| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ksuwbbfan
Joined: 14 Mar 2014
Posts: 98
Location: Kansas
Back to top |
|
Joe Foss
Joined: 23 Aug 2007
Posts: 4066
Back to top |
 Posted: 04/15/14 9:04 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| I never understand why a university prefers to slather itself with bad publicity rather than simply grant a release. It would serve Kansas State right if it became the next focus of athlete unionization efforts.
_________________
Ohio Bobcats WBB Fan
|
|
Dennis1361
Joined: 12 Nov 2005
Posts: 248
Back to top |
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 12:06 am ::: |
Reply |
|
That's pretty pathetic. Romero was about 80% of their *power* last year, so ya, she's a loss, but the Bigger Picture is waaay more negative if they screw her this way. I'd think Mittie would advocate for her, if he has any sense.
Isn't K-State the place that released a player a couple of years ago, but because of the circumstances, the NCAA also waived her year of 'sitting out' when she went to Gonzaga?
_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
|
|
blaase22
Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Posts: 4163
Location: Paradise
Back to top |
|
JACKOWACKO
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 2884
Location: Right now? Cambridge
Back to top |
|
FS02
Joined: 19 Jul 2006
Posts: 9699
Location: Husky (west coast) Country
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 12:41 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Yes... really dumb. Don't get it.
_________________
@dtmears2
|
|
ksuwbbfan
Joined: 14 Mar 2014
Posts: 98
Location: Kansas
Back to top |
|
dfineguy
Joined: 05 Oct 2008
Posts: 201
Location: Bay Area Califonia
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 6:39 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Under Patterson, players were granted releases. Now, under Mittie's regime, managers are sent by the coach to threaten the player (AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT IT WAS IF HE SENT MANAGERS TO DELIVER THAT MESSAGE) and enslave a foreign national.
If the K-State administration, not the athletic department but president and his staffers, has any brains, they will fire Mittie now for cause, not pay him and be rid of this now before it blows up completely and they have to fire him anyway with all the ensuing damage to the program. I heard there were complaints at TCU. They must have handed him a one-way ticket when he left.
_________________
From the Desk of the Cat in the Hat
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11142
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 9:12 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Now you know Kansas State is only doing this for the player's own good. After all, athletes are treated so well that there's no need to distrust the motives of any college or athletic institution.
The student-athletes always come first, so this must be the right decision.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8942
Back to top |
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7828
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 11:12 am ::: |
Reply |
|
This makes K-State look REALLY good /sarcasm
Who in their right mind is going to want to play for a school that treats their players this way? Most kids sign with a program to play for a particular coach and that's where their loyalties are. If Romero is serious and the school won't budge, she can always pull a Sydney Moss and go play for a D-III school for a year. But K-State really needs to reconsider, because they are doing nothing but giving themselves a black eye.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 11:36 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
Now you know Kansas State is only doing this for the player's own good. After all, athletes are treated so well that there's no need to distrust the motives of any college or athletic institution.
The student-athletes always come first, so this must be the right decision. |
Is this going to be your comment from here on out (something similar in at least a couple of other threads)...being a complete smart ass? Pretty unbecoming of someone that is supposed to be a respected member of the media.
The reality is that this is a complete joke by Kansas State...and the public reaction that they are getting is going to cause a major issue with them and I believe will force their hand to issue the release. Seriously, why a school wouldn't issue a release is beyond me seeing as the kid no longer wants to be there...why would the school want them there?
However, this is the exact situation where I think we are all in agreement that kids should be allowed to transfer without question...when a coaching change occurs. That is one change that the NCAA should make because these types of situations should NEVER happen.
Again, why would a school want a student-athlete to stay when they don't wanna be there? That makes ZERO sense.
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7828
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 12:36 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Now you know Kansas State is only doing this for the player's own good. After all, athletes are treated so well that there's no need to distrust the motives of any college or athletic institution.
The student-athletes always come first, so this must be the right decision. |
Is this going to be your comment from here on out (something similar in at least a couple of other threads)...being a complete smart ass? Pretty unbecoming of someone that is supposed to be a respected member of the media.
The reality is that this is a complete joke by Kansas State...and the public reaction that they are getting is going to cause a major issue with them
and I believe will force their hand to issue the release. Seriously, why a school wouldn't issue a release is beyond me seeing as the kid no longer wants to be there...why would the school want them there?
However, this is the exact situation where I think we are all in agreement that kids should be allowed to transfer without question...when a coaching change occurs. That is one change that the NCAA should make because these types of situations should NEVER happen.
Again, why would a school want a student-athlete to stay when they don't wanna be there? That makes ZERO sense. |
I don't get your problem with what Clay said. He was being no less sarcastic than I was. Unfortunately there is no "sarcasm" icon here.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 1:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Again, why would a school want a student-athlete to stay when they don't wanna be there? That makes ZERO sense. |
An Athletic Department policy against granting releases makes sense to me. I'm sure it's the AD policy at most schools. The purpose is very simply to deter transfers, as is the NCAA's policy requiring transfer students to sit out a year in most cases.
A school has invested tens of thousands of dollars in a scholarship athlete. A school especially would not want players to transfer out when a coaching change is made. A school fires a coach and hires a different one for the very purpose of improving its team's performance. It would be shooting itself in the foot to allow the players to transfer without penalty at the very time the school is trying to improve with a better coach.
I believe schools are required to have an appeals mechanism so that, in individual situations, athletes can challenge an AD no-release policy in front of an independent school panel. This two-step procedure allows a school to maintain a general deterrent policy while allowing individual exceptions. Romero is now taking advantage of the appeal process at KSU.
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 1:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Again, why would a school want a student-athlete to stay when they don't wanna be there? That makes ZERO sense. |
An Athletic Department policy against granting releases makes sense to me. I'm sure it's the AD policy at most schools. The purpose is very simply to deter transfers, as is the NCAA's policy requiring transfer students to sit out a year in most cases.
A school has invested tens of thousands of dollars in a scholarship athlete. A school especially would not want players to transfer out when a coaching change is made. A school fires a coach and hires a different one for the very purpose of improving its team's performance. It would be shooting itself in the foot to allow the players to transfer without penalty at the very time the school is trying to improve with a better coach.
I believe schools are required to have an appeals mechanism so that, in individual situations, athletes can challenge an AD no-release policy in front of an independent school panel. This two-step procedure allows a school to maintain a general deterrent policy while allowing individual exceptions. Romero is now taking advantage of the appeal process at KSU. |
I tend to agree with all of this...however, Mittie was hired a month ago. My guess is team meetings have transpired, maybe even some individual instruction on the court, whatever. At this point, the players have probably have had sufficient interaction to figure out whether or not they would like to stay.
My point earlier was this...if a kid doesn't want to be there, the last thing you want to do is force them to stay. A malcontent in any program is going to do nothing but slowly destroy that program.
|
|
ksuwbbfan
Joined: 14 Mar 2014
Posts: 98
Location: Kansas
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 5:51 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Romero's appeal hearing was today. She should hear something tonight or tomorrow regarding her release.
|
|
gymrat32
Joined: 21 Aug 2012
Posts: 60
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 8:01 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Again, why would a school want a student-athlete to stay when they don't wanna be there? That makes ZERO sense. |
An Athletic Department policy against granting releases makes sense to me. I'm sure it's the AD policy at most schools. The purpose is very simply to deter transfers, as is the NCAA's policy requiring transfer students to sit out a year in most cases.
A school has invested tens of thousands of dollars in a scholarship athlete. A school especially would not want players to transfer out when a coaching change is made. A school fires a coach and hires a different one for the very purpose of improving its team's performance. It would be shooting itself in the foot to allow the players to transfer without penalty at the very time the school is trying to improve with a better coach.
I believe schools are required to have an appeals mechanism so that, in individual situations, athletes can challenge an AD no-release policy in front of an independent school panel. This two-step procedure allows a school to maintain a general deterrent policy while allowing individual exceptions. Romero is now taking advantage of the appeal process at KSU. |
It should be noted that ALL leverage is given to the school and the coach when it comes to student-athlete scholarships, so in cases where players aren't granted a release, it's basically a dictatorship type of system. For Mittie to send word thru his coaches that her appeal probably won't be granted is ridiculous....
_________________
"Don't let what you cannot do interfere with what you can do." John Wooden
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7828
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/16/14 9:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| gymrat32 wrote: |
| GlennMacGrady wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Again, why would a school want a student-athlete to stay when they don't wanna be there? That makes ZERO sense. |
An Athletic Department policy against granting releases makes sense to me. I'm sure it's the AD policy at most schools. The purpose is very simply to deter transfers, as is the NCAA's policy requiring transfer students to sit out a year in most cases.
A school has invested tens of thousands of dollars in a scholarship athlete. A school especially would not want players to transfer out when a coaching change is made. A school fires a coach and hires a different one for the very purpose of improving its team's performance. It would be shooting itself in the foot to allow the players to transfer without penalty at the very time the school is trying to improve with a better coach.
I believe schools are required to have an appeals mechanism so that, in individual situations, athletes can challenge an AD no-release policy in front of an independent school panel. This two-step procedure allows a school to maintain a general deterrent policy while allowing individual exceptions. Romero is now taking advantage of the appeal process at KSU. |
It should be noted that ALL leverage is given to the school and the coach when it comes to student-athlete scholarships, so in cases where players aren't granted a release, it's basically a dictatorship type of system. For Mittie to send word thru his coaches that her appeal probably won't be granted is ridiculous.... |
If Mittie really did that, he establishes himself as an a$$hat and will definitely hurt both himself and K-State when it comes to recruiting. Word gets around very quickly. And why would he really want a player there who doesn't want to be? Does he think he's that wonderful that he can change her mind, when he's already been there a month and she's decided she doesn't *want* to be there any more? That would be some powerful ego on his part.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
allenleavell
Joined: 28 Apr 2010
Posts: 677
Back to top |
| Posted: 04/17/14 7:56 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| This is not about the people on this board.It about Romero being held hostage. Coaches were fired she should given a unconditonally release!!END OF STORY!!!!!!
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
|
kool-aide
Joined: 09 Jun 2009
Posts: 1650
Back to top |
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
|
|
