OSU Point new point guard was in trouble at previous school.

I don't get your point. Do you think a kid that gets in trouble and loses his scholarship should be treated more favorably than a kid that simply changes his mind?

In terms of sitting out athletic competition?

Absolutely.

Because like I said, all team rules aren't created equal. If he is "bad" enough, the NCAA will punish him, and he'll be forced to sit out.
 
Last edited:
In terms of sitting out athletic competition?

Absolutely.

Because like I said, all team rules aren't created equal. If he is "bad" enough, the NCAA will punish him, and he'll be forced to sit out.

Then why wouldn't a very talented kid (not a marginal player) who wants to be elsewhere purposely break enough team rules to get a free pass to leave? The very talented player will find plenty of other schools willing to take him, despite his misdeeds.

Sorry, but that strikes me as a bizarro-world approach: Punish the good citizens by making them sit out a year; reward the bad apples by letting them play right away.
 
Last edited:
if an institution continues to take risks with players who have questionable history and character, it eventually catches up with them in the APR not to mention the reputation of the institution.
 
Then why wouldn't a very talented kid (not a marginal player) who wants to be elsewhere purposely break enough team rules to get a free pass to leave? The very talented player will find plenty of other schools willing to take him, despite his misdeeds.

Sorry, but that strikes me as a bizarro-world approach: Punish the good citizens by making them sit out a year; reward the bad apples by letting them play right away.

If a kid wants to get a bad rep. Make the news papers for being a bad kid and getting into trouble and then take a chance on some school you want to go to actually wanting you then go for it

Matt pilgrim did nothing wrong and his scholarship wasn't renewed.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top