Go through this list and tell me who "deserves" to be cut.

[k.c.hawg]

How is this allowed to stay in the board?  Why is a site that claims it won't allow players to be bashed allowing a thread to stay open asking for people to list by name who should be cut from the team?  I've seen a lot of crap over the years, but this is ridiculous.  The program and players deserve better.  This is pathetic.  I've enjoyed the conversations with many of you, but I've had it.  Im done.

Well said. I don't know how you have lasted this long.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

How is this allowed to stay in the board?  Why is a site that claims it won't allow players to be bashed allowing a thread to stay open asking for people to list by name who should be cut from the team?  I've seen a lot of crap over the years, but this is ridiculous.  The program and players deserve better.  This is pathetic.  I've enjoyed the conversations with many of you, but I've had it.  Im done.

Check the statements of other Mods in this thread about "naming names". I think everyone has done well to not be critical of specifically named players but instead discussing different positions. As long as we aren't critical of specific players currently on the team, we are o.k. despite a poorly named thread.

[Josh Goforth]

We have lots of youth on the roster and several kids that have not contributed much. My question would be WHY? Are they clearly NOT SEC material? Are they behind talented upper-classmen? Have they had the opportunity to really develop their skills?

On the other side, are they failing in the classroom? How many have caused trouble on or off the field? Which kid has not lived up to his part of the bargain?

Just how does a coach make a decision to cut a kid? With so little time to really judge a kid's talent level what exactly does a coach go on? Do you cut a young kid with more time to develop or the older kid that only has 1 season left?

Scholarship Numbers by Position
QB (3) - Ty Storey, Cole Kelley and Daulton Hyatt

RB (4) - Devwah Whaley, Maleek Williams and Chase Hayden, TJ Hammonds

FB (2) - Kendrick Jackson and Hayden Johnson

WR (11) - Jared Cornelius (X), Jonathan Nance (X), Brandon Martin (X), LaMichael Pettway (X), Deon Stewart (Z),  Kofi Boateng (Z), Jordan Jones (Z), Maleek Barkley, Jarrod Barnes, Koilan Jackson and DeVion Warren

TE (6) - Jack Kraus, Jeremy Patton, Austin Cantrell, Will Gragg, Cheyenne O'Grady and Grayson Gunter

OL (11) -Johnny Gibson (RG), Deion Malone (LG), Brian Wallace (RT), Hjalte Froholdt (LG), Zach Rogers (C), Colton Jackson (LT), Jalen Merrick (RG), Jake Heinrich (LG), Kirby Adcock (RG), Shane Clenin (LT) and Dalton Wagner (RT)

NG (2) - Austin Capps and Dylan Hays

DE ( 8 ) - Jake Hall, Michael Taylor, Armon Watts, T.J. Smith, McTelvin Agim, Briston Guidry, Jonathan Marshall and David Porter

OLB (6) -  Randy Ramsey (RZ), Jamario Bell (H), Gabe Richardson (H), Alexy Jean-Baptiste (RZ), Derrick Munson (RZ) and J.Paul (OLB)

ILB (5) - Dre Greenlaw (W), De'jon Harris (M), Giovanni LaFrance (-), Dee Walker (W) and Kyrei Fisher (W)

CB ( 8 ) - Ryan Pulley, Nate Dalton, Britto Tutt, Chevin Calloway, Kamren Curl, Jordon Curtis, Korey Hernandez and Jarques McClellion

S (5) - Santos Ramirez (S), Reid Miller (F), Deon Edwards (F), Micahh Smith (S) and Montaric Brown

K (1) - Cole Hedlund

P (1) - Blake Johnson
SNP (0) -

I feel like I can safely say that there is not a single name on this list that jumps out at me and says " I am not right for the University of Arkansas." And yes, before any one of you starts in, that includes Hedlund! With some real coaching he could be a really good kicker.

I do think that we are heavy at a couple of spots, WR, TE and LB. But even with those spots having higher numbers how do you cut a kid that is doing what he has been coached to do?

I am so glad that I don't have to make such a hard decision!!!

This is the most idiotic thread of 2017....

[Theolesnort]

Check the statements of other Mods in this thread about "naming names". I think everyone has done well to not be critical of specifically named players but instead discussing different positions. As long as we aren't critical of specific players currently on the team, we are o.k. despite a poorly named thread.

Nobody deserves to be cut but sadly at schools like Alabama it is called the process where they bring in a full load of scholies every year despite the fact they cut very good talent off their roster looking to replace them with even better talent. Bama has sold their soul in many different avenues and ways to be the best. No doubt about it. You can praise St Nick to high heaven as the best. You can curse him to a bad place for being so cold and cruel too. Like Lombardi, winning is not just everything, it is the only thing.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Nobody deserves to be cut but sadly at schools like Alabama it is called the process where they bring in a full load of scholies every year despite the fact they cut very good talent off their roster looking to replace them with even better talent. Bama has sold their soul in many different avenues and ways to be the best. No doubt about it. You can praise St Nick to high heaven as the best. You can curse him to a bad place for being so cold and cruel too. Like Lombardi, winning is not just everything, it is the only thing.

It happens every year at every P-5 school. More so for some, less so for others, but that very uncomfortable conversation takes place between scholarship players and coaches after every season.

Personally I think that if schools offer kids and those kids are willing to commit to a school for 4 years of their lives, the scholarship should be binding upon the school for those 4 years short of academic failure or situations that involve severe rule violations of school policy that result in disciplinary action with that player. Now if the player chooses to leave of their own volition, all bets are off.

If this were the case I think that you might see closer competition at all levels of P-5 football because schools would have to live with their successes in evaluation, but also be forced to live with their failures in evaluation. Whether it is considered to be the "norm" or not, I've never been a fan of coaching staffs being able to "churn" their rosters each year.

[Bacons Rebellion]

How is this allowed to stay in the board?  Why is a site that claims it won’t allow players to be bashed allowing a thread to stay open asking for people to list by name who should be cut from the team?  I’ve seen a lot of crap over the years, but this is ridiculous.  The program and players deserve better.  This is pathetic.  I’ve enjoyed the conversations with many of you, but I’ve had it.  Im done.

Actually, I'm kind of pleased with the thread, because, if you'll notice, no one has jumped on board.

[k.c.hawg]

Anyone that follows college football knows some of the ugly realities. That does not keep this thread from being ultra offensive to the parent of any scholarship player or any young man on scholarship that gives his all to the Razorback nation. The thread starts with the name of every player and every position group. Much less offensive threads go away on a regular basis.

[HognotinMemphis]

Any of them who are below the average speed and strength in the SEC for their position should be politely told they are not going to get any playing time. Of those who do not leave voluntarily, they can be politely informed that their scholarship will not be renewed for the next year but they are welcome to apply for a student scholarship.

[sigpooie]

We have the players and now we have a coach that knows how to win. Ctfd...with over 50 years of hog football in my mind and 100 years in my blood, I'm sure we are headed in the right direction. I love that coach said it takes all of us to win..yall better get your a_ses to work..I never quit.

[k.c.hawg]

Any of them who are below the average speed and strength in the SEC for their position should be politely told they are not going to get any playing time. Of those who do not leave voluntarily, they can be politely informed that their scholarship will not be renewed for the next year but they are welcome to apply for a student scholarship.

What rock have you been living under. Scholarships at the 65 P5 schools are 4 years now and not on yearly renewals. Scholarships can only be revoked for being accademically innelgible or off field misconduct.

[RebelliousHog]

Trash this before some idiot actually starts naming names.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

What rock have you been living under. Scholarships at the 65 P5 schools are 4 years now and not on yearly renewals. Scholarships can only be revoked for being accademically innelgible or off field misconduct.

Not entirely true. Schools can give up to 4 year athletic scholarships, they are not required to do so. They can issue those 1 year at a time giving them the flexibility to not renew a student athlete's scholarship for a variety of reasons.

Q: Is a scholarship a binding contract between a student-athlete and a school?

A: No. The scholarship is an agreement between the school and the student-athlete with expectations on both sides, but the agreement is completely separate from transfer regulations. A student-athlete may choose to transfer at any time. With multi-year scholarships now available for Division I schools, those colleges and universities have the option to offer athletics financial aid for more than one year. Such an agreement requires the school to provide financial aid to the student-athlete in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. However, the agreement does not bind the student-athlete to the institution any more than the current transfer rules – he or she may transfer during the term of the award.

If a student-athlete signs a National Letter of Intent, he or she cannot transfer during the initial year of competition without penalty.

Q: Can a coach cancel a student-athlete's scholarship?

A: Depending on various circumstances, a school can choose not to renew or cancel a student-athlete's scholarship*. The school has the choice to reduce or cancel the scholarship at the end of the period of the award. 

The school could also cancel the scholarship during the period of the award under the following circumstances:

    Student-athlete becomes ineligible
    Student-athlete commits fraud
    Misconduct
    Quits the team for personal reasons

http://www.ncaa.org/about/frequently-asked-questions-about-ncaa

[jkstock04]

Like Okla, I agree with this.

But it's more than that.

We (fans) think we "know" by now, who among our current roster actually are, or could be, SEC caliber athletes.

And who aren't.  It's the "aren't" that the OP wants lists of (did I just end a sentence with a preposition? Sorry Mrs Thompson)

We...don't.  Know. We....don't know squat about who's good enough.

Because no one on our current roster got SEC caliber coaching to find out if they're good enough.

It remains to be seen if they will.

I remember distinctly thinking during games this season you could count on one hand how many legit SEC players we had on our starting offense and defense combined. That's not going to be a popular statement but one could easily go back and watch the games and make that argument.

Was it all Bielemas fault simply for being a terrible coach? Is this REALLY the deepest and most talented team we have had in modern times like was commonly claimed prior to the 2017 season? Guess we will find out.

[JIHawg]

Go back to the original post, in the lower right hand corner see "report to moderator" and type in "please kill this thread".

[rude1]

Welcome to the world of big time college football, with scholarship limits  no coach is going to turn away a potential prospect in favor of a player on the roster who isn't cutting it. You use the term cut like a coach is simply going to tell the kid to get lost, when a coach wants a player to move on he is going to help the kid find a program that might be a better fit for him. Coaches are paid to win, they aren't going to stand pat with a roster that cant win because they have good kids doing the right things. Recruiting is a chance to improve the roster and that is what they will do, and some kids who aren't getting it done will be released in favor of prospects with a higher upside.

[k.c.hawg]

Not entirely true. Schools can give up to 4 year athletic scholarships, they are not required to do so. They can issue those 1 year at a time giving them the flexibility to not renew a student athlete's scholarship for a variety of reasons.

Q: Is a scholarship a binding contract between a student-athlete and a school?

A: No. The scholarship is an agreement between the school and the student-athlete with expectations on both sides, but the agreement is completely separate from transfer regulations. A student-athlete may choose to transfer at any time. With multi-year scholarships now available for Division I schools, those colleges and universities have the option to offer athletics financial aid for more than one year. Such an agreement requires the school to provide financial aid to the student-athlete in accordance with the terms and conditions of the agreement. However, the agreement does not bind the student-athlete to the institution any more than the current transfer rules – he or she may transfer during the term of the award.

If a student-athlete signs a National Letter of Intent, he or she cannot transfer during the initial year of competition without penalty.

Q: Can a coach cancel a student-athlete's scholarship?

A: Depending on various circumstances, a school can choose not to renew or cancel a student-athlete's scholarship*. The school has the choice to reduce or cancel the scholarship at the end of the period of the award. 

The school could also cancel the scholarship during the period of the award under the following circumstances:

    Student-athlete becomes ineligible
    Student-athlete commits fraud
    Misconduct
    Quits the team for personal reasons

http://www.ncaa.org/about/frequently-asked-questions-about-ncaa

So this isn't correct??

In our June newsletter, I wrote a brief paragraph about a new NCAA Division I rule that becomes effective this Fall and which has the effect of "protecting" Division I student-athletes from having their athletic scholarship cancelled or not renewed for any athletics reason.

Here are several facts about this rule:

– This new rule was voted in by the universities of the "Power 5" conferences – the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, PAC-12, and SEC, as well as Notre Dame. This rule must be followed by these 65 universities.

– Other Division I schools and conferences can choose to follow this rule, but are not required to do so. So, an athlete receiving an athletic scholarship from a university that is NOT one of the 65 mentioned here might still receive a one-year scholarship which a coach can choose not to renew for the following academic year.

– The "protection" provided by this rule only applies to athletes who signed their National Letter of Intent and scholarship agreement after the new rule was approved in January of this year (at the NCAA Convention), will be enrolling in a Division I university as a freshman or new transfer this Fall, AND who will be receiving an athletic scholarship in their first year

https://informedathlete.com/the-facts-about-guaranteed-multi-year-ncaa-di-scholarships/

[MuskogeeHogFan]

So this isn't correct??

In our June newsletter, I wrote a brief paragraph about a new NCAA Division I rule that becomes effective this Fall and which has the effect of "protecting" Division I student-athletes from having their athletic scholarship cancelled or not renewed for any athletics reason.

Here are several facts about this rule:

– This new rule was voted in by the universities of the "Power 5" conferences – the ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, PAC-12, and SEC, as well as Notre Dame. This rule must be followed by these 65 universities.

– Other Division I schools and conferences can choose to follow this rule, but are not required to do so. So, an athlete receiving an athletic scholarship from a university that is NOT one of the 65 mentioned here might still receive a one-year scholarship which a coach can choose not to renew for the following academic year.

– The "protection" provided by this rule only applies to athletes who signed their National Letter of Intent and scholarship agreement after the new rule was approved in January of this year (at the NCAA Convention), will be enrolling in a Division I university as a freshman or new transfer this Fall, AND who will be receiving an athletic scholarship in their first year

https://informedathlete.com/the-facts-about-guaranteed-multi-year-ncaa-di-scholarships/

You will have to take that up with the NCAA. That is who I quoted, as you can see.

[k.c.hawg]

In my quote to HIM I stated P5 schools. All 65 mandate guaranteed 4 year scholarships.

[k.c.hawg]

You will have to take that up with the NCAA. That is who I quoted, as you can see.

As a result of an autonomy conference vote at the January 2015 NCAA Convention, scholarships in those conferences may no longer be revoked based on athletic performance. Scholarships are not entirely guaranteed and can be revoked for other reasons, such as behavioral issues, but athletic aptitude is no longer one of those criteria at the 65 autonomy schools. The proposal has also been adopted by several conferences outside the autonomy group.


NCAA Quote


http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/feature/9-ways-life-changing-college-athletes

[ricepig]

You will have to take that up with the NCAA. That is who I quoted, as you can see.

And the NCAA convention passed the 4 year guarantee in the January 2015 meeting.

[Hogtimes]

In my quote to HIM I stated P5 schools. All 65 mandate guaranteed 4 year scholarships.

Thanks k.c. hawg for clearing this up.   

[k.c.hawg]

All of the Power 5 plus ND give 4 year scholarships now. They can be revoked for off field issues or if a player is accademically inelegible but they cannot be revoked for athletic performance or lack there of.

[jusgtohogs]

No. None of the D1 schools are required to offer 4 year scholly's (although some do).

Scholly's are 1 year agreements and renewed each year... based on coaching changes, medical status, performance, etc.

A coach can only pull a scholarship from a player mid-year if:
1) they are ineligible, or
2) they misrepresent information in a university document or
3) they withdraw from the team

Here is a good article (it's a bit old & ignore the source)
http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sports_nut/2012/05/ncaa_scholarship_rules_it_s_morally_indefensible_that_athletic_scholarships_can_be_yanked_after_one_year_for_any_reason_.html

And another article changes to 1 year scholly's, given a certain situation
https://www.athleticscholarships.net/question/can-a-coach-take-away-my-scholarship-without-telling-me

this/\/\/\

[MuskogeeHogFan]

And the NCAA convention passed the 4 year guarantee in the January 2015 meeting.

Then they need to update their site info. I quoted them, from their site.

[ricepig]

Then they need to update their site info. I quoted them, from their site.

Well, it only took a Google search to find it had been changed in 2015.

[k.c.hawg]

this/\/\/\

Written years before the new legislation was passed. In an ever changing landscape it's probably best to not rely on articles from 2012.

[MuskogeeHogFan]

Well, it only took a Google search to find it had been changed in 2015.

Alert the NCAA.

[ricepig]

Alert the NCAA.

Not my problem.

[k.c.hawg]

Alert the NCAA.

The NCAA is aware. I posted information from the NCAA website. You just have to dig a little deeper because it doesn't apply to 2/3 of those they govern.

[lakecityhog]

Guys, probably 75% of you totally missed MY point of this entire thread.
We have so many people talk about Hedlund and Storey  and others transferring, actually sounding like they relish the thought
and I simply wanted to point out that in my view NOT 1 SINGLE PLAYER ON THE ROSTER DESERVES TO BE CUT!!

Now I know that many of you are fairly dense and simply rush thru an OP in order to form your scathing response, but before you attack someone why not TRY to understand the point of the discussion! I want Morris to give EVERY kid the opportunity to stay for the full 4 or even 5 years. As long as the kid lives up to his end of the bargain, go to class and excel, practice hard and represent the University of Arkansas well.

The other sad fact is that we ALL know that he is NOT planning to do that. We are basically done with signing with maybe 1 scholarship open, but we are still actively recruiting MANY kids. Morris said in his early signing presser that he planned for up to 8 early signees and as many as 10 for February. It doesn't take a scientific rocket to figure out that half a dozen or more current players on scholarship will have to leave in order for that to happen. Grow the hell up! Not talking about it and acting all self righteous about it WILL NOT change it 1 bit.

Yeah, I know that some of you have convinced yourselves that Morris wouldn't do such a terrible thing. Again, GROW THE HELL UP! He stated himself that he and others of his staff have been watching film trying to figure out what they had. He also said that he will have 1-on-1 meetings with each player. Do you honestly think that during those meetings everything will be noodle salad and kool-aide?

I want to win as much as anyone, but I am totally against running kids off. You can dress it up any way that you want to try to make it more palatable, but when it comes right down to the nitty-gritty it is running kids off! If a kid has had trouble with the law, fine, if a kid is not giving an effort in the classroom, fine cut them. But, come out and say it. If a kid just never will be a starter and you want to cut him to make room for a "better" player, then I say NO!
The fact is we need scout teamers and if a kid signed up for a 4 year stint, give it to him. He will earn it. If a kid gives his all on the field and in the classroom it is just flat out wrong to run him off!

So for those of you that feel so smug and self-righteous, this is my position stated as plainly as I can say it. Let's see if you have the guts to really put yours out there for everyone to see!

[RebHog]

Good point.

+1

I wish the mods would take a good long look at this posters history. Almost every post is negative/condescending or has a "I am smarter than you" vibe. HV would be a better place without him.

[Piggfoot]

I disagree with the point of your OP. Let's look at kids who have earned academic scholarships. All of these scholarships require a certain level of performance. It should be no different with Athletic scholarships. To do so is as foolish has we were by giving Bielema a unreasonable buy out. Of course his job was tied to performance. 
In the case of the Athelete, just showing up and not causing trouble is not enough. A simple requirement to maintain an Atheletic scholarship after a red shirt year is making the three deep on offense (33) or defense (33) or making the special teams squad (11).  This requirement would take up 77 scholarships leaving 8 unassigned and on the bubble so to speak.  Certainly these eight could qualify for an academic scholarship if their grades met the requirement.

[ricepig]

I disagree with the point of your OP. Let's look at kids who have earned academic scholarships. All of these scholarships require a certain level of performance. It should be no different with Athletic scholarships. To do so is as foolish has we were by giving Bielema a unreasonable buy out. Of course his job was tied to performance. 
In the case of the Athelete, just showing up and not causing trouble is not enough. A simple requirement to maintain an Atheletic scholarship after a red shirt year is making the three deep on offense (33) or defense (33) or making the special teams squad (11).  This requirement would take up 77 scholarships leaving 8 unassigned and on the bubble so to speak.  Certainly these eight could qualify for an academic scholarship if their grades met the requirement.

Why don't you just give them the 'Pigfoot" Annual Dismissal Scholarship. You could make a large donation that could find it, a list the criteria for these kids to be cut from the team. The rules have changed, accept that fact and hope we recruit more "contributors" in your eyes.

[Beached]

This thread is somehow ok, but calling the loser coach we had "Bert" is an issue.

Sure.  Seems legit. 

[ChitownHawg]

I wouldn't be surprised if the film and interviews show there are some of the players who are not the right fit for the new scheme. If they do find such players and the player truly wants playing time that the coaches will do like the old regime by helping the player find a better matching team.

Changing coaches is a tough time for the program. The players have worked their butt off to be on the team. They have given everything of tbemselves to the team. However, everyone knows the new coach is going to be judged by wins. Fans, including powerful boosters, will not say "Well we need to wait for four years as CBB's players filter through the team."

Something will have to give. All I expect my school to do - is the right thing. If the players want to move on then help him find the best school for them.

[Steef]

Guys, probably 75% of you totally missed MY point of this entire thread.
We have so many people talk about Hedlund and Storey  and others transferring, actually sounding like they relish the thought
and I simply wanted to point out that in my view NOT 1 SINGLE PLAYER ON THE ROSTER DESERVES TO BE CUT!!

Now I know that many of you are fairly dense and simply rush thru an OP in order to form your scathing response, but before you attack someone why not TRY to understand the point of the discussion! I want Morris to give EVERY kid the opportunity to stay for the full 4 or even 5 years. As long as the kid lives up to his end of the bargain, go to class and excel, practice hard and represent the University of Arkansas well.

The other sad fact is that we ALL know that he is NOT planning to do that. We are basically done with signing with maybe 1 scholarship open, but we are still actively recruiting MANY kids. Morris said in his early signing presser that he planned for up to 8 early signees and as many as 10 for February. It doesn't take a scientific rocket to figure out that half a dozen or more current players on scholarship will have to leave in order for that to happen. Grow the hell up! Not talking about it and acting all self righteous about it WILL NOT change it 1 bit.

Yeah, I know that some of you have convinced yourselves that Morris wouldn't do such a terrible thing. Again, GROW THE HELL UP! He stated himself that he and others of his staff have been watching film trying to figure out what they had. He also said that he will have 1-on-1 meetings with each player. Do you honestly think that during those meetings everything will be noodle salad and kool-aide?

I want to win as much as anyone, but I am totally against running kids off. You can dress it up any way that you want to try to make it more palatable, but when it comes right down to the nitty-gritty it is running kids off! If a kid has had trouble with the law, fine, if a kid is not giving an effort in the classroom, fine cut them. But, come out and say it. If a kid just never will be a starter and you want to cut him to make room for a "better" player, then I say NO!
The fact is we need scout teamers and if a kid signed up for a 4 year stint, give it to him. He will earn it. If a kid gives his all on the field and in the classroom it is just flat out wrong to run him off!

So for those of you that feel so smug and self-righteous, this is my position stated as plainly as I can say it. Let's see if you have the guts to really put yours out there for everyone to see!

I have the guts to tell you the title of this thread truly sucks.

I mean, in a profound, historically bad way.

It's irrelevant what you MEANT. What matters is what you said. The title says:

"Come bash some players with me!"

Yes, for the most part, the thread itself has been the opposite of that. Despite constant complaints and reports to moderator that cut into our holiday weekend. And it's through no small effort we've kept it civil.

So do a better job of titling your next thread.

[Steef]

This thread is somehow ok, but calling the loser coach we had "Bert" is an issue.

Sure.  Seems legit. 

For the most part, this thread has been malice free towards players. Just a discussion of our future.

Calling Coach B "Bert" is pure malice.

[Johnny Bobo]

none of them deserve to be cut

[nwahogfan1]

I have the guts to tell you the title of this thread truly sucks.

I mean, in a profound, historically bad way.

It's irrelevant what you MEANT. What matters is what you said. The title says:

"Come bash some players with me!"

Yes, for the most part, the thread itself has been the opposite of that. Despite constant complaints and reports to moderator that cut into our holiday weekend. And it's through no small effort we've kept it civil.

So do a better job of titling your next thread.

If a scholarship player is buried behind some non scholarship players who are playing what is a coach to do??  Doesn't Morgan deserve a scholarship??   He plays above players who have a scholarship.   Coaches have to play their best.

Also Coach Morris plays a different scheme on both sides than CBB.   Some will not be a good fit.   Plus Morris did not recruit these kids so he doesn't have the loyalty to these guys.  Saying all that I say it will work itself out.

[lakecityhog]

It's irrelevant what you MEANT. What matters is what you said. The title says:

"Come bash some players with me!"

This is an outright LIE! You projected your thoughts into the title of the thread. I put the word deserve in "" to indicate sarcasm, I guess like Sheldon we will have to hold up a sarcasm sign for you so you can actually get it!

I have read threads that have an actual list of players that should be gone and NOT ONE mod bothered to take any note.
Just because you and a few others FAILED to read the ENTIRE post before jumping to a WRONG conclusion is not my problem.

Did you even read this?

I feel like I can safely say that there is not a single name on this list that jumps out at me and says " I am not right for the University of Arkansas." And yes, before any one of you starts in, that includes Hedlund! With some real coaching he could be a really good kicker.

If the thread bothers you that much as a mod why not just put it in the trash?? Or would you rather just bitch about it?

[Beached]

Calling Coach B "Bert" is pure malice.

http://www.hogville.net/yabbse/index.php?topic=313726.0

Better coach, and better record.  Sad to say.

[Steef]

http://www.hogville.net/yabbse/index.php?topic=313726.0

Better coach, and better record.  Sad to say.

Not the point.

[Beached]

Totally the point.  You're just overly sensitive about one and not the other. 

[Steef]

Totally the point.  You're just overly sensitive about one and not the other.

THAT is true. Both are failures at coaching. One is a failure at human being.

But its not the point of this thread.

[jkstock04]

Totally the point.  You're just overly sensitive about one and not the other. 

It's an excellent point. The defenders of all things Bielema have this and this only to fall back on, "he's a really nice guy." Which, of course they have zero clue if that's true or not.

On a side note, as terrible as Nutt may have been as coach, he could coach circles around Bielema blindfolded at Arkansas. Bielema is the worst thing that has ever happened to the Razorback football program, but a contingent of our fans love him like the messed up woman that always crawls back to an abusive husband. Stuff like this is what separates our program from other (more successful) SEC football programs. The fluffy fluffy stuff > results on the field.

[Inhogswetrust]

As a result of an autonomy conference vote at the January 2015 NCAA Convention, scholarships in those conferences may no longer be revoked based on athletic performance. Scholarships are not entirely guaranteed and can be revoked for other reasons, such as behavioral issues, but athletic aptitude is no longer one of those criteria at the 65 autonomy schools. The proposal has also been adopted by several conferences outside the autonomy group.


NCAA Quote


http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/feature/9-ways-life-changing-college-athletes

Seems to me the key word there is  "aptitude." That's not the same as "attitude". Therefore it appears, but I could be wrong, that IF a player isn't trying as hard as the coaches thinks he can or is late to meetings/practice, etc. then that would be an "attitude" problem and thus could cause loss of scholarship.