Kiffin rips scholarship from former walk-on; player "heartbroken"

9,139 Views | 70 Replies | Last: 13 yr ago by brdcstr
Ace4eVer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus;841916439 said:

Agreed, I recall the same.

The kid went to SC as a walk-on with no expectations of receiving a scholarship, combine that with SC's sanctions and he was lucky to get even one year of scholarship. Kiffin was up front with him about it.

I think Kiffin is a sleaze, but I find it difficult to find too much fault here. I think what Stanford did to that recruit was far worse.


I agree with you here. I remember the Furd article and the kid finding out late in the process he wasn't going to make it. I have no idea what his name is now. What Kiffin is doing isn't quite as reprehensible. Still a crappy way to treat someone, but not that bad in the game of college football.

On a side note, Vanderdoes and Hutchings are talking about another '13 recruit that will be joining them, apparently someone pretty good. They appear to know some people on the current team won't qualify. I guess USC will just keep recruiting, full or not. I think the only way they can take more is if someone from their class signed last year doesn't qualify so they can EE a spot from this year. The name Rogers is being thrown around a lot.
biely medved
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm not defending the SEC. I'm trying to make Cal not sound like the whiner loser school which right now we basically are. I have posted here before - Cal fans are split internally emotionally and ethically. They want to win, but don't understand the game. Nothing in that article even implied illegal activity, nor does it sound unethical even - it is how the game is played. Ole Miss was #1 in oversign - they finished, what? 5th in SEC West? And we don't know what actually happened in the cases where people left early, so we should not judge.

But here's the thing. If we want to be holier than thou and sit around like babies complaining about the teams that win, we will continue to think 7-5 is a really good season and never win the Pac ##, never win the Rose Bowl, etc. The game is played to win, and the NCAA is supposed to enforce the rules. If the NCAA allows things to happen, then it is "legal". It is the same as salary caps and other rules with pro leagues. Some teams just do it better. Those that don't, accuse the great teams of abusing the cap, etc, etc, etc. Cal fans want to win, but don't want to play the "games" that the teams that win play to maximize their competitive advantages. I happen to be fine with not playing the games and not being a football factory,and understand that that means we probably keep losing to USC and Oregon, but BI/Cal fans keep trying to be half-way pregnant.

So. Would we discreetly usher someone out who is taking up 1 of 85 schollys but will NEVER contribute on the field in order to take someone who could be starting ILB - a position of weakness? If no, then yeah for us - we are so pure and will be rewarded in heaven. If yes, then we are no different than anyone else.

But what we SHOULD HAVE learned from Paterno, is that there are NO infallible "gods" in football. Tosh was EXACTLY the same Tosh when he was here as he is @ Washington. If we get excited about "toshing" a recruit for Cal, then we can't complain when he "toshes" one for the Huskies. This "us v. them" group think/cognitive dissonance is silly.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
??? What's wrong with withdrawing a scholie from a player. Until the recent change, scholies were year to year. Everyone is clearly aware of the situation. Therefore, no surprises. I don't see any problem with Kiffin's actions.
Cal_Fan2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
biely medved;841916476 said:

I'm not defending the SEC. I'm trying to make Cal not sound like the whiner loser school which right now we basically are. I have posted here before - Cal fans are split internally emotionally and ethically. They want to win, but don't understand the game. Nothing in that article even implied illegal activity, nor does it sound unethical even - it is how the game is played. Ole Miss was #1 in oversign - they finished, what? 5th in SEC West? And we don't know what actually happened in the cases where people left early, so we should not judge.

But here's the thing. If we want to be holier than thou and sit around like babies complaining about the teams that win, we will continue to think 7-5 is a really good season and never win the Pac ##, never win the Rose Bowl, etc. The game is played to win, and the NCAA is supposed to enforce the rules. If the NCAA allows things to happen, then it is "legal". It is the same as salary caps and other rules with pro leagues. Some teams just do it better. Those that don't, accuse the great teams of abusing the cap, etc, etc, etc. Cal fans want to win, but don't want to play the "games" that the teams that win play to maximize their competitive advantages. I happen to be fine with not playing the games and not being a football factory,and understand that that means we probably keep losing to USC and Oregon, but BI/Cal fans keep trying to be half-way pregnant.

So. Would we discreetly usher someone out who is taking up 1 of 85 schollys but will NEVER contribute on the field in order to take someone who could be starting ILB - a position of weakness? If no, then yeah for us - we are so pure and will be rewarded in heaven. If yes, then we are no different than anyone else.

But what we SHOULD HAVE learned from Paterno, is that there are NO infallible "gods" in football. Tosh was EXACTLY the same Tosh when he was here as he is @ Washington. If we get excited about "toshing" a recruit for Cal, then we can't complain when he "toshes" one for the Huskies. This "us v. them" group think/cognitive dissonance is silly.



Who's whining? I'm just not a big fan of unethical behavior if it is repeated time and time again. Now, I'll grant you that everyone does this from time to time but I'm talking about institutions that have a pattern of behavior in this. I'm not talking about about randon hit and miss stuff. I'm on record saying Kiffin is unethical long before this incident...he was with the Raiders and Volunteers big time and like I wrote earlier, how many coaches can you name who have ticked off so many people in such a short time......

I also was one of the first in BI to criticize Tosh (or whomever) for having our players fake injuries and was roundly bashed on here by a few. Though not illegal, it was unethical and I said so. I can forgive errors in judgment which everyone makes including me, but SOME of the SEC guys like Saban and Miles make this an institutional thing and pattern of unethical behavior that is disturbing....if you read any other message boards, you'd know that most people, including oversignings.com recognize this. In my case, this isn't about winning, it is about patterns of unethical behavior that continues. Did you read the article I linked?....Holy Crap, Saban had 2 years on a row where TONS of guys left and no other school came close, and it continues to happen. How can so many guys have medical hardships or simply transfer for no good reason?.....
Phantomfan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear;841916484 said:

??? What's wrong with withdrawing a scholie from a player. Until the recent change, scholies were year to year. Everyone is clearly aware of the situation. Therefore, no surprises. I don't see any problem with Kiffin's actions.

Intent.

I am sure you know that, though.
biely medved
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Again, I am not trying to attack you personally. I am just making general comments on what I perceive as a dominant meme on this board. I will then simply add - you don't know the "ethics" of ANY Alabama situation specifics, nor can you trust a media report of people who weren't there. So what we are doing then is pointing out the perceived splinter in someone else's eye and pretending that there are never any in ours. It is enough to worry about our own house without having to assume things about someone else's. Now, where is this scholarship coming from for our new ILB? Did we recruit him? How did we persuade him to leave his school? What did we promise? Do you know? In other words, this is only marginally if at all different than USC's situation. Let's BEAT THEM FIRST, then complain about what sleazes THEY are.
Haashole
How long do you want to ignore this user?
1BTF is nowhere to be found on this thread...

guess (unfortunately) there's no real defense to play here
USCdentist
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Haashole;841916562 said:

1BTF is nowhere to be found on this thread...

guess (unfortunately) there's no real defense to play here


I'm not sure there is much of a need to defend it. It seems several people commenting on the article never read it. A walk on who was given a scholarship on a year to year basis who was well aware of the situation said that if he was asked he would give back his scholarship. That being said, if it comes to that it would not make me feel all warm and fuzzy, but Kiffin was up front with him from the beginning.
Cal_Fan2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
biely medved;841916557 said:

Again, I am not trying to attack you personally. I am just making general comments on what I perceive as a dominant meme on this board. I will then simply add - you don't know the "ethics" of ANY Alabama situation specifics, nor can you trust a media report of people who weren't there. So what we are doing then is pointing out the perceived splinter in someone else's eye and pretending that there are never any in ours. It is enough to worry about our own house without having to assume things about someone else's. Now, where is this scholarship coming from for our new ILB? Did we recruit him? How did we persuade him to leave his school? What did we promise? Do you know? In other words, this is only marginally if at all different than USC's situation. Let's BEAT THEM FIRST, then complain about what sleazes THEY are.


I'll answer your questions....you can google this stuff but I DO KNOW the ethics of the Bama situation and the LSU situation because the players who got bumped were all over the internet when this happened and how unfair it was at the time. I initially got this info from people WHO WERE THERE before I even knew oversignings.com existed. By the way, that site has been reputed to be pretty right on as far as the facts go.

Yes...we recruited Fortt right out of high school and he visited Cal back then and had a relationship with Thompson and liked Cal a lot. We have free schollies since 2 kids just failed to qualify academically and we haven't used up our all our schollies anyway. This is not even close to the USC situation which by the way, I don't blame Kiffin that much, he is just unethical as a rule. Not sure what we promised him, probably similar to what we told him the first time he came out here.

You talk about splinters in one's eye. I'm not talking about isolated incidents, I'm talking about institutional patterns of slimy behavior, repeated over and over...and some of us did blame Cal when we did something similar on the field also.
BearForceMajor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
USCdentist;841916583 said:

I'm not sure there is much of a need to defend it. It seems several people commenting on the article never read it. A walk on who was given a scholarship on a year to year basis who was well aware of the situation said that if he was asked he would give back his scholarship. That being said, if it comes to that it would not make me feel all warm and fuzzy, but Kiffin was up front with him from the beginning.


What!? Sure, 'can't wait to give back my 50K'?

Poor kid -and family- sacrificed despite the "Good job, kid, good news, you earned it, we're gonna give you a scholarship. Go tell everyone! Remember though, just like everybody else, these things technically are year-to-year and you have to behave." ...

Yeah, 'fight on'.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Have we always renewed scholarships awarded to walk-ons? I can understand moral outrage over gently pushing out a highly recruited scholarship athlete because they want to bring someone younger or better. However, when the school needs a scholarship for a highly-recruited player, pulling a year-to-year scholarship to a walk-on that was originally granted when the school had left over spots for that year doesn't offend me too much. He may be disappointed but he really isn't entitled to something that wasn't promised to him.
BearForceMajor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93;841916637 said:

Have we always renewed scholarships awarded to walk-ons? I can understand moral outrage over gently pushing out a highly recruited scholarship athlete because they want to bring someone younger or better. However, when the school needs a scholarship for a highly-recruited player, pulling a year-to-year scholarship to a walk-on that was originally granted when the school had left over spots for that year doesn't offend me too much. He may be disappointed but he really isn't entitled to something that wasn't promised to him.


If it wasn't promised to him, by your definition, then it isn't promised to anyone. They are all the same.
calbear93
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ThoseBearNestEcstasies;841916649 said:

If it wasn't promised to him, by your definition, then it isn't promised to anyone. They are all the same.


That is what I don't know. For a highly recruited players, at least the implicit promise is that they will receive a scholarship for the full four or five years. When a spare scholarship is granted to a walk-on, is the implicit promise that the scholarship will be renewed the following year? Also, have we ever given a scholarship to a walk-on for less than the remaining years after it was first rewarded when we had an excess scholarship? If it is the same, I see your point. I just don't know that it was and, therefore, it is hard for me to have the same moral outrage.
GMP
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calbear93;841916637 said:

Have we always renewed scholarships awarded to walk-ons? I can understand moral outrage over gently pushing out a highly recruited scholarship athlete because they want to bring someone younger or better. However, when the school needs a scholarship for a highly-recruited player, pulling a year-to-year scholarship to a walk-on that was originally granted when the school had left over spots for that year doesn't offend me too much. He may be disappointed but he really isn't entitled to something that wasn't promised to him.


I have a vague recollection of some former walk-on turned scholarship athlete at Cal not getting his scholarship renewed because we were out of scholarships. No idea who it was, but it does sound familiar. If this story wasn't about SC, people wouldn't care too much.
BearForceMajor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
grandmastapoop;841916661 said:

I have a vague recollection of some former walk-on turned scholarship athlete at Cal not getting his scholarship renewed because we were out of scholarships. No idea who it was, but it does sound familiar. If this story wasn't about SC, people wouldn't care too much.


I couldn't care less if it/s USC, or U&Me. Wrong is wrong. If we did that, shame on us, period.
RealDrew2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If Tedford tried to pull this ***, the Bay Area Press would crucify him. He would be asked about it at every press conference.

Cal is Cal, and thus must appear to win ethically or else.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
ThoseBearNestEcstasies;841916649 said:

If it wasn't promised to him, by your definition, then it isn't promised to anyone. They are all the same.


Not true. They are very different situations. When a player is recruited as a scholarship athlete out of high school, the implicit agreement is that they will have a scholarship for 4 or 5 years as long as they stay in good standing with the team and school.

When a player comes to a school as a walk-on, they have no expectation of receiving a scholarship (except if there is a gray-shirt agreement, as originally with Brandon Smith). They expect to pay their way for four years.

However, sometimes (often) a scholarship opens up at the last minute (like when Gary Franklin transferred from Cal). The coach already has offers out to the next year's entering class. It is too late to bring someone in for the current class. The coach can either let the scholarship go unused for a year or offer it to a walk-on for a year. The player is told it is only for the year and the player is usually grateful to get it.

Now it is true, that sometimes a walk-on becomes a starter/major contributor and "earns" a scholarship (Uwaezuoke, Fujita, Ahanatu). In that case, the coach makes the scholarship permanent and then, I'd agree, it is like any other scholarship and it would be wrong to take it away.

I don't think there is any former walk-on who is starting or a major contributor for the Trojans. The kid rightly considers himself lucky to get a scholarship for even one year on a scholarship reduced National championship contending team where scholarships are offered almost exclusively to 4 and 5 star talent.

I hate that I am in the position of defending USC and Kiffen, but they are not doing anything wrong in this case.
GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear;841916484 said:

??? What's wrong with withdrawing a scholie from a player. Until the recent change, scholies were year to year. Everyone is clearly aware of the situation. Therefore, no surprises. I don't see any problem with Kiffin's actions.


My understanding is that the year to year nature is to make sure that the player continues on the team and obeys the coach and follows all the rules set by the coach and school. If he breaks the team rules he is off the team and off scholarship even if there is no violation of the law. It would take quite a contract to list all the appropriate terms and conditions, which is why the coach is given the right to terminate.

But I would bet that most players assume that if they follow the above rules their scholarship will not be pulled.

So yes it Kiffin may be within his legal rights. But is it ethical? Is it moral?
Otherwise why was the player in question -- heartbroken.
Tedhead03
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I wonder if Redd's family will get the Reggie Bush house. I hear they're no longer there, anyway.
HaasBear04
How long do you want to ignore this user?
RealDrew2;841916721 said:

If Tedford tried to pull this ***, the Bay Area Press would crucify him. He would be asked about it at every press conference.

Cal is Cal, and thus must appear to win ethically or else.


????

Does the 'bay area press' even know who tedford is?
biely medved
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal_Fan2;841916588 said:

I'll answer your questions....you can google this stuff but I DO KNOW the ethics of the Bama situation and the LSU situation because the players who got bumped were all over the internet when this happened and how unfair it was at the time. I initially got this info from people WHO WERE THERE before I even knew oversignings.com existed. By the way, that site has been reputed to be pretty right on as far as the facts go.

Yes...we recruited Fortt right out of high school and he visited Cal back then and had a relationship with Thompson and liked Cal a lot. We have free schollies since 2 kids just failed to qualify academically and we haven't used up our all our schollies anyway. This is not even close to the USC situation which by the way, I don't blame Kiffin that much, he is just unethical as a rule. Not sure what we promised him, probably similar to what we told him the first time he came out here.

You talk about splinters in one's eye. I'm not talking about isolated incidents, I'm talking about institutional patterns of slimy behavior, repeated over and over...and some of us did blame Cal when we did something similar on the field also.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oversigning

So I guess we should ask all your old girlfriends to explain why you broke up. We want the real story right? Or do you want Saban to violate Hipaa and academic privacy. "Cecil W. was suspended because he's an idiot and can't pass a class. He has since left the team and we gave his scholarship to another player."

COLLEGE FOOTBALL IS SLIMY. Why? Because BILLIONS of dollars are on the line. If you want clean sports try crew at Harvard maybe. Again, institutional patterns are that there are winners and losers based on the rules of the game that these institutions agree to and self-enforce. Factories put out winning football teams. You may have a subjective ethical concern, but that's your problem. Either play the game to win or accept that there are things more important than winning, such as your own ethical standards and self respect. As I said, I like the way Cal does its sports my son just spent a week with the NCAA champ's swim camp. but I accept that as a result, teams that push the lines and perhaps cross them to get a competitive advantage are likely to beat us. I don't get my panties in a wad that someone else wants to win no matter how. But that's life in a "call your own fouls" world.

Alabama and Nick Saban
[edit]2010
[edit]WSJ Medical Scholarship Concerns
On September 24, 2010 2010, theWall Street Journal published an article suggesting the University of Alabama and its head coach, Nick Saban, had encouraging some under-performing players to quit the team for medical reasons in order to gain a competitive edge.
Former Alabama linebacker Chuck Kirschman said "I'm still kind of bitter," and Coach Saban encouraged him to accept the scholarship because of a back problem that Kirschman believes he could have played through. Kirschman said the school offered in the summer of 2009 to pay for his graduate degree in business, an offer he accepted, and that he still gets some of the same perks as players. Kirschman completed his MBA in Finance.
Charles Hoke, a former Alabama offensive lineman, took a medical scholarship in 2008 because of a shoulder problem, said the choice was left entirely up to him and was based on the many conversations he had with the team's doctors and trainers over the course of his junior year.
Jeramie Griffin tore an anterior cruciate ligament in his knee in August 2009. He said, "I came back in the spring and I was OK." Griffin said that he was surprised football staff told him he had failed a physical. Griffin said, Saban asked him what he wanted to do besides playing football, and that Saban floated the possibility of a medical scholarship and asked if Griffin was interested in student coaching. Griffin said he doesn't contest the results of the physical and said it was "basically my decision" to forgo the rest of his playing career.
Doug Walker, the school's associate athletic director for media relations, said "Decisions about medical disqualifications for student-athletes are made by medical professionals and adhere to the parameters outlined by the NCAAand the Southeastern Conference."[20]
On September 29, 2010 Coach Saban responded to questions about the Wall Street Journal Article, "We don't make the decision about medicals. I have nothing to do with that. Those are medical decisions made by our medical staff. I think we have one of the finest medical staffs in the country. I don't have any question about the fact every player we have given a medical to, it's been because of the medical opinion of the medical staff," Saban said. "Those guys should not continue to play football because it would put their future in tremendous risk. Those decisions are always made in the best interest of the player. Whether the player agrees with that or not, I can't control. I don't make the decision. They don't make the decision as players. That's why we have a medical staff."[21]
[edit]WSJ Transfer Concerns
On November 25, 2010, the Journal reported that several former Alabama players claim Saban and Alabama lied about their reasons for leaving the school.[3] On August 5, 2009, Saban made a statement in a press conference that included a reference to four players Price Hall, Brandon Fanney, Alonzo Lawrence and Jermaine Preyear. "These guys all did something. It doesn't make them bad people.These guys didn't do what they were supposed to do here, whether it was for academic reasons or whatever. They're not going to be part of the program."[22] The players told The Wall Street Journal they committed no such violations and that Alabama and Saban had only claimed as much so as to protect the image of their program in the eyes of future recruits.
Prince Hall, a starter and All-American as freshman, had been suspended for the 3rd time during the Spring according to published reports, the last being categorized as indefinite. Brandon Fanney, a 14 game starter from the previous season, had been suspended for rules violations during the Spring.[23]
Preyear, who decided to transfer six months after enrolling during the Spring, said he chose to leave over concerns about playing time. "I don't know any rules I could have broken."
Alonzo Lawrence reasons for transfer were unclear, but according to his high school coach his problems at Alabama "wasn't anything major," and tied it to things like being late to team meetings. Lawrence transferred to Southern Miss before moving on to Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College.[24][25]
[edit]Saban's Exchange with another Reporter
On April 15, 2008, Saban was asked by reporter Ian Rapoport how he was going to handle the numbers and when does he you start to worry about it? Saban replied "I'm not worried about them. It'll all work out. I mean, the whole thing has a solution to every issue. You don't put yourself in a position where you don't know what's coming." Rapoport respond, "So you're not going to tell us?" to which Saban replied "We know how it has to be managed, and it will be managed. It's none of your business. Aiight? And don't give me this stuff about the fans' need to know, because they don't need to know. Don't even ask. Aiight?"[26]
biely medved
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal_Fan2;841916588 said:

I'll answer your questions....you can google this stuff but I DO KNOW the ethics of the Bama situation and the LSU situation because the players who got bumped were all over the internet when this happened and how unfair it was at the time. I initially got this info from people WHO WERE THERE before I even knew oversignings.com existed. By the way, that site has been reputed to be pretty right on as far as the facts go.

Yes...we recruited Fortt right out of high school and he visited Cal back then and had a relationship with Thompson and liked Cal a lot. We have free schollies since 2 kids just failed to qualify academically and we haven't used up our all our schollies anyway. This is not even close to the USC situation which by the way, I don't blame Kiffin that much, he is just unethical as a rule. Not sure what we promised him, probably similar to what we told him the first time he came out here.


Great. And you know that b/c you pay attention to Cal recruiting, know the history with certain guys, etc. But what are the WSU fans going to say if he comes here? Probably the same as you do about USC. What do you think Bama fans thought about us getting KA? Any comments about Gabe King on the net after he signed? How many kids did we get from where? North Carolina? To Cal? You are fine with that b/c you know Cal's side of the story and accept it, but you don't know about these other places.
Cal_Fan2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
biely medved;841916942 said:

Great. And you know that b/c you pay attention to Cal recruiting, know the history with certain guys, etc. But what are the WSU fans going to say if he comes here? Probably the same as you do about USC. What do you think Bama fans thought about us getting KA? Any comments about Gabe King on the net after he signed? How many kids did we get from where? North Carolina? To Cal? You are fine with that b/c you know Cal's side of the story and accept it, but you don't know about these other places.


Honestly, this is getting old..on your other post, you question who I listen to but you listen to Saban....all this stuff is orchestrated from his office for the most part and I wouldn't believe him or Les Miles as far as I could throw them.....so maybe I'm right and maybe you are right...BUT, the fact of the matter is, how many schools have so many kids leaving every year?....those are hard stats. How come so many medical hardships and transfers?...seems like a lot to me from such a great program....this stuff has been written about even in the SEC for years, that is the reporters bold enough to question it. I'll bet you don't read nearly as many message boards as I used to and there are tons of examples I can't begin to look for right now...but you know how this works in the NCAA and the SEC....don't punish anyone who is succeeding.....

They seem to have more medical hardships than anyone else. If that is so, they should stop recruiting such FRAIL players...OR... fire their S&C coach since he is not doing his job.....but yet he is still around. Doesn't make sense to me from guys who are so great at football.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Scholies are now multi-year. The rule changed earlier this year....
TheSouseFamily
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Are you sure, 71? I know the SEC coaches voted to move to 4-year scholarships but I don't think that's been implemented. Some school have voluntarily begun offering 4-year rides, but that's on a school by school basis. The majority of the Big 10 now does this. I could be wrong but I don't think there's a "rule" about this anywhere.
TheSouseFamily
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FingeroftheBear;841917012 said:

Are schollies now 4 year, with no sway outs/replacements?

I've heard rumbling but I don't recall it becoming official. If it's true, it would be big news because it would kill standard operating procedures for the SEC and many of the top ten/sleaze programs.


Definitely not a rule. Below is a link to an interesting article on Slate.com on the topic. Among the interesting factoids is that earlier this year, the NCAA voted on this. Of the 330 votes, more than 200 rejected multi-year scholarships. The premise of the article is that one-year scholarships are "the most evil thing in college sports."

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2012/05/ncaa_scholarship_rules_it_s_morally_indefensible_that_athletic_scholarships_can_be_yanked_after_one_year_for_any_reason_.html
liverflukes
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Back to the topic at hand...I don't think SC did anything wrong or "ripped" a scholarship from a walk-on. As disagreeable as it all sounds, the kid appears to have been told up front that it could be revoked (if and when a better player came along) or would be reviewed on a year to year basis as Kiffin actually explained to him. This has happened and that's where it all stands today. F him and his heart breaking story. He can still be the water boy. Most of all though, F*ck USC in general.
The Duke!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As to the issue of whether Cal might do the same thing if the "ILB" indeed transfers, we won't. And here's why:

1) The NCAA is granting an additional scholarship to teams that take on Penn State transfers. So we wouldn't need to pull anyone's scholarship. SC did not benefit from this because their former Heisman running back accepted large and illegal financial gifts from an agent, and the USC staff didn't care to pay attention to this. Then they failed to fully cooperate with an NCAA investigation. Thus, they are under sanctions and unable to take advantage of the extra scholarship that the NCAA is offering to teams who don't cheat.

2) Fortt lined up at outside linebacker at Penn State, which also ran a lot of 3-4. I don't see why he would play ILB for us.
brdcstr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheSouseFamily;841916422 said:

Oh, and USC was the 7th worst oversigner and the only PAC-12 team on the list. Biely, your response?

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2011/10/college_athletes_rights_some_a.html


Calling BS on the list.

USC was able to legally sign 29 in 2011 because they UNDERSIGNED their permitted allotment in 2010 by 4 players.

In other words, there was no over signing going on whatsoever. Nobody lost their scholarship, nobody was pushed out the door, but rather, there were four vacancies filled in 2011 that weren't filled in 2010.

Signing EE's is a perfectly legitimate and acceptable practice, one which I'm guessing Cal partakes in whenever you undersign players from the previous year.

NO WAY USC would ever land on that list under Pete Carroll, either. He was frustratingly notorious for signing classes of only 18-19 per year.
brdcstr
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear;841916986 said:

Scholies are now multi-year. The rule changed earlier this year....


Not so. Perhaps if Cal voted for them to be 4 years...others would've followed::facepalm j/k

Actually, schools now have the option to offer 4 year schollies if they choose to. Most don't - including Cal - since they claim they're merit based and kids need to earn them.

http://businessofcollegesports.com/2012/02/13/should-division-i-schools-vote-to-overturn-the-ncaas-multi-year-scholarship-measure/



Quote:

NCAA scholarship shift could alter recruiting practices
By Kirk Bohls

AMERICAN-STATESMAN STAFF

Updated: 1:55 a.m. Thursday, March 29, 2012

Published: 8:06 p.m. Wednesday, March 28, 2012

When Jake Raulerson told Mack Brown last month that he intended to be a Texas Longhorn, the head coach told Celina's gifted two-way lineman that he had a full football scholarship.

For only one year.

Raulerson pledged anyway. Not because the first commitment of Texas' 2013 signing class wants to be a Longhorn for only one season, but because he trusts Brown that Texas' grant will almost certainly be renewed every year, and that he'll stay in school until the NFL beckons or his eligibility expires. However, he does come at his own risk.

Texas could assure Raulerson and other recruits a four-year scholarship and not just for one renewable year under a controversial NCAA initiative that's changed a four-decades-old rule by allowing schools to give multiyear grants instead of yearly ones. But Brown has chosen not to use it, to keep Texas' athletes accountable both on the field and in the classroom.

Never mind that Texas voted against the rule change. The Longhorns weren't alone.

Among the 204 other schools and conferences that didn't want the multiyear scholarships were such prominent colleges as defending national champion Alabama, new SEC member Texas A&M, Tennessee, LSU, Oklahoma and Florida State. Others, like California, USC, Virginia, Louisville and Georgia Tech sided with them as well.


http://www.statesman.com/sports/longhorns/ncaa-scholarship-shift-could-alter-recruiting-practices-2268275.html?printArticle=y
Refresh
Page 2 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.