We shouldn't self-impose another post-season ban

[Canesfan1899]

I'd take the second bowl ban this season.

I would have to agree, but it is going to be interesting how all this plays out.

As painful as it is for me to say, take the bowl ban now and show the NCAA how seriously the University is taking this matter. I believe we are getting at the least 1 more bowl ban, may as well take it this year and make a run at another bowl with a better team.

 

[cane305]

but allowing our admin to ban us from the bowl game just for recruiting means you are stabbing your seniors in the back.

By imposing bowl bans you are basically saying,

"Sorry Davon Johnson, your 5 years worth of work is less important to us than Matthew Thomas playing for the next 3 or 4."

So you want to mortgage our future so James and DJ can play in the Emerald Bowl? Nice Logic

a coach should be loyal to his current players not ones who may or may not be hurricanes.

 

[gangis2169]

but allowing our admin to ban us from the bowl game just for recruiting means you are stabbing your seniors in the back.

By imposing bowl bans you are basically saying,

"Sorry Davon Johnson, your 5 years worth of work is less important to us than Matthew Thomas playing for the next 3 or 4."

So you want to mortgage our future so James and DJ can play in the Emerald Bowl? Nice Logic

+1

 

[CanesAreAble]

I see your point but totally disagree from the recruits that I have talked to over the last 10 years and seen gone elsewhere when a university is in trouble. There is no need to be ****y and go play a game we don't belong in. ****iness gets a university nowhere! Ask USC! Be proactive and acknowledge that we have make mistakes and we are making an effort to move forward.

Then why not self-impose at the beginning of the season?

Playing in the bowl game isn't a sign of ****iness. SC's problems were different. Their main problem was they had a one-man compliance department for a certain period of time. Their monitoring protocols were a joke.

 

[Consigliere]

but allowing our admin to ban us from the bowl game just for recruiting means you are stabbing your seniors in the back.

By imposing bowl bans you are basically saying,

"Sorry Davon Johnson, your 5 years worth of work is less important to us than Matthew Thomas playing for the next 3 or 4."

So you want to mortgage our future so James and DJ can play in the Emerald Bowl? Nice Logic

I think he also said he wanted to go to a bowl game because he is graduating this year. I don't think much of that made sense.

 

[gangis2169]

but allowing our admin to ban us from the bowl game just for recruiting means you are stabbing your seniors in the back.

By imposing bowl bans you are basically saying,

"Sorry Davon Johnson, your 5 years worth of work is less important to us than Matthew Thomas playing for the next 3 or 4."

So you want to mortgage our future so James and DJ can play in the Emerald Bowl? Nice Logic

a coach should be loyal to his current players not ones who may or may not be hurricanes.

The coach should be loyal to the university period!

 

[DiegoCane]

Thinking we get a 1 year ban is wishful thinking IMO. Hope I'm wrong

 

[Problem2]

I'd much rather sacrifice this year then next year.

People say that we don't know if we are going to make it back next year. A team with a bunch of freshman and sophomores has a chance to go 8-4. Who is going to be significantly better in the ACC? VT? UNC? Facking Duke? Virigina scares you? We'll have a tougher schedule sure, but we'll also have a significantly more talented and experienced team. And with one more recruiting class, we are finally going to see us out talent some of these lower level teams in the ACC. And who knows, who says we can't take a Notre Dame type of leap (not likely, but we don't know that)? If that happens, you just wasted a championship level team for an Orange Bowl birth.

I think if they know that the NCAA is going to impose one more bowl ban, which is obviously the only reason they would do it, it would be a grave miscalculation to put it off for another year. You get it over it and move on.

 

[cane305]

also us practicing and playing in a bowl game will give at least 60 players valuable experience for next year.

whereas imposing a bowl ban may help with less than 10 recruitst at best

 

[Problem2]

and what do we do when we forgo the title game and/or bowl but NCAA STILL gives us a ban?

The **** are you talking about? The whole reason to self impose is because we know the NCAA is going to ban us for one more.

 

[DiegoCane]

I see your point but totally disagree from the recruits that I have talked to over the last 10 years and seen gone elsewhere when a university is in trouble. There is no need to be ****y and go play a game we don't belong in. ****iness gets a university nowhere! Ask USC! Be proactive and acknowledge that we have make mistakes and we are making an effort to move forward.

Then why not self-impose at the beginning of the season?

Playing in the bowl game isn't a sign of ****iness. SC's problems were different. Their main problem was they had a one-man compliance department for a certain period of time. Their monitoring protocols were a joke.

You don't self impose early because its a motivation thing.something to play for is important, especially for a young squad.

Plus I'm sure they are trying to gther as much info as possible from the NCAA

 

[cane305]

but allowing our admin to ban us from the bowl game just for recruiting means you are stabbing your seniors in the back.

By imposing bowl bans you are basically saying,

"Sorry Davon Johnson, your 5 years worth of work is less important to us than Matthew Thomas playing for the next 3 or 4."

So you want to mortgage our future so James and DJ can play in the Emerald Bowl? Nice Logic

a coach should be loyal to his current players not ones who may or may not be hurricanes.

The coach should be loyal to the university period!

not true. that' the president's job. Jimmy Johnson wasn't always cooperating with the university admins. a football coach should look for what's best for his TEAM.

 

[gangis2169]

I see your point but totally disagree from the recruits that I have talked to over the last 10 years and seen gone elsewhere when a university is in trouble. There is no need to be ****y and go play a game we don't belong in. ****iness gets a university nowhere! Ask USC! Be proactive and acknowledge that we have make mistakes and we are making an effort to move forward.

Then why not self-impose at the beginning of the season?

Playing in the bowl game isn't a sign of ****iness. SC's problems were different. Their main problem was they had a one-man compliance department for a certain period of time. Their monitoring protocols were a joke.

Why do it at the beginning and hurt recruiting from the start? At least now the recruits can say wow they got heart and fight if they take the ban I can play without sanctions. Rather than doing at the beginning and potential not getting the best out of your players. Honestly it would be different if we were 10-2 at the end of the year then I would say lets do it. But since we all know we don't belong just take the ban.

 

[cane305]

and what do we do when we forgo the title game and/or bowl but NCAA STILL gives us a ban?

The **** are you talking about? The whole reason to self impose is because we know the NCAA is going to ban us for one more.

you don't know that. it can be more than one, who knows?

 

[gangis2169]

but allowing our admin to ban us from the bowl game just for recruiting means you are stabbing your seniors in the back.

By imposing bowl bans you are basically saying,

"Sorry Davon Johnson, your 5 years worth of work is less important to us than Matthew Thomas playing for the next 3 or 4."

So you want to mortgage our future so James and DJ can play in the Emerald Bowl? Nice Logic

a coach should be loyal to his current players not ones who may or may not be hurricanes.

The coach should be loyal to the university period!

not true. that' the president's job. Jimmy Johnson wasn't always cooperating with the university admins. a football coach should look for what's best for his TEAM.

Dude get a clue JJ was covering his own ***! His teams were filled with trouble makers! God bless him but this is not then this is now!

 

[CanesAreAble]

but allowing our admin to ban us from the bowl game just for recruiting means you are stabbing your seniors in the back.

By imposing bowl bans you are basically saying,

"Sorry Davon Johnson, your 5 years worth of work is less important to us than Matthew Thomas playing for the next 3 or 4."

So you want to mortgage our future so James and DJ can play in the Emerald Bowl? Nice Logic

What future are we mortgaging?

Missing a bowl game next year isn't going to hurt THAT bad. I don't think we're contenders next year. Best case scenario we're in the ACCCG next year, but only with a prettier record. IMO 2014 is the first year we'll be legit contenders with studs all over the roster.

And when you factor in recruiting, missing next year's bowl game doesn't hurt 2014 recruiting. Ohio State is working on a top 10 class right now.

However, self-imposing THIS year could disrupt 2013 recruiting. The reason being is the uncertainty. If we self-impose again, recruits could freak out. I'm trying to put myself in the shoes of a recruit. If UM is recruiting and telling me the worst is behind us and all of a sudden they're sitting out another bowl game, I'd start looking around to be on the safe side.

If we were going to self-impose, we should've done it before the season.

 

[4Canes]

and what do we do when we forgo the title game and/or bowl but NCAA STILL gives us a ban?

The **** are you talking about? The whole reason to self impose is because we know the NCAA is going to ban us for one more.

Perhaps, but there's no precedent that I know of that suggests another ban will help. The first I understand, but another?
It would be disingenuous for Golden to stand up there and preach a process and staying the course and then allow the administration to take away the reward if they accomplish the goal.

 

[cane305]

who cares if we don't belong? couple of fluke plays in the championship game and we may end up in the Orange bowl.

that's the beauty of college football and sports in general

no one knows what can happen. but we must be given the opportunity

 

[CanesAreAble]

I see your point but totally disagree from the recruits that I have talked to over the last 10 years and seen gone elsewhere when a university is in trouble. There is no need to be ****y and go play a game we don't belong in. ****iness gets a university nowhere! Ask USC! Be proactive and acknowledge that we have make mistakes and we are making an effort to move forward.

Then why not self-impose at the beginning of the season?

Playing in the bowl game isn't a sign of ****iness. SC's problems were different. Their main problem was they had a one-man compliance department for a certain period of time. Their monitoring protocols were a joke.

You don't self impose early because its a motivation thing.something to play for is important, especially for a young squad.

Plus I'm sure they are trying to gther as much info as possible from the NCAA

So instead we just rip their hearts out after they win the Coastal? You can lose players like that.

 

[Problem2]

and what do we do when we forgo the title game and/or bowl but NCAA STILL gives us a ban?

The **** are you talking about? The whole reason to self impose is because we know the NCAA is going to ban us for one more.

you don't know that. it can be more than one, who knows?

And if it's more then one, you've sacrificed two years.

Which means the year everyone is looking forward to (2014), would then be meaningless.

It's not worth it.