I was a student on campus when Rod Rhodes "transferred" to USC and it never felt right that he left UK. I'll leave that statement as it is.

 

BCG has made the climate in this state so awful, that yes, it has become a talent grab and that yes, by judging from comments made from other threads winning has become such a drug for some UK fans that it doesn't matter how they do it. Calipari has brought back the "sense of entitlement" that some UK fans now are feeling like the kids who gave up their lives for UK are now not deserving of the scholarship they earned because they aren't good enough. To me, that is a sickening attitude. Scholarship pulling may happen all of the time, but the way people are making lists and openly discussing who should be gone is sad, IMO. I know Calipari was brought here to win, but if he can't take what is in the cupboard and do better than Billy G, well then he isn't worth the money then, is he?

I was a student on campus when Rod Rhodes "transferred" to USC and it never felt right that he left UK. I'll leave that statement as it is.

 

BCG has made the climate in this state so awful, that yes, it has become a talent grab and that yes, by judging from comments made from other threads winning has become such a drug for some UK fans that it doesn't matter how they do it. Calipari has brought back the "sense of entitlement" that some UK fans now are feeling like the kids who gave up their lives for UK are now not deserving of the scholarship they earned because they aren't good enough. To me, that is a sickening attitude. Scholarship pulling may happen all of the time, but the way people are making lists and openly discussing who should be gone is sad, IMO. I know Calipari was brought here to win, but if he can't take what is in the cupboard and do better than Billy G, well then he isn't worth the money then, is he?

Who gave up their lives? The closest I can think of is Ramon Harris. I don't think he will be playing much more if at all because of the concussion he got this year. You are a little over dramatic on your comments.:ohbrother:

I am not meaning it in the aspect of life or death, but once you sign on the dotted line you are bound by that signature and everything you do from then on is not only a reflection on you, but of the university as well. For four years you are property of the University of Kentucky.....unless of course you aren't good enough.

I am not meaning it in the aspect of life or death, but once you sign on the dotted line you are bound by that signature and everything you do from then on is not only a reflection on you, but of the university as well. For four years you are property of the University of Kentucky.....unless of course you aren't good enough.

 

I thought all scholarships are really one year contracts that technically do not have to be renewed.

I thought all scholarships are really one year contracts that technically do not have to be renewed.

Correct...

I was a student on campus when Rod Rhodes "transferred" to USC and it never felt right that he left UK. I'll leave that statement as it is.

 

BCG has made the climate in this state so awful, that yes, it has become a talent grab and that yes, by judging from comments made from other threads winning has become such a drug for some UK fans that it doesn't matter how they do it. Calipari has brought back the "sense of entitlement" that some UK fans now are feeling like the kids who gave up their lives for UK are now not deserving of the scholarship they earned because they aren't good enough. To me, that is a sickening attitude. Scholarship pulling may happen all of the time, but the way people are making lists and openly discussing who should be gone is sad, IMO. I know Calipari was brought here to win, but if he can't take what is in the cupboard and do better than Billy G, well then he isn't worth the money then, is he?

 

Gave up their lives? Are you kidding me? As if they don't get anything in return...they're going to college for free.

 

What makes them different than kids who lose academic scholarships for not keeping a good enough GPA? Did they give up their lives as well? Should they get to keep them if they're trying hard but just can't meet the requirements?

Gave up their lives? Are you kidding me? As if they don't get anything in return...they're going to college for free.

 

What makes them different than kids who lose academic scholarships for not keeping a good enough GPA? Did they give up their lives as well? Should they get to keep them if they're trying hard but just can't meet the requirements?

 

Very valid point.

Gave up their lives? Are you kidding me? As if they don't get anything in return...they're going to college for free.

 

What makes them different than kids who lose academic scholarships for not keeping a good enough GPA? Did they give up their lives as well? Should they get to keep them if they're trying hard but just can't meet the requirements?

 

These colleges recruit these kids hard. Very hard. It takes the average kid months to figure out what route to go. When the kids picks his school, does everything right except the fact that he didn't pan out as a basketball player they had hoped, you kick him off of the team to make room for a younger, better player who isn't going to school for a 4 year education whatsoever so the basketball team can hang banners? To me that is wrong, I don't care what school it is, that is wrong. Maybe the school should do a better job of recruiting so situations like this don't pop up. Tubby was man enough to take what Pitino left him and excelled with what Pitino couldn't bare to look at. Billy G took what Tubby left him and well, we see the result of that, but he was a horrible coach anyways. My whole point is that Calipari should do the same. Kicking kids off of the team for the sole purpose of bringing in his recruits and winning next year is despicable. Things are already going to be better next year and beyond whether you kick kids off of the team or not. Winning is that important that you turn your backs on the same kids you cheered for this year because they aren't good enough all of a sudden? After doing all of that and acting the way some posters are acting, and then wonder why a kid like Dominique Ferguson is re-opening his recruitment. I am glad my son isn't a current Wildcat.

 

 

 

The difference between academic and athletic scholarships is that kids on academic scholarships know exactly what they have to do to maintain their eligibility. If you don't have a 3.5 or higher, you lose your scholarship. Athletic scholarships aren't taken away because you averaged 30 seconds a game. If that was the case, someone like Jared Carter would have been kicked off of the team his freshman year.

I thought all scholarships are really one year contracts that technically do not have to be renewed.

 

Technically, yes, but when was the last time you saw or heard of a kid being kicked off of the team because he is no longer as talented as the school once thought he was. Never seen that one scroll across the ESPN Bottomline. Jared Carter's UK athletic scholarship not renewed for the 2008-9 season. Carter averaged 22 seconds a game this year.

 

I like how everyone tries to gloss over the real issue when it is so clear that UK fans want to kick off the kids they deem aren't good enough to play for UK and bring in the best recruiting class Calipari can get right now. At least be honest with your intentions, there's no point in trying to sugarcoat it. It's an insult to people's intelligence.

Technically, yes, but when was the last time you saw or heard of a kid being kicked off of the team because he is no longer as talented as the school once thought he was. Never seen that one scroll across the ESPN Bottomline. Jared Carter's UK athletic scholarship not renewed for the 2008-9 season. Carter averaged 22 seconds a game this year.

 

I like how everyone tries to gloss over the real issue when it is so clear that UK fans want to kick off the kids they deem aren't good enough to play for UK and bring in the best recruiting class Calipari can get right now. At least be honest with your intentions, there's no point in trying to sugarcoat it. It's an insult to people's intelligence.

 

What's the point of keeping players that have seen virtually ZERO playing time during their time at the university, when you could recruit players that will make an impact? And honestly do you think ESPN will scroll across their bottom line it would say The University of Kentucky will not retain Sophomore Guard Donald Williams, Williams averaged 1.2 seconds per game this year.? Come to think of it, would ESPN do that for any school, let alone Kentucky.

What's the point of keeping players that have seen virtually ZERO playing time during their time at the university, when you could recruit players that will make an impact? And honestly do you think ESPN will scroll across their bottom line it would say The University of Kentucky will not retain Sophomore Guard Donald Williams, Williams averaged 1.2 seconds per game this year.? Come to think of it, would ESPN do that for any school, let alone Kentucky.

 

If a school kicks a kid off of the team for disciplinary reasons it is scrolled on the bottom line. The school should be scrolled across the bottom line for kicking a kid off the team for averaging 1.2 seconds a game as well. It's only fair.

 

 

All colleges in every division has players at the end of the bench, on scholarship, that see virtually zero playing time. Every school has them.

 

When was the last time a kid's scholarship was pulled because he wasn't good enough anymore? When was the last time a coach came to a new school and kicked off players he didn't think were good enough? People say "it happens all of the time". I'd like to know facts and certain situations, and not just one, I want multiple situations because this is a practice that seems fairly new to me and if it isn't it is tailor made for an episode on "Outside The Lines". All schools that do things of that nature should be exposed.

 

I completely understand if a player wants to leave because he realizes he isn't good enough, but the question being posed isn't which kids will want to leave, the question being posed is which kids should be kicked off the team because they aren't good enough? That's the question that disturbs me.

If a school kicks a kid off of the team for disciplinary reasons it is scrolled on the bottom line. The school should be scrolled across the bottom line for kicking a kid off the team for averaging 1.2 seconds a game as well. It's only fair.

 

 

All colleges in every division has players at the end of the bench, on scholarship, that see virtually zero playing time. Every school has them.

 

When was the last time a kid's scholarship was pulled because he wasn't good enough anymore? When was the last time a coach came to a new school and kicked off players he didn't think were good enough? People say "it happens all of the time". I'd like to know facts and certain situations, and not just one, I want multiple situations because this is a practice that seems fairly new to me and if it isn't it is tailor made for an episode on "Outside The Lines". All schools that do things of that nature should be exposed.

 

I completely understand if a player wants to leave because he realizes he isn't good enough, but the question being posed isn't which kids will want to leave, the question being posed is which kids should be kicked off the team because they aren't good enough? That's the question that disturbs me.

 

 

Well as you and I are both are probably not close enough to a college basketball program to know the statistics, but this can't be a foreign concept, maybe it is taboo, but I am certain that this is not the only instance in College Basketball history this will have happened.

 

I think the Seniors on the team should have their scholarships honored, they have been there for three seasons and deserve to finish out their time at the University. But for the others, I don't feel bad for them, why would they want to go and sit on the bench for four years when they could go to another school-one of lesser prestige, granted-and see significant playing time. Sure it may be a dream of theirs to play at their home state's flagship university, but at the same time they are nothing more than benchwarmers. Call me mean, call me heartless, whatever, I would have said this last year, five years ago, I've never seen the appeal in going to a school and riding the pine for 4 years. I'm not one of the dreaded 18% either, I just feel that a school with the tradition and history of a Kentucky, Duke, North Carolina, Arizona, UCLA, Indiana, or Georgetown should fill their rosters with players that can step in and contribute from day 1.

I have no problems with guys who aren't with UK yet not being given the opportunity to play here. If he tells Vilarano (sp?), Euton, etc that they aren't good enough and that they should look else where I'm fine with that.

 

I find it harder to just say, "see ya Ramon". These kids are already in school and have changed their lives for this school. Porter and Harris have moved from the other side of the country to be here. If he tells them to leave, I'll understand it, I'll just feel worse about that I guess is what I'm trying to say.

 

When you're given an academic scholarship, and you just aren't cutting it by making the grades, they take that scholarship away from you. In my eyes, an athletic scholarship should be no different, and there's a whole lot on that team that just "aren't cutting it".

When you're given an academic scholarship, and you just aren't cutting it by making the grades, they take that scholarship away from you. In my eyes, an athletic scholarship should be no different, and there's a whole lot on that team that just "aren't cutting it".

 

You know that information when you get the academic scholarship. If that was made known with athletic scholarships then you probably wouldn't have guys who "aren't cutting" it on the team.

I would object to any 2010 senior being asked for their scholarship.