Jeremy Calhoun

[spsyk]

Well, you can't refute my argument, so your right you are a waste time.

Hauck dosen't need me as a sycophant, he proved himself by being the winningest coach in Griz history.

You end your post with go Griz, I’m assuming that does not include Hauck.

Sissy,

Your argument was swatted away by PR, AWF and others above.

I have a vested interest in Bobby succeeding, of course I want to see that. I want to see Bobby excel as a coach, a role model and as a teacher for this team. I would like to see him act in a mature and professional manner to carry out these goals.

I'm sorry if this is too nuanced for you. I'm just not equipped nor inclined to play the black and white game with you.

My dialog is with you, question, are you as brave with your loud mouth face to face, if you are it would be a pleasure to meet you.

Again, decisions make for the team are in the hands of Hauck, not a backbencher as your self.

Reading that gave me CTE.

Not sure what CTE means ?

 

[Chet_Ripley]

Sissy,

Your argument was swatted away by PR, AWF and others above.

I have a vested interest in Bobby succeeding, of course I want to see that. I want to see Bobby excel as a coach, a role model and as a teacher for this team. I would like to see him act in a mature and professional manner to carry out these goals.

I'm sorry if this is too nuanced for you. I'm just not equipped nor inclined to play the black and white game with you.

My dialog is with you, question, are you as brave with your loud mouth face to face, if you are it would be a pleasure to meet you.

Again, decisions make for the team are in the hands of Hauck, not a backbencher as your self.

Reading that gave me CTE.

Not sure what CTE means ?

Color me surprised...

 

[debellatio]

I believe the NCAA needs to make some changes to this new redshirt rule:

1. Any game missed due to suspension counts as a game played. What's the point in suspending a kid if you are going to give him another year of eligibility late. If they came out in August and said they weren't going to suspend him but were going to redshirt him instead, can you imagine the fallout.

2. If player quits team they are not eligible to redshirt. I don't believe the spirit of the rule was to essentially allow a kid to decide to be a free agent and not loose any eligibility. I believe it was to reward a kid for sticking it out and being loyal to the team.

It is the first you having this rule so they are probably going to make some tweaks. Hopefully they look at these two.

Disagree on both counts.

I agree with 1 and disagree with 2. The second is open for interpretation though. For example, if i'm a senior QB and there's a kick ass freshman recruit taking my job, I may announce my decision to transfer (see Clemson). If you are still admitted to initial university at the new semester then you lose that. If you transfer, then I can let it slide and agree could be able to play.
I do think if you're suspended...those should count. Means you've done something stupid and should be penalized for it besides the missed game or 2.

I agree with your premise on 2 but I just don't think that was what or how the NCAA intended it to be used. I could be wrong but it doesn't seems to be the typical way the NCAA would allow a student to change a school without some kind of penalty. If the Clemson situation happened and the coach decided to redshirt the senior, then I would see the NCAA not having a problem with him transferring at semester. It just seems to me that the NCAA does not like to allow athletes to make decisions to better themselves. They seem to think the athlete should follow through on his commitment to that school even though the school can pull that scholarship in the blink of an eye.

 

[AZDoc]

I believe the NCAA needs to make some changes to this new redshirt rule:

1. Any game missed due to suspension counts as a game played. What's the point in suspending a kid if you are going to give him another year of eligibility late. If they came out in August and said they weren't going to suspend him but were going to redshirt him instead, can you imagine the fallout.

2. If player quits team they are not eligible to redshirt. I don't believe the spirit of the rule was to essentially allow a kid to decide to be a free agent and not loose any eligibility. I believe it was to reward a kid for sticking it out and being loyal to the team.

It is the first you having this rule so they are probably going to make some tweaks. Hopefully they look at these two.

Disagree on both counts.

I agree with 1 and disagree with 2. The second is open for interpretation though. For example, if i'm a senior QB and there's a kick ass freshman recruit taking my job, I may announce my decision to transfer (see Clemson). If you are still admitted to initial university at the new semester then you lose that. If you transfer, then I can let it slide and agree could be able to play.
I do think if you're suspended...those should count. Means you've done something stupid and should be penalized for it besides the missed game or 2.

I agree with your premise on 2 but I just don't think that was what or how the NCAA intended it to be used. I could be wrong but it doesn't seems to be the typical way the NCAA would allow a student to change a school without some kind of penalty. If the Clemson situation happened and the coach decided to redshirt the senior, then I would see the NCAA not having a problem with him transferring at semester. It just seems to me that the NCAA does not like to allow athletes to make decisions to better themselves. They seem to think the athlete should follow through on his commitment to that school even though the school can pull that scholarship in the blink of an eye.

I agree 100%. I think it's a great rule, but there are flaws and loopholes that need to be addressed. i think every situation is different and think all of these discussions are helpful in determining how best it be fixed.

 

[AZDoc]

I believe the NCAA needs to make some changes to this new redshirt rule:

1. Any game missed due to suspension counts as a game played. What's the point in suspending a kid if you are going to give him another year of eligibility late. If they came out in August and said they weren't going to suspend him but were going to redshirt him instead, can you imagine the fallout.

2. If player quits team they are not eligible to redshirt. I don't believe the spirit of the rule was to essentially allow a kid to decide to be a free agent and not loose any eligibility. I believe it was to reward a kid for sticking it out and being loyal to the team.

It is the first you having this rule so they are probably going to make some tweaks. Hopefully they look at these two.

Disagree on both counts.

I agree with 1 and disagree with 2. The second is open for interpretation though. For example, if i'm a senior QB and there's a kick ass freshman recruit taking my job, I may announce my decision to transfer (see Clemson). If you are still admitted to initial university at the new semester then you lose that. If you transfer, then I can let it slide and agree could be able to play.
I do think if you're suspended...those should count. Means you've done something stupid and should be penalized for it besides the missed game or 2.

some of us certainly like to play judge and jury, meting out punishments on top of punishment. ever stop and wonder when enough is enough for an emotion-driven mistake?

Oh...so you were there and know for sure what happened? Yes, yes I think it's OK to punish on top of punishing because one is the team and the other is the governing body. Happens all the time, even in college sports. Look at the code of conduct vs team punishment comparisons. You think it's ok if the code says 1 game and the coach gives 2? Isn't that punishment on top of punishment? Naw...probably not. :roll:

 

[argh!]

Disagree on both counts.

I agree with 1 and disagree with 2. The second is open for interpretation though. For example, if i'm a senior QB and there's a kick ass freshman recruit taking my job, I may announce my decision to transfer (see Clemson). If you are still admitted to initial university at the new semester then you lose that. If you transfer, then I can let it slide and agree could be able to play.
I do think if you're suspended...those should count. Means you've done something stupid and should be penalized for it besides the missed game or 2.

some of us certainly like to play judge and jury, meting out punishments on top of punishment. ever stop and wonder when enough is enough for an emotion-driven mistake?

Oh...so you were there and know for sure what happened? Yes, yes I think it's OK to punish on top of punishing because one is the team and the other is the governing body. Happens all the time, even in college sports. Look at the code of conduct vs team punishment comparisons. You think it's ok if the code says 1 game and the coach gives 2? Isn't that punishment on top of punishment? Naw...probably not. :roll:

huh? not sure you get my point. i am not talking about bobby hauck, the code of conduct, or the ncaa. i am talking about you and others who want to control some kids life because he screwed up in what was an emotional situation. just seems kinda sad.

 

[AZDoc]

I agree with 1 and disagree with 2. The second is open for interpretation though. For example, if i'm a senior QB and there's a kick ass freshman recruit taking my job, I may announce my decision to transfer (see Clemson). If you are still admitted to initial university at the new semester then you lose that. If you transfer, then I can let it slide and agree could be able to play.
I do think if you're suspended...those should count. Means you've done something stupid and should be penalized for it besides the missed game or 2.

some of us certainly like to play judge and jury, meting out punishments on top of punishment. ever stop and wonder when enough is enough for an emotion-driven mistake?

Oh...so you were there and know for sure what happened? Yes, yes I think it's OK to punish on top of punishing because one is the team and the other is the governing body. Happens all the time, even in college sports. Look at the code of conduct vs team punishment comparisons. You think it's ok if the code says 1 game and the coach gives 2? Isn't that punishment on top of punishment? Naw...probably not. :roll:

huh? not sure you get my point. i am not talking about bobby hauck, the code of conduct, or the ncaa. i am talking about you and others who want to control some kids life because he screwed up in what was an emotional situation. just seems kinda sad.

Oh I don't give a rat's azz what he does. He's a college kid and I wish him the best if he plays next year in Missoula, Maine, or not at all. My post initially wasn't about him specifically, just my thoughts on loopholes in the system and how they may need to be addressed. I actually wanted him to redshirt way way back before he came back as somewhere I posted maybe he could redshirt and help out next year. Addressing the "kicked off the team" vs "leaving the team" was really what I was trying to convey and the idiosyncrasies of how difficult this fantastic new rule can be based on different circumstances. Was giving my opinion on how to address it, that's all.

 

[horribilisfan8184]

Hauck just said on the radio that Calhoun "walked in and said he wanted to redshirt." "Coaches decide who redshirts, not players"

OK folks, let's condense this into what important events happened and didn't happen that should be considered in this situation.

1) In his freshman redshirt year, Jeremy was asked to help the team due to injuries at his position and blow his redshirt, and he rose to the task. Team player? You bet.

2) The suspension in his senior year, and "delayed" return to playing generated a scenario where, if it looked unlikely for the Griz to make the playoffs, with 4 or fewer games played, he could sit out the last two games, redshirt, and gain an additional year of eligibility, ie, working to improve the future.

3) As the chance of #2 became closer to a reality, Egriz speculators began openly advocating for a redshirt result, to both Jeremy and the team, as the best and most logical course for Jeremy and the team.

4.) As the Griz played several horrible games the HC goes on the air to remind fans that this is a rebuilding process, it will take time, and the future will be brighter each year, so bright in fact we'll have to wear shades, ie, his improvement goals are geared for future years.

5) The talk and speculation of a possible redshirt path for Jeremy continues and becomes regular discussion on egriz, in booster circles, and on campus including inside and outside the Champions Center.

6) Once the team is down to 2 games left and any redshirt possibility could be lost, Jeremy, according to Hauck, approaches him directly, not through parents or assistant coaches or the team mascot, about the possibility of redshirting this year.

7) Hauck sees the request as presumptuous of his responsibilities, makes sure Jeremy knows that in no uncertain terms, and with no present reflection or conferring with the OC or position coach or recruiting coordinator, reflexively says "no" so as to defend his coaching turf.

8) Insulted and hurt the "Team" (Coach) wasn't there in his time of need, Jeremy decides his heart is no longer in it and declines to participate further. (Just an aside here, if anybody knows when they are in Hauck's doghouse it's Jeremy, where he probably was again if he did stay with the team).

9) None of this rumored redshirt "speculation" was unknown to Bobby for weeks, yet he apparently didn't head this off and go to Jeremy and ask if it was something he was interested in or tell him what he was thinking about it or let him know whether it was something he might consider or not consider, so Jeremy didn't have to do what we now know is unthinkable and (gulp) ask. (An "I am the Great Oz" vibe going on here?")

10) A pattern fairly clearly emerges, so it is fair to ask why does it seem every story of Hauck's "mentoring" program with his players that leaks from the Champions Center end with a starter leaving the program?

Just another way to look at the facts, folks. The way the Griz played last week suggests Hauck is getting better play out of his players. A win this weekend will have me sold. But it seems that this situation could have and should have been addressed and diffused long before the moment of critical mass, and these 25 pages of back yard gossip would not exist.

 

[grizindabox]

Hauck just said on the radio that Calhoun "walked in and said he wanted to redshirt." "Coaches decide who redshirts, not players"

OK folks, let's condense this into what important events happened and didn't happen that should be considered in this situation.

1) In his freshman redshirt year, Jeremy was asked to help the team due to injuries at his position and blow his redshirt, and he rose to the task. Team player? You bet.

2) The suspension in his senior year, and "delayed" return to playing generated a scenario where, if it looked unlikely for the Griz to make the playoffs, with 4 or fewer games played, he could sit out the last two games, redshirt, and gain an additional year of eligibility, ie, working to improve the future.

3) As the chance of #2 became closer to a reality, Egriz speculators began openly advocating for a redshirt result, to both Jeremy and the team, as the best and most logical course for Jeremy and the team.

4.) As the Griz played several horrible games the HC goes on the air to remind fans that this is a rebuilding process, it will take time, and the future will be brighter each year, so bright in fact we'll have to wear shades, ie, his improvement goals are geared for future years.

5) The talk and speculation of a possible redshirt path for Jeremy continues and becomes regular discussion on egriz, in booster circles, and on campus including inside and outside the Champions Center.

6) Once the team is down to 2 games left and any redshirt possibility could be lost, Jeremy, according to Hauck, approaches him directly, not through parents or assistant coaches or the team mascot, about the possibility of redshirting this year.

7) Hauck sees the request as presumptuous of his responsibilities, makes sure Jeremy knows that in no uncertain terms, and with no present reflection or conferring with the OC or position coach or recruiting coordinator, reflexively says "no" so as to defend his coaching turf.

8) Insulted and hurt the "Team" (Coach) wasn't there in his time of need, Jeremy decides his heart is no longer in it and declines to participate further. (Just an aside here, if anybody knows when they are in Hauck's doghouse it's Jeremy, where he probably was again if he did stay with the team).

9) None of this rumored redshirt "speculation" was unknown to Bobby for weeks, yet he apparently didn't head this off and go to Jeremy and ask if it was something he was interested in or tell him what he was thinking about it or let him know whether it was something he might consider or not consider, so Jeremy didn't have to do what we now know is unthinkable and (gulp) ask. (An "I am the Great Oz" vibe going on here?")

10) A pattern fairly clearly emerges, so it is fair to ask why does it seem every story of Hauck's "mentoring" program with his players that leaks from the Champions Center end with a starter leaving the program?

Just another way to look at the facts, folks. The way the Griz played last week suggests Hauck is getting better play out of his players. A win this weekend will have me sold. But it seems that this situation could have and should have been addressed and diffused long before the moment of critical mass, and these 25 pages of back yard gossip would not exist.

Is this completely factual?

 

[AZDoc]

Hauck just said on the radio that Calhoun "walked in and said he wanted to redshirt." "Coaches decide who redshirts, not players"

OK folks, let's condense this into what important events happened and didn't happen that should be considered in this situation.

1) In his freshman redshirt year, Jeremy was asked to help the team due to injuries at his position and blow his redshirt, and he rose to the task. Team player? You bet.

2) The suspension in his senior year, and "delayed" return to playing generated a scenario where, if it looked unlikely for the Griz to make the playoffs, with 4 or fewer games played, he could sit out the last two games, redshirt, and gain an additional year of eligibility, ie, working to improve the future.

3) As the chance of #2 became closer to a reality, Egriz speculators began openly advocating for a redshirt result, to both Jeremy and the team, as the best and most logical course for Jeremy and the team.

4.) As the Griz played several horrible games the HC goes on the air to remind fans that this is a rebuilding process, it will take time, and the future will be brighter each year, so bright in fact we'll have to wear shades, ie, his improvement goals are geared for future years.

5) The talk and speculation of a possible redshirt path for Jeremy continues and becomes regular discussion on egriz, in booster circles, and on campus including inside and outside the Champions Center.

6) Once the team is down to 2 games left and any redshirt possibility could be lost, Jeremy, according to Hauck, approaches him directly, not through parents or assistant coaches or the team mascot, about the possibility of redshirting this year.

7) Hauck sees the request as presumptuous of his responsibilities, makes sure Jeremy knows that in no uncertain terms, and with no present reflection or conferring with the OC or position coach or recruiting coordinator, reflexively says "no" so as to defend his coaching turf.

8) Insulted and hurt the "Team" (Coach) wasn't there in his time of need, Jeremy decides his heart is no longer in it and declines to participate further. (Just an aside here, if anybody knows when they are in Hauck's doghouse it's Jeremy, where he probably was again if he did stay with the team).

9) None of this rumored redshirt "speculation" was unknown to Bobby for weeks, yet he apparently didn't head this off and go to Jeremy and ask if it was something he was interested in or tell him what he was thinking about it or let him know whether it was something he might consider or not consider, so Jeremy didn't have to do what we now know is unthinkable and (gulp) ask. (An "I am the Great Oz" vibe going on here?")

10) A pattern fairly clearly emerges, so it is fair to ask why does it seem every story of Hauck's "mentoring" program with his players that leaks from the Champions Center end with a starter leaving the program?

Just another way to look at the facts, folks. The way the Griz played last week suggests Hauck is getting better play out of his players. A win this weekend will have me sold. But it seems that this situation could have and should have been addressed and diffused long before the moment of critical mass, and these 25 pages of back yard gossip would not exist.

That seems like the scenario right there. But, during kitten weak, gives something to chew on to pass the long, long week before the game starts.

 

[Ursa Major]

Sissy Spacek, you're a Bobby sycophant. I won't waste each of our time.

Well, you can't refute my argument, so your right you are a waste time.

Hauck dosen't need me as a sycophant, he proved himself by being the winningest coach in Griz history.

You end your post with go Griz, I’m assuming that does not include Hauck.

Sissy,

Your argument was swatted away by PR, AWF and others above.

I have a vested interest in Bobby succeeding, of course I want to see that. I want to see Bobby excel as a coach, a role model and as a teacher for this team. I would like to see him act in a mature and professional manner to carry out these goals.

I'm sorry if this is too nuanced for you. I'm just not equipped nor inclined to play the black and white game with you.

My dialog is with you, question, are you as brave with your loud mouth face to face, if you are it would be a pleasure to meet you.

Again, decisions make for the team are in the hands of Hauck, not a backbencher as your self.

Sissy,

I'm much louder in person, especially when it's cold.

 

[Ursa Major]

My dialog is with you, question, are you as brave with your loud mouth face to face, if you are it would be a pleasure to meet you.

Again, decisions make for the team are in the hands of Hauck, not a backbencher as your self.

Reading that gave me CTE.

Not sure what CTE means ?

Color me surprised...

:lol:

 

[Ursa Major]

Hauck just said on the radio that Calhoun "walked in and said he wanted to redshirt." "Coaches decide who redshirts, not players"

OK folks, let's condense this into what important events happened and didn't happen that should be considered in this situation.

1) In his freshman redshirt year, Jeremy was asked to help the team due to injuries at his position and blow his redshirt, and he rose to the task. Team player? You bet.

2) The suspension in his senior year, and "delayed" return to playing generated a scenario where, if it looked unlikely for the Griz to make the playoffs, with 4 or fewer games played, he could sit out the last two games, redshirt, and gain an additional year of eligibility, ie, working to improve the future.

3) As the chance of #2 became closer to a reality, Egriz speculators began openly advocating for a redshirt result, to both Jeremy and the team, as the best and most logical course for Jeremy and the team.

4.) As the Griz played several horrible games the HC goes on the air to remind fans that this is a rebuilding process, it will take time, and the future will be brighter each year, so bright in fact we'll have to wear shades, ie, his improvement goals are geared for future years.

5) The talk and speculation of a possible redshirt path for Jeremy continues and becomes regular discussion on egriz, in booster circles, and on campus including inside and outside the Champions Center.

6) Once the team is down to 2 games left and any redshirt possibility could be lost, Jeremy, according to Hauck, approaches him directly, not through parents or assistant coaches or the team mascot, about the possibility of redshirting this year.

7) Hauck sees the request as presumptuous of his responsibilities, makes sure Jeremy knows that in no uncertain terms, and with no present reflection or conferring with the OC or position coach or recruiting coordinator, reflexively says "no" so as to defend his coaching turf.

8) Insulted and hurt the "Team" (Coach) wasn't there in his time of need, Jeremy decides his heart is no longer in it and declines to participate further. (Just an aside here, if anybody knows when they are in Hauck's doghouse it's Jeremy, where he probably was again if he did stay with the team).

9) None of this rumored redshirt "speculation" was unknown to Bobby for weeks, yet he apparently didn't head this off and go to Jeremy and ask if it was something he was interested in or tell him what he was thinking about it or let him know whether it was something he might consider or not consider, so Jeremy didn't have to do what we now know is unthinkable and (gulp) ask. (An "I am the Great Oz" vibe going on here?")

10) A pattern fairly clearly emerges, so it is fair to ask why does it seem every story of Hauck's "mentoring" program with his players that leaks from the Champions Center end with a starter leaving the program?

Just another way to look at the facts, folks. The way the Griz played last week suggests Hauck is getting better play out of his players. A win this weekend will have me sold. But it seems that this situation could have and should have been addressed and diffused long before the moment of critical mass, and these 25 pages of back yard gossip would not exist.

Clear, cogent and comprehensive work.

Mods?

 

[HookedonGriz]

Hauck just said on the radio that Calhoun "walked in and said he wanted to redshirt." "Coaches decide who redshirts, not players"

OK folks, let's condense this into what important events happened and didn't happen that should be considered in this situation.

1) In his freshman redshirt year, Jeremy was asked to help the team due to injuries at his position and blow his redshirt, and he rose to the task. Team player? You bet.

2) The suspension in his senior year, and "delayed" return to playing generated a scenario where, if it looked unlikely for the Griz to make the playoffs, with 4 or fewer games played, he could sit out the last two games, redshirt, and gain an additional year of eligibility, ie, working to improve the future.

3) As the chance of #2 became closer to a reality, Egriz speculators began openly advocating for a redshirt result, to both Jeremy and the team, as the best and most logical course for Jeremy and the team.

4.) As the Griz played several horrible games the HC goes on the air to remind fans that this is a rebuilding process, it will take time, and the future will be brighter each year, so bright in fact we'll have to wear shades, ie, his improvement goals are geared for future years.

5) The talk and speculation of a possible redshirt path for Jeremy continues and becomes regular discussion on egriz, in booster circles, and on campus including inside and outside the Champions Center.

6) Once the team is down to 2 games left and any redshirt possibility could be lost, Jeremy, according to Hauck, approaches him directly, not through parents or assistant coaches or the team mascot, about the possibility of redshirting this year.

7) Hauck sees the request as presumptuous of his responsibilities, makes sure Jeremy knows that in no uncertain terms, and with no present reflection or conferring with the OC or position coach or recruiting coordinator, reflexively says "no" so as to defend his coaching turf.

8) Insulted and hurt the "Team" (Coach) wasn't there in his time of need, Jeremy decides his heart is no longer in it and declines to participate further. (Just an aside here, if anybody knows when they are in Hauck's doghouse it's Jeremy, where he probably was again if he did stay with the team).

9) None of this rumored redshirt "speculation" was unknown to Bobby for weeks, yet he apparently didn't head this off and go to Jeremy and ask if it was something he was interested in or tell him what he was thinking about it or let him know whether it was something he might consider or not consider, so Jeremy didn't have to do what we now know is unthinkable and (gulp) ask. (An "I am the Great Oz" vibe going on here?")

10) A pattern fairly clearly emerges, so it is fair to ask why does it seem every story of Hauck's "mentoring" program with his players that leaks from the Champions Center end with a starter leaving the program?

Just another way to look at the facts, folks. The way the Griz played last week suggests Hauck is getting better play out of his players. A win this weekend will have me sold. But it seems that this situation could have and should have been addressed and diffused long before the moment of critical mass, and these 25 pages of back yard gossip would not exist.

Well would you look at that.... another Sammy Sosa Hooooooome Ruuuuuun

 

[argh!]

some of us certainly like to play judge and jury, meting out punishments on top of punishment. ever stop and wonder when enough is enough for an emotion-driven mistake?

Oh...so you were there and know for sure what happened? Yes, yes I think it's OK to punish on top of punishing because one is the team and the other is the governing body. Happens all the time, even in college sports. Look at the code of conduct vs team punishment comparisons. You think it's ok if the code says 1 game and the coach gives 2? Isn't that punishment on top of punishment? Naw...probably not. :roll:

huh? not sure you get my point. i am not talking about bobby hauck, the code of conduct, or the ncaa. i am talking about you and others who want to control some kids life because he screwed up in what was an emotional situation. just seems kinda sad.

Oh I don't give a rat's azz what he does. He's a college kid and I wish him the best if he plays next year in Missoula, Maine, or not at all. My post initially wasn't about him specifically, just my thoughts on loopholes in the system and how they may need to be addressed. I actually wanted him to redshirt way way back before he came back as somewhere I posted maybe he could redshirt and help out next year. Addressing the "kicked off the team" vs "leaving the team" was really what I was trying to convey and the idiosyncrasies of how difficult this fantastic new rule can be based on different circumstances. Was giving my opinion on how to address it, that's all.

ok = i just read it differently