I noticed a trend for college coaches to cut players at the end of the season.

quote:

by bbhdl: mentioned several players who were uncerimoniously cut from their college teams. Is this normal ?

hmm, prolly not connected to post season (season end) random testing .. but

THe one guy was a soph 4.0 student and no drugs. He was my son's roommate freshman year. The guy was told more cuts to come.

When are they supposed to cut them, mid season?

Did they make an impact as players or just in the classroom? Were they on athletic scholarship or academic? Has the team been successful?
I think you are going to see a lot of this. JMO.

quote:

by TPM: When are they supposed to cut them

the timing still sounds odd, unless there is some immediate issue the pink slip should come at the exit interview/meeting ...

but maybe that is what Bobblehead decribed, as some teams are finished

The player I know about was RS so he had his exit early. The odd thing was he was told there were more to come which he obviously related to other players who are still playing in the regionals. He had both acadfemic and BB money. I would say he never got a chance to make an impact. Too many great guys in front of him.
I thought the new rules were designed to stop this. I though earlier would have been better diving him a cxhance to find a new school.

Could it be, given the NCAA's new requirement of a minimum of 33% scholarship for players, that the program needed to free up some scholarship money for new recruits?

I've heard of the same thing, so there may be some correlation with the new NCAA rules if it's this widespread.

I can also understand it happening at the end of the season, given that a rash of injuries to a program's 'keepers' might mean some playing time for those who hadn't had much PT earlier in the season; a coach isn't going to potentially leave himself short. Classes are over at a number of universities, conference tournaments are in varying stages, exit interviews have happened.

Leave it to coaches to show how stupid the proposed NCAA regulations are.

Since virtually everyone here comes from the perspective of parents/fans, let me try to give a possible coach's perspective:

I don't think 'cut' is the appropriate word, considering the season is over in these instances.

If a coach just doesn't think the player is going to contribute in the program, should he keep the player and string him along as if he might play a bigger role? If so, should the purpose of keeping the player be to keep academic progress rates at the required levels?

Perhaps what these coaches are doing is really giving the student-athlete an opportunity to transfer someplace else where they might have a better opportunity.....from that point of view, many people should be happy for the opportunity.

Another thread will soon open up with people questioning the fact that a player has been a team player, paid his dues, only to sit on the bench again this season......while having the expectation that he would be playing a bigger role on the field.

So, which way would everyone prefer?

We don't really know for sure exactly what a coach tells the players. We hear it second hand, or even further down the line, and we all know how facts change as the stories continue to be told.

There are only ten spots on the lineup card to fill in with names.....that means twenty guys will not have their names written on that card.

I suppose if players can leave and tranfer, then its a 2way street.
I don't believe that its the way to do things.
But that's JMHO.
EH

quote:

by EH: I don't believe that its the way to do things. But that's JMHO.

what do you suggest?

quote:

Originally posted by theEH:
I suppose if players can leave and tranfer, then its a 2way street.
I don't believe that its the way to do things.
But that's JMHO.
EH

I'm in agreement here. Same thing happened to a friends son at a local D2. He was a freshman, the coach decided to redshirt him and at the end of the season was told his scholarship wasn't going to be renewed - and it was a small $ scholarship. This kid was a team player and had done every thing the coaching staff asked. It wasn't his fault the team imploded during the conference games. He was told that several teammates were also going to be let go. I am in total disagreement with that type behavior, particularly with the new rule of having to sit out 1 year coming into effect in August for D1s. IMHO there should be a commitment by the coaching staff when recruiting a kid and if they later feel they made a mistake and he cann't play up to the level they hoped and he wants to be a part of the team, they should just live with it unless the player is disruptive to the team. I believe that is why they have a 35 player roster, not just to provide team depth but to also allow for some failures during the recruiting process. Perhaps the NCAA should come down even harder on the schools and coaches to entice them to keep the players in school that they bring in and maybe that will stop some of this type behavior.

On a side note, it all ended up well for my friends son. As soon as other schools found out he had been released, a local D2 called and offered him an even bigger scholarship than he had at his previous school and two D1's called and offered him a spot on their team, one being a decent $$ offer. However, it didn't end up as well for one of the others released. He is scrambling to find a place to play next year - and he was also a pretty fair player but it is late in the year.

To me this is the dark side of college baseball that needs to be changed.

Michaels'Dad,
You have the same feelings I have.
Are they not coaches,
Then coach.
Same goes for the Player.
Work your tail off.
Its called COMMITMENT.
EH

quote:

by Michael's dad: coach decided to redshirt him and at the end of the season was told his scholarship wasn't going to be renewed - and it was a small $ scholarship. This kid was a team player and had done every thing the coaching staff asked. It wasn't his fault the team imploded during the conference games. He was told that several teammates were also going to be let go.

I'm a bit confused


a) it is a fact of life that athletic aid is a 1 year renewable deal

b) not sure how someone not on the team or staff could attest that the ...
"kid was a team player and had done every thing the coaching staff asked"

c) if the coach has no future plans for these players, the sooner they are told the better it is for the player, as it is their LAST chance to transfer w/out losing a year

quote:

Perhaps the NCAA should come down even harder on the schools and coaches to entice them to keep the players in school

they were not told to leave the school, only that baseball "there" was over for them

I am with Bee>.

Regardless of whether the player is a great kid with great grades and does everything he is told, if he is not making an impact and the coach needs a player that will, he could be asked to leave the team. All coaches (no matter where you go) want great kids, but they want great kids who can PLAY and make an IMPACT.
That is how it is folks, at all schools. Some schools don't come right out and cut you, that is not their style, they give you options. If my son was told he most likely would not play much the next year, I am sure he would rather go somewhere he would have more playing time. It's unfortunate but this is THE WAY IT IS. This doesn't make the coach a bad person, you have to go into any situation with your eyes wide open. We all hope in the end that the commitment lasts for 4-5 years but that doesn't always happen.
I think that if all rules remain in place, the player that has an option to go pro or college after HS will go pro. Seems to me lots of these rules are to weed out that type of player. I think it grossly unfair treatment of baseball players to not be able to be forced to make a decision so early in their lives (pro or college).

What I am against is the coach that brings many players on in fall redshirts the overflow and then decides late spring who is staying and who is not. Redshirt is for the player to mature, not for overstock.

JMO.

I know of one coach who, about 12 years ago, cut his ENTIRE team...and told them they could come back in the fall and win back their scholly. One of the guys who came back, following his mediocre freshman season, is now a starting position player for a MLB team.

quote:

a) it is a fact of life that athletic aid is a 1 year renewable deal

Yes, that's true, but some teams honor their commitment to the player all the way through college. Jim Schlossnagle with TCU said that even if his players have a horrible season or get injured, they can rest assured that they will keep their scholarship. My hat is off to him and other coaches like him.

It may be compassion that is driving coaches to cut some players this year, knowing that this is the last time they can tranfer and not be penalized. My heart goes out to those players who will be cut next year and not be able to play at all for 12 full months.

I am very confused regarding the APR Academic Progress Rate.

If an athelete leaves school to transfer or go professional this has a negative affect on the schools APR. Now if scholarship atheletes that are released for lack of contribution or are not expected to contribute in upcoming years, won't this also have a negative affect on the APR? So this year if kids are released at a more rapid rate than in the past it seems these scores will go down.

I don't understand how a school should be punished for someone being drafted. The majority of these atheletes have obviously made a major contribution to the team for three years or they probably wouldn't get drafted in the first place so why is this in the equasion? I am only referring to baseball.

If a student athelete has maintained acceptable grades and decides to transfer for whatever reason this should not be held against the team. If a student does not pass the required classes while participating then and only then should they be required to sit out a season.

Allowing D1 players to transfer to D2 or lower classifications without 1 year penalty will simply strengthen the lower classifications it won't help the APR as it is currently measured.

After reading what I have written I feel like Andy Rooney rambling on 60 minutes but what the heck isn't that what a message board is all about.

I have known and do know currently players who have their scholarships honored even when injured or not playing.
I feel for the players who get cut but I also understand the coach's position. Getting cut could end up as a positive.

.
Yes boys and girls it's a rough tough world out there...It's not always fair, but it is the way the game is played (by the current rules)....but at least now, as mentioned above if a player is let go they have the option to move to another school....might even be a blessing...But..

...unless the new NCAA DI rules are clarified or modified...

...next year they have the opportunity to be let go AND have to sit out an entire DI year...

...That to me is simply wrong.

44
.

quote:

My heart goes out to those players who will be cut next year and not be able to play at all for 12 full months

I see the courts getting a little busy about this time!

There are offsets for APR.
Clemson an example. Very little in/out movement from D1, higher GPA required by coach and most players on track, offsets many leaving for draft.
Many schools lose players to the draft, have revolving doors, coaches require lower minimum GPA, nothing to offset the required APR. Those schools should be penalized, not those that keep their house in order.

Seems like to me it is the player thats getting penalized!

quote:

Originally posted by Infield08:

quote:

a) it is a fact of life that athletic aid is a 1 year renewable deal

Yes, that's true, but some teams honor their commitment to the player all the way through college. Jim Schlossnagle with TCU said that even if his players have a horrible season or get injured, they can rest assured that they will keep their scholarship. My hat is off to him and other coaches like him.

My hat is off to him also. That is the way it should be. Make a commitment and keep it. That goes both ways, the coaches and the players. The players shouldn't wait to have a good year and then transfer to a bigger school either, as happens. Hopefully it will come back to haunt the coaches that do not honor their commitments. Perhaps the NCAA should go a little further on their new rules and take the scholarships back to a 4 year deal.

.
Sad.

When a DI player who was, at the very best was getting only a portion of his fare paid by baseball, could make the choice to leave and play elsewhere the next year the field was at least somewhat level.

Now, with a two year minimum comittment (one year there and a wait out year to transfer) on the part of the player and one year comittment on the part of the school, the playing field is significantly tilted tward the coach/school. THis increased power over the players will certainly lead to more abuse.

44
.

I won't say this applies in every case, but in some....and I may be way off the mark here but my input would be........

A college coach's job is to make his program successful and get better every year. He has a contract and in most cases is evaluated every year, if he doesn't improve he stands to lose his job. In order for this coach to be successful, his players must improve and get better every year. If a coach evaluates his players every year and they don't improve and help the program be successful they lose their job.

I could be completely off the mark here, and I am not saying it is right, but it does stand to reason.

quote:

Originally posted by kevin11:
I won't say this applies in every case, but in some....and I may be way off the mark here but my input would be........

A college coach's job is to make his program successful and get better every year. He has a contract and in most cases is evaluated every year, if he doesn't improve he stands to lose his job. In order for this coach to be successful, his players must improve and get better every year. If a coach evaluates his players every year and they don't improve and help the program be successful they lose their job.

I could be completely off the mark here, and I am not saying it is right, but it does stand to reason.

You are correct. If a coach has a winning program he can afford to keep players every year that do not have an impact, if not he needs to do what he has to do to keep his job.

This seems like a growing trend to me. I can name, but won't, a former player of mine that has been let go by his college. We always encouraged honest answers to questions and so, his coach in college asked him whether he was happy about his playing time. The coach initiated this meeting and my former player thought that this was innocent meeting. In short, he wasn't happy and cited some examples. He's been released. Guess he should have lied!

Again I will play Devil's advocate here, because coaches seem to be getting the short end of the stick in this conversation.

For example, CoachB25 (by the way you are one of this formum's best contributors), do you really think your former player would have been better off lying? If he lied (and MAYBE kept his spot on the team) he would have returned again and again not have been happy. What would that have accomplished.

I will say that in every program (winning programs, losing programs, big schools, small schools) there are players who are selfish, are malingerers, are narcissistic, think they got shafted but didn't, skip classes, get drunk too often, practice academic dishonesty, complain to their parents and anyone else who will listen, secretly hope some of their teammates fail, slack in their conditioning, etc., etc.

On this website, we read about the coaches who supposedly shaft the athletes. It's a good thing those coaches aren't on here, because many people might actually have to see things from another perspective.....the perspective of someone who is with these kids every day, who see them in the weightroom, get their academic reports, deal with them after they spend nights in jail, listen to them in the dugout when they blame others.

Some players are just not good for the programs they are in....and some are not good for any college baseball program, because they are self-centered, individualistic, pampered athletes.

I am not saying that the kids being discussed in this thread are bad kids or that they deserve to be taken off their scholarships, etc.......but there are many young adults today who just have never been forced to look in the mirror.

quote:

I am not saying that the kids being discussed in this thread are bad kids or that they deserve to be taken off their scholarships, etc.......but there are many young adults today who just have never been forced to look in the mirror.

I don't think we are talking about the same thing. Those guys deserve to be cut. We are talking about good kids who may be seen as surplus marginal players.

Bobble, in one sense you are right, that there are good kids who get released/cut at the end of the season......

But we're not really talking about different things, merely the other side of the coin.

I could be specific, and tell you a story about a kid whose family thinks he is the hardest working team player on his team, because that is what the kid told his parents. His coaches would tell you that he was lazy, dishonest, selfish, and not nearly as good as he or his parents think he is.

Stories like this are not told by his parents, or by friends of the family.....but they happen.

When I read all this coach bashing (and some coaches perhaps should be bashed), I just want to remind the readers that it isn't always what it seems.

Sometimes, we don't know what we don't know.

I thought the discussion was fairly balanced. I personally see the coaches point but I also see the players side. We tell guys to pick a school for the academics and when he is cut this may have accademic ramifications as well.
I know several ball players that fall into your bad guy profile and most get cut very quickly.
I started the thread because I thought it was interesting because of all the proposed NCAA changes. There are lots of people who think getting a scholarship is the end of the rollercoaster ride when for many it is the beginning.

.
IMO...

All is fair in love and baseball...

Make no mistake....This is not "parentball" anymore...Coaches are to do what coaches are to do: Win ballgames with the best players they can get within the rules they are given. Their jobs, their livelihood depend upon that. It's a tough cold world of collegiate athletics. I have always advocated for a coach with character as they are going to spend a great deal of time with your son, have a great deal of influence and to a great extent will dictate our son's baseball fate. It's why I advocate for a dream coach as much as a dream school.

44
.

"Sometimes, we don't know what we don't know."

Isn't that the title of Don Rumsfeld's upcoming book?

quote:

It's why I advocate for a dream coach as much as a dream school.

The problem is they are all nice when they recruite a player.

44:

I know exactly what you mean. Dream coach. They're a rare creature. I honestly feel that we have a collection of them as members here on the HSBBW...we're fortunate.

Our four kids have been on many, many travel teams over the years and we've been fortunate to find a few dream coaches scattered here or there. The quality and competency of the coach is our top priority when selecting a team. When we find a keeper we stay with him or her.

I'll be the first to admit that our criteria and standards for a coach may be quite different from someone else's standards. That's ok. We're looking for the correct fit. Just like the coach is looking for the right fit as well.

grateful, my response on telling a lie was sarcastic. No, I don't want him to lie and have already found another place for him to play.

Please don't lose the point that when a coach seeks out a player and ask that question, they shouldn't throw a fit and throw a player off of team when they get an honest answer. In this case, the kid cited the success he had each time he was given the ball and yet because he doesn't throw in the upper 80s, they were reluctant to give him the ball. This coach commented to me when recruiting this young man that he didn't have tremendous velocity but "knew how to pitch." That's a very accurate statement!

quote:

Originally posted by CoachB25:
No, I don't want him to lie and have already found another place for him to play.

YOU have already found another place for him to play????

What a wonderful coach you are!!!!! I told you a long time ago (many posts and pages ago!) and I still stand by it...Can MY kids play for YOU?????????????? You are one of those "Dream Coaches", I'm sure!

Keep in mind that the "dream" coach for one player may not be a 'dream" coach for another, especially in the parents mind