CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

Schwenke--Draw your own conclusion

by snoscythe · 1/29/2010

Sponsored Advertisementad content
B
BigCougsFan
Mars wrote:
Because that has a lot to do with Schwenke. Also because I've never answered it before. :roll:



To me, leaving BYU early to play professional sports is a sign of disrepect and disloyalty that I would never do. I believe in being grateful in all things, and that includes scholarship money. But then again, I'm much more loyal than the average guy I guess.


I don't really think it's not being disloyal. Collie's married and his family should come first. He needs to be loyal to his family. He put his career off for two years to do something totally unselfish and served his Church. Athletes his age have two more years experience in the NFL that Collie does this year. God gave him a talent and he's making the most of it. Maybe God has a job for him in Indiana that non of us will never know about and he needed to be out there this year.
M
Mars
BigCougsFan wrote:
I don't really think it's not being disloyal.

So you agree with me then. Others will agree with US, some will not.
B
bigbluepuma
Mars, in large part, I agree with you. I am big on loyalty, and have been very upset about the lack thereof in players, recruits and fans alike, but I am going to have to take you on concerning this issue. While loyalty is very important, it is not the only factor to come into play for AC. I would like to have seen him stay, and I understand your frustration. On the other hand, he may have needed to go when he did. While he may have left with a dept for the education, he had payed a lot of it with the games he had a large part in our winning. Although I would have stayed, and at face value think that he should have, I can't fault him for leaving us in a lurch like some do. We had very good receivers this year, and his timing gave us more continuety from this year to next, when we will really need it. That being said, I sure am glad that Unga had the loyalty to stay.
C
CougarClaw
Kona obviously preferred notre dame to BYU. They looked fr a way out of his commitmnent and BYU gave them a reason. Now to hide their own lack of integrity, they try to play it as if it was really the universtity's fault for something they wanted all along. I'm glad you posted these quotes. I don't pretend to know the schwenkes, but I do know human nature. And Being honest and upfront about a changing decision is much harder than throwing blame around and diverting attention away from something you don't want people to see- your own lack of integrity.



I would love to be wrong about this and if I am I apologize beforehand, but what really makes me mad is when you drag MY Alma mater's name through the mud because YOU are too cheap and pathetic to admit you were wrong in committing in the first place during a time when they can't do a thing about it to defend themselves even If they wanted too. That's right I said cheap and pathetic.



Again someone convince me that I'm wrong and they're really honorable people and bronco attacked their car with a sledgehammer which is the real reason they left and I'll be happy to eat crow. I want honorable and great players at the Y. Not pathetic blaming excusers and posers who get what they deserve: four losing seasons at Southward Trend.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
D
Ddawg
CougarClaw wrote:

Kona obviously preferred Notre Dame to BYU. They looked for a way out of his commitmnent and BYU gave them a reason.



Now to hide their own lack of integrity, they try to play it as if it was really the universtity's fault .....



Four losing seasons at Southward Trend.




Bingo!!!!!!!!

With each hour that passes - I'm getting more steamed about this debacle.

:crazy:
Sponsored Advertisementad content
B
blue42
Mars wrote:
you don't think that someone saying to you that you doubt that their kid would be able to keep the HC,because he's tripping to ND,would get your ire up if the kid actually was 100% comitted,as he said?

What a load of bull. If he was 100% committed, he doesn't set up the N.D. and UW visits. If he was even 60% committed he doesn't go through with them. The kid lied to Bronco and his dad lied to the media.


I will with you Mars the kid lied but more importantly his dad lied so what kind of example does the kid have? A bad one! For those who say people are blowing this out of context because everyone has the "right" to change their mind are technically correct, but when a promise is made the "right" therefore ceases to be an option. Remember most "men" still live by the phrase "my word is my bond" and that has changed dramatically by those who deem themselves deserving and above all others. So I guess the new code to live by is "my word is my bond unless a better offer comes along!" All of you who are saying it is okay are probably the same ones who think everybody needs to be a winner in elementary school.
K
kfilly20
Mars wrote:
Mars,answer the queston.I want to read the words from your own keyboard,how devoid of all morality and judgement Collie was in leavin' early.
Because that has a lot to do with Schwenke. Also because I've never answered it before. :roll:



To me, leaving BYU early to play professional sports is a sign of disrepect and disloyalty that I would never do. I believe in being grateful in all things, and that includes scholarship money. But then again, I'm much more loyal than the average guy I guess.


I hope you are being sarcastic. Because I dont believe that for one minute.
Y
Ygridiron4ever
Help me out here, because I am very curious and more than just a little naive;



When a high school athlete signs his letter of intent, and accepts a scholarship so that he can focus on athletics and academics without worrying quite so much about finances, does he sign any paper stating that he will stay for five years? Or doesn't the school actually give out the scholarships one year at a time, with the understanding that if the athlete performs up to expectations, he or she will get subsequent scholarships for as long as they stay?



And if the athlete does not perform, doesn't the school have the right to not give another scholarship the following year?



For the life of me I can not see how these kids committing and then changing their mind, and any ethical or moral standards involved therein, can in any way be compared to Austin Collie choosing to not accept a scholar ship for his senior season.
S
snoscythe
Ygridiron4ever wrote:
Help me out here, because I am very curious and more than just a little naive;



When a high school athlete signs his letter of intent, and accepts a scholarship so that he can focus on athletics and academics without worrying quite so much about finances, does he sign any paper stating that he will stay for five years? Or doesn't the school actually give out the scholarships one year at a time, with the understanding that if the athlete performs up to expectations, he or she will get subsequent scholarships for as long as they stay?



And if the athlete does not perform, doesn't the school have the right to not give another scholarship the following year?



For the life of me I can not see how these kids committing and then changing their mind, and any ethical or moral standards involved therein, can in any way be compared to Austin Collie choosing to not accept a scholar ship for his senior season.


It's a renewable one-year commitment. Anything binding commitment longer than one-year would take away the tax advantages of the scholarship to both the school and the athlete.



While schools/coaches technically could decide not to re-up on a scholarship for a bust, most never will because they want to avoid setting that precedent. There is a tacit understanding that a scholarship will be there for four/five years, but both would be in their right to end the relationship sooner.
W
Wickchad
snoscythe wrote:
Help me out here, because I am very curious and more than just a little naive;



When a high school athlete signs his letter of intent, and accepts a scholarship so that he can focus on athletics and academics without worrying quite so much about finances, does he sign any paper stating that he will stay for five years? Or doesn't the school actually give out the scholarships one year at a time, with the understanding that if the athlete performs up to expectations, he or she will get subsequent scholarships for as long as they stay?



And if the athlete does not perform, doesn't the school have the right to not give another scholarship the following year?



For the life of me I can not see how these kids committing and then changing their mind, and any ethical or moral standards involved therein, can in any way be compared to Austin Collie choosing to not accept a scholar ship for his senior season.


It's a renewable one-year commitment. Anything binding commitment longer than one-year would take away the tax advantages of the scholarship to both the school and the athlete.



While schools/coaches technically could decide not to re-up on a scholarship for a bust, most never will because they want to avoid setting that precedent. There is a tacit understanding that a scholarship will be there for four/five years, but both would be in their right to end the relationship sooner.


I'm not sure this precedent hasn't been set in the SEC. You hear about kids being run out of school all the time.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
B
bigbluepuma
A verbal isn't a signature, and isn't legally binding, nor is it as ethically binding. Just like an engagement to marry, if one finds that it isn't right, one can de-commit, and I can understand that. The problem that I have with this situation is the deceit involved. If you don't see the deceit, you are living in selective reality, plain and simple.



While a signature, and the schollie, are for a year at a time, once Bronco has committed to a recruit or a signee, he has never initiated a de-commit.
Page 2 of 2
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.