billiken_roy Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 i know rules change, especially after 30 years, but when kevin stallings signed with minnesota out of high school and then changed his mind, he played one year at BAC then went to purdue immediately with no additional penalties. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 I am not sure what this post means since I have not read the whole article on Nate's site but I am not crazy about it if it really means we have one less schollie to give out to the 2008 class. Now I do understand that RM needs bodies for the team next year especially for practices. As far as I am concerned, if he simply wants to ensure he gets a quality practice player for next year then fine. For those of you who think that this is an audition for Erckle then explain how this can be since that would mean RM would have one less schollie to give this fall. I guess he could still give it out in the spring - I just think there is more to this from a technicality standpoint that we are missing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BillikenReport Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 >I am not sure what this post means since I have not read the >whole article on Nate's site but I am not crazy about it if >it really means we have one less schollie to give out to the >2008 class. Now I do understand that RM needs bodies for >the team next year especially for practices. As far as I am >concerned, if he simply wants to ensure he gets a quality >practice player for next year then fine. For those of you >who think that this is an audition for Erckle then explain >how this can be since that would mean RM would have one less >schollie to give this fall. I guess he could still give it >out in the spring - I just think there is more to this from >a technicality standpoint that we are missing. Eckerle's scholarship counts toward next season, not the recruiting class of 2008. If his athletic scholarship is renewed for more than one year, it means the kid has done enough to show he deserves that scholarship (over a potential incoming freshman or JUCO guy) or it means that Rick Majerus wasn't able to fill that spot with someone he thought could help the team more than Eckerle could. Eckerle's scholarship for this coming season would not change recruiting for the 2008 class (Brett Thompson, Scott Suggs, Kwamain Mitchell, Jesse Perry and Willie Reed). Like Brian said earlier, it's a no-lose situation for the program. - Nate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 nate, what if cma is right? cma said in an above post, "If the scholarship is not renewed BUT he takes an academic grant in aid of some type AND he plays basketball in suceeding years, he WILL count toward the 13 scholarship limit - regardless if he receiving a BB schollie or not. So, if his scholarship is not renewed, he will not be on the team most likely. This is an NCAA rule that makes some sense. It keeps programs from "loading up" certain sports with players on schollies meant for other purposes." you have to admit what cma claims is an ncaa rule makes sense. and it would be terrible public relationswise if majerus forced eckerle to leave the team his sophomore year to comply and if majerus tries to switch his "athletic" scholarship to an "academic" scholarship and wants to let eckerle continue as a preferred walk-on, i would think at the very least the ncaa would greatly scrutinize the move if there isnt a rule as cma has suggested there is. it isnt as clear a no lose scenario as you suggest. and if we are forced into a position that we indeed lose that scholarship for four years, that would be unfortunate assuming majerus and staff indeed do have the recruiting juice we expect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BillikenReport Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 >you have to admit what cma claims is an ncaa rule makes >sense. and it would be terrible public relationswise if >majerus forced eckerle to leave the team his sophomore year >to comply and if majerus tries to switch his "athletic" >scholarship to an "academic" scholarship and wants to let >eckerle continue as a preferred walk-on, i would think at >the very least the ncaa would greatly scrutinize the move if >there isnt a rule as cma has suggested there is. it isnt as >clear a no lose scenario as you suggest. and if we are >forced into a position that we indeed lose that scholarship >for four years, that would be unfortunate assuming majerus >and staff indeed do have the recruiting juice we expect. There have been people working on this to see what was possible and what was not possible. That's why it took so long to become official. I'll choose to believe the people on this issue whose job it is to deal with these things, to make sure what they are doing is the right way to do it, rather than an anonymous poster on a message board claiming to know an NCAA rule. - Nate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 i guess we will know in about 12 months. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BillikenReport Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 >i guess we will know in about 12 months. Roy, One thing that I'm interested to see in the Rick Majerus era is which players currently on the team end up sticking it out for all four years. I'm not predicting that anyone will leave, but whenever you have a coaching change you never know who is going to get along with the new coach or who thinks the grass will be greener somewhere else or who just can't cut it playing Division I basketball. - Nate Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tonka Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Nate, that's a good point about who may leave. I think we are going to have deal with that all through the RM era. He has high standards and we've heard he can be tough on players if they are living not up to their potential. I definitely see there being issues like this. When you have a high profile coach who knows how to win, he definitely will pressure kids. Also, the competition for playing time will be more fierce under RM than probably any Coach we have seen at SLU. Many top programs have players that leave because they are not getting the playing time they wanted or simply because they can't handle the pressure. I have to believe this staff did their research on Eckerle and the NCAA rules. I personally like the signing. I have been told he is a fantastic teammate, shoots well, and is fundamentally sound. If you combine that with the fact that you won't have academic issues with him or any other off the court issues, I like the signing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 regardless of who quits or leaves, i am interested in upgrading the talent level from where we are at now. imo eckerle, while apparently a very good kid and an outstanding student, doesnt sound like the level of basketball player that this team needs. there are others on the team we can say the same about. however they were given four year scholarships that i would hope we would honor just from the stand point of honoring a promise to a student athlete. i expected majerus to be able to get us players on the level of a lisch or liddell on a regular basis and it is concerning to me that in actuality we are now giving out scholarships on the same talent level that we have been giving for the last 20 years if this situation turns into a 4 year deal and paul doesnt surprise us by turning into kevin lisch. like i said yesterday, i would love him to prove me wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LoveforVouk Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Well there really aren't a whole lot of guys with options. Polk, Husak, Meyer, and Brown will all be seniors. Liddell and Lisch will be juniors and if they were going to leave they likely would have already done so. That leaves Knollmeyer and Maguire being the guys who as far as age would seem to have some options, but I am not sure they would have many progams petitioning for their services. Then there are the recruits and since Barry committed to Majerus and only has two years of eligibility he is not going anywhere so that would leave Mitchell and Relphorde. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 Nate, I understand that this situation with Erckle does not impact the 2008 kids but it does mean that RM has one less schollie to offer to 2008 kids. He had 6 now he has 5 - the only way he can have 6 is if he plans not to renew Erckle or he knows something about a kid on the team possibly leaving. However, I am a little wary of assuming a kid might leave - too much up in the air for me. We will as Roy says- see in 12 months. One other question - is it being said that Erckle is better then Femi John? - if so then that has to be taken into accoung I guess. I am like Roy though, I was hoping for upgrades with RM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 I say we trust in RM's evaluation. Not everyone becomes a star, some guys are purely practice players or fill certain niches. If we use all of our scholarships we will have 13 players and probably a 9 man rotation at best. Where Paul will end up who knows, maybe RM thinks more of him than others do and think he will be a solid contributor who has been undervalued. Maybe he things he can be a 3pt bomber who will fill a part time role. No one here knows what RM is thinking and one of the things we know is he has always won, and not always with the big time recruits ... so lets just trust in his evaluation. Official Billikens.com sponsor of H Waldman Official Sponser of the Stemmler and Ahearn could and would have helped club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Box and Won Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 I think people are overreacting to this. Wasn't Wendell Bennett or someone of that ilk given a scholarship for one year only to revert back to walk-on status the next year? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 no my understanding was that wendell got the scholarship just last season only. he was a walkon in all the previous seasons. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted June 8, 2007 Share Posted June 8, 2007 I am not really questioning RM's judgment but simply asking questions about this particular situation and its impact on the team's future recruits. I also had said that I really do believe there are some technical matters that we are simply missing/not understanding so that makes you start to simply wonder. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.