socaliganbear;842353106 said:

---

Hmm well I suppose we can get in contact with him. I know there are players/IA employees on here....

---

Isn't advising bear who posts here a student athlete advisor? Perhaps he can get the right contact info for him.

Eeyore;842353080 said:

---

Do you think Goff or Rubenzer would have gotten their scholarships pulled if they were receiving more money than they should have? Unless there's another story, Grisom got his scholarship pulled because Dykes didn't need his services and wanted his scholarship for another player. Dykes should have just told Grisom upfront instead having some admin tell him over email. Over-payment is a separate issue from that.

---

Goff and Rubenzer were not walk on players... Did you not read the article? Walk ons, who receive a Scholarship, get one for one year. Grissom was a great story and I was so happy for him, but he was paid twice. He had to know he was paid to much. I am curious how he could just have extra money and not have known it was to much. He is saying he only received $4000 to much and gave it back, but if that was the case he should be in the clear. He should have records of that on everything he was paid and the money he returned. I think there has to be more to this and how much he actually got. Because he got money that he shouldn't have is what is causing this issue. It sucks that they messed up, but you can't take the risk of losing aid for everyone else because he was double paid. I am glad they are working with him and I wish Grissom the best. What he did to play for Cal is amazing. I would be more than happy to also throw down a little to help the man out.

going4roses;842353099 said:

---

ok are we going to talk about or help ?

---

I'd definitely like to help Grisom. I started this thread to at least bring awareness of his plight on BI. Two big issues on helping:

1. We could somehow get Cal in trouble with NCAA if we give money to Grisom. Anything we do should be cleared by Cal Athletics.

2. I don't quite trust these 3rd parties that sprung up after Ted's tragedy. I saw a former Cal player advertising his own Bitcoin link on twitter, claiming all donations goes to Ted's family. It may be true, but I've seen too many scams on the Internet that prey on people's willingness to donate.

I guess the best way to help Grisom is to call Cal financial aid or athletic office to see if something can be done. Yes, it's gonna be a friggin bureaucratic nightmare dealing with Cal admin but it's the only legit way I can think of.

socaliganbear;842353106 said:

---

Hmm well I suppose we can get in contact with him. I know there are players/IA employees on here....

---

then i will leave that part up to you. and then let me know how i can help. will DM you on twitter.

KoreAmBear;842353112 said:

---

Someone run it by compliance and see if we can do something for him. This sucks.

---

will probably need to clear it with Compliance, but i think that just means the Athletic Dept and the school can't have any participation in it.

WhipItOutJoe;842353055 said:

---

Can we crowd fund him? I can kick in a benjie.

---

Someone run it by compliance and see if we can do something for him. This sucks.

jamonit;842353108 said:

---

Goff and Rubenzer were not walk on players... Did you not read the article? Walk ons, who receive a Scholarship, get one for one year. Grissom was a great story and I was so happy for him, but he was paid twice. He had to know he was paid to much. I am curious how he could just have extra money and not have known it was to much. He is saying he only received $4000 to much and gave it back, but if that was the case he should be in the clear. He should have records of that on everything he was paid and the money he returned. I think there has to be more to this and how much he actually got. Because he got money that he shouldn't have is what is causing this issue. It sucks that they messed up, but you can't take the risk of losing aid for everyone else because he was double paid. I am glad they are working with him and I wish Grissom the best. What he did to play for Cal is amazing. I would be more than happy to also throw down a little to help the man out.

---

My understanding from the article is that (a) losing scholarship and (b) over-payment were SEPARATE issues. I wasn't blaming the staff for over-payment. I was critical of how the staff informed (or lack of) Grisom on his loss of scholarship.

I mean... He's legit off the team right?

hanky1;842353060 said:

---

Walk-on scholarships are typically for 1 year. I thought this was understood by everyone.

---

I was aware that scholarships in general work on a year-by-year renewable basis, but I had previously assumed that when a walk-on player "earned" a scholarship, that they were earning it for the remainder of their collegiate career and not that it was widely understood to be a 1 year thing that wasn't going to be renewed.

beeasyed;842353066 said:

---

but the biggest issue is that the school messed up in disbursement, and now wants it all back. hey buddy, yeah we're going to need that $11k back....

---

Sorry, take it up with Top Dog because you can trace the money and it goes there. Both Grisom and Top Dog are bona fide participants in good faith. Out of luck UC.

beeasyed;842353110 said:

---

then i will leave that part up to you. and then let me know how i can help. will DM you on twitter.

---

before you guys contact him directly and give him money, be aware that could be construed as boosters paying student athletes. Clear it with Cal compliance before you do anything -- as KAB suggested.

Eeyore;842353119 said:

---

before you guys contact him directly and give him money, be aware that could be construed as boosters paying student athletes. Clear it with Cal compliance before you do anything -- as KAB suggested.

---

oh, i'm definitely not reaching out to ANY Cal player re: giving money, on Twitter, or otherwise. that's just asking to be hammered by the NCAA.

jamonit;842353108 said:

---

Goff and Rubenzer were not walk on players... Did you not read the article? Walk ons, who receive a Scholarship, get one for one year. Grissom was a great story and I was so happy for him, but he was paid twice. He had to know he was paid to much. I am curious how he could just have extra money and not have known it was to much. He is saying he only received $4000 to much and gave it back, but if that was the case he should be in the clear. He should have records of that on everything he was paid and the money he returned. I think there has to be more to this and how much he actually got. Because he got money that he shouldn't have is what is causing this issue. It sucks that they messed up, but you can't take the risk of losing aid for everyone else because he was double paid. I am glad they are working with him and I wish Grissom the best. What he did to play for Cal is amazing. I would be more than happy to also throw down a little to help the man out.

---

I don't have trouble with your comments, its use of "to" that is a pet peeve of mine. I see it all the time on this Board. Whenever you're explaining that something exceeds a barrier or is in addition to or is more than enough the proper word is "too." I also make the mistake when talking about there, their or they're. Sorry, don't mean to be the grammar police, but it does bug me. There, I feel better already.

By the way, this is about as well-written a story as I have seen by the Daily Cal, maybe ever.

jamonit;842353108 said:

---

Goff and Rubenzer were not walk on players... Did you not read the article? Walk ons, who receive a Scholarship, get one for one year.

---

Did you not read the article?

"According to associate athletic director and head of compliance Chris Stivers — whose office ensures Cal’s athletic teams comply with NCAA regulations — every Cal football player is signed to a one-year renewable scholarship."

Yes, even Goff and Rubenzer can have their scholarships revoked after one-year, though unlikely. My point was Dykes didn't need Grisom anymore so he pulled the scholarship. He did this to other non-walk on players such as McCain (though McCain brought that onto himself).

Eeyore;842353125 said:

---

Did you not read the article?

"According to associate athletic director and head of compliance Chris Stivers whose office ensures Cal's athletic teams comply with NCAA regulations every Cal football player is signed to a one-year renewable scholarship."

Yes, even Goff and Rubenzer can have their scholarships revoked after one-year, though unlikely. My point was Dykes didn't need Grisom anymore so he pulled the scholarship. He did this to other non-walk on players such as McCain (though McCain brought that onto himself).

---

What he is saying is that recruited players don't lose scholarships (at Cal). Walk-ons get them for that year, when earned. Then they go back to being walk-ons. He is not the first nor last walk on to go back to paying their own way.

The McCain situation is not even close to relevant to this story. He didn't lose a scholly because Dykes didn't need him anymore, WE ABSOLUTELY NEEDED HIM.

The big issue here is the aid office screw up.

how is it a violation by helping a student .. not student athlete ?

Straight out of Office Space! He got fired, but no one ever bothered to tell him about it, but because of a glitch in accounting, he kept on getting paid! So what did they do?



A similar thing happened to my mom while at Cal. She was working as a staff research assistant at Cal, doing work for professors for various grants, and her grant ran out but she didn't find out until she didn't get her paycheck. Thankfully, someone was able to fix it.

Eeyore;842353100 said:

---

My agenda is both. Help Grisom and bash Dykes/Likens.

Take a look at this quote from the article: "[Grisom] says he met with wide receiver coach Rob Likens, who was stunned Grisom hadn't been informed prior to receiving the email."

So Likens knew Grisom should have been informed in person, but Likens is not taking the blame for not telling Grisom? Uh, how would you like to be informed by your boss via HR email that you've been transferred to another group (or worse, fired) and no reason given? Like I said before, this is basic management 101 stuff.

---

One thing I really love about some BI posters is how quickly we jump to conclusions before all the facts are in and often without bothering to read those facts that are readily available.

Plus we often accept the statements of some party at face value without asking: 1. Does this person know all the facts 2. Does this person understand what he knows. 3. is this person accurately reporting all the facts he does know. 4. Does this person have any reason to shade the facts one way or another.

But then. If we did that it would take all the fun out of reading BI.

KoreAmBear;842353124 said:

---

By the way, this is about as well-written a story as I have seen by the Daily Cal, maybe ever.

---

Agreed. It's actually original journalism not copying or
mindless opining.

WhipItOutJoe;842353091 said:

---

Eeyore - he was given a one year scholarship to reward him for his dedication last year. Recruited athletes are offered 4 year scholarships whereas walk-ons are offered 1 year scholarships on very rare occasions. If he was one of the top receivers on the team, you are correct that the scholly would have been renewed. Otherwise, the coaches make it available for other players. That fact that he did not know this is a bit surprising as he is on a team filled with athletes, some on scholarship, some not. You appear to have an agenda here. Is it to help Grissom or bash the coaches? If it is to help Grissom the. Let's get it done.

---

At this moment at Cal ALL athletic scholarships are rewarded on a yearly basis (for both walk on and recruited players). It is just almost guranteed that a recruited player will receive a new scholarship after every year. USC is the only PAC 12 school I know of that offers a 4 year scholarship and they announced this in June. Eventually, all big time schools will be offering 4 year scholarships but that is not case currently.

I think everybody deserves a little blame is this story. Dykes probably should have been more specific with what James was receiving. But because EVERYBODY on the team only has a 1 year scholarship, James should not have assumed otherwise. I've never been on scholarship before but I'm assuming on the actual contract, it says "1 year scholarship" somewhere. So when he signed the paper he could have saw that and asked "are you planning to reissue one every year?"

Regarding the practice of giving walk-ons scholarships, it seems as though if the team is under limit of 85 they award the extras to walk-ons. This would have no effect on recruiting( but maybe spring signees) because the walk on schollies would get pulled at the end of the year. I believe this year that all the walk ons that have received scholarships have been seniors. This is an obvious effort to try and avoid this confusion in the future.

As far as the administrative side, the to me is inexcusable. If anybody finds a way for us to help him pay back the $11,000, I would gladly contribute.

going4roses;842353132 said:

---

how is it a violation by helping a student .. not student athlete ?

---

The reason it COULD be a violation -- pure speculation -- is that imagine a situation where a football-factory school with deep pockets were allowed to remove athletes from schollies and then pay their way anyway... Say an Oregon could get rid of any player that was underperforming so they could try somebody new, but, don't worry, because Uncle Phil will still pay your full ride on the side, that wouldn't be fair. They could cycle through all their "mistakes" too easily and just tell recruits, "Hey, even if it doesn't work out, we'll still pay your way. Besides, YOU'RE going to work out, aren't you? But, just in case, don't worry."

btsktr;842353163 said:

---

At this moment at Cal ALL athletic scholarships are rewarded on a yearly basis (for both walk on and recruited players). It is just almost guranteed that a recruited player will receive a new scholarship after every year. USC is the only PAC 12 school I know of that offers a 4 year scholarship and they announced this in June. Eventually, all big time schools will be offering 4 year scholarships but that is not case currently.

I think everybody deserves a little blame is this story. Dykes probably should have been more specific with what James was receiving. But because EVERYBODY on the team only has a 1 year scholarship, James should not have assumed otherwise. I've never been on scholarship before but I'm assuming on the actual contract, it says "1 year scholarship" somewhere. So when he signed the paper he could have saw that and asked "are you planning to reissue one every year?"

Regarding the practice of giving walk-ons scholarships, it seems as though if the team is under limit of 85 they award the extras to walk-ons. This would have no effect on recruiting( but maybe spring signees) because the walk on schollies would get pulled at the end of the year. I believe this year that all the walk ons that have received scholarships have been seniors. This is an obvious effort to try and avoid this confusion in the future.

As far as the administrative side, the to me is inexcusable. If anybody finds a way for us to help him pay back the $11,000, I would gladly contribute.

---

Now wait a "goldern" minute here. Before criticizing Sonny.
Do we know what Sonny said? How many of us have said something to a friend, co-worker, employee and later that person mis-remembers what was and was not said. Many of us hear only what we want to hear.

Plus if every scholarship player has a one-year scholarship, is Grisom claiming that he did not know this? or that he thought he was to be special and have a multi-year scholarship?

Eeyore;842353113 said:

---

My understanding from the article is that (a) losing scholarship and (b) over-payment were SEPARATE issues. I wasn't blaming the staff for over-payment. I was critical of how the staff informed (or lack of) Grisom on his loss of scholarship.

---

You're critical of how the staff informed him, from his one sided point of view. For all we know they talked to him a year ago and maybe he was so excited he missed some of what they were saying. I don't know and I would hope their would be better communication also. The problem is we don't know the whole story and it sounds like even Grisom doesn't know. If we can help him out let's do it.

StillNoStanfurdium;842353117 said:

---

I was aware that scholarships in general work on a year-by-year renewable basis, but I had previously assumed that when a walk-on player "earned" a scholarship, that they were earning it for the remainder of their collegiate career and not that it was widely understood to be a 1 year thing that wasn't going to be renewed.

---

That was my impression, too. That player would now become a scholarship player. A walk-on who had now, through merit, become a scholarship player. I can see the one-year thing, in cases like these: A scholarship is sitting there unused for a year, let's award it to a walk-on. It's a morale boost for everyone! In that case, though, it should be made crystal clear that it's for that year only.

IIRC, this situation has occurred in men's basketball, where a walk-on who might be borderline schollie-worthy was given a one-year as a scholarship opened up, perhaps due to unexpected attrition. I think in that case/those cases, they were careful to award it to a senior who would be graduating anyway after that year so that they didn't have to deal with a situation just like this.

68great;842353172 said:

---

Now wait a "goldern" minute here. Before criticizing Sonny.
Do we know what Sonny said? How many of us have said something to a friend, co-worker, employee and later that person mis-remembers what was and was not said. Many of us hear only what we want to hear.

Plus if every scholarship player has a one-year scholarship, is Grisom claiming that he did not know this? or that he thought he was to be special and have a multi-year scholarship?

---

The biggest issue with story is that I am assuming that James had to sign some sort of contract to make his scholarship official. Even though I have never signed an athletic scholarship, I am fairly certain that somewhere on the contract were the words "1 year scholarship". So in James did get exactly what he signed on for, a 1 year scholarship. Regarding the scholarship issue I place more blame on James because he signed a contract for 1 year. If he was expecting otherwise he should have asked.

But like I said be for the administrative issue regarding $11,000 is inexcusable.

Eeyore;842353125 said:

---

Did you not read the article?

"According to associate athletic director and head of compliance Chris Stivers whose office ensures Cal's athletic teams comply with NCAA regulations every Cal football player is signed to a one-year renewable scholarship."

Yes, even Goff and Rubenzer can have their scholarships revoked after one-year, though unlikely. My point was Dykes didn't need Grisom anymore so he pulled the scholarship. He did this to other non-walk on players such as McCain (though McCain brought that onto himself).

---

Yes I did read the WHOLE article. To have your Scholarship revoked it has to be signed off...

"At Cal, generally, no, we do not revoke scholarships on the basis of performance," Stivers said. "If it's somebody who's not as good as the coach thought they were going to be, we make the coach live with it. That's why we feel we don't even need to give four-year scholarships. If the student's not having major conduct issues, it will be renewed."

So no Rubenzer or Goff would not have their Scholarships revoked because it would have to be signed off on. They wouldn't do that unless the player had academic or attitude issues like ur example of Chris McCain.

Walk ons tho that receive a scholarship are issued it for one year without the guarantee of being renewed.

going4roses;842353132 said:

---

how is it a violation by helping a student .. not student athlete ?

---

If you give anything even once you are a donor for life per NCAA rules. I'd be pretty damn surprised if it didn't work the other way, too.

tequila4kapp;842353192 said:

---

If you give anything even once you are a donor for life per NCAA rules. I'd be pretty damn surprised if it didn't work the other way, too.

---

He's not coming back to the team.

Half the OL members should be on year to year then. This is very sad indeed.

StillNoStanfurdium;842353117 said:

---

I was aware that scholarships in general work on a year-by-year renewable basis, but I had previously assumed that when a walk-on player "earned" a scholarship, that they were earning it for the remainder of their collegiate career and not that it was widely understood to be a 1 year thing that wasn't going to be renewed.

---

Quote:

---

According to associate athletic director and head of compliance Chris Stivers whose office ensures Cal's athletic teams comply with NCAA regulations every Cal football player is signed to a one-year renewable scholarship.

Rarely does this actually matter in practice. Technically, however, coaches still retain the right to revoke scholarships for performance-related issues. According to Stivers, this almost never occurs at Cal.

"At Cal, generally, no, we do not revoke scholarships on the basis of performance," Stivers said. "If it's somebody who's not as good as the coach thought they were going to be, we make the coach live with it. That's why we feel we don't even need to give four-year scholarships. If the student's not having major conduct issues, it will be renewed."

---

Basically everyone's on a one year schollie and they rarely pull schollies. Basically Grisom appears to have expected the norm but an exception was made for him (presumably to make room for another player). IMO, the kid got screwed.

Eeyore;842353071 said:

---

Even if it should have been understood as one-year scholarship, Dykes or Likens should have talked to Grisom PERSONALLY about not renewing it before he got the news via email (from an admin office). I have not been a critic of this staff before, but I'm pretty pissed at how they handled the Grisom situation. This is management 101 stuff.

---

Ok I'll agree with you there that they should have informed him in person...and stupid of the university to screw up his payments. Who the hell is in charge of this stuff at Cal?

Having said that, walk-ons are awarded scholarships for 1 year and it's only renewed on an 'as available' basis i.e. rides for walk-ons are only available if the recruited athletes can't fill the balance. I thought that was fairly common knowledge. This is not unique to Cal... virtually every D1 program in the country does this. Sometimes a walk-on who plays extensively gets a reserved spot at the expense of a HS recruit, but Grisom clearly didn't fall into this category.

socaliganbear;842353130 said:

---

What he is saying is that recruited players don't lose scholarships (at Cal). Walk-ons get them for that year, when earned. Then they go back to being walk-ons. He is not the first nor last walk on to go back to paying their own way.

The McCain situation is not even close to relevant to this story. He didn't lose a scholly because Dykes didn't need him anymore, WE ABSOLUTELY NEEDED HIM.

The big issue here is the aid office screw up.

---

"
What he is saying is that recruited players don't lose scholarships (at Cal). Walk-ons get them for that year, when earned. Then they go back to being walk-ons. He is not the first nor last walk on to go back to paying their own way. "


Can you tell me the last time this happened at Cal without using Google?

freshfunk;842353225 said:

---

"
What he is saying is that recruited players don't lose scholarships (at Cal). Walk-ons get them for that year, when earned. Then they go back to being walk-ons. He is not the first nor last walk on to go back to paying their own way. "


Can you tell me the last time this happened at Cal without using Google?

---

Somehow I just knew that you'd be up in this thread.

NYCGOBEARS;842353229 said:

---

Somehow I just knew that you'd be up in this thread.

---

What's that mean?

I've mentioned on other threads that I was a Grisom fan, especially after seeing his story last year. I also lamented earlier this season (probably last week) that I was sad to see him gone when we heard the news. Hearing that this was the reason makes me angry, especially for someone who comes from a very disadvantaged background and was literally working 2-3 jobs and sleeping 5 hours a day so that he could keep up with his academics AND play football. I'm a sucker for people who try that hard to get ahead in life and improve their and their family's situation.

Btw this isn't just on the coaching staff but on the AD as well. What the hell are they doing? Where's the support the kids are getting when crap like this happens in a byzantine state run system? I wish someone here had a way of contacting the interim AD and expressing the frustration and anger over something like this.

Here's your answer why, even though Cal has a large number of alumni, only a fraction donate to academic departments or the athletic department. I'm sure almost everyone here has a story or two about having to deal with the bureaucracy that is Cal and the range of bad feelings it leaves behind. I've met a lot of fellow students who've said "I'm never giving another dime to this institution after I graduate." I hope Grissom graduates, but I hope the person who calls him up 10 years from now soliciting a donation is ready for the snicker followed by a quick unanswered "click".

That $11,000 mistake should show up in somebody's performance review. I doubt they ever catch the mistakes that go the other way (where students overpay and get refunded). Reminds me of Comcast.