Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Oregon steals EWU QB Adams as Graduate Transfer

buffaholic said:
In CFB, there is no parity. The winners get first pick of the players and everyone else is required to find hidden gems and develop them. If those gems that do develop, are allowed to become unrestricted FAs and sign with the winners, then the pretense of competitiveness becomes a sham.
Click to expand...

You could call it "sign with the winners" but the student athlete is also trading up to a better education/degree in some cases. I think they should be allowed to do this.

buffaholic said:
In the NFL, you have to play for the team that drafted you until you earn free agency, in CFB, it's a similar 4 year commitment.
Click to expand...

What if the team isn't committed to the player? What if the coach who recruited him is gone and the new coach doesn't see a good fit for the veteran players in his new scheme? Should a player still just sit politely on the bench, even if there's another team that wants and needs him more?
 
AlferdJasper said:
What if the team isn't committed to the player? What if the coach who recruited him is gone and the new coach doesn't see a good fit for the veteran players in his new scheme? Should a player still just sit politely on the bench, even if there's another team that wants and needs him more?
Click to expand...

No - the coach should have the ability to grant a transfer request and release the kid with no penalty. But if the coach invested 3 years to develop him, I think they should have option to retain.
 
buffaholic said:
No - the coach should have the ability to grant a transfer request and release the kid with no penalty. But if the coach invested 3 years to develop him, I think they should have option to retain.
Click to expand...

Talking about a kid who is at a school and the coach leaves. It doesn't always end well for the kid, so I'm glad they at least have the option of graduating and moving on somewhere else. The system is heavily slanted toward schools, not individual athletes.
 
wsp4820 said:
The quad laser.
Click to expand...

In my senior year I had a roomie who loved the dog track. As a result, I joined him on a couple of trips to the tracks in Commerce City and Loveland. There was actually such a thing as a Tri-Superfecta, which was even better than a trifecta. So there you go.
 
tsarbomba said:
In my senior year I had a roomie who loved the dog track. As a result, I joined him on a couple of trips to the tracks in Commerce City and Loveland. There was actually such a thing as a Tri-Superfecta, which was even better than a trifecta. So there you go.
Click to expand...

No one can defeat the quad laser.
 
buffaholic said:
The only reason it bothers me is because the difference from a very mediocre QB and a guy like this kid is the difference between an 8-4 season and "sky's the limit". It's that he's a QB.

The NFL has a draft whereby the worse teams draft first and that free agents can't move freely from winner to winner, because of the salary cap. That provides for parity, and the organizations that can spot talent and develop it rise to the top. Pats draft near the end every year....

In CFB, there is no parity. The winners get first pick of the players and everyone else is required to find hidden gems and develop them. If those gems that do develop, are allowed to become unrestricted FAs and sign with the winners, then the pretense of competitiveness becomes a sham.

In the NFL, you have to play for the team that drafted you until you earn free agency, in CFB, it's a similar 4 year commitment.

It's what ruined MLB for me. The Yankees. If they don't check this, it will be standard practice for QBs to be Unrestricted FAs.
The pretense of competitiveness far out weighs an individual player' right to choose (for me). A player can always move down a division with no penalty or move up or laterally with a 1 year penalty.
Click to expand...

There isn't any parity in CFB. Don't kid yourself. Year and year end it's the same teams at the top, but maybe change 1 MAYBE 2. Individual games can be changed, but the seasonal outcomes are nearly always the same. Ohio St won the NC after being on probation for the past 3 years. And they were on top while on probation too. Assuming Sark isn't a moron USC has the Pac12/NC as a limit given how they are recruiting.

And scholarships are not a 4 year commitment. They should be, but currently aren't. They are on a year to year basis. If Tad shows some players the door after this year would your tune change? Well, it'd definitely help CU, but some of the guys on the current team would have to drop down to a lesser school. Or look at the Hawk/Embree guys we had on the team that were shown the door. I'm not saying it's justified or not, there is definitely a gray moral area, but college athletics are ruthless and the student athletes usually end up on the wrong side of the stick. APR rates are dreadful at the CFB level. It's rather sad.

Some people even attempt to leave early and the schools forbid it. Look at some of the OL that has transferred to CU due to family issues. Some coaches are really harsh. So they aren't unrestricted FAs. They aren't anything close to it. Unless the school allows them to transfer they are the school's/coach's lackey.

SuperiorBuff said:
Realistically, how often does this happen? I think this is making a mountain out of a molehill.
Click to expand...

We are talking true seniors, RS-juniors and true juniors that entered college with a ton of AP credits (or maybe gray shirted). As I said above, APR rates are awful. Very few regular students graduate in 4 years and they don't have the demands and expectations that student athletes have (in some ways, not in others, obviously).

It's a moot point. If this guy came to CU we'd be drawing up the horse carriage for him. He may not even be that good. He may only be good in an Oregon's offense.

Let's just focus on what CU can do. These are the rules. We should play by them instead of whining about them.
 
I don't remember any Buff fans complaining about competitive balance when we were getting 7 or 8 kids a year drafted and even had some back-ups getting FA invites to NFL camps. Hoping that one day in the future we are back to the point where people are complaining that our talent level is unfair.

As far as kids being able to transfer and use unused eligibility someplace else the fairness all depends on your perspective but it does allow student athletes who have earned a degree the ability to have some control over their educations.

It sucks for an EWU to lose a starting QB to Oregon but how many schools have been helped by picking up a QB from a higher division team who wanted a chance to start before finishing his career.
 
MtnBuff said:
I don't remember any Buff fans complaining about competitive balance when we were getting 7 or 8 kids a year drafted and even had some back-ups getting FA invites to NFL camps. Hoping that one day in the future we are back to the point where people are complaining that our talent level is unfair.

As far as kids being able to transfer and use unused eligibility someplace else the fairness all depends on your perspective but it does allow student athletes who have earned a degree the ability to have some control over their educations.

It sucks for an EWU to lose a starting QB to Oregon but how many schools have been helped by picking up a QB from a higher division team who wanted a chance to start before finishing his career.
Click to expand...
We want a liberal utopia while we suck and a conservative utopia when we kick ass.

/end thread
 
CanadianDuck said:
A lot of this has to do with our redshirt freshman Mahalak getting injured and being set back a year. That means Oregon was left with a transfer and a true freshman at QB so getting Vernon made a lot of sense. I don't see why anyone would be bothered by him transferring as student athletes already get ****ed over enough. This gives a guy who graduated within 4 years a chance to get more exposure to increase his shot at an NFL job.
Click to expand...

I agree.

The whole system is kind of ****ed. And that was before [strike]stipends[/strike] money for playing were being offered.

I think the system should be modified to create some parity. The winning teams should have slightly less scholarships for example. The LOI date should be moved since its in this period that there is a lot of coaching upheavals.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
I agree.

The whole system is kind of ****ed. And that was before [strike]stipends[/strike] money for playing were being offered.

I think the system should be modified to create some parity. The winning teams should have slightly less scholarships for example. The LOI date should be moved since its in this period that there is a lot of coaching upheavals.
Click to expand...

Excuse me? When CU starts winning again, don't be taking any scholarships away so we can have parity with the teams who've been beating us the last decade or so. Screw that suggestion.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
I agree.

The whole system is kind of ****ed. And that was before [strike]stipends[/strike] money for playing were being offered.

I think the system should be modified to create some parity. The winning teams should have slightly less scholarships for example. The LOI date should be moved since its in this period that there is a lot of coaching upheavals.
Click to expand...
What kind of inane dickery is this?
 
Maybe the rule is kind of iffy but that guy worked with what was there. I have zero issue with it, just hope we sack him quite a bit.
 
A kid works hard and graduates, good for him and he can reap the benefits from that. Too many rules are in place that limit the options of the kids in the first place. A HC change may change the whole landscape for current roster kids and may turn a good situation to very bad for the kid quickly. This is one that would encourages a kid to get his degree and protect himself long term. Graduate in 4 years if you are a redshirt and it may open up options for you in that 5th year of eligibility.
 
What gets ignored in this conversation is that the huge majority of these kids end up playing where, at their original schools.

If the school they are at provides the best options and opportunities and treats players well it is rare that a kid will leave. CU has a long list of kids who have gotten a nice start on a graduate degree in their fifth year.

We know that as much as the NCAA would like to imagine otherwise they put the money before their athletes but in this case the rule actually works for the best interest of the student-athlete. It should stay that way.
 
Without naming names, let's go with a hypothetical player. Let's say (choose a reason), fresh out of high school, he did not go with a Division 1 school.
Maybe ...
he was injured as a junior and sat out his senior season,
or he was poised to be the high school starter as a senior until the son of an NFL player joined his high school team and he was benched/switched to a different position he'd never played,
or he thought he was going to college A, until they burned him at the last minute when a 5-star player took his spot, and by then college B and C had moved on,
or maybe he was naive and paid some "recruiter" to get his tapes out and talk to colleges and discovered after the fact that the "recruiter" hadn't done squat.
(Yeah, and I know or know of players who lived through each and every one of these situations.)
Maybe he didn't realize until too late that his HS school grades weren't good enough for the schools where he wanted to play.

So the kid says, I'm not giving up my dream and I'm taking the best spot offered by the best college I can still find and I'll work my tail off and play my hardest and maybe I'll get one more chance. I'll take every class I can, even in summers, and keep my grades up in case I can graduate and transfer. And then a school who just played for the national championship comes calling.
How the hell does he owe that opportunity to the lower-division school for "developing" him? Why is it not considered mutually beneficial for both the original school and the player that he found a spot to play, did what was asked of him and contributed to the first college?
 
If you're worried about players that "you spent time and effort developing" leaving after they graduate (maybe even by graduating early), perhaps you should increase the academic rigorousness of earning a degree at your school.
 
It's just sour grapes. Kid wins starting job next year and does well, $$$$$$ move
.
 
MiamiBuffs said:
I agree.

The whole system is kind of ****ed. And that was before [strike]stipends[/strike] money for playing were being offered.

I think the system should be modified to create some parity. The winning teams should have slightly less scholarships for example. The LOI date should be moved since its in this period that there is a lot of coaching upheavals.
Click to expand...

Darth Snow said:
What kind of inane dickery is this?
Click to expand...

Highlander said:
We want a liberal utopia while we suck and a conservative utopia when we kick ass.

/end thread
Click to expand...
My earlier post stands perfectly to address this interchange.

What's wrong, Snow? What works in your politics does not work for you on the football field?
 
All I know is that no matter how good this QB may be, Oregon downgraded the position. Mariota may be the best college QB I've ever seen.
 
Buffnik said:
All I know is that no matter how good this QB may be, Oregon downgraded the position. Mariota may be the best college QB I've ever seen.
Click to expand...
Bro I respect you and your opinions, you know that. I think he's very good, I'd tap the brakes on great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top