TSO cuts 10 players at NCCU | The Boneyard

TSO cuts 10 players at NCCU

Was just going to post this story. I don't know how they will field a team next year, never mind a Winning Team. 10 out of 14 players not returning.

Seems like for the Juniors, the school should put the players on an academic scholarship to offset the loss of the athletic scholarship. Those are the players that may have the most difficulty getting another athletic scholarship at another school for one year.
 
All the schools will fire the coach except this one, fired student players.
Can they get any more players this coming year?
 
HuskyBandDad said:
The dark side of college athletics. Sure doesn't help recruiting. Is the coach a new hire?
Expand ...
Her bio says she was hired in May of 2017, so she has 1 season at this school.
 
.-.
She was the one who coached at both UNC and Duke, right? Weird story.
 
Concordia University introduced Trisha Stafford-Odom as the ninth women's basketball coach in program history in 2013-14.
 
WOW!!! Win or else at NCCU. Talk about throwing the players under the bus. Not only throw them under the bus , but run over them and then back up on them too.

Did the coach ever consider that the losing record could have something to do with the coaching ?
 
If there are bad seeds a coach should be allowed to push players out. HOWEVER, it shouldn't be 10.

And an HBCU like NCCU should really care more about educating young black women.

It's not like this team is going to challenge for a national title. This conference is terribly weak, and an epic year would mean .... a #16 seed.
 
Interestingly enough i have heard (word of mouth) that TSO is hard to play for. One of those situations where good assistants don’t always make good head coaches.
 
.-.
This decision undermines the fact that college should be about education first. I wonder why any parent would allow their child to play for that coach after what she has done. I would not let that coach anywhere near my child.
 
If these young ladies broke rules, then the coach has a responsibility to make that public. She and the athletic director have a responsibility to make clear why they are pulling scholarships. And to pull scholarships from kids who are completing their junior year, who would have to repeat that year at a new university in order to receive a degree (most universities require the equivalent of two years in residence in order to earn a BA/BS from the institution), it puts a large burden on the students.

I can understand a coach wanting to recruit her own athletes. But to cut scholarship support from ten of the fourteen players? Cruel and unacceptable. This is why so many athletes have been agitating for the NCAA to guarantee scholarship offers for four years, not just one.

The school's silence on this is deafening. Something is very wrong here. Hope reporters stay on this story, and help get justice for these young ladies.
 
Fairfield Fan said:
If these young ladies broke rules, then the coach has a responsibility to make that public. She and the athletic director have a responsibility to make clear why they are pulling scholarships.
Expand ...

They need to make it clear to the players. To the public, not so much. In fact, privacy laws may restrict exactly what can be said.
 
Is this so different then when Geno first started and alot of the old players could not adjust and left the team. Voluntary or pushed, it is hard to differentiate. The bottom line is if the players are good enough to play and earn a scholarship, they will find another team and probably would have a good case of waiving the transfer sitting period. If not, they had alot of their education paid for. jmho.
 
eebmg said:
Is this so different then when Geno first started and alot of the old players could not adjust and left the team.
Expand ...

Left the team is a big difference from not having scholarship being renewed.
10 is a big difference from a couple of players. I absolutely expect some discord/transfers with a new coach.

And how about, I dunno, _coaching_ ? If you can't salvage a couple of players out of 10 I kinda wonder what you're doing.

It's possible that there was one big clique of 10 and they collectively refused to cooperate, and so this was her laying down the law. But that's a huge IF.
 
HuskyFan1125 said:
Interestingly enough i have heard (word of mouth) that TSO is hard to play for. One of those situations where good assistants don’t always make good head coaches.
Expand ...

Rumor has it that there is some guy at UConn that is also "very difficult" to play for.
None of us know why these players got dumped, however I'm willing to consider that maybe it was for cause - even if it were that they stunk up the court and the coach is cleaning house in hopes of taking the team in a new direction. Who knows?
 
.-.
Frankly I find it insulting that folks are comparing this coach to Geno.
 
'Coincidentally', the 4 players who were not kicked off the team were also the top 4 scorers this year.

STAY
Rodneyshia Martin - JR
Caira Benton - JR
Paulina Afirye - SO
Kieche White - FR

GONE
Dominique Adams - JR
Sami Oliver-Alexander - JR
Jayla Calhoun - JR
Deja McCain - JR
Ezinne Mbumalu - JR
Darria Hewitt - SO
Jada Blow - SO
Kayla Hall - FR
Alyssa Thompson - FR

GRAD
Kierona Martin - SR
 
vowelguy said:
They need to make it clear to the players. To the public, not so much. In fact, privacy laws may restrict exactly what can be said.
Expand ...

They have a responsibility to inform the students, which they did not do. And they have an obligation to inform the community at the very least that they took the scholarships away from ten scholarship athletes, and why they did so. This is, after all, a public university and the scholarships mostly come from public tax dollars. And let's be clear that this is extraordinary. So the university community and the state deserve an accounting.

Clearly, there has been no public accounting, and the administration have refused to explain themselves. So the administration won't give an honest answer to the student athletes, to the university community, or to the public.

That stinks. I'm guessing that there could be a lawsuit here to at the very least get to the truth. And the NCAA might also like to get a straight answer out of them, especially when the NCAA has approved the offering of four-year scholarships by a number of top conferences. This gives the game a big bruised eye.
 
vowelguy said:
Frankly I find it insulting that folks are comparing this coach to Geno.
Expand ...
vowelguy said:
Frankly I find it insulting that folks are comparing this coach to Geno.
Expand ...

Insulted by what? Even if my comment was intended to compare Auriemma to this coach (it wasn't) why in hell should it insult you?

Wow, you really are out in left field without a hat.
 
.-.
vowelguy said:
We do not know if they did or did not inform the students.
Expand ...

The kids who were interviewed on camera made clear that they were not told the reason why their scholarships were cancelled. And the interviewer was unable to get any response as to the reasons why they were cancelled. Seems pretty clear that the university did this without any explanation.
 
RegisteredUconn said:
Here's another article on the subject. With only one side of the issue it's difficult to draw conclusions. This coach needs to shines some light on things.
Scholarships of four NCCU women's basketball players won't be renewed, parents say
Expand ...

The university states "
The decision to cancel, reduce or renew a student-athlete’s scholarship award is within the purview and discretion of a coach." But that's not fair. Kids who are offered a scholarship, indeed a full scholarship, believe that they're set for four years. They make a big commitment to the university, one that has enormous impact on their lives.

This may be legal at the moment, but it is disruptive, mean-spirited, and unfair. Universities should be required to guarantee scholarships for four years, to be cancelled only in extreme situations regarding the commission of a crime or the athletes' decision not to compete on the team any longer. And maybe even that is not right.

It's just unfair. Wonder where the other six athletes are? The TV report mentioned that ten were terminated. And let's be clear that that means that if they don't have the cash within their families, they are being thrown out of the university. Are these kids from poor communities?

Something's wrong here.
 
I don't understand all the angst about this. What does race or poverty have to do with this? The people involved had a one year contract with the university. At the end of that contract the university, as allowed, opted to not renew the contract. End of story.

Is it because of the number of players involved? Didn't UConn just do something similar with Espinoza-Hunter? "She's not here because I didn't want her here." Maybe those players are no longer there simply because that coach didn't want them there. Does just one player canned make it easier to swallow?
Think of it this way - if a student on academic scholarship is carrying a 0.2 GPA does the university have the right to not renew the scholarship? Why should it be different for an athlete on scholarship that fails to perform?
 
Fairfield Fan said:
The university states "
The decision to cancel, reduce or renew a student-athlete’s scholarship award is within the purview and discretion of a coach." But that's not fair. Kids who are offered a scholarship, indeed a full scholarship, believe that they're set for four years. They make a big commitment to the university, one that has enormous impact on their lives.

This may be legal at the moment, but it is disruptive, mean-spirited, and unfair. Universities should be required to guarantee scholarships for four years, to be cancelled only in extreme situations regarding the commission of a crime or the athletes' decision not to compete on the team any longer. And maybe even that is not right.

It's just unfair. Wonder where the other six athletes are? The TV report mentioned that ten were terminated. And let's be clear that that means that if they don't have the cash within their families, they are being thrown out of the university. Are these kids from poor communities?

Something's wrong here.
Expand ...
Being "disruptive, mean-spirited, and unfair" on a coach's part will sort itself out without rewriting NCAA and/or university regulations. I have no firsthand knowledge but I can't imagine that kids aren't told the nature of scholarships and their required renewals before letters of intent are signed. I have no intention of defending what happened to the dismissed players but neither am I willing to offer conclusions based on assumptions.
 
vowelguy said:
They need to make it clear to the players. To the public, not so much. In fact, privacy laws may restrict exactly what can be said.
Expand ...
I think you have hit upon some critical points. As @Centerstream noted, the coach was hired last May and recruiting for the 2017-18 season was 99% complete. Given the team only graduated 1 senior this year and the team was 9-21, I think a few things are occurring:
1. The coach doesn't see a lot of talent on the roster and with 6 Juniors more than half who played minimally, they are not producing.
2. The 1 senior graduating doesn't open up any money to bring in talent so clearing all the juniors (most of them anyway, does that).
3. All the athletes know the deal when they sign that scholarship. The juniors certainly apply for and probably get financial aid to complete the last year.

Usually athletic departments, even those that are poorly run and especially those at state sponsored schools, don't cut scholarships without checking their situation first to avoid lawsuits and bad publicity. It also could be that the coach gave the girls this past year to complete 3 years and either prove or disprove the reason to be kept. 14 players is a lot on a team, but so is cutting 10. I suspect the coach has offers out to a bevy of transfers or incoming freshman to fill the void.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,476
Messages
4,577,052
Members
10,488
Latest member
husky62


Top Bottom