Muhammad Final 5
- Thread starter hbkmyr
- Start date
Sign me up, love to add another NJ/NY kid with a desire to come back home and play in front of family and friends. I guess this only works if Ant enters the portal. I would hate for the kid to lose a full year if Willard gives him the TT and Brodie treatment! He doesn’t deserve that and hopefully he can read the writing on the wall.
And local option. Then again UCLA is UCLA with a good coach, WVA has a great coach, etc. So plenty of factors.
He wants to play imm with a waiver. SHU wants him badly but only as a sit out.
Let's see how this works out.
Horse's mouth. Although things can change with the possible waiver situation and something else I can't reveal here.
I can understand both sides position and it seems to me that schools that want him to play immediately hold an advantage over a school like SH that wants to sit him a year.
Like the basis for most waivers... "Hi NCAA, I want to transfer and get a waiver to play next year"
But I would assume, coming home to NJ to be with his family while a global pandemic is not under control.
Not the kids, the system, which is so arbitrary.
Dont you think they hate the arbitrary way the NCAA handles these situations, not the kids?
If you do add Muhammad to the mix at guard it would now include Aiken, Reynolds , Nelson , Long , Molson that’s six and both Cale and Stevens are players who could play the two guard that’s eight . That leaves only four players for the center and power forward position , which seems short on depth to me.
Dan , isn’t the reality that the sit out a year requirement is going to disappear as the NCAA will eliminate that requirement immediately and all sit out a year transfers for this year will become immediately eligible? With that more likely to happen then not , free agency will be upon us.
I didn't see RU listed anywhere with him recently. Does that imply these schools listed would agree to him playing immediately if the waiver is granted?
Right, of course. Conceptually I meant. You in particular are our biggest voice against kids getting immediate eligibility except in a rare circumstance like I think the SJU kid last year who it was so obvious should have gotten to play right away and still had to sit for a period I believe
Yes the system but also conceptually the majority here dislike the notion of kids getting immediate eligibility in most all circumstances, even the most justifiable ones. Granted that hasn’t really been the case with a player we wanted, so I’m sure the tune will change as what usually happens in fandom.
I’m not a fan of outright FA either because of my view on what that might mean for the sport. I think there are some common sense exceptions like where a HC leaves or gets fired and/or a kid has already sat a year. I think there are legitimate family related medical hardships as well but those sometimes are taken advantage of and of course the NCAA sucks on this issue generally.
I’m not a fan of outright FA either because of my view on what that might mean for the sport. I think there are some common sense exceptions like where a HC leaves or gets fired and/or a kid has already sat a year. I think there are legitimate family related medical hardships as well but those sometimes are taken advantage of and of course the NCAA sucks on this issue generally.
And this is the scenario that those pushing for outright FA cite in support of their argument. For arguments sake let’s say it is Nelson who is told to leave to make room, he now has to sit a year? Because the paramount interest for the HC and the fans is getting the best players in the door, even if that means pushing a kid out who will then have to waste a year on the sideline. The HC and fans interest conflicts with the kid in this respect, and yet the kid gets penalized when the primary goal should be to safeguard their interest. But this is what the proponents of the proposed rule point to on why it should pass.
I’m confused. I thought you hate the proposed rule because of what you think it will do to the sport?
I’m
What makes you think he or anyone is being pushed out? Maybe he wants to leave? Maybe it’s mutual?
It was cool to have to much size last year but look at the NBA or basketball in general. It is a guard dominated game now. Most teams are rocking 3 or even 4 guards and then like a PF or SF out there with them. IMO, above is exactly how our roster should be constructed.
While ncaa likely to vote in favor of this which i do not agree with the enacting would be for 21-22
Right. Except if it’s his decision why hasn’t he announced it yet? It does him no good to wait.
Well this wasn’t true for Brodie this past year. And, it’s in everyone’s best interest if the player in question gets recruited over. If the coach tells the kid that they won’t play the next year because the current players are better, then it’s up to the player to stay (see Brodie and Thompson).
Is watching from the sidelines and not playing with your current team with zero future any better than sitting and watching with a future program in which you could be factored into it?
I don't like free agency in college BB, but what I like doesn't matter.
Because of that at least I want to see uniformity within the rules and not discretionary calls made by suits in the NCAA's offices.
Similar threads
