|
Post by n00b on Nov 6, 2020 0:07:34 GMT -5
From Oregon State's website: Institutional Financial Aid Renewal/NonrenewalAid based in any degree on athletics at Oregon State University is awarded on a one year renewable basis. In rare cases, a student-athlete may sign a multi-year aid agreement, in which case the award is renewable based upon the schedule initially included on the award letter. osubeavers.com/sports/2014/5/1/209486422.aspxSo this wasn't the coach being deceptive. Oregon State (generally) doesn't offer multi-year scholarships. But it clearly does. You're willfully misreading that to say OSU doesn't offer it. The coach was being deceptive by offering a 4-year scholarship to this, and other athletes, similar to other offers PAC-12 schools make. Continue to stretch to defend bad behavior from authority figures. I expect nothing less at this point. He acted in the same way he would've if she'd had a multi-year scholarship. You're naive if you don't think the majority Power 5 coaches don't regularly tell athletes that don't pan out "you're never going to start here, if you ever want to see the court, you probably want to transfer."
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Nov 6, 2020 0:09:31 GMT -5
But it clearly does. You're willfully misreading that to say OSU doesn't offer it. The coach was being deceptive by offering a 4-year scholarship to this, and other athletes, similar to other offers PAC-12 schools make. Continue to stretch to defend bad behavior from authority figures. I expect nothing less at this point. He acted in the same way he would've if she'd had a multi-year scholarship. You're naive if you don't think the majority Power 5 coaches don't regularly tell athletes that don't pan out "you're never going to start here, if you ever want to see the court, you probably want to transfer." You're refusing to see the point, so I'm just going to end this convo. Goodbye.
|
|
|
Post by volleyvietnam on Nov 30, 2020 9:13:10 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by coldsnap on Nov 30, 2020 13:18:00 GMT -5
I don't have any insight into how players are treated at Oregon State. My feeling is the truth about the story falls somewhere in the middle. But what I will say is that if you sign an NLI, which is always accompanied by a Grant-in-Aid (scholarship) during your respective signing period, it is irrelevant whether it is a 4 year written offer or a 1 year offer, it is essentially the same. The way the scholarships are handled isn't really any different. The 1 year offer implies that you will get that same offer year after year through the 4 years of competition, a 5th year can be added at the University's discretion at the conclusion of the eligibility clock in order to finish a degree. In fact the Grant-in-Aid paperwork can reflect a 5th year option up front if desired. The key is, in order to take a scholarship, regardless of year to year or 4-5 years written as one, an athlete would have to trigger ineligibility, quit, transfer, or break some team rule of which they signed their name to at the beginning of the year. They CANNOT lose their scholarship based on their athletic ability. When a coach has made a recruiting mistake based on ability they are in a tough spot. Very often letting the player be aware that they might not play due to other's being better than them at the moment, will often trigger them going into the portal. If playing time is crucial to them they will transfer to where they can play. Does it get dicey sometimes and a coach or coaching staff makes it tough on the athlete so they want to leave, the answer is yes. Can this cross the line? Yes it can and sometimes does. Again, I am not taking sides on this matter, just mostly clarifying some items on the scholarship portion. If what is alleged did happen, coach was trying to get her to hit the portal so he could get the scholarship back. If he tried to get it otherwise (based on athletic ability) they could appeal it and would likely win the appeal, get to keep their scholarship and not even play for the team. This would count against his 12 scholarships.
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Nov 30, 2020 15:05:48 GMT -5
I don't have any insight into how players are treated at Oregon State. My feeling is the truth about the story falls somewhere in the middle. But what I will say is that if you sign an NLI, which is always accompanied by a Grant-in-Aid (scholarship) during your respective signing period, it is irrelevant whether it is a 4 year written offer or a 1 year offer, it is essentially the same. The way the scholarships are handled isn't really any different. The 1 year offer implies that you will get that same offer year after year through the 4 years of competition, a 5th year can be added at the University's discretion at the conclusion of the eligibility clock in order to finish a degree. In fact the Grant-in-Aid paperwork can reflect a 5th year option up front if desired. The key is, in order to take a scholarship, regardless of year to year or 4-5 years written as one, an athlete would have to trigger ineligibility, quit, transfer, or break some team rule of which they signed their name to at the beginning of the year. They CANNOT lose their scholarship based on their athletic ability. When a coach has made a recruiting mistake based on ability they are in a tough spot. Very often letting the player be aware that they might not play due to other's being better than them at the moment, will often trigger them going into the portal. If playing time is crucial to them they will transfer to where they can play. Does it get dicey sometimes and a coach or coaching staff makes it tough on the athlete so they want to leave, the answer is yes. Can this cross the line? Yes it can and sometimes does. Again, I am not taking sides on this matter, just mostly clarifying some items on the scholarship portion. If what is alleged did happen, coach was trying to get her to hit the portal so he could get the scholarship back. If he tried to get it otherwise (based on athletic ability) they could appeal it and would likely win the appeal, get to keep their scholarship and not even play for the team. This would count against his 12 scholarships. I agree that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. There is a difference between 1 and 4 year scholarships, unless things changed very recently. You don't have to "get back" 1 year scholarships. They can just not be renewed, for no reason. Yes, this non-renewal can be appealed, and perhaps reasoning comes up then. How each school and appeal committee handles each individual appeal of a 1 year deal varies widely.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Nov 30, 2020 15:16:09 GMT -5
I don't have any insight into how players are treated at Oregon State. My feeling is the truth about the story falls somewhere in the middle. But what I will say is that if you sign an NLI, which is always accompanied by a Grant-in-Aid (scholarship) during your respective signing period, it is irrelevant whether it is a 4 year written offer or a 1 year offer, it is essentially the same. The way the scholarships are handled isn't really any different. The 1 year offer implies that you will get that same offer year after year through the 4 years of competition, a 5th year can be added at the University's discretion at the conclusion of the eligibility clock in order to finish a degree. In fact the Grant-in-Aid paperwork can reflect a 5th year option up front if desired. The key is, in order to take a scholarship, regardless of year to year or 4-5 years written as one, an athlete would have to trigger ineligibility, quit, transfer, or break some team rule of which they signed their name to at the beginning of the year. They CANNOT lose their scholarship based on their athletic ability. When a coach has made a recruiting mistake based on ability they are in a tough spot. Very often letting the player be aware that they might not play due to other's being better than them at the moment, will often trigger them going into the portal. If playing time is crucial to them they will transfer to where they can play. Does it get dicey sometimes and a coach or coaching staff makes it tough on the athlete so they want to leave, the answer is yes. Can this cross the line? Yes it can and sometimes does. Again, I am not taking sides on this matter, just mostly clarifying some items on the scholarship portion. If what is alleged did happen, coach was trying to get her to hit the portal so he could get the scholarship back. If he tried to get it otherwise (based on athletic ability) they could appeal it and would likely win the appeal, get to keep their scholarship and not even play for the team. This would count against his 12 scholarships. I agree that the truth lies somewhere in the middle. There is a difference between 1 and 4 year scholarships, unless things changed very recently. You don't have to "get back" 1 year scholarships. They can just not be renewed, for no reason. Yes, this non-renewal can be appealed, and perhaps reasoning comes up then. How each school and appeal committee handles each individual appeal of a 1 year deal varies widely. This is true. And worthy of its own discussion. But isn’t really what happened here. According to those articles, the coach was pushing the player to enter the transfer portal. To me that implies OSU wouldn’t permit him to not renew a scholarship based on athletic reasons (fairly common). Convincing a player to enter the portal is the same whether the are on a 1-year or multi-year scholarship.
|
|
|
Post by coldsnap on Nov 30, 2020 16:24:02 GMT -5
Like I said, I am not going to say what happened. I have absolutely no personal knowledge of any of the inner workings of the program. If what is alleged is true I can easily fill in the gaps. But when it comes to scholarships and how they work it is as I stated. There was a time that you could take a scholarship back for any reason or no reason at all and you didn't really have to give for-warning. You could take it and notify the student athlete by June or July 1st, I can't remember the date. They were still entitled to an appeal which was heard by a group consisting largely of folks on the academic side of campus. The rule changed (by vote of the power 5 institutions) that you could not take an athlete's scholarship based on athletic ability. The rule change was a good thing really as it had a sh&%show before that with kids getting shafted left and right. This was within the last 6 years. Certain conferences have rules now like the "BIG" that indicate if you sign a scholarship in the signing period that you have that scholarship for 4 years. Others might do the same I am not sure, others might be able to answer that better than me. But with regard to scholarship, it doesn't really matter whether you sign a Grant-in-Aid that lists all 4 years on it or one that just lists the upcoming year, it's essentially the same. It's no easier to get back a one year scholarship and no harder to get back a 4 year scholarship. What's important to know is that in the power 5 you can't tell a kid "hey man you're not as good as I thought and therefore I am not renewing your scholarship after this season". There's ways to not get renewed but ability isn't one of them anymore. If a coach wants the scholarship back they will have to be candid with that athlete about their future prospects of playing time and hope that the player leaves. If they want to stay, and their following all the rules, and remain eligible, then they will get to keep their scholarship. Is it possible that a coach explains all that regarding the playing time and the player still doesn't want to leave, yes it is. If this happens, is it possible that the coach decides to make things as tough as possible without breaking the rules so the player will transfer, absolutely. If this is a pattern with the coach, unless that coach is winning a ton they're not likely to be employed long. If you don't sign a scholarship prior to entering college you're a walk on. Even if you're promised scholarship in the future you're by definition still a walk on. You can call yourself a recruited walk on. Unless your signing an NLI and Grant-in-Aid prior to college there really isn't anything that you can sign on signing day. With the exception of an acceptance letter which doesn't carry any financial obligation. If you don't sign a scholarship prior to entering college you are taking a risk and you have to have faith in the coach and hopefully you have an email indicating the scholarship agreement but it is still just a handshake deal really. If the coach leaves for any reason the new coach might say tough luck.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Nov 30, 2020 16:57:29 GMT -5
Like I said, I am not going to say what happened. I have absolutely no personal knowledge of any of the inner workings of the program. If what is alleged is true I can easily fill in the gaps. But when it comes to scholarships and how they work it is as I stated. There was a time that you could take a scholarship back for any reason or no reason at all and you didn't really have to give for-warning. You could take it and notify the student athlete by June or July 1st, I can't remember the date. They were still entitled to an appeal which was heard by a group consisting largely of folks on the academic side of campus. The rule changed (by vote of the power 5 institutions) that you could not take an athlete's scholarship based on athletic ability. The rule change was a good thing really as it had a sh&%show before that with kids getting shafted left and right. This was within the last 6 years. Certain conferences have rules now like the "BIG" that indicate if you sign a scholarship in the signing period that you have that scholarship for 4 years. Others might do the same I am not sure, others might be able to answer that better than me. But with regard to scholarship, it doesn't really matter whether you sign a Grant-in-Aid that lists all 4 years on it or one that just lists the upcoming year, it's essentially the same. It's no easier to get back a one year scholarship and no harder to get back a 4 year scholarship. What's important to know is that in the power 5 you can't tell a kid "hey man you're not as good as I thought and therefore I am not renewing your scholarship after this season". There's ways to not get renewed but ability isn't one of them anymore. If a coach wants the scholarship back they will have to be candid with that athlete about their future prospects of playing time and hope that the player leaves. If they want to stay, and their following all the rules, and remain eligible, then they will get to keep their scholarship. Is it possible that a coach explains all that regarding the playing time and the player still doesn't want to leave, yes it is. If this happens, is it possible that the coach decides to make things as tough as possible without breaking the rules so the player will transfer, absolutely. If this is a pattern with the coach, unless that coach is winning a ton they're not likely to be employed long. If you don't sign a scholarship prior to entering college you're a walk on. Even if you're promised scholarship in the future you're by definition still a walk on. You can call yourself a recruited walk on. Unless your signing an NLI and Grant-in-Aid prior to college there really isn't anything that you can sign on signing day. With the exception of an acceptance letter which doesn't carry any financial obligation. If you don't sign a scholarship prior to entering college you are taking a risk and you have to have faith in the coach and hopefully you have an email indicating the scholarship agreement but it is still just a handshake deal really. If the coach leaves for any reason the new coach might say tough luck. This isn't true. What changed is that Power 5 schools are permitted to offer multi-year scholarships, not that they are required to. The NCAA rules is that scholarships cannot be cancelled/reduced during the period of the award due to performance, injury, etc. So if it's a 4-year scholarship, it can never be pulled due to performance. If it's a 1-year renewable scholarship, then it can (although the school may not allow it). If this is wrong, somebody should let Oregon State compliance know because it's spelled out on their website: osubeavers.com/sports/2014/5/1/209486422.aspx
|
|
|
Post by trollhunter on Nov 30, 2020 17:29:51 GMT -5
"During the period of the award" is the clause I was struggling to elaborate. Thanks n00b
|
|
|
Post by coldsnap on Dec 1, 2020 11:30:20 GMT -5
web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/reports/getReport/90008 I hope this attachment comes through. I apologize if it doesn't. NCAA Bylaw 15.3.5.3 explains it pretty well. You are correct that the power 5 implemented the ability to give 4 years scholarships. While not requiring them. You are correct. That wasn't really my intent to talk about what various conference's have adopted. Any institution can give a 4 year scholarship if that's what they want to do, not just in the power 5. I can't speak to all the various power 5 conference rules they put in place regarding how they give them out, 4 year or 1 at a time. My point was that it really doesn't matter. If my kid goes in on a 1 year they will be treated the same as if they were on a 4 year. That is to say they cannot lose their scholarship based on athletic performance. There are ways to lose or have a reduction in your scholarship and it's the same whether you're on a 1,2,3,4,or 5 year scholarship. You deem yourself ineligible, you quit, break team rules (of which you signed at the beginning of the year), or misrepresent yourself on your application. None of these infractions mean you will automatically lose your scholarship but you can without much recourse. But to be clear, you cannot lose your scholarship because you did not perform up to the coaching staff's hopes. There can be discussion prior to signing, that the scholarship is only available for the upcoming year and is not available the subsequent year, therefore you sign it knowing it is only for one academic year. But again, this is known on the front end and is not related to athletic ability. If a coach tries to tell a freshman that signed a scholarship that they didn't earn as much playing time as we were hoping for and therefore I need part or all of it back, it's not going to end well for the coach. The player will proceed to the AD and explain the situation, if the AD doesn't help then the player and the parents will proceed to the Chancellor of the University, if that doesn't work they will lawyer up and head to the media and at that point they will get to keep their scholarship while being a regular student. The kicker will be that the scholarship will also count against the team's scholarship limit. This is only if the coach tries to use athletic ability as the reason. If a coach has a player that they feel they missed on when it comes to talent they have some avenues to try and get the scholarship back. They will start with having the "playing time" conversation and encourage them to find another place to play if that concerns them. The kid will ask "what will happen to my scholarship if I stay, I really like it here and I think I can crack the line up and help us win"? The coach will respond with "well I am not going to take your scholarship but I really don't see a path for you to play". Or maybe the coach likes the determination in the kid and decides to keep working with them to help them get there and contribute. But if the player doesn't decide to transfer then the coach could decide to make it a little difficult for that athlete in the hope that they decide to leave on their own. All Coaches miss on athletes from time to time and face this possibility. If you coach volleyball at say Nebraska or Texas for example, the kid will likely see the writing on the wall and absolutely want to play the remainder of their career, so they have a discussion with the Head Coach and the Coach will decide whether they want to talk them out of it or green light their decision to transfer. There will be some programs that the player might see the writing on the wall and still not want to transfer. It's possible that some mistreatment comes into play at this point to get the player to transfer or quit. I don't know what it says on anyone's web site, I only know the NCAA rules. The institutions discuss and vote on these rules and they have to follow them. Again, I am not saying at all what happened at Oregon State, I don't have any insight. But if you could just take a kid's scholarship based on athletic ability then it would have been pretty easy to do it and the media might not have too much to write about. My objective was to shed light on how the scholarship process works. I am not taking the Coach's or Athlete's side in the story. I can only speak from my personal experience. In this case, I feel for both the athlete's and the coach(s).
|
|
|
Post by dodger on Dec 1, 2020 15:51:18 GMT -5
👆🏼👆🏼👆🏼👆🏼 The above explanation about non-renewal is true. From my ump-teen years experience with ncaa rules and legislation. It may appear from media reports, but if you do what listed above tou keep scholarship till graduation. Of course you may never play again at that school but graduate and scholarship yes.
|
|
|
Post by eazy on Dec 1, 2020 16:46:38 GMT -5
web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/reports/getReport/90008 I hope this attachment comes through. I apologize if it doesn't. NCAA Bylaw 15.3.5.3 explains it pretty well. You are correct that the power 5 implemented the ability to give 4 years scholarships. While not requiring them. You are correct. That wasn't really my intent to talk about what various conference's have adopted. Any institution can give a 4 year scholarship if that's what they want to do, not just in the power 5. I can't speak to all the various power 5 conference rules they put in place regarding how they give them out, 4 year or 1 at a time. My point was that it really doesn't matter. If my kid goes in on a 1 year they will be treated the same as if they were on a 4 year. That is to say they cannot lose their scholarship based on athletic performance. There are ways to lose or have a reduction in your scholarship and it's the same whether you're on a 1,2,3,4,or 5 year scholarship. You deem yourself ineligible, you quit, break team rules (of which you signed at the beginning of the year), or misrepresent yourself on your application. None of these infractions mean you will automatically lose your scholarship but you can without much recourse. But to be clear, you cannot lose your scholarship because you did not perform up to the coaching staff's hopes. There can be discussion prior to signing, that the scholarship is only available for the upcoming year and is not available the subsequent year, therefore you sign it knowing it is only for one academic year. But again, this is known on the front end and is not related to athletic ability. If a coach tries to tell a freshman that signed a scholarship that they didn't earn as much playing time as we were hoping for and therefore I need part or all of it back, it's not going to end well for the coach. The player will proceed to the AD and explain the situation, if the AD doesn't help then the player and the parents will proceed to the Chancellor of the University, if that doesn't work they will lawyer up and head to the media and at that point they will get to keep their scholarship while being a regular student. The kicker will be that the scholarship will also count against the team's scholarship limit. This is only if the coach tries to use athletic ability as the reason. If a coach has a player that they feel they missed on when it comes to talent they have some avenues to try and get the scholarship back. They will start with having the "playing time" conversation and encourage them to find another place to play if that concerns them. The kid will ask "what will happen to my scholarship if I stay, I really like it here and I think I can crack the line up and help us win"? The coach will respond with "well I am not going to take your scholarship but I really don't see a path for you to play". Or maybe the coach likes the determination in the kid and decides to keep working with them to help them get there and contribute. But if the player doesn't decide to transfer then the coach could decide to make it a little difficult for that athlete in the hope that they decide to leave on their own. All Coaches miss on athletes from time to time and face this possibility. If you coach volleyball at say Nebraska or Texas for example, the kid will likely see the writing on the wall and absolutely want to play the remainder of their career, so they have a discussion with the Head Coach and the Coach will decide whether they want to talk them out of it or green light their decision to transfer. There will be some programs that the player might see the writing on the wall and still not want to transfer. It's possible that some mistreatment comes into play at this point to get the player to transfer or quit. I don't know what it says on anyone's web site, I only know the NCAA rules. The institutions discuss and vote on these rules and they have to follow them. Again, I am not saying at all what happened at Oregon State, I don't have any insight. But if you could just take a kid's scholarship based on athletic ability then it would have been pretty easy to do it and the media might not have too much to write about. My objective was to shed light on how the scholarship process works. I am not taking the Coach's or Athlete's side in the story. I can only speak from my personal experience. In this case, I feel for both the athlete's and the coach(s). I want to make sure I am reading your point correctly and not putting words in your mouth, per say. If a coach offers a player a one year scholarship for their freshman year, do they have to verbally commit to the athlete whether that will be renewed for a specific number of years? Is it not allowed to tell a player "I only have one year right now, but may or may not be able to extend it into the future depending on various factors"?
|
|
|
Post by coldsnap on Dec 1, 2020 16:57:53 GMT -5
Full disclosure, I spent my whole career coaching in the power 5. Kids are not renewed all the time and most of the time it's because the coach doesn't think they're going to contribute. In the power 5 in particular, if the kid knows he or she is up against it for playing time they're going to hit the portal on their own because they want to play. The discussion is pretty simple and the the kid sees it the same way and decides to leave. But the Universities began seeing problems with massive transfer rates so they put in a number of small barriers like graduation rates and APR benchmark numbers to meet. Like baseball players couldn't be signed for less than 25% and if a player transfers with a GPA less than 2.6 your team would lose a retention point etc. If the numbers got below a certain point then your team is docked scholarship for a period of time. It was to curb the massive transfer rates and the low graduation rates, as well as poor academic performance at times. They felt, rightfully so, that it was becoming less about education and only about the sport. Balance that on the other side with Coaches having contracts and large bonuses tied in with a number of benchmarks. Some academic of course and many more athletic related. These bonuses are also tied with the sports supervisors, strength coaches, and Athletic Directors. They get bonuses too based on how your team performs. It's tough when making a recruiting mistake. You live with it and so does the rest of the team. There is a massive amount of time and money put into recruiting for this reason but you can still miss or sometimes it's just not a good fit. My point in all my "way too long" writing was simply to clarify the scholarship part and distinguish the 1 year versus multi year. The process for non-renewal is essentially the same regardless. I gave single years, as well as up to 5 years at once. The multi year gives a little more sense of ease in that if the program got dropped for example you knew that your scholarship would be honored. It became a way to win the recruiting battle. You could also tell a player that even if they turned pro after the first year that you would also honor their scholarship to graduation after they finished their playing career. They could come back and get their degree later. But if you sign a 1 year, the process of non-renewal would have to be for the same reasons as that for a 4 year. I stated those above. When a player is not renewed people automatically think "oh the coach took their scholarship away". You can take a scholarship if the terms of the agreement are broken. But if they are leaving simply because they're not playing well enough, there is a lot more to that than one would think. A lot of discussion takes place before that happens, then the player goes into the portal, after that happens their scholarship is not renewed at that point. That's the clean break version. There's a lot less clean break version too. Sometimes the stories you read about kid's experiences are true and that's a fact. If you could just tell a kid they're not good enough and therefore I am not going to renew you then it would be easy, with no appeal process, and kids would just quit or transfer. The kids have some rights too and that's the way it should be so they are treated fairly. Even then it can be a rough experience for the kids sometimes and the coaching staff is under pressure too. In coach's defense, including the revenue sports, they care a ton about these kids, invest a lot of time and effort in them outside of the sport, and stay in contact with them for a lifetime. Some of these kids are even the ones that transferred from their programs. Like I said there are two sides to every story and the truth is usually in the middle.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Dec 1, 2020 17:42:48 GMT -5
That’s all really good info but you really need to use paragraphs.
|
|
|
Post by sevb on Dec 1, 2020 21:55:34 GMT -5
That’s all really good info but you really need to use paragraphs. +1
|
|