Kansas Crimson

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:15 am Alternatively, I could have tried (and failed) to rip it.

lmao...don’t recall having seen that before

Isn’t it kinda moot though?

Why give a “senior” a speech when they’ll be back next year?

TraditionKU wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:18 am

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:15 am Alternatively, I could have tried (and failed) to rip it.

lmao...don’t recall having seen that before

It clearly works though. Look at the passion it instilled on the faces of all the players.

The streak is a real thing.

As far as speeches, I agree it could be pretty telling if Mitch and/or Marcus don't give one to the few people in attendance.

I don't know anything about anyone's financial situations.

But is there anyone on the team who going the Morningsleeves route of going off scholly and paying your way is an option for?

I think the NCAA is making a mistake by not having some type of rolling increase to the number of schollies, bumping it to something like 15 next year and then 14 the following year....

This seems like its really going to reduce the number of scholarships that will be offered to HS seniors this year. But that could also have implications down the line with regard to scholarship numbers, as it presumably would also lead to an increase 4-5 years from now. Maybe no one cares.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:25 am I don't know anything about anyone's financial situations.

But is there anyone on the team who going the Morningsleeves route of going off scholly and paying your way is an option for?

I think the NCAA is making a mistake by not having some type of rolling increase to the number of schollies, bumping it to something like 15 next year and then 14 the following year....

This seems like its really going to reduce the number of scholarships that will be offered to HS seniors this year. But that could also have implications down the line with regard to scholarship numbers, as it presumably would also lead to an increase 4-5 years from now. Maybe no one cares.

I mean, this is something that isn't talked about much. It's why KU football had so many leave. Because they were all seniors and KU wanted to give the scholarships to the freshmen coming in and not the seniors wanting to stay another year. All left on good terms with the program in football, but KU kind of had to force them out because they had no room to keep them.

It's what I mentioned on another thread, KU has 12 scholarship guys this year. 3 coming in next year. Who are the ones not sticking around? MG, Mitch and someone like Tristan is going to leave. It's a nature of the beast, especially with Covid.

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:25 am I don't know anything about anyone's financial situations.

But is there anyone on the team who going the Morningsleeves route of going off scholly and paying your way is an option for?

I think the NCAA is making a mistake by not having some type of rolling increase to the number of schollies, bumping it to something like 15 next year and then 14 the following year....

This seems like its really going to reduce the number of scholarships that will be offered to HS seniors this year. But that could also have implications down the line with regard to scholarship numbers, as it presumably would also lead to an increase 4-5 years from now. Maybe no one cares.

This is a good point.

Also makes me angry about the fact that NCAA always uses scholly reductions as punishment.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:51 am

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:25 am I don't know anything about anyone's financial situations.

But is there anyone on the team who going the Morningsleeves route of going off scholly and paying your way is an option for?

I think the NCAA is making a mistake by not having some type of rolling increase to the number of schollies, bumping it to something like 15 next year and then 14 the following year....

This seems like its really going to reduce the number of scholarships that will be offered to HS seniors this year. But that could also have implications down the line with regard to scholarship numbers, as it presumably would also lead to an increase 4-5 years from now. Maybe no one cares.

This is a good point.

Also makes me angry about the fact that NCAA always uses scholly reductions as punishment.

It's (characteristically) harsh (and arbitrarily cruel) of the NCAA to grant additional eligibility years...but enforce scholarship limits.

So here's the thing about that. Just thought of this too so I'm typing as I'm thinking. So hear me out as I probably won't make sense...

Can they really expand the scholarship numbers? There are programs that can barely afford to afford 12 full-ride basketball scholarships. Can you extend them to 15 indefinitely? Because with a scholarship expansion, there would be a windfall for the following classes for a period of time, no? If you cut out freshmen, then your classes will be short and cause issues in the long run.

In the long run, they probably should not have given a free year out. Great for Kansas football though, because the freshmen in 2020 now become experienced freshmen in 2021, but really quite inconvenient for so many others considering you have to boot seniors for incoming freshmen to keep your scholarships balanced between upper and lower classmen.

jfish26 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 12:23 pm

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:51 am

PhDhawk wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 11:25 am I don't know anything about anyone's financial situations.

But is there anyone on the team who going the Morningsleeves route of going off scholly and paying your way is an option for?

I think the NCAA is making a mistake by not having some type of rolling increase to the number of schollies, bumping it to something like 15 next year and then 14 the following year....

This seems like its really going to reduce the number of scholarships that will be offered to HS seniors this year. But that could also have implications down the line with regard to scholarship numbers, as it presumably would also lead to an increase 4-5 years from now. Maybe no one cares.

This is a good point.

Also makes me angry about the fact that NCAA always uses scholly reductions as punishment.

It's (characteristically) harsh (and arbitrarily cruel) of the NCAA to grant additional eligibility years...but enforce scholarship limits.

Yes.

It felt like a happy little PR move, "see, we care about the KEEDS"

Ignoring the unintended problem it immediately created.

Agree that scholarships should be extended -- the NCAA perhaps extending a financial arm/trickle down economics to help -- but Newton is right, if you extend for men's football/basketball, I'm guessing it has to be the same across all sports -- so might be difficult to do.

extending a financial arm/trickle down economics lulz

pdub wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 1:50 pm Agree that scholarships should be extended -- the NCAA perhaps extending a financial arm/trickle down economics to help -- but Newton is right, if you extend for men's football/basketball, I'm guessing it has to be the same across all sports -- so might be difficult to do.

I mean, there wouldn't need to be a requirement that you fill all the slots (there never is). So an institution could cap the number themselves.

The problem is that the governing body made a ruling and then clapped there hands together and said you figure it out. (Like what the orange baffoon trump always did to state governors...amirite ousey?)

Understanding the domino effect would go on forever, but there should be at least some option. That might be players that were in line to exhaust eligibility after 2021 don't count against the limit in 2022, and then end it there.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 1:57 pm Understanding the domino effect would go on forever, but there should be at least some option. That might be players that were in line to exhaust eligibility after 2021 don't count against the limit in 2022, and then end it there.

Fair.

CrimsonNBlue wrote: ↑Thu Feb 25, 2021 1:57 pm Understanding the domino effect would go on forever, but there should be at least some option. That might be players that were in line to exhaust eligibility after 2021 don't count against the limit in 2022, and then end it there.

I just assumed that this WAS the plan, leaving it up to the schools to determine how/if they would choose to proceed. If a school determined they didn't want to go above the standard scholly limit due to costs then they could choose whether to give them to returning players, grad transfers or incoming freshmen.
It's absurd that it isn't.

So, is UTEP Senior Night now?

Bill Self reads this message bored:

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=3660&p=167551&hilit=UTEP#p167551

KU will play Texas Tech in the 3/6 game of the Big 12 tournament.

Projected Big 12 Tournament Seedings:

*1 Baylor (13-1)

*8 TCU (5-11)
*9 Kansas St. (4-14)

4 Texas (11-6)
5 Oklahoma St. (10-7)

3 Kansas (12-6)
6 Texas Tech (9-8)

*7 Oklahoma (9-8)
*10 Iowa State (0-18)

2 West Virginia (12-5)

* = seed locked in

-KU would be the 2 seed if WVU loses at home to Oklahoma St.
-Barring a disaster at TCU, Texas will be the 4-seed.