illustrious posters, not sure that any of us should be commenting on which 19, 20, 21 years should or shouldn't be on scholarship. Seems demeaning to the kids and their family. Leave such decisions for the coaches to quietly resolve.
And just stick to ****ing all over the program, the uniform manufacturer, the stadium, the coaches, and presidents and athletic directors past and present.
Click to expand...

No, no I disagree.

Take your skirt off and understand that college football is a business just like any other. If this type of thread hurts your feelings then perhaps you should delete your existence instead of telling others what to do on a college football message board you...you Hurricane Athletic Department apologist man.
Click to expand...

College football maybe a bussiness but your talking about kids education. THE U is about more than the football program regardless if people wanna hear it. Isnt a public ****hole state school like they have up in Gville and Tally. Rooting for kids who've done nothing wrong, and likely have no future in pro sports to lose there scholorships and education is just dirty. A player might get pushed out every once in awhile but to just go down a roster a pluck the least talented players and say **** off will never ever happen. And if it did that school/admin would deal with repercusions for a long time. Not the kind of publicity or reputation you want.
 
umhurricano said:
The problem with offering kids who aren't full grown scholarships is that some don't work out. Gray Crow is the only one who didn't at least have some potential coming out of high school based on measurables.

Five players seems like a pretty small amount of dead weight to me on an 81 man roster. There are a handful of programs across the country that are stacked top to bottom but I would guess that most have at least that many scholarship scout team players. Golden has been fairly proficient at cutting dead weight for a presumed "nice guy." Complaining about these 5 seems like a stretch.

Also, for the 50 thousandth time, regardless of sanctions, our numbers are limited by how many we can bring in as freshman. Getting rid of these upperclassmen would not allow us to sign more than 25 this next year.
Click to expand...

Would it have any effect on EE's?
 
Every team has a handful of scholarship players that never do more than practice with the team. It happens.
 
Crow? Agreed. Had small college skills. Wells will play a lot this year. Jones will see the field for occasional offensive downs and special teams. King will be in the rotation if someone on the DL goes down. O'Donnell won't see the field.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top