1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

What is your opinion about offering multi-year scholarships?

Discussion in 'University of Colorado Recruiting Archive' started by FChairbanks, Feb 19, 2012.

?

Multi-year Schollies...good or bad?

Poll closed Mar 20, 2012.
  1. :thumbsup: this lets us lock in kids for the long term

    45.5%
  2. :wtf: this hurts us in a competitive recruiting situation

    54.5%
  1. FChairbanks

    FChairbanks muthaka slayer Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    9,674
    Likes Received:
    709
    I read in the camera that the PAC 12 has voted in favor of allowing schools to offer a 4-year schollie commitment rather than the single year, re-up system that is currently in place...thoughts?
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2012
  2. OUBuff

    OUBuff American Club Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    5,203
    Likes Received:
    1,137
    I think I would favor a compromise system where an initial scholly is for one year, then the option of up to 3/4 years after that. This reduces risk to the programs while offering the desired stability to the athlete. This would enable the coaching staff to determine which players would still thrive under an extended scholly and not put the staff into a situation where there must be no mistakes in evaluation of 17 year old kids.
     
  3. MtnBuff

    MtnBuff Not allowed in Barzil 2 Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    26,453
    Likes Received:
    2,353
    I don't think it will make any significant difference in most cases as long as the school maintains the integrity to keep honoring schollies for kids who maintain reasonable standards.

    CU has carried a significant number of players on the roster who never worked out and contributed on the field as expected but continued to be solid teammates and performed in the classroom.

    This change is I think more of a poke at schools who might have the SEC-like cut em' and replace em' mentality about non-performing schollies.

    What I do like about the renewables is that if a kid becomes an attitude problem or is continually on the fringes of stuff that could embarrass the program you can get rid of him before he becomes a headline or contaminates your locker room. With the 4-year this is much harder to clean up and the coaches have less control.
     
    aik likes this.
  4. aik

    aik Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,868
    Likes Received:
    623
    Well, I think that's about the earliest anyone's ever won a thread around here. This.
     
  5. Buffnik

    Buffnik Real name isn't Nik Club Member Junta Member

    Joined:
    Mar 20, 2009
    Messages:
    80,752
    Likes Received:
    16,467
    We should offer them.

    May as well get ahead of the game.

    It really changes nothing regarding disciplinary reasons for pulling a scholarship. What it changes is programs that missed on a guy who isn't good enough and then decide not to renew the scholarship in order to make room for someone else.

    This is college, not pro. You sign a kid and he does the work he should stay on scholarship.
     
  6. bigbang2

    bigbang2 Typical, brain knowledge or the ability to have a

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2011
    Messages:
    3,770
    Likes Received:
    107
    I understand both sides of the arguement, i would have to agree with giving kids multi year scholarships.
     
  7. zbuff

    zbuff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    713
    Let the bidding begin!
     
  8. mattrob

    mattrob Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2011
    Messages:
    1,933
    Likes Received:
    100
    Making the change makes Pac12 schools more attractive to recruits and holds schools accountable for the management of their scholarships. I don't agree with cutting college athletes that don't meet on-field expectations and this helps the student athletes.
     
  9. BuffHerd

    BuffHerd Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2011
    Messages:
    2,167
    Likes Received:
    316
    It would seem that the current staff has been ahead of the curve in terms of evaluating talent. CU was first, or close to first to offer several kids last cycle and is already putting offers out there for next cycle. Once scout,rivals, 24/7,espn start grading athletes, then many of these kids will get more attention and offers.

    That being said, multiyear scholies favor the schools that hit on their evaluations. If the SEC doesn't want to honor multiyear schollies because they can't evaluate talent (i.e. Rely on recruiting services), Pac12 may start attracting that talent because those sign and cut practices can be exploited in recruiting.

    I think there would always be the ability to cut players off for off the field behavior, grades, drugs, etc.
     
  10. Swish

    Swish Half a bubble off Club Member

    Joined:
    Aug 15, 2006
    Messages:
    4,202
    Likes Received:
    551
    See the disadvantages to a multiyear ride but I agree with Ringo, we better keep up with the trends in things like this. Getting left behind could hurt us pretty bad in this case. Schools would certainly use it to recruit against us.
     
  11. Buffellow85

    Buffellow85 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 25, 2009
    Messages:
    4,628
    Likes Received:
    164
    Just a thought.

    If we lock in a kid for 4 years, is the price of scolly locked in at a fixed rate? ( 4 years @ what the cost of a scolly is at the time it is given, vs. 4 years at what the cost is for that year)

    If the rate is fixed or locked them I am all for a mult-year deal. It could save the AD a significant amount of money.
     
  12. OUBuff

    OUBuff American Club Member

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2008
    Messages:
    5,203
    Likes Received:
    1,137
    I understand trying to fix the "fired for not being good enough" aspect of 4 yr scholly. The rule seems to protect the university from the player that fails academically or behavior issues. But, is the university protected from the player that (regardless of skill) does the work academically, but does not put forth effort on the practice or game field? I am speaking of a kid that receives an athletic scholarship and basically turns it into an academic scholarship by not performing his athletic responsibilities.
     
  13. MtnBuff

    MtnBuff Not allowed in Barzil 2 Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2008
    Messages:
    26,453
    Likes Received:
    2,353
    This is a real question.

    Also what about a kid who doesn't get arrested or end up in the media but despite guidance from the coaches spends his time in situations that are likely to eventually end up making the school look bad. How about if the kid shows up for ever practice and does what's ask of him but his attitude creates a cancer on the team and he isn't willing to change.

    I think that the coaches have to have something to hold over the players heads to keep them on the straight and narrow. If your program has integrity and doesn't "cut" kids just to bring in a better player thats pretty easy to demonstrate to kids who might be concerned. At the same time having a way to influence kids before they hit the papers or have a negative impact on other kids can be good for the school and program.
     
  14. zbuff

    zbuff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    713
    I think this would have zero (or close) effect on kids headed for the SEC. The vast majority come from the SE and will stay there. What it does is tie the HC's hands, so it's bad for the AD. I doubt any good will generated from it will make much of a difference, but it does seem more fair to the kids.
     
  15. aik

    aik Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 2008
    Messages:
    5,868
    Likes Received:
    623
    My biggest concern is are they like multi-year contracts in other jobs? How easy is it to get out of a deal if the kid proves he doesn't want to be here or put the necessary work in to be part of the program?
     
  16. BinaryBuff

    BinaryBuff mmmm...beer Club Member

    Joined:
    Sep 1, 2006
    Messages:
    1,578
    Likes Received:
    64
    There are definitely some concerns that have been pointed out. I'm really not in favor of it, but I'd say that at a minimum, I don't want CU to be leading the movement towards 4 year scholarships, but rather follow like lemmings if it comes to be a common thing. If the majority of the P12 moves to this (and especially the better football schools like USC & Oregon), then we should follow suit.

    Would a stud 4* or 5* base his decision to attend a school on whether he had a 4 year guarantee or a year-to-year? I'd bet he thinks he's good enough to not need the 4 year and that it's a (very) minor part of his decision.
     
  17. FChairbanks

    FChairbanks muthaka slayer Club Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2005
    Messages:
    9,674
    Likes Received:
    709
    i see more potential downside than upside to multi-year schollies.

    first, what about inconsistency? what kind of negative motivation is going to occur on a kid who is signed to a year-to-year agreement when he is looking at his counterpart at the same position who is on a four-year deal...it could lead to a serious decline in competition for spots on the playing field.

    second, what if a kid comes in on a four-year deal and redshirts, then in between his soph and junior year the staff changes and he no longer fits the goals of the program? he is stuck with a coaching staff who doesn't need him and the coaching staff is stuck with a scholarship player who rides the bench.

    third, what impact will this have on the staff's flexibility to sign jucos or walk-ons to fill an immediate need? how many schollies do you have to hold open on a two-year horizon to account for those opportunities?

    fourth, listen to what the players and coaches are saying. they like the year-to-year system. it holds everyone's feet to the fire, and makes people work for their meal ticket...

    i don't like it.
     
  18. zbuff

    zbuff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    713
    I finally got around to reading the article. Funny how Ringo lists all of the reasons DiStefano voted against the proposal, but then just declares it bad for CU at the end. He's entitled to his opinion, but his only logic was other schools are doing it. I don't really buy that. I also think even schools that do offer multi-year will offer one year at a time to guys with injuries.
     
  19. Clean Undies

    Clean Undies Flagship of the 12-Pac Club Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    27,301
    Likes Received:
    5,992
    Anyone responsible for the decission to extend Hawkins for a fifth season probably doesn't have the most reliable opinion.

    I'd lean towards whatever peers in the conference are doing.
     
  20. zbuff

    zbuff Club Member Club Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    7,414
    Likes Received:
    713
    Okay, but did you read the article? He's quoting all groups he talked with, faculty, coaches and even the players, all of whom did not want multiple year scholarships. It's not a one off DiStefano decision. The players want to be pushed to work for each year's scholarship, and they want to know the guy next to them has to do the same. I'm going with the players on this one.
     
  21. moett88

    moett88 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 16, 2011
    Messages:
    402
    Likes Received:
    72
    good point!
     
  22. BuffsNYC

    BuffsNYC Uptown Club Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2007
    Messages:
    2,672
    Likes Received:
    1,012
    This is much ado about nothing. Coaches will still be able to run off scholarship players who don't contribute. At CU, all Embo will have to do is set up a little one-on-one between the player and Bobby Anderson.

    [video=youtube;vkqjjHDEt_w]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkqjjHDEt_w[/video]

    Damn, that Robby Benson was nails! :lol:
     
  23. Clean Undies

    Clean Undies Flagship of the 12-Pac Club Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2007
    Messages:
    27,301
    Likes Received:
    5,992
    I read the article. I also recall the BDC being used as a mouthpiece for the school.

    Whenever a paid employee of the university uses some generic line about seeking student opinion to justify their decission, there is bound to be an agenda.

    I bet "the students" that were loosely referenced in the article would also have favorable opinions about being given large sums of cash to help with college expenses.

    Edit: I'm not done. I'd be a lot more comfortable if it were Embree or Bohn being the mouthpiece on this issue.

    I'll be more open to respecting DiStephano's press quotes IF he were to show a bias towards kicking ass in athletics.

    Get back to me after 5th year Phil is quoted in the press telling us how his legacy at CU is incomplete without another national championship. Only then will I drop my scepticism.
     
    Last edited: Feb 24, 2012

Share This Page