To be honest, I don't see that as an abuse.
by KeoughCharles05 (2019-06-12 12:14:49)
Edited on 2019-06-12 12:17:34

In reply to: You're leaving the door open for abuses, however  posted by Jvan


That is, I don't have a problem with telling that player -- solely on the basis of where he lies on the depth chart -- that he has a choice of remaining at ND on a full scholarship (but not being a member of the football team), or remaining on the football team, but not on scholarship.

The important part of the commitment ND makes is about providing the individual an opportunity to graduate. Having a paid spot on the team is kind of in the noise.

To make the analogy -- I see failing to be involved somewhere on the depth chart as failing to make grades. There may be no character flaw whatsoever, but if someone doesn't pan out athletically, I see no reason why a continued paid spot on the team is important.


You are unfit *
by ACross  (2019-06-13 00:10:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


That seems to be a popular position
by KeoughCharles05  (2019-06-13 13:08:13)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

But I have yet to see anyone explain to me why it is important for the welfare and benefit of the player who committed to ND for that player to continue to play on the football team if he isn't meeting performance standards.

We have performance standards in every other aspect -- on all students to make certain grades, regardless of the amount of effort they put in. On coaches to win enough, regardless of how nice of a person they are, or how great they are at developing character.

Why shouldn't a paid spot on the football team also be subject to performance standards?


Because we're not an NFL team
by Jvan  (2019-06-13 16:56:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

For an otherwise smart guy, you are really embarrassing yourself here.


It's a promise
by ACross  (2019-06-13 14:04:16)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

We don't just promise him tuition, room and board. We promise him a spot on the football team.

There are all sorts of opportunities for chicanery if we don;t have a bright line rule that honors four year commitments to players who choose to play at Notre Dame.

Remember Kelly's "my guys" delineation? Well, that come from his heart. That's how a lot of low rent coaches operate when they come on board. That's why we say players commit to a school, not to a "program" or a coach. Head coaches play favorites. so do assistants. Or they give up on the current year and start playing for next year, to benefit the coach's own interests.

And players can improve year over year. They can grow, things can click, players in front of them can get hurt, kicked out, transfer. Life happens. There's something to be said for sticking things out and perserverance. And there's something to be said for a school for living up to its side of the bargain.


Fully agree with you. Unfortunately, as a matter of NCAA
by 1NDGal  (2019-06-14 18:25:22)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Rule, a scholarship is considered an annual benefit that must be renewed. And 98% of FBS teams treat scholarships that way.

I do not want ND to stoop to that level. I’m not sure, however, that there is unanimity in South Bend on that point. For now it would appear that “medical scholarships” are being appropriately applied.


This is HOF material. Really well said.
by Otter  (2019-06-13 17:35:51)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

We are ND for goodness sakes.


What I see as really ironic here
by tf86  (2019-06-13 22:00:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

Is that ND was the one of the first, if not the first, schools to develop the medical scholarship. The idea was to honor the scholarship commitment to a player who, through no fault of his own, had suffered a career-ending injury, while at the same time not unilaterally disarming ourselves by giving a football scholarship to a player who would never see the field. At the time, most other schools simply yanked the scholarships of players in similar circumstances.

And for that reason, I think the medical scholarships need to continue. Their application, however, should be limited to players who have suffered career-ending injuries, or reasonable facsimiles thereof.


I vehemently disagree with pulling a player's scholarship
by Jvan  (2019-06-12 12:19:23)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

....as a matter of football related performance and absent any health, discipline or academic issues. It's in the noise? Shame on you.


agree. All of these things are lined up against the athlete
by jt  (2019-06-12 17:05:41)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

early signing dates, LOI, not being able to leave if a coach leaves, etc.

It's all to make the school and fans happy.


His premise was not that it would be pulled.
by tdiddy07  (2019-06-12 12:39:42)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

But that it would be transferred to a non-athletic scholarship to fulfill the academic commitment ND made the player. I don't see anything wrong in terms of the school's personal commitment to the player. But it's an obvious bad-faith evasion of NCAA scholarship limitations. And the NCAA should more closely enforce manipulating medical scholarships. Particularly when it is offered to a player who then gets cleared to play elsewhere without much difficulty.


doesn't his way just remove the scholarship limits?
by ram  (2019-06-12 15:49:48)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

and favor the teams with the most money?






It might
by KeoughCharles05  (2019-06-13 13:04:06)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

But that's not a concern about player welfare. That's a concern about abiding by NCAA rules. I don't give a flying fuck about NCAA rules as such. They're arbitrary and meaningless.


Yes, effectively. Which is the bigger concern to me. *
by tdiddy07  (2019-06-12 15:53:45)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


That practice just begs to be abused by coaches *
by Jvan  (2019-06-12 13:45:53)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


Seems easy to draw a thick line between injuries/conditions
by 1NDGal  (2019-06-12 16:32:47)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

that prevent playing FB and coaches’ decisions that the New Kid is better so byeee.

For example, Corey Robinson. He decided he liked his brain after having two (three?) concussions. Medical scholarship, finish your degree, go with God.

A licensed medical professional would have to lie, jeopardizing their entire career, in order to enable a school to abuse that rule. The kid blew his knee or he didn’t. He is at risk of paralysis from one more hit (Danny Spond, we will love you forever) or he isn’t.


I'm not talking about injuries
by Jvan  (2019-06-12 19:36:38)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post

I'm talking about cutting a healthy player from the team because he didn't turn out to be as good as the coaches thought when they recruited him.


I hear you on that. It’s a very Alabama thing to do. *
by 1NDGal  (2019-06-12 21:30:55)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post


News flash *
by ACross  (2019-06-13 00:11:50)     cannot delete  |  Edit  |  Return to Board  |  Ignore Poster   |   Highlight Poster  |   Reply to Post