forums

Golden said UM will have only 80 or so scholarship players

The bowl ban is one thing, but to harm ourselves because we think it might sway the ncaa is a big risk.
 
Advertisement
rokulika said:
The bowl ban is one thing, but to harm ourselves because we think it might sway the ncaa is a big risk.
Click to expand...

It's not about swaying the NCAA, it's about helping ourselves.

Sure, swaying the NCAA may have played a role, but when it's an absolute certainty that you're going to receive certain punishments, would you rather receive them now or later? Would you rather have sat out this year after a 6-6 season? Or next year when Golden can potentially put together a better one? Would you rather cut dead weight from a Shannon-infused team? Or would you rather not allow Golden to recruit as many players as he physically can; players in his mold and with his mentality? Because remember, for every scholarship reduction we don't impose now, it's a scholarship reduction we'll have to enforce in the future. And in the future, we'll be enforcing it against those players that Golden is capable of bringing in. Right now is our only real opportunity to rid ourselves of that which Shannon brought in. And I don't know about you, but I trust Golden more than Shannon in compiling a capable roster.

At the end of the day, if we KNOW that scholarship reductions are coming (and we do), I'd prefer that we take our licks now and allow Golden the best chance to succeed in and build for the future.
 
Last edited:
Jen, just playing devil's advocate here....

Do you not think the NCAA realizes why we took a bowl ban during a 6-6 season? Same with the scholarships.

I agree to do it. However, a little bit of me says it doesn't help one bit aside from showing compliance, and you can also show compliance with their investigation without harming yourself. A bit of a risk, IMO.
 
Jen, I would feel better if the the self-imposed bowl bans and scholly reductions always worked. OSU and Meyer were blindsided that they got a bowl ban in spite of the penalties they had already placed on themselves. It's probably the right thing to do since we're likely not going to be a BCS bowl contender next year. However, nothing is guaranteed.
 
rokulika said:
Jen, I would feel better if the the self-imposed bowl bans and scholly reductions always worked. OSU and Meyer were blindsided that they got a bowl ban in spite of the penalties they had already placed on themselves. It's probably the right thing to do since we're likely not going to be a BCS bowl contender next year. However, nothing is guaranteed.
Click to expand...

That's the thing though, OSU barely self-imposed any penalties. Everyone across the country knew they were a joke and that the institution would receive more. We're not making that same mistake. And again, if Meyer and OSU saw bowl bans and scholarship losses, we're almost sure to also, so why not do it now?
 
Advertisement
rokulika said:
Jen, I would feel better if the the self-imposed bowl bans and scholly reductions always worked. OSU and Meyer were blindsided that they got a bowl ban in spite of the penalties they had already placed on themselves. It's probably the right thing to do since we're likely not going to be a BCS bowl contender next year. However, nothing is guaranteed.
Click to expand...

When did OSU self-impose a bowl ban?
 
I wasn't too articulate in saying that....

The NCAA knows Miami is self-imposing because it's the perfect time. Does this really play into their penalty? I doubt it. Shows compliance, but it's not like they are saying "well, they already took a 1 year bowl ban, so now we are going to give them 1 instead of the originally planned 2." I don't know exactly how they work, but I still think there's a possibility it doesn't help one iota in the end when the size of the punishment is handed down.
 
I would rather see us purge our own roster now even if it just saves us one scholarship player that Golden wants down the road.
 
Advertisement
TheU1984 said:
I wasn't too articulate in saying that....

The NCAA knows Miami is self-imposing because it's the perfect time. Does this really play into their penalty? I doubt it. Shows compliance, but it's not like they are saying "well, they already took a 1 year bowl ban, so now we are going to give them 1 instead of the originally planned 2." I don't know exactly how they work, but I still think there's a possibility it doesn't help one iota in the end when the size of the punishment is handed down.
Click to expand...

Playing even more conspiracy theory, I think Golden wants a bunch of these guys out, and if it happens to help us out with the NCAA then thats a bonus. A calculated risk for sure.
 
TheU1984 said:
I wasn't too articulate in saying that....

The NCAA knows Miami is self-imposing because it's the perfect time. Does this really play into their penalty? I doubt it. Shows compliance, but it's not like they are saying "well, they already took a 1 year bowl ban, so now we are going to give them 1 instead of the originally planned 2." I don't know exactly how they work, but I still think there's a possibility it doesn't help one iota in the end when the size of the punishment is handed down.
Click to expand...

The NCAA isn't always consistent, so I could be wrong, but I don't believe the above bolded statement to be accurate. They most definitely take self-imposed penalties into consideration when choosing whether or not to add on. And I hate to be the person to put things into perspective, but it's not like 6-6 is so far off from our status quo these days. It'd be one thing if it were an unusually bad season for us, but 6-6 is more the norm for us lately than anything else, so us forfeiting our bowl isn't going to be seen as some sort of convenient anomaly.
 
I dont think its about sanctions. I think Golden wants a bigger class in 2013. We dont have very many SRs this year which usually equals small incoming class for 2013. Trimming the roster down to 80 assuming we let go of some underclassmen in the trimming process should free up additional schollies for 2013.
 
Now would definitely be the time to purge if we are sure that we are helping ourselves.

Purging now means that certain guys won't be able to redshirt.

If Ben Jones and Jeremy Lewis are gone, there's a chance that Flowers, Gadbois, and Isidora can't redshirt.

In the big scheme of things it's probably not a big deal, but as Miami fans we should know better than to trust the NCAA. We could forfeit the entire 2012 season and we would still probably get the DP.
 
Advertisement
if we can save even one Golden scholly in the future now by cutting some Shannon scrub, thus causing the NCAA to take the slightest bit of mercy, why not do it? Why not even do it on the off chance? Are those five Randall guys actually going to contribute? Wouldn't you rather have one more AG kid here in 2014 if it means chopping five schollys now? Why the **** not? It just might work.
 
I think there's a bigger question: How did we get to the point where we're at 80 scholarship players, even having signed 34 kids this year?
 
He probably said that because we can only sign 25 per year and we weren't able to keep up with all the attrition. Pretty simple if you ask me.
 
Advertisement
Canezach said:
I think there's a bigger question: How did we get to the point where we're at 80 scholarship players, even having signed 34 kids this year?
Click to expand...

We haven't yet. Golden would need to shoo a bunch of kids off the team first.
 
Canezach said:
I think there's a bigger question: How did we get to the point where we're at 80 scholarship players, even having signed 34 kids this year?
Click to expand...

The current roster right now, including the EE's, is 85. Add the 24 from today, and there are going to be some cuts. However, I easily counted 10-15 walk-ons in that roster so it is not going to be a gigantic number.
 
jenniferurs said:
rokulika said:
The bowl ban is one thing, but to harm ourselves because we think it might sway the ncaa is a big risk.
Click to expand...

It's not about swaying the NCAA, it's about helping ourselves.

Sure, swaying the NCAA may have played a role, but when it's an absolute certainty that you're going to receive certain punishments, would you rather receive them now or later? Would you rather have sat out this year after a 6-6 season? Or next year when Golden can potentially put together a better one? Would you rather cut dead weight from a Shannon-infused team? Or would you rather not allow Golden to recruit as many players as he physically can; players in his mold and with his mentality? Because remember, for every scholarship reduction we don't impose now, it's a scholarship reduction we'll have to enforce in the future. And in the future, we'll be enforcing it against those players that Golden is capable of bringing in. Right now is our only real opportunity to rid ourselves of that which Shannon brought in. And I don't know about you, but I trust Golden more than Shannon in compiling a capable roster.

At the end of the day, if we KNOW that scholarship reductions are coming (and we do), I'd prefer that we take our licks now and allow Golden the best chance to succeed in and build for the future.
Click to expand...

excellent post. I completely agree we should get as much "time served" in before sentencing. we aren't winning anything next year w/ this young team, so we might as well get in front of the sanctions as fast as we can.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top