Crimson324

47 minutes ago, BADGERVOL said:

So one scholarship available. I’ve heard banking it which I totally get.

but I have a question same as last year.

why…if we landed a guy who only had one year left to use, wouldn’t we add that guy? Thats the part that doesn’t make sense to me.

 

not adding a 2-3 year guy even who’s solid, I get. But adding a one year guy if you have the scholarship for one year…I need explained why? 🤔🤷🏻‍♂️

Just my read…but time and energy is a finite resource in recruiting. With what we have to offer to a 13th scholly candidate, it’s a hard pitch. The 25 class is loaded and this coaching staff needs to spend more time building relationships with future HS talent. 
 

If there’s an obvious candidate for that 13th scholarship, take them! But I’m betting this coaching staff has an idea of what is left and who they are competing with for those quality pieces still out there. 

1 hour ago, Hoosier4Life53 said:

My youngest son was an All-American and a top 20 prospect in his sport coming out of HS, and had to be careful about even signing autographs that could violate NCAA rules. Basically, he couldn’t profit from anything as an amateur athlete or risk his eligibility. 
The trade off was a scholarship and a great education, which has served him well. Hard to believe how far college athletics has slipped in just a few short years.

To me that story just showcases how silly the old rules were. 
 

Bottom line: This benefits the athletes. They work their a$$es off so that students and alumni can be entertained watching them represent the university. Why shouldn’t they be able to make a little money doing that?