RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

UConn 2019-2020
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
CBiebel



Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 778
Location: PA


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/19/19 3:31 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

cthskzfn wrote:
CBiebel wrote:
SDHoops wrote:
Just to clarify, Shepard was one of the anti-Yori's. She didn't like being held accountable for being out of shape and only playing half of the game..so sthu. Imo, EW should be IMMEDIATELY eligible. Next!


Says the person who once posted:

Yes, karma. They got a rare hardship transfer exception (whatever you want to call it) for Shepard..when there was really no reason. I'm not the only one thinking that, even Staley said some other coaches are good liars to get people waivers. MM sold her soul to YKW and she's been paying for it ever since.

Hmmm! I wonder if EW gets the immediate eligibility whether you would say that GA "sold his soul."

Amazing how many about faces there seem to be among UConn fans regarding this issue when it happens to be a player transferring to UConn... Wink



Said the ND fan whose team won it's 1st NC in 17 yrs only because of said controversial waiver ruling. Laughing

IOW, do as I say, not as I do.



I'm sorry, but where did I say that I objected to EW getting immediate eligibility? Please show me a post where I said so. You said "not as I do." I never said that the NCAA shouldn't give EW immediate eligibility.

Mr. "If you say 'UConn fans say this' you must apologize because you didn't say 'some'." you sure should take some of your own medicine. I NEVER said that EW shouldn't get immediate eligibility. I always said that in a case of a coaching change, this should be an option.

My problem is with the hypocrites on the UConn side who attacked ND for that situation while they are perfectly willing to take it for UConn.

You constantly attacked me any time I didn't include the word "some" when talking about what some UConn fans said.

Please show me the post where I said that she shouldn't get immediate eligibility. If it existed (it doesn't), then it shouldn't be hard (it will be, because, well, it doesn't exist) since this has only come up in the last week or two.

So you are going to apologize to me for this, right, because I never said anything against EW getting immediate eligibility? You wouldn't want to be a hypocrite, would you? Will you admit that your post is wrong? Well?




Last edited by CBiebel on 05/19/19 3:41 am; edited 4 times in total
CBiebel



Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 778
Location: PA


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/19/19 3:36 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Shades wrote:
http://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/21284147/transfers-remain-tricky-growing-part-women-college-basketball

Quote:
Although the waiver is helping the Irish this season, McGraw said she doesn't want to see women's basketball have a one-time transfer exception -- where anyone can transfer once without sitting out -- as exists in NCAA Division I sports except for football (bowl subdivision), men's and women's hoops, baseball and men's ice hockey.

"I hope not," McGraw said. "Because with 400 transfers this year, and then to say it's an open gate and you can play right away? I think there would be at least double that. It's really hard on the teams that lose people. It takes two years to recover from it, and it puts you in a tough situation trying to fill out a roster."

But the reality is, even when well-intentioned, coaches discussing transfers often end up essentially contradicting themselves: "We're against them ... until we need them."


She actually admitted this and you are using this against her? How many UConn fans attacked Shepard, yet now are for EW getting immediate eligibility.

I'm sure that you, Shades, are against EW getting that immediate eligibility for EW, right? Wink


Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 52124



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/19/19 8:02 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CBiebel wrote:
Shades wrote:
http://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/21284147/transfers-remain-tricky-growing-part-women-college-basketball

Quote:
Although the waiver is helping the Irish this season, McGraw said she doesn't want to see women's basketball have a one-time transfer exception -- where anyone can transfer once without sitting out -- as exists in NCAA Division I sports except for football (bowl subdivision), men's and women's hoops, baseball and men's ice hockey.

"I hope not," McGraw said. "Because with 400 transfers this year, and then to say it's an open gate and you can play right away? I think there would be at least double that. It's really hard on the teams that lose people. It takes two years to recover from it, and it puts you in a tough situation trying to fill out a roster."

But the reality is, even when well-intentioned, coaches discussing transfers often end up essentially contradicting themselves: "We're against them ... until we need them."


She actually admitted this and you are using this against her?


If I didn’t post that, then there would be those that would deny that she held this viewpoint. Can you deny that? It’s actually Mechelle Voepel pointing out McGraw being a hypocrite. Voepel is like the Mother Teresa of women’s basketball. If she’s pointing out that McGraw is a hypocrite, it surely must be the case.

CBiebel wrote:
How many UConn fans attacked Shepard, yet now are for EW getting immediate eligibility.


I don’t know. That’s not important to me, and you never seem to come up with a number yourself. You’re just suggesting UConn fans “attack Shepard” instead of the reality of being upset with the inconsistent rulings in order to paint them as terrible or unfair people.

You react like a Trump supporter who screams “what about Hillary’s emails?” every time Russian collusion is brought up. Each situation should be looked at and judged on its own merits. As I have painstakingly detailed repeatedly, the Shepard transfer had absolutely no merit to be immediate.

CBiebel wrote:
I'm sure that you, Shades, are against EW getting that immediate eligibility for EW, right?


I’ve already said I’m leaning against immediate transfer in her case. If she wants out because of the coaching staff, it doesn’t make sense to leave now that the coaching staff is gone. But I know and care less to research the merits of her case. The reason I was so passionate about the Shepard case was because I have a high regard for what Connie Yori had done with Nebraska. She brought them from nothing to national prominence with players like Kelsey Griffin and Lindsey Moore. Shepard’s teammate at the time, Romeo, supported Yori and said she had done nothing wrong.

Westbrook had to waste some of her career under Warlick, so I feel a little sympathy for her. I don’t think her terrible performance in the NCAA’s had much to do with Warlick, unless it was a matter of being entrenched in that culture of losing that Warlick developed.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
CamrnCrz1974



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 17866
Location: Phoenix


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/20/19 10:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Shades wrote:
If I didn’t post that, then there would be those that would deny that she held this viewpoint. Can you deny that? It’s actually Mechelle Voepel pointing out McGraw being a hypocrite. Voepel is like the Mother Teresa of women’s basketball. If she’s pointing out that McGraw is a hypocrite, it surely must be the case.


And there would have been those who questioned Mechelle Voepel and any potential bias had she not made a point about this issue.


Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1104



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/20/19 3:36 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CBiebel wrote:


How many UConn fans attacked Shepard, yet now are for EW getting immediate eligibility.


I'll bite, how many?

I don't memorize every post I read, but I don't recall any.

I know there was some criticism of the NCAA decision, and I'll bet someone used it to take a shot at Muffet, but attacking Shepard? Seriously?


SDHoops



Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 923



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/20/19 4:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

It doesn't matter how many ppl were against ND getting the Shepard waiver..the point is that now the slipper will see if everyone gets a fair shot at fitting it or only certain programs!!...CBible forgets that a player that left UConn last year was immediately eligible the following season..


linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 4024



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/20/19 6:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CBiebel wrote:
Shades wrote:
http://www.espn.com/womens-college-basketball/story/_/id/21284147/transfers-remain-tricky-growing-part-women-college-basketball

Quote:
Although the waiver is helping the Irish this season, McGraw said she doesn't want to see women's basketball have a one-time transfer exception -- where anyone can transfer once without sitting out -- as exists in NCAA Division I sports except for football (bowl subdivision), men's and women's hoops, baseball and men's ice hockey.

"I hope not," McGraw said. "Because with 400 transfers this year, and then to say it's an open gate and you can play right away? I think there would be at least double that. It's really hard on the teams that lose people. It takes two years to recover from it, and it puts you in a tough situation trying to fill out a roster."

But the reality is, even when well-intentioned, coaches discussing transfers often end up essentially contradicting themselves: "We're against them ... until we need them."


She actually admitted this and you are using this against her? How many UConn fans attacked Shepard, yet now are for EW getting immediate eligibility.

I'm sure that you, Shades, are against EW getting that immediate eligibility for EW, right? Wink


Actually, if UConn fans are angry at anyone over Sheppard it would be the NCAA. They granted the waiver. And most UConn fans would agree with that. Our annoyance at Irish Nation predates this and doesn't descend to the level of hate.
"Some" Irish fans didn't get the letter telling them that the universe does not revolve around South Bend. Rolling Eyes

I think MM made some good points against a blanket waiver but if you weren't eligible until you complete 2 years of school and then only once, it could work. The biggest problem would be with keeping the coaches honest. Schools with wide recruiting nets, a fat budget and contacts all over the country might be tempted to approach players through surrogates. Of course that could be happening now with grads.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 9860



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/20/19 6:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If the players have to sit a year, coaches should too ...



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 5418
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/21/19 10:43 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
If the players have to sit a year, coaches should too ...


Now you're really being ridiculous.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
SDHoops



Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 923



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/19 10:13 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
ClayK wrote:
If the players have to sit a year, coaches should too ...


Now you're really being ridiculous.

You know what though...Clay has a really good point.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 5418
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/19 11:24 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SDHoops wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
ClayK wrote:
If the players have to sit a year, coaches should too ...


Now you're really being ridiculous.

You know what though...Clay has a really good point.


Explain why. Coaching is a JOB and the workers are adults being paid. Players are, in most cases at least. STUDENTS...at least the women are. Male players are something else, at least at P5 schools. D-II and D-III players are a whole other thing.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 59301
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/19 12:05 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
SDHoops wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
ClayK wrote:
If the players have to sit a year, coaches should too ...


Now you're really being ridiculous.

You know what though...Clay has a really good point.


Explain why. Coaching is a JOB and the workers are adults being paid. Players are, in most cases at least. STUDENTS...at least the women are. Male players are something else, at least at P5 schools. D-II and D-III players are a whole other thing.


None of which justifies making them sit out a year



_________________
On Christmas Day, the Gingerbread Man said, ‘Ladyfingers, be my wife.’
Shades



Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 52124



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/19 12:18 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Sitting out is a bonus for those wanting the extended education. For instance, Lexie Brown ended up with a Duke MBA.



_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
Davis4632



Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 564



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/19 1:25 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
SDHoops wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
ClayK wrote:
If the players have to sit a year, coaches should too ...


Now you're really being ridiculous.

You know what though...Clay has a really good point.


Explain why. Coaching is a JOB and the workers are adults being paid. Players are, in most cases at least. STUDENTS...at least the women are. Male players are something else, at least at P5 schools. D-II and D-III players are a whole other thing.


Coaches can also get fired at any point during a season.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 12056
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/19 2:30 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Davis4632 wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
SDHoops wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
ClayK wrote:
If the players have to sit a year, coaches should too ...


Now you're really being ridiculous.

You know what though...Clay has a really good point.


Explain why. Coaching is a JOB and the workers are adults being paid. Players are, in most cases at least. STUDENTS...at least the women are. Male players are something else, at least at P5 schools. D-II and D-III players are a whole other thing.


Coaches can also get fired at any point during a season.


Well, so can players for that matter....at least, if they demonstrate egregious behaviors that violate team rules, etc.

There certainly does need to be SOME differentiation between coaches' and players' movability....that's not a precise equivalence. While the arbitrary protocol of granting waivers may be flawed, what else does anyone here recommend regarding a system of checks and balances that keeps players from moving around at every teenaged whim? There does need to be SOME kind of accountability for players who accept the 'commitment' to a school, no?



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 9860



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/19 2:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
Davis4632 wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
SDHoops wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
ClayK wrote:
If the players have to sit a year, coaches should too ...


Now you're really being ridiculous.

You know what though...Clay has a really good point.


Explain why. Coaching is a JOB and the workers are adults being paid. Players are, in most cases at least. STUDENTS...at least the women are. Male players are something else, at least at P5 schools. D-II and D-III players are a whole other thing.


Coaches can also get fired at any point during a season.


Well, so can players for that matter....at least, if they demonstrate egregious behaviors that violate team rules, etc.

There certainly does need to be SOME differentiation between coaches' and players' movability....that's not a precise equivalence. While the arbitrary protocol of granting waivers may be flawed, what else does anyone here recommend regarding a system of checks and balances that keeps players from moving around at every teenaged whim? There does need to be SOME kind of accountability for players who accept the 'commitment' to a school, no?


Of course I'm not convinced there should be some kind of accountability -- at least not until those teenagers can hire agents, if they so choose, before they sign their LOIs. Why should anyone be denied representation before they sign a contract?

Again, are coaches and ADs prohibited from hiring agents?

I would also argue that scholarship athletes meet almost every definition of an "employee" -- including cash payouts. Whether they are students is irrelevant. If a college student has a union job to pay for tuition, is she denied the right to union benefits because she's enrolled in a university?



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
Davis4632



Joined: 14 Jul 2014
Posts: 564



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/22/19 3:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
Davis4632 wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
SDHoops wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
ClayK wrote:
If the players have to sit a year, coaches should too ...


Now you're really being ridiculous.

You know what though...Clay has a really good point.


Explain why. Coaching is a JOB and the workers are adults being paid. Players are, in most cases at least. STUDENTS...at least the women are. Male players are something else, at least at P5 schools. D-II and D-III players are a whole other thing.


Coaches can also get fired at any point during a season.


Well, so can players for that matter....at least, if they demonstrate egregious behaviors that violate team rules, etc.

There certainly does need to be SOME differentiation between coaches' and players' movability....that's not a precise equivalence. While the arbitrary protocol of granting waivers may be flawed, what else does anyone here recommend regarding a system of checks and balances that keeps players from moving around at every teenaged whim? There does need to be SOME kind of accountability for players who accept the 'commitment' to a school, no?


I know, I was more or less pointing that the negative aspects of coaching movement. Coaches also have buyout clauses that can restrict movement for a coach too.

I agree with you about having a system of checks and balances for players moving around.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 9860



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/19 8:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

>Coaches also have buyout clauses that can restrict movement for a coach too.

But they have agents to help them negotiate an individual contract, not a group contract imposed on them by a system they have no representation in.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 25253



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/19 12:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
>Coaches also have buyout clauses that can restrict movement for a coach too.

But they have agents to help them negotiate an individual contract, not a group contract imposed on them by a system they have no representation in.


When you go to college, you don't set the terms by which you will graduate. You go and abide by the rules set by others even though you are deemed an adult.
When you get a job, you abide by the rules of whatever your job description decrees.
In neither case do you have representation or an agent. You simply agree to abide by the rules or you don't a)go to that college or b)get that job.

Ditto for college athletes no matter how often you try to make it otherwise.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 59301
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/19 12:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
ClayK wrote:
>Coaches also have buyout clauses that can restrict movement for a coach too.

But they have agents to help them negotiate an individual contract, not a group contract imposed on them by a system they have no representation in.


When you go to college, you don't set the terms by which you will graduate. You go and abide by the rules set by others even though you are deemed an adult.
When you get a job, you abide by the rules of whatever your job description decrees.
In neither case do you have representation. You simply agree to abide by the rules or you don't a)go to that college or b)get that job.

Ditto for college athletes no matter how often you try to make it otherwise.


People often have representation where they work in the form of unions.

Any other student can transfer schools without sitting out of activities. Why are athletes treated differently?



_________________
On Christmas Day, the Gingerbread Man said, ‘Ladyfingers, be my wife.’
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 25253



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/19 12:51 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
myrtle wrote:
ClayK wrote:
>Coaches also have buyout clauses that can restrict movement for a coach too.

But they have agents to help them negotiate an individual contract, not a group contract imposed on them by a system they have no representation in.


When you go to college, you don't set the terms by which you will graduate. You go and abide by the rules set by others even though you are deemed an adult.
When you get a job, you abide by the rules of whatever your job description decrees.
In neither case do you have representation. You simply agree to abide by the rules or you don't a)go to that college or b)get that job.

Ditto for college athletes no matter how often you try to make it otherwise.


People often have representation where they work in the form of unions.

Any other student can transfer schools without sitting out of activities. Why are athletes treated differently?


Those other students aren't getting a free ride. While some people have unions, the vast majority don't.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 9860



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/19 3:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If you have an academic scholarship, you can transfer to another school and continue your studies in your major.

If you have an arts scholarship, you can transfer to another school and star in the school play or display paintings right away.

Why are athletes treated differently?



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5673
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/23/19 6:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

This is an interesting subject, which we've debated before and surely will again, but I don't really think it belongs in this UConn thread.
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 5418
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/19 12:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
This is an interesting subject, which we've debated before and surely will again, but I don't really think it belongs in this UConn thread.


Then will you PLEASE start a new one?



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
SDHoops



Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 923



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/24/19 1:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
GlennMacGrady wrote:
This is an interesting subject, which we've debated before and surely will again, but I don't really think it belongs in this UConn thread.


Then will you PLEASE start a new one?

When did Glenn become a mod? Rolling Eyes


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10  Next
Page 8 of 10

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin