|
Post by eyeroll2021 on Jul 24, 2024 18:42:56 GMT -5
Your concerns seem a bit contradictory. Programs like Texas and Nebraska already get quality players to walk on who otherwise could get a scholarship at other quality schools and that fact has nothing to do with the current scholarship limits. But that aside, what is confusing to me is that you think that Texas hoarding talent is a bad thing (or at least you said it contributes to a "wrong direction"), but then lament that losing quality non-scholarship players is a "shame" for Texas specifically as it relates to team culture. I was trying to figure how to say the same thing here. I’m not sure I’m fully following the logic in the OP Totally possible that these are not entirely consistent reactions - but see above, which I hope at least clarifies the second point some
|
|
|
Post by hornshouse23 on Jul 24, 2024 18:51:33 GMT -5
I was trying to figure how to say the same thing here. I’m not sure I’m fully following the logic in the OP Totally possible that these are not entirely consistent reactions - but see above, which I hope at least clarifies the second point some okay I see the argument for walk ons who dream of going to Texas and playing volleyball potentially not having a place. But honestly that’s what college club is for 🤷🏾♂️ . However I don’t feel like having 6 extra scholarships is automatically going to attract players to come and sit who would have otherwise successful careers at schools that are competitive if not elite.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Jul 24, 2024 18:56:12 GMT -5
Your concerns seem a bit contradictory. Programs like Texas and Nebraska already get quality players to walk on who otherwise could get a scholarship at other quality schools and that fact has nothing to do with the current scholarship limits. But that aside, what is confusing to me is that you think that Texas hoarding talent is a bad thing (or at least you said it contributes to a "wrong direction"), but then lament that losing quality non-scholarship players is a "shame" for Texas specifically as it relates to team culture. I think if we had 18 scholarships to give, Texas would not be giving the extra 6 to players like Kenna Miller (sad but true). That and the 18 roster limit would mean that she could not play at Texas in any capacity -- so she's either forced out of the sport (if she likes Texas as a university and wants to get her degree there) or has to transfer to keep playing. So what I'm hearing is that you want Kenna Miller to be able to have her cake and eat it too?
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Jul 24, 2024 18:58:22 GMT -5
Totally possible that these are not entirely consistent reactions - but see above, which I hope at least clarifies the second point some okay I see the argument for walk ons who dream of going to Texas and playing volleyball potentially not having a place. But honestly that’s what college club is for 🤷🏾♂️. Right. Kenna Miller is hardly the only volleyball player at UT Austin that dreams of going to Texas (for whatever reason) but that the D1 inter-collegiate team doesn't want to play with. That is exactly what college club volleyball is for, and I suspect that UT-Austin probably has a pretty good one.
|
|
|
Post by eyeroll2021 on Jul 24, 2024 19:09:18 GMT -5
I think if we had 18 scholarships to give, Texas would not be giving the extra 6 to players like Kenna Miller (sad but true). That and the 18 roster limit would mean that she could not play at Texas in any capacity -- so she's either forced out of the sport (if she likes Texas as a university and wants to get her degree there) or has to transfer to keep playing. So what I'm hearing is that you want Kenna Miller to be able to have her cake and eat it too? LOL I like do like Kenna, but she was used as an example to illustrate a point.
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Jul 24, 2024 19:19:41 GMT -5
So what I'm hearing is that you want Kenna Miller to be able to have her cake and eat it too? LOL I like do like Kenna, but she was used as an example to illustrate a point. The point being that while players like Kenna Miller are certainly good enough to get a scholarships at other quality programs, the Texas program is too elite/desirable to want her to fill the 18th spot on the roster. I have a solution! lets make the Texas program less elite/desirable. Come join the ranks of people wanting to see Texas go down...then, when that happens, even if Texas wanted better players to fill out that 18th spot on the roster, those players will be less likely to want to go to Texas, thus creating more opportunities for players like Kenna Miller.
|
|
|
Post by hookem1 on Jul 24, 2024 19:32:56 GMT -5
LOL I like do like Kenna, but she was used as an example to illustrate a point. The point being that while players like Kenna Miller are certainly good enough to get a scholarships at other quality programs, the Texas program is too elite/desirable to want her to fill the 18th spot on the roster. I have a solution! lets make the Texas program less elite/desirable. Come join the ranks of people wanting to see Texas go down...then, when that happens, even if Texas wanted better players to fill out that 18th spot on the roster, those players will be less likely to want to go to Texas, thus creating more opportunities for players like Kenna Miller. No. We sacrificed beating Washington in football so we could continue to be an elite volleyball program. You can’t have your cake and eat it too!
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Jul 24, 2024 20:03:51 GMT -5
The point being that while players like Kenna Miller are certainly good enough to get a scholarships at other quality programs, the Texas program is too elite/desirable to want her to fill the 18th spot on the roster. I have a solution! lets make the Texas program less elite/desirable. Come join the ranks of people wanting to see Texas go down...then, when that happens, even if Texas wanted better players to fill out that 18th spot on the roster, those players will be less likely to want to go to Texas, thus creating more opportunities for players like Kenna Miller. No. We sacrificed beating Washington in football so we could continue to be an elite volleyball program. You can’t have your cake and eat it too! That Washington/Texas game was pretty darn good.
|
|
|
Post by stevehorn on Jul 24, 2024 20:12:41 GMT -5
It is a part of the agreement. Schools will be able to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters but those roster sizes will be capped at different numbers per sport IMO this is a step on the wrong direction for a couple of reasons: - the smaller scholarship number has diffused talent to lower ranked programs, mid-majors etc. Increasing the schollie count means that programs like TX and Nebraska will hoover up more top talent. Those additional talented players are likely to sit the bench before transferring out after 1-2 seasons, rather than being potentially 4-year starters elsewhere. - I think the means the end of quality walk-ons at programs like Texas. Which is a shame, since the walk-ons we have had the last two seasons have contributed so much to team culture - it's not always visible on tv, but if you attend live matches and watch the sidelines, players like Ewert, Miller, Crownover, Heinrich, and Pierce have been the team's biggest hype men and getting everyone fired up It's not all bad. For starters, IMO volleyball has needed more scholarships. It really is the only full headcount sport where almost all teams, including NC contenders, have one or two non-scholarship players playing significant minutes most years. At least one or two of these ships will go to backcourt players that the "system" currently has them playing most or all of their career as a "walk-on". Also transfers like Ewert and Barnes would be on scholarship their one year at Texas.
|
|
|
Post by horns1 on Jul 24, 2024 22:55:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by slxpress on Jul 25, 2024 1:19:15 GMT -5
So I guess it wasn’t recorded? He’s just thanking David Hunt for talking with him. I don’t see anything on the website or podcast.
|
|
|
Post by hornfanaustin on Jul 25, 2024 9:43:09 GMT -5
I don't see how that agreement to limit roster size to scholarship limits will hold up in court. There's going to be the inevitable lawsuit from someone that says that being denied a walkon spot on a NCAA team will limit their potential NIL opportunities and/or conversion to full time scholarship. i.e. If you're not on the team, you won't have a chance to show your worth and be granted an eventual scholarship.
Jhenna Gabriel is a real world example of that.
Also, various football and basketball IG/Twitter clips showing walk-ons receiving a scholarship to the whooping and hollering of their teammates.
Also, being denied a spot on a team where you have skills and are willing to be a practice player and pay your own way seems unfair.
I know this is to limit transfers, which is another supporting fact in the eventual lawsuit.
|
|
|
Post by bborr on Jul 25, 2024 9:56:12 GMT -5
I don't see how that agreement to limit roster size to scholarship limits will hold up in court. There's going to be the inevitable lawsuit from someone that says that being denied a walkon spot on a NCAA team will limit their potential NIL opportunities and/or conversion to full time scholarship. i.e. If you're not on the team, you won't have a chance to show your worth and be granted an eventual scholarship.
Jhenna Gabriel is a real world example of that.
Also, various football and basketball IG/Twitter clips showing walk-ons receiving a scholarship to the whooping and hollering of their teammates.
Also, being denied a spot on a team where you have skills and are willing to be a practice player and pay your own way seems unfair.
I know this is to limit transfers, which is another supporting fact in the eventual lawsuit.
Early on I think it will increase transfers, as more top schools have additional scholarships for athletes who wanted to attend there, but the school was “full.” As for court attack, these limits are part of a comprehensive settlement that will have court approval. Of course another court could disagree, but knowing that these terms settled several longstanding lawsuits will make other courts reluctant to disagree. Of course this court overseeing the current litigation may decide it doesn’t approve of the settlement terms, in which case it is back to the drawing board.
|
|
|
Post by texaslonghorns on Jul 25, 2024 11:01:58 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by hookem1 on Jul 25, 2024 11:03:28 GMT -5
|
|