Bryce Brown battling for starting RB position

#78
#78
LMF'nAO..........he was the #1 recruit in the country and a midget from Waco, Tx is giving him a fit......that is so...

nukingfuts3.jpg
 
#80
#80
BigPapaVol said:
Bullshiz coachspeak is absolutely meaningless. Trying to use it for a point is just silly.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

The article clearly states that there is an open competing. You are clearly wrong.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#81
#81
Vols520 said:
The article clearly states that there is an open competing. You are clearly wrong.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

:shakehead:
There's an open competition because "open competition" makes the #1 play just that little bit harder. Bryce is the #1. If you want to get him to work slightly harder, you say he isn't the official #1 yet.
 
#84
#84
SGMVols said:
As am I. Still think it was a douche move by Dooley to deny his release.
Click to expand...

I dont know if I would call it a douche move, but I certainly didnt agree with how BB or CDD handled it. There were absolutely no positives in denying his release, he was going to go either way.
 
#85
#85
SGMVols said:
As am I. Still think it was a douche move by Dooley to deny his release.
Click to expand...

Not sure I would go that far. Dooley had to have known Brown would not stay for any reason; however, he might have thought that allowing his release could open the floodgates.
 
#88
#88
tvolsfan said:
I think all players should be given a release if they wish when there's a head coaching change, to be honest.
Click to expand...

Agreed. There is little to nothing positive that can come out of trying to force someone to stay who flat out wants to leave in that situation.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#89
#89
tvolsfan said:
I think all players should be given a release if they wish when there's a head coaching change.
Click to expand...

He probably would have been a little more forthcoming if depth wasn't so unbelievably thin. Hard to blame him for not wanting to make an impossible situation impossible-er.

And in retrospect, we could have really used Brown last year. Poole did well enough, but we had virtually nothing behind him.
 
#90
#90
tvolsfan said:
I think all players should be given a release if they wish when there's a head coaching change.
Click to expand...

I disagree. This could wreak catastrophic effects not only on the school that a coach leaves but also on the program he takes over. What would keep a coach, if said rule was in effect, from taking his best players, that know his system, to his next destination? Wouldn't that result in players who were already at the destination school losing scholarships?

Players commit to a school, not to a coach. The incoming coach has the discretion to release the player or not, and I believe the rule is prudent at worst.
 
#91
#91
therealUT said:
I disagree. This could wreak catastrophic effects not only on the school that a coach leaves but also on the program he takes over. What would keep a coach, if said rule was in effect, from taking his best players, that know his system, to his next destination? Wouldn't that result in players who were already at the destination school losing scholarships?

Players commit to a school, not to a coach. The incoming coach has the discretion to release the player or not, and I believe the rule is prudent at worst.
Click to expand...

All that release says is that the kid can get a scholarship somewhere else. He still has to sit out a year.
 
#93
#93
kptvol said:
He probably would have been a little more forthcoming if depth wasn't so unbelievably thin. Hard to blame him for not wanting to make an impossible situation impossible-er.

And in retrospect, we could have really used Brown last year. Poole did well enough, but we had virtually nothing behind him.
Click to expand...
I don't disagree with any of this. I just don't think Brown should have been forced to stay or sit out a year.
 
#94
#94
therealUT said:
I disagree. This could wreak catastrophic effects not only on the school that a coach leaves but also on the program he takes over. What would keep a coach, if said rule was in effect, from taking his best players, that know his system, to his next destination? Wouldn't that result in players who were already at the destination school losing scholarships?
Click to expand...
What's your point? Coaches kick players off upon arrival all the time.

Players commit to a school, not to a coach. The incoming coach has the discretion to release the player or not, and I believe the rule is prudent at worst.
Click to expand...
That's the way many look at it, but in reality, they commit to both.
 
#95
#95
#99
#99
tvolsfan said:
Could you elaborate on this?
Click to expand...

If coaches could easily leave with the best talent, they would have much more negotiating leverage over the AD and the institution.
tvolsfan said:
I just don't think scholarship players would really be any less protected. Plenty of players are told to hit the road when a new coach arrives.
Click to expand...

IMO, I would imagine that even more would be told to take a hike.
 
#100
#100
therealUT said:
If coaches could easily leave with the best talent, they would have much more negotiating leverage over the AD and the institution.


IMO, I would imagine that even more would be told to take a hike.
Click to expand...


Okay, that makes sense. I've been in this debate several times, but I think this is the first time I've heard a lot about the school the coach is leaving. I understand your argument, but I don't think it would be a huge issue. Coaches generally leave for better jobs/teams. I don't think you would generally see a lot of problems with that.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top