'24 TN WR Braylon Harmon (Tennessee)

#101
#101
swampfoxfan said:
I don't consider it a moral issue not sure where that comes from. If a second or third customer steps up and offers full price I might need to reconsider my sale price offer, or buy something else.
Click to expand...
And since they haven't, why give him a scholarship when he's willing to take a PWO spot?
 
#104
#104
NighthawkVol said:
So? That doesn’t answer my question. He’s willing to come as a PWO. If you see an item you want on sale, do you offer to pay full price because it’s worth that? It’s not a moral issue.
Click to expand...
Maybe he's willing currently, but the right FBS offer could sway that? We lost a local Knoxville kid in 2013 or 2014 to Oklahoma because they gave him a scholarship...and he was an anchor at long-snapper for four seasons.
 
#105
#105
butchna said:
Maybe he's willing currently, but the right FBS offer could sway that? We lost a local Knoxville kid in 2013 or 2014 to Oklahoma because they gave him a scholarship...and he was an anchor at long-snapper for four seasons.
Click to expand...
If Oklahoma is dumb enough to put a long snapper on scholarship, let ‘em. It’s stupid. Butch and Pruitt were dumb enough to do that crap.

I’ll lament losing the Maryville Center to Clemson. But not a long snapper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cosmo Kramer
#106
#106
NighthawkVol said:
If Oklahoma is dumb enough to put a long snapper on scholarship, let ‘em. It’s stupid. Butch and Pruitt were dumb enough to do that crap.

I’ll lament losing the Maryville Center to Clemson. But not a long snapper.
Click to expand...
I don't think they ever regretted it...so not "stupid". This is a different animal of course...him being a WR. Wanna look like a cartoon donkey on here? Put your name on the wall of internet GM who opposed giving a productive player a scholarship because you played a stubborn game of PWO chicken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: swampfoxfan
#107
#107
swampfoxfan said:
Your right, nothing ever changes. The point is, some of us think he's worth a scholarship.
Click to expand...
The coaches might think he's worth a scholarship, but they have to be creative in managing the roster with the scholarship penalties we received. The faster that we get that out of the way, the better off we'll be. This is just speculation on my part though.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Orange., tnktm and NighthawkVol
#108
#108
butchna said:
I don't think they ever regretted it...so not "stupid". This is a different animal of course...him being a WR. Wanna look like a cartoon donkey on here? Put your name on the wall of internet GM who opposed giving a productive player a scholarship because you played a stubborn game of PWO chicken.
Click to expand...
I’m not opposed to giving a productive player a scholarship. When he’s productive, give him a scholarship. Tennessee has 2 fewer scholarships to give each of the next 6 years. So it’s important to be creative in how you get some extra talent on the roster. That doesn’t mean handing out scholarships like candy.

Whether OU regretted the scholarship long snapper or not, I don’t know. But there is zero reason for UT to regret losing him. He was replaced by a walk-on long snapper who never missed a beat and didn’t cost UT a scholarship. In fact, the two worst long snappers at UT in my lifetime were Lovingood (who only snapped on punts, couldn’t even snap on PATS/FGs) and the other kid who Pruitt gave a scholarship to who screwed up a few times and lost his job. Name escapes me. And guess what? They’re the only two who were scholarship recruits. Every other one was better and also non-scholarship.

Fortunately, Heupel doesn’t subscribe to that ridiculous practice. I think it was a passing fad because Saban did it, so everyone had to reflexively copy him before realizing it was a waste of a scholarship.
 
#109
#109
NighthawkVol said:
I’m not opposed to giving a productive player a scholarship. When he’s productive, give him a scholarship. Tennessee has 2 fewer scholarships to give each of the next 6 years. So it’s important to be creative in how you get some extra talent on the roster. That doesn’t mean handing out scholarships like candy.

Whether OU regretted the scholarship long snapper or not, I don’t know. But there is zero reason for UT to regret losing him. He was replaced by a walk-on long snapper who never missed a beat and didn’t cost UT a scholarship. In fact, the two worst long snappers at UT in my lifetime were Lovingood (who only snapped on punts, couldn’t even snap on PATS/FGs) and the other kid who Pruitt gave a scholarship to who screwed up a few times and lost his job. Name escapes me. And guess what? They’re the only two who were scholarship recruits. Every other one was better and also non-scholarship.

Fortunately, Heupel doesn’t subscribe to that ridiculous practice. I think it was a passing fad because Saban did it, so everyone had to reflexively copy him before realizing it was a waste of a scholarship.
Click to expand...
Seems you took it personal and that’s your prerogative. I’m more from the school of if they’re at the top of their craft and you have it to give…why not?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VOLINVONORE and swampfoxfan
#110
#110
bigl3327 said:
The coaches might think he's worth a scholarship, but they have to be creative in managing the roster with the scholarship penalties we received. The faster that we get that out of the way, the better off we'll be. This is just speculation on my part though.
Click to expand...
I’m confident they will be…no matter how WE vote. They employ people to concentrate on roster matters like this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: bigl3327
#112
#112
butchna said:
Seems you took it personal and that’s your prerogative. I’m more from the school of if they’re at the top of their craft and you have it to give…why not?
Click to expand...
Because you can get one just as good (or in those cases, better) without sacrificing a scholarship. Like most schools in America. Same reason you don’t recruit a scholarship holder. Scholarships are valuable. Especially for Tennessee right now.
 
#113
#113
NighthawkVol said:
Because you can get one just as good (or in those cases, better) without sacrificing a scholarship. Like most schools in America. Same reason you don’t recruit a scholarship holder. Scholarships are valuable. Especially for Tennessee right now.
Click to expand...
Meh. NIL is way more valuable.
 
#114
#114
I guess I don't see the issue as long as the young man ends up with the same money. On scholarship or not.
 
#119
#119
butchna said:
Which long snapper would that be? Or they look all the same to you? 😏
Click to expand...
Nah. Will Albright, for example, looked crappy. He was a scholarship long snapper, like Riley Lovingood. Matthew Salansky, though, has been really good. He beat out Albright when Albright botched 2 or 3 snaps in game one of the 2020 season. Salansky is a non-scholarship player, like all the other good long snappers we've had. Albright entered the transfer portal in 2022, but no one wanted him, so he's done with football.

So no, they don't ALL look the same: the non-scholarship ones have all looked the same (good) and the scholarship ones have both looked the same (crappy).
 
#120
#120
NighthawkVol said:
Nah. Will Albright, for example, looked crappy. He was a scholarship long snapper, like Riley Lovingood. Matthew Salansky, though, has been really good. He beat out Albright when Albright botched 2 or 3 snaps in game one of the 2020 season. Salansky is a non-scholarship player, like all the other good long snappers we've had. Albright entered the transfer portal in 2022, but no one wanted him, so he's done with football.

So no, they don't ALL look the same: the non-scholarship ones have all looked the same (good) and the scholarship ones have both looked the same (crappy).
Click to expand...
I’m versed. There were no scholarship restrictions under Pruitt til he changed that. What generational player did we miss out on by wasting one on Albright?

And who earned a scholarship more…Lovingood or Dillon Bates?
 
#121
#121
butchna said:
I’m versed. There were no scholarship restrictions under Pruitt til he changed that. What generational player did we miss out on by wasting one on Albright?

And who earned a scholarship more…Lovingood or Dillon Bates?
Click to expand...
False equivalencies don't move you forward. The issue is whether long snappers should be recruited scholarship players or not. There is no evidence to support the idea that you get a better long snapper by offering him a scholarship. In fact, the evidence (oddly) points to the opposite. Therefore, don't waste a scholarship on one.

Pointing out that UT misevaluated a scholarship LB is a red herring that doesn't address the actual issue. But since there will inevitably be misevaluations, that's all the more reason to use your scholarships wisely.

Asking what generational talent we missed out on by offering Albright is just bizarre. But sure, let's just give out scholarships like candy because, you know, they wouldn't have gone to a generational talent anyway.

And yes, there were scholarship restrictions under Pruitt...the 85 total/25 initial counters. You still had to fit into those parameters, even if the NCAA hadn't hit us with further reductions yet.
 
#122
#122
NighthawkVol said:
Nah. Will Albright, for example, looked crappy. He was a scholarship long snapper, like Riley Lovingood. Matthew Salansky, though, has been really good. He beat out Albright when Albright botched 2 or 3 snaps in game one of the 2020 season. Salansky is a non-scholarship player, like all the other good long snappers we've had. Albright entered the transfer portal in 2022, but no one wanted him, so he's done with football.

So no, they don't ALL look the same: the non-scholarship ones have all looked the same (good) and the scholarship ones have both looked the same (crappy).
Click to expand...
I get your point here. I also think if the coaches feel it’s an important enough position to use a scholarship on why would we argue with it? I would rather not have to use a scholarship but at the same time a crappy long snapper will lose you games in this conference. Is that scholarship better used on that position or a WR or LBer that never plays? If we have the scholarship to use, it’s an important enough position to warrant using it on.
 
  • Like
Reactions: butchna
#123
#123
NighthawkVol said:
False equivalencies don't move you forward. The issue is whether long snappers should be recruited scholarship players or not. There is no evidence to support the idea that you get a better long snapper by offering him a scholarship. In fact, the evidence (oddly) points to the opposite. Therefore, don't waste a scholarship on one.

Pointing out that UT misevaluated a scholarship LB is a red herring that doesn't address the actual issue. But since there will inevitably be misevaluations, that's all the more reason to use your scholarships wisely.

Asking what generational talent we missed out on by offering Albright is just bizarre. But sure, let's just give out scholarships like candy because, you know, they wouldn't have gone to a generational talent anyway.

And yes, there were scholarship restrictions under Pruitt...the 85 total/25 initial counters. You still had to fit into those parameters, even if the NCAA hadn't hit us with further reductions yet.
Click to expand...
You’re being very dramatic in incredulous fashion. Get back to me when you want to have an honest conversation sans histrionics. In the meantime take a Midol and recognize that no…scholarships aren’t “candy”, but they are necessary to secure our PERFORMERS sometimes. Kickers, punters, return guys and yes…sometimes long snappers. All take up roster spots at the next level and they’re even more valuable at this one. Gripping on one really tight and miserly isn’t going to turn a fifth string OG into a diamond…just prevents you from using it as fuel.
 
#124
#124
DaddyChad said:
I get your point here. I also think if the coaches feel it’s an important enough position to use a scholarship on why would we argue with it? I would rather not have to use a scholarship but at the same time a crappy long snapper will lose you games in this conference. Is that scholarship better used on that position or a WR or LBer that never plays? If we have the scholarship to use, it’s an important enough position to warrant using it on.
Click to expand...
Fortunately, coaches have moved on from the practice of offering scholarships to long snappers (at least until they earn it on the field). Saban did it once or twice, then a few others (including Butch and Pruitt) did it as copycats because Saban is Coaching Jesus. Saban hasn't done it in awhile now and coaches have realized there's really no need, so the practice has essentially stopped. Heupel is smart enough to know he can get a long snapper who is just as competent by bringing him in as a PWO, so that's what he does. There just isn't a lot of differentiation between the best power 5 starting long snapper and the worst.

It was a dumb practice that went away because it was a dumb practice.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top