Open Scholarship spots

[Hutch89 2,939]

I've been thinking about the 2015 recruiting class, and I'm unsure about how the scholarship situation works.

When a student athlete is given a scholarship, is the university able to cancel/reduce/withdraw that scholarship from that student athlete?

If we fill our last Scholly spot for 2014, we will have no remaining open schollys available for the 2015 class. Unless someone transfers, gets injured, graduated.. and with no one graduating, we might be putting ourselves in a tough spot in how many players we can bring in for 2015.  I'm mostly thinking of Jurkin here, but would the uni be able to cancel his scholly at anytime? or does he have a right to it, and just because he's had nearly 0 minutes and has had some injury problems, does he have any protective rights that allow him to remain tuition free?

 

 

[JSHoosier 19,568]

Scholarships are one year renewable.  So they could pull Jurkin's scholarship from him, he could also be given a Medical Exemption which means his schooling is still paid for as if he were on scholly but he doesn't count against the limit.

 

EDIT:  The Medical Exemption is what Saban does at Alabama.  Basically kicking players off the team that have injuries but not career ending injuries.  The player still has a scholarship essentially, but he's no longer on the team.  Ending their college careers but paying for their tuition.

[Myrmidon76 614]

Jurkin will graduate next year. Problem solved. His spot will be open for 2015. No need to go HAM on a great guy like Peter. He's had some very unfortunate medical situations that haven't allowed him to show what he can do. With so much time/experience lost, he will likely never see the floor. Peter is a great student and will easily finish his degree next year. I get the frustration, but just spend 5 minutes with Peter and you'll regret even thinking it.

[Bowhunter 2,655]

Amen

[Stuhoo 75,564]

CTC gets a bad rap for "Creaning". "Creaning" is for guys that are ready and able, but not willing.

 

Peter Jurkin is willing, but not able. Even with his unfortunate injury situation, he is an asset to his teammates and to the program. 

[Hutch89 2,939]

No hate against Jurkin, I think he's a fine student athlete.  Just thought of him as one of the better examples on our team of players who have schollys but don't play for whatever reason.   Tough break for the kid though.

[BrownCoEagle 8]

CTC gets a bad rap for "Creaning". "Creaning" is for guys that are ready and able, but not willing.

 

Peter Jurkin is willing, but not able. Even with his unfortunate injury situation, he is an asset to his teammates and to the program. 

what happened with Creek?

[Stuhoo 75,564]

what happened with Creek?

 

Mo was on scholarship for four years and got his degree. Had a new baby that was in DC, and in theory wanted to move back home to be near family.

 

FWIW, even though schollys are renewable annually, I happen to be a proponent of keeping good kids on scholly until they get a degree.

 

After four years and a degree paid for by the taxpayers of the State of Indiana, if a basketball decision is made to not extend the scholly for a fifth year, I'm ok with that. That goes for Mo Creek and Matt Roth too.

 

Do you agree?

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

[quote name="Stuhoo" post="65629" timestamp="1399475716"]Mo was on scholarship for four years and got his degree. Had a new baby that was in DC, and in theory wanted to move back home to be near family. FWIW, even though schollys are renewable annually, I happen to be a proponent of keeping good kids on scholly until they get a degree. After four years and a degree paid for by the taxpayers of the State of Indiana, if a basketball decision is made to not extend the scholly for a fifth year, I'm ok with that. That goes for Mo Creek and Matt Roth too. Do you agree?[/quote] If you commit to the player the time it takes to finish a degree completely paid for by the state, you've given them all they were promised IMO. The Mo Creek situation made sense to me. I'm a little less aware of the full situation with Roth. Wasn't official word that there were no hard feelings, but a lot of rumors of bad blood? Sent from my place of advanced, analytical thinking: the toilet.

[Hutch89 2,939]

I'm all for a scholly spot being promised until the student gets his/her degree. unless of course they do something to not deserve it like break the law or whatever.   

[HoosierAloha 29,887]

[quote name="Stuhoo" post="65629" timestamp="1399475716"]Mo was on scholarship for four years and got his degree. Had a new baby that was in DC, and in theory wanted to move back home to be near family.

FWIW, even though schollys are renewable annually, I happen to be a proponent of keeping good kids on scholly until they get a degree.

After four years and a degree paid for by the taxpayers of the State of Indiana, if a basketball decision is made to not extend the scholly for a fifth year, I'm ok with that. That goes for Mo Creek and Matt Roth too.

Do you agree?[/quote]

Not to derail the thread too much but I would argue the taxpayers are paying for their scholarships. The basketball program makes plenty of money to cover their scholarships.


Sent from my sarcastic iPhone using BrownBanners

[Walking Boot of Doom 18,170]

[quote name="HoosierAloha" post="65649" timestamp="1399485285"]Not to derail the thread too much but I would argue the taxpayers are paying for their scholarships. The basketball program makes plenty of money to cover their scholarships. Sent from my sarcastic iPhone using BrownBanners[/quote] Very few athletic departments are actually profitable without being subsidized by the state. I know basketball and football are the sports making the profits, but scholarships are given by the school. One sport does not individually fund their own. It's pooled and shared with other, mostly unprofitable, sports. Indiana is one of many who received state, tax payer, money to the tune of nearly $3 million. [url="http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/05/07/ncaa-finances-subsidies/2142443/"]http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/college/2013/05/07/ncaa-finances-subsidies/2142443/[/url] Look at the first link in the article for the actual financials for each school. Sent from my place of advanced, analytical thinking: the toilet.

[HoosierAloha 29,887]

I understand that. I was making a point that the basketball program makes enough profit to cover their own scholarships even though that's not how it works.


Sent from my sarcastic iPhone using BrownBanners

[BrownCoEagle 8]

Mo was on scholarship for four years and got his degree. Had a new baby that was in DC, and in theory wanted to move back home to be near family.

 

FWIW, even though schollys are renewable annually, I happen to be a proponent of keeping good kids on scholly until they get a degree.

 

After four years and a degree paid for by the taxpayers of the State of Indiana, if a basketball decision is made to not extend the scholly for a fifth year, I'm ok with that. That goes for Mo Creek and Matt Roth too.

 

Do you agree?

not really. i think if they thought Creek would be near the same scorer he was as a freshman then he'd have still been at IU. 

[Stuhoo 75,564]

not really. i think if they thought Creek would be near the same scorer he was as a freshman then he'd have still been at IU. 

 

not really. i think if they thought Creek would be near the same scorer he was as a freshman then he'd have still been at IU. 

 

That's EXACTLY my point.

 

I expect IU to honor scholarships for good kids through when they get a college degree, regardless of whether they get injured or not. After three/four years AND a degree, whether the player stays becomes solely a basketball decision. 

 

This is exactly how it played out with Mo Creek and Matt Roth. Exactly.

________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Now, it is more than fair to say that the basketball decision to not keep Matt and Mo around for one more extra year was misguided; Matt could have helped against that Syracuse zone, and Mo likely would have helped last year's outside shooting significantly.

[JaybobHoosier 11,821]

[quote name="Stuhoo" post="65781" timestamp="1399554118"]That's EXACTLY my point.

I expect IU to honor scholarships for good kids through when they get a college degree, regardless of whether they get injured or not. After three/four years AND a degree, whether the player stays becomes solely a basketball decision.

This is exactly how it played out with Mo Creek and Matt Roth. Exactly.
________________________________________________________________________________________

Now, it is more than fair to say that the basketball decision to not keep Matt and Mo around for one more extra year was misguided; Matt could have helped against that Syracuse zone, and Mo likely would have helped last year's outside shooting significantly.[/quote]

I believe if you offer a kid and he does nothing wrong, he stays on scholarship until he leaves. Firmly believe that!

Sent from my DROID4 using BtownBanners mobile app

[WayneFleekHoosier 46,745]

I believe if you offer a kid and he does nothing wrong, he stays on scholarship until he leaves. Firmly believe that!Sent from my DROID4 using BtownBanners mobile app

Alternately, I have no problem with a player transferring in effort to get more PT. ala creek, Etherington, capobianco, etc....

[Stuhoo 75,564]

I believe if you offer a kid and he does nothing wrong, he stays on scholarship until he leaves. Firmly believe that!

Sent from my DROID4 using BtownBanners mobile app

 

"Does nothing wrong" is in the eye of the beholder. See: Capobianco, Bobby. Good student, nice kid, reportedly put no extra effort toward basketball development. Was allegedly encouraged to seek more playing time elsewhere. Where does he fit?

 

Stays on scholly 'til he leaves? Matt Roth got four years on scholly, got his undergrad and masters degree, and wanted a fifth year on scholly. Should IUbball be required to give him the fifth year?

[BrownCoEagle 8]

"Does nothing wrong" is in the eye of the beholder. See: Capobianco, Bobby. Good student, nice kid, reportedly put no extra effort toward basketball development. Was allegedly encouraged to seek more playing time elsewhere. Where does he fit?

 

Stays on scholly 'til he leaves? Matt Roth got four years on scholly, got his undergrad and masters degree, and wanted a fifth year on scholly. Should IUbball be required to give him the fifth year?

I would unless there was an attitude problem or something. cutting a kid loose when he has worked his butt off through injuries and in the classroom just seems wrong to me and i guess that's where we have a difference of opinion. i don't think Knight would ever have done that. seems selfish and shady. kind of thing a backstabber would do, imo. i think its low and that's my biggest beef with Coach Crean. i don't care if other schools/coaches do it. this is IU. 

[Stuhoo 75,564]

I would unless there was an attitude problem or something. cutting a kid loose when he has worked his butt off through injuries and in the classroom just seems wrong to me and i guess that's where we have a difference of opinion. i don't think Knight would ever have done that. seems selfish and shady. kind of thing a backstabber would do, imo. i think its low and that's my biggest beef with Coach Crean. i don't care if other schools/coaches do it. this is IU. 

 

Just a difference of opinion. I think your point is more than fair, though I disagree only to the extent that I think the "get them to a degree" point is the standard for continued scholly years.

 

Also, I'm a huge fan of Coach Knight's academic standards, but I'm pretty sure that he cut lose more than a few kids that were pretty good kids on a personal level.