plenty of not beth's here wrote:
I am not beth but still don't see this situation as any grand travesty.
It's a business decision. She is the CEO of the business.
Sounds like something Sullivan would say/think.
plenty of not beth's here wrote:
I am not beth but still don't see this situation as any grand travesty.
It's a business decision. She is the CEO of the business.
Sounds like something Sullivan would say/think.
Best response yet.
Refussle wrote:
Most of the major BCS programs in NCAA I are a business. They don't care about people, they care about attempting to win. Kids aren't mature enough to understand that. They think its going to be like high school and they get drawn in by the shiny recruiting visit, being paraded out onto the football field before the big game, getting the attention and dinner.
They don't realize what its really like. It's nothing like their show business recruiting visit. Which is one reason why so many great high school runners go to big schools and disappear.
What she did to those kids is crappy. But this is really about kids and parents not understanding the situation at most of the BCS level schools. Choosing the name, instead of what is really important. Complaining now is a bit silly.
Either go deeper in the recruiting process and understand what each school is really like, or live with your choices.
No, I don't think you realize what it is like. Yes, the NCAA is a "business". But as an institution, it's purpose is to serve student-athletes. I feel like that needs to be stressed, to serve student-athletes. Now, whether or not the NCAA functions that way is up for debate. But that is their charter.
You're argument is that parents and athletes should be more diligent and realize that they may be victims of the NCAA corporate mindset. Even if the NCAA was just in behaving this way, which they are not since they aren't serving the student-athlete, how would you suggest parents behave. How can you possibly approach the college decision process, maximize their athletic and educational development, if revoking a scholarship for no reason was "just part of doing business"?
I agree with the person who suggested there has to be more to the story. My understanding of D1 scholarships was that for a scholarship to not be honored, the athlete had to be doing something detrimental to their performance. Also, there is some scholarship graduation rate that most administrations take very seriously. Any pulled scholarship counts against it.
The negative recruiting that will come from this will be epic.
What is odd is that Sullivan was recruiting one of them to Penn State so evidently she can't judge talent/people any better than her predecessor.
tse wrote:
How can you possibly approach the college decision process, maximize their athletic and educational development, if revoking a scholarship for no reason was "just part of doing business"?
.
LOL, you fell out of the naivety tree and hit every branch on the way down!
Coaches are there to win.
There is nothing more to the story.
Four year commitments are coming next year and she didn't want to be on the hook for the price of these 3 for 4 years. Period. That being said, she also doesn't want to have to compete against the same athletes that she cut either, so she waited until after the year began to cut them.
They can't transfer to another SEC school without sitting out next year.
BAS didn't break any rules, but she did everything wrong in this situation.
The other SEC coaches are going to ROAST TENNESSEE ALIVE during the recruiting battles.
There are some mistakes you just don't come back from...
The coach is absolutely within her right to publicly welcome the athletes to campus and then AFTER they are enrolled to drop their scholarships.
She is free to set conditions on where they transfer, as in, she\'s free to promise them a spot & money at Tennessee and then cut them and disallow transfers to other SEC schools.
These are things she is allowed to do.
We, on the other hand, are free to think these actions are low-class, cutthroat, low character, and generally the actions of a lousy human being.
The coach thinks its to her advantage to lock up the gifted athletes and then drop them once they are signed. The coach thinks it\'s a competitive advantage to go back on her word.
My opinion is that she knew that if she didn\'t take them, they\'d go to a competing SEC school, so by taking them after publicly announcing she\'d keep all of her predecessor\'s recruits
http://deadspin.com/tennessee-track-coach-cuts-six-athletes-just-weeks-into-1645583400
so this way, when they do transfer they\'ll go outside of her conference.
It\'s a dirt-bag move. Coaches are free to be dirtbags within the rules, but people will remember this. She\'s free to do what she thinks is best, but always remember other people are free to hold a grudge or to stop respecting someone.
Lets hope the SEC makes an exception in this case and allows the girls to transfer in the conference.
This stuff happens in basketball and football all the time. They just dont go crying on FB and twitter and have their parents call the newspaper.
It doesn't happen in football and basketball before practice even begins!!!
Ok, anyone can say she didn't break any rules or is within her rights as head coach. But what are you basing that on?
I ran for, then was a graduate assistant on, a D1 team. Every time an athlete left, a scholarship was removed or reduced, it had to be compliant with NCAA and school rules. You couldn't just drop scholarships at your discretion. Someone with actual knowledge on the procedure should chime in.
Again, I understand a coach is judged on ability to win. And that winning can come at the cost of an athlete. However, my opinion is that college running and the NCAA still have a fundamental responsibility to educate and support athletes. All the people on here suggesting college athletes are an ends to a mean misunderstand what education and college athletics are meant to be.
Edukatur wrote:
This stuff happens in basketball and football all the time. They just dont go crying on FB and twitter and have their parents call the newspaper.
I don't believe that it does happen in FB and BB all the time. How many times do you see a coach come in and say "wait until we get my guys in here". They are stuck with those recruits and players unless they can have them removed for viable reasons (violation of team rules, etc).
Even at an athletic factory like Texas, Charlie Strong has to implement rules and policies and then enforce them before cutting the guys he wanted to cut last year.
I don't have a dog in this fight, but it is really mind boggling that nobody in that athletic department thought this was a bad idea. The Office of Civil Rights' Title IX folks wold have a field day with this. If 6 track girls occupying approx. 3 scholarships get cut, then the guys should have the same.
Serve student-athletes or serve students? I believe they are still students being served by the university which is their charter. The athlete part is optional and by choice.
I've been in coaching for 15 years and would never treat an athlete like this. Sullivan and the UT AD have completely lost their moral compass, if they ever had one to begin with.
You simply do not treat people like this, particularly when there is an imbalance of power as pronounced as is true of a D1 head coach and a freshman.
If karma is real, Sullivan is going to come back as a horse turd in her next life
Well, technically the scholarships have not been taken away yet, and I am sure they will be filled next year or possibly in the spring if anyone transfers out in December. I suppose they could be at risk for a title ix violation if the girls leave before the spring semester and the scholarships are left unfilled until the fall semester. It depends what UTs overall participation and scholarship numbers are for all men's and women's sports.
Don't know her, but she sounds like a nut job.
Probably a good idea to stay away from that school or start planning to transfer out, if you are already there.
tse wrote:
No, I don't think you realize what it is like. Yes, the NCAA is a "business". But as an institution, it's purpose is to serve student-athletes. I feel like that needs to be stressed, to serve student-athletes. Now, whether or not the NCAA functions that way is up for debate. But that is their charter.
You're argument is that parents and athletes should be more diligent and realize that they may be victims of the NCAA corporate mindset. Even if the NCAA was just in behaving this way, which they are not since they aren't serving the student-athlete, how would you suggest parents behave. How can you possibly approach the college decision process, maximize their athletic and educational development, if revoking a scholarship for no reason was "just part of doing business"?
I agree with the person who suggested there has to be more to the story. My understanding of D1 scholarships was that for a scholarship to not be honored, the athlete had to be doing something detrimental to their performance. Also, there is some scholarship graduation rate that most administrations take very seriously. Any pulled scholarship counts against it.
Not the NCAA specifically, but the BCS schools more specifically. Not the NCAA, but the school/coach itself.
There is a difference between the way it should be, and the way it actually is. I would think most/all agree with you that it should be different. But while this situation is public and a bit more extreme, the reality at most of the BCS DI programs is that they don't care about the athletes.
If recruits understand that and choose one of those schools, great. They will either succeed, partially because they are ready for what they will get, or fail. But at least they know.
If recruits don't understand and aren't ready for it, what can you say? Other than that they should have paid better attention, asked more questions, and looked behind the show. Maybe their desire to brag about going to the name school bit them in the butt, but it is their fault. I don't think these behaviors are surprising at all if you pay any attention.
As for honoring scholarships, technically an NCAA I coach or program doesn't have to have any reason for revoking a scholarship. There is an appeals process they must make the athlete aware of. The athlete can then appeal to keep their scholarship. No reason is required though.
Basketballhttp://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/18652163/wisconsins-ryan-way-out-of-bounds-with-transfer-restrictions-on-uthoffFootballhttp://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/5/17/4341810/wes-lunt-transfer-oklahoma-state-restrictions
Edukatur wrote:
This stuff happens in basketball and football all the time. They just dont go crying on FB and twitter and have their parents call the newspaper.
Koppenberg wrote:
Basketball
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/story/18652163/wisconsins-ryan-way-out-of-bounds-with-transfer-restrictions-on-uthoffFootball
http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/5/17/4341810/wes-lunt-transfer-oklahoma-state-restrictionsEdukatur wrote:This stuff happens in basketball and football all the time. They just dont go crying on FB and twitter and have their parents call the newspaper.
And these girls have none of those restrictions.