|
Post by beachman on Apr 16, 2007 13:10:12 GMT -5
There should be no problem with these girls transferring. At the end of each year, a coach has the right to renew or not renew a scholarship. Why shouldn't athletes have the same prerogative as coaches? The VT community seems to be condeming these players for seeking what they believe to be a better opportunity. How many of you have changed jobs for a better opportunity? The accusations on this board are nothing short of Nifongesque I have a real problem with your post.......playing collegiate sports, at the D-1 level(or any other level that provides a free education) is a PRIVILEGE!!!! Period......coaches and administrators must have the ability to get rid of kids who don't live up to their half of the agreement.....you play sports in return for a FREE COLLEGE EDUCATION!! In my day, for women, there were no scholarships.....my wife played collegiate tennis on the D-1 level at a relatively high level.....got no money, had to work 20-30 hours a week, and attended class full time.....and LOVED TO PLAY.....kids today are so damned spoiled that it isn't funny.....they should be made to perform, JUST LIKE THEY WILL HAVE TO IN REAL LIFE AFTER COLLEGIATE SPORTS, and if they don't then they should get cut.....furthermore both the athletes and their "mommies and daddies" should do enough 'due diligence' to make a good decision on where they go and on what their ultimate goals are(in reference to the sport that they play)......the numbers don't mispeak the truth.....how many spots are there on the women's national team??? How many d-1 programs are there, and how many players play in those 320+ teams.....you do the math.....I still say that it is loooooong overdue to change the transfer rules....maybe it will take some of the pressure off and we won't see coaches persuing 9th graders as much in the future.....just my thoughts!
|
|
|
Post by romeo on Apr 16, 2007 13:14:11 GMT -5
The problem with your rant, Beachman, is that a lot of times a coach will recruit a player and tell them how great they are and how great they will get by playing for them. Then, after the athlete puts her heart and soul into that sell, the coach sees that he made a mistake and will try to get rid of her, oftentimes in April when it is too late to get accepted somewhere else. It depends on the people involved, and whether they care about each other or not. It goes both ways. There should be no problem with these girls transferring. At the end of each year, a coach has the right to renew or not renew a scholarship. Why shouldn't athletes have the same prerogative as coaches? The VT community seems to be condeming these players for seeking what they believe to be a better opportunity. How many of you have changed jobs for a better opportunity? The accusations on this board are nothing short of Nifongesque I have a real problem with your post.......playing collegiate sports, at the D-1 level(or any other level that provides a free education) is a PRIVILEGE!!!! Period......coaches and administrators must have the ability to get rid of kids who don't live up to their half of the agreement.....you play sports in return for a FREE COLLEGE EDUCATION!! In my day, for women, there were no scholarships.....my wife played collegiate tennis on the D-1 level at a relatively high level.....got no money, had to work 20-30 hours a week, and attended class full time.....and LOVED TO PLAY.....kids today are so damned spoiled that it isn't funny.....they should be made to perform, JUST LIKE THEY WILL HAVE TO IN REAL LIFE AFTER COLLEGIATE SPORTS, and if they don't then they should get cut.....furthermore both the athletes and their "mommies and daddies" should do enough 'due diligence' to make a good decision on where they go and on what their ultimate goals are(in reference to the sport that they play)......the numbers don't mispeak the truth.....how many spots are there on the women's national team??? How many d-1 programs are there, and how many players play in those 320+ teams.....you do the math.....I still say that it is loooooong overdue to change the transfer rules....maybe it will take some of the pressure off and we won't see coaches persuing 9th graders as much in the future.....just my thoughts!
|
|
|
Post by vbfanatic on Apr 16, 2007 13:19:21 GMT -5
The other question is who thinks Salvo has the talent to play outside on the National Team. There are a lot of kids in front of her that I'll bet Jenny has her eye on...Larson, Barboza, Fawcett, Hodge, Hooker. Hooker is a project (not having to play backrow at Texas) but athletically she has Olympian written all over her. I've seen Utah play and though she is a very complete player, she may not have the athleticism to be an outside against teams like Russia, Brazil and China.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2007 13:20:45 GMT -5
Here's the latest article in the Utah student newspaper. The U volleyball team took an immense hit last Monday when sophomore Airial Salvo and freshman Sydney Anderson asked coach Beth Launiere for release from their scholarships at the university. The reasons behind their decisions are undisclosed. "It came as a shock to all of us," said Utah libero Connie Dangerfield, who will be a senior next season. "We didn't hear of any unhappiness or anything. It's just really tough because those are also our friends we are losing." Since the decisions might be fueled by the need to play for a more prestigious program than the U, outside interference hasn't yet been ruled out. When asked about her decision to leave Utah, Salvo said she had "been advised not to talk to anybody." Anderson could not be reached for comment. The Salt Lake Tribune reported Salvo's mother, Lori Salvo, as saying that the staff of the U.S. Women's National A2 team told her that the Mountain West Conference was "just not that tough." Both Airial Salvo and Anderson had recently qualified for the A2 team, which is one step below the U.S. Women's Olympic team. Additionally, Lori Salvo said that her daughter and Anderson "want to play for a national championship and become Olympians." "We'll be calling USA Volleyball about comments made in The Tribune and finding out where that came from," Launiere said. "This program was good before they came and it will still be good long after they leave…We have a lot of talent in our gym still, and I think my program speaks for itself. The reputation and the success of it will continue." The pair shined for the Utes this season, with both receiving All-Mountain West Conference honors for their efforts. Airial Salvo was selected as the MWC Player of the Year and Anderson was picked as its top freshman. Airial Salvo also received national honors, as she was named a second-team All-American. But all the conference and national accolades weren't enough to keep Airial Salvo and Anderson at the U. "If they felt like this team wasn't good enough, then I don't think we would have reached our goals anyways," Launiere said. "It takes a team to win, not individuals." Most of the Utes say that they were hurt about the unexpected departure of their close friends and teammates-some feeling a sense of abandonment. But they are slowly learning to cope with the loss by getting back into their familiar spring/summer routine of hitting the weight room and pounding volleyballs. "I'm really proud of how the team has bonded together and responded to this surprise announcement," Launiere said. "Everybody on the team was just as surprised as I was, but we're moving forward. This is our team now, and we're going to go be great." Despite losing two key players, the Utes still return a roster full of experienced athletes. Emillie Toone and Lori Baird will be back at middle blockers, Kate Robison and Kathryn Lovell will be on the outsides and 2004 MWC Libero of the Year Dangerfield returns on the back row. "We still have such a strong nucleus coming back and the rest of us have really bonded through this," Dangerfield said. "If they need to leave for themselves, then we're going to be fine without them." tinyurl.com/2rqv3j
|
|
|
Post by saywho on Apr 16, 2007 13:25:27 GMT -5
I really don't see what all the fuss is about either. I mean, yes, I understand it was slightly shady to decide this in April, but c'mon, do you really think the two of them sat in their dorm rooms saying, "Ok Sydney, lets quit this team right now, they are hopeless and we are too good for them. But wait, let's make sure we get the free trip to Europe first." Somehow, I doubt either of these girls are that evil. I think it probably went more along the lines that this was a really really hard decision for them deciding what they think might be better for their future and they may have waited through the Europe trip to see how they really felt and did not want to rush this decision as it was a big one. Utah is a solid program, #9 is good -- hell, great in many eyes. But if they have the opportunity to play at Washington, who has been to the past two final fours, then why would they not want that opportunity as two young women, particularly if they went to Europe and watched their teammates and really truly believed Utah was not going to be getting to the final four but just staying a Top 10 program. There is a difference there folks in the level of success. Why blame them for something that most people would desire?
|
|
|
Post by foreignball on Apr 16, 2007 13:55:51 GMT -5
If these Kids want to play for a national championship and become Olympians, they're not gonna do it at Ohio State or Texas A&M. In fact, there is only a small number of teams that would apply. I think Stacy Sykora played for Texas A&M, ever hear of her? .....add also Jennifer Flynn (OSU) who set for the silver medal finish of team USA at WC2002
|
|
|
Post by Durian on Apr 16, 2007 14:15:11 GMT -5
Good news for Utah. They won their own tournament yesterday. They beat Montana State, Utah State, Boise State and Utah Valley all in two. All while having their outside turned setter, Kate Robison, run the court. It's looking up for the Utes Is there a position Kate Robison hasn't played? I know she played libero, OH, DS, maybe not MB. I will be cheering hard for the Utes this year, and against any team Salvo/Anderson end up on. The VB community is very tight in Utah. I imagine Lori Salvo will be treated like a leper for a while. It surprises me most because I know some of the girls on the U of U personally and 6 of the U of U players (including Ariel and Sydney) all played on the same club team.
|
|
|
Post by DaDawgFather on Apr 16, 2007 15:02:30 GMT -5
There should be no problem with these girls transferring. At the end of each year, a coach has the right to renew or not renew a scholarship. Why shouldn't athletes have the same prerogative as coaches? The VT community seems to be condeming these players for seeking what they believe to be a better opportunity. How many of you have changed jobs for a better opportunity? The accusations on this board are nothing short of Nifongesque Their leaving at this juncture would be likened to a coach telling a player just before they left for the summer that they were not renewing their scholarship. That to me would be just as deplorable but still "legal" as many are alluding to. As for changing jobs for a better opportunity, I have done it but if they had lined up this opportunity before leaving, clearly they have violated NCAA rules.
|
|
|
Post by vbcrazy on Apr 16, 2007 18:03:56 GMT -5
Beachman, You have a real problem with my post? LOL. Anyone who has a kid on an athletic scholarship knows that although some expenses are covered, it is certainly not free, financially or otherwise. Being a high level D-1 athlete AND a student at the same time is the equivalent of working two full time jobs. Scholarship athletes are pushed and pushed every single day to perform athletically and academically. Most do it very successfully and are happy to do it. If an athlete made an error in their judgement when they were 16 or 17 and didn't define their "ultimate goal" and picked the wrong school, let them transfer. Neither they nor the program would benefit if they were forced to stay. A redshirt year requirement wouldn't stop a transfer either. And, as a side note, your proctologist's office called & left a message; they said they found your head.
|
|
|
Post by dishdaball on Apr 16, 2007 18:09:26 GMT -5
Maybe Beachman didn't like your first post......I don't like your second! I think your missing the point. These girls could have accomplished this before they took a FREE trip to Europe. Period. The whole USA thing transpired in February. Mommy dearest confirms this through the media...yet another stinker. The girls have a right to transfer and do whatever they want. The way they went about it flat out smells bad.
|
|
|
Post by mrdigs on Apr 16, 2007 18:14:09 GMT -5
"The Salt Lake Tribune reported Salvo's mother, Lori Salvo, as saying that the staff of the U.S. Women's National A2 team told her that the Mountain West Conference was "just not that tough."
-- Sounds like a cover to me.
IE:
Mr College Coach (cough: from Washington): "Tell your coach and team that USA told you to do it in order to be an olympian. Just say that a staff member told you that your conference is not tough enough. Heck, I might be the next national team coach. Wouldnt you want to play for me?"
If a USA staff member said that being at Utah would hamper her chances at being an Olympian then why not mention his/her name? Hmmm... maybe because it came from a college coach?
Warn Columbo, he's got competition.
|
|
|
Post by romeo on Apr 16, 2007 18:24:56 GMT -5
Like I said earlier, if the contracts were signed before spring season, there is less likelihood of players or coaches wanting a change this late in the game. The initial NLI can be signed in November, almost a full year before freshman year. Don't you think that both parties have a better idea how things will pan out after the fall when they are already there and have been a part of the program for a semester (or more)?
The only reason I can see that programs wouldn't want to renew schollies before spring is so that they have an out, fair or not. I'm sure this doesn't have anything to do with the Utah situation, but if the contracts had already been handled, it's probable this wouldn't have happened.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 16, 2007 18:28:09 GMT -5
I don't want to make any accusations without evidence.
I just read that article again and its says that Salvo "has been advised not to talk with anybody" That raises the question, so who is advising these people? Judging from the teamates reaction, they were completely surprised as well, there was no hint of any dissatisfaction at all.
This whole thing just keeps getting stranger.
|
|
|
Post by StanfordFan on Apr 16, 2007 18:28:24 GMT -5
Let's not impugn the WA coaching staff until we know what actually happened. "The Salt Lake Tribune reported Salvo's mother, Lori Salvo, as saying that the staff of the U.S. Women's National A2 team told her that the Mountain West Conference was "just not that tough." -- Sounds like a cover to me. IE: Mr College Coach (cough: from Washington): "Tell your coach and team that USA told you to do it in order to be an olympian. Just say that a staff member told you that your conference is not tough enough. Heck, I might be the next national team coach. Wouldnt you want to play for me?" If a USA staff member said that being at Utah would hamper her chances at being an Olympian then why not mention his/her name? Hmmm... maybe because it came from a college coach? Warn Columbo, he's got competition.
|
|
|
Post by cougvb on Apr 16, 2007 19:04:55 GMT -5
These girls grew up in Utah, played club ball in Utah, Salvo's mother coaches, knows the club and college scene. Ariel, especially, was a very well informed high school junior/senior when she made her decision to go to Utah. I loved the analogy of a coach telling a schollie player in April her scholarship isn't being renewed. VTalkers would be all over a coach that did that. Is that really done very often? I would think most coaches would just swallow their pride and eat their mistake for 4 years.
|
|