• You do not need to register if you are not going to pay the yearly fee to post. If you register please click here or log in go to "settings" then "my account" then "User Upgrades" and you can renew.

HuskerMax readers can save 50% on  Omaha Steaks .

Vedral granted scholarship release

Agree. I'm all for giving a waiver to a guy like Tanner Lee who didn't fit a new coach/system at all and went somewhere else, but following a coach creates a foggy line. Is it system, or preference?
He is still required to sit a year ... which in and of itself is an inducement not to transfer ... so releasing him so he can be awarded a scholarship is a no brainer.
 



He is still required to sit a year ... which in and of itself is an inducement not to transfer ... so releasing him so he can be awarded a scholarship is a no brainer.

and it frees up a schollie at UCF too, right, so there is actually self-interest in this decision by UCF...
 
Agree. I'm all for giving a waiver to a guy like Tanner Lee who didn't fit a new coach/system at all and went somewhere else, but following a coach creates a foggy line. Is it system, or preference?
Although I agree in theory. Vedral would have come to NE originally but he did not fit. So although he is following a coach he is also following his ultimate dream school. Not the same as most cases.
 
I don't mind kids following a coach in theory:
  • If things are humming along well, the coach stays forever (Osborne, Saban, JoePa) and builds a consistent system over years and years. Kids aren't apt to leave because the coach doesn't leave and the system is more or less the same.
  • If the coach is terrible, he gets booted and tries his system elsewhere. Any maybe it works at the new school. West Coast kids who are now under a new coach who runs a Triple Option should be able to get some choices about where they go.

When you get down to mid-majors it becomes tricky though. Let's use Urban Meyer as an example. He started at Bowling Green, went to Utah (before they were a Pac-12 member) and then to Florida and Ohio State. Now, Urban took a break between Gainesville and Columbus, but had he went straight to OSU, I wouldn't have too much issue with a Gator kid transferring to be a Buckeye. Florida doesn't hurt for recruits or resources. Neither does Ohio State.

But, had the same thing happened between Bowling Green -> Utah or between Utah -> Florida, you'd have problems. Why? Because there are appreciable gaps in overall talent/success between those schools. Bowling Green is a decent mid-major, but Utah was clearly a good enough G5 team to crack into a Power 5 conference. And again, there's a gap between the Utes and Gators.

If Urban had recruited a 4 or 5 star QB to play at Bowling Green, that single player could be a MASSIVE difference. Just look at some of Nebraska's recent games against Wyoming, Fresno State, McNeese State and even the NIU loss. Two or three big playmakers can make a MASSIVE difference in a well-coached midmajor team. You put an electric QB and WR duo on the field or maybe a great DE/LB blitz combo and you've got a team that can hang (kinda) with the big boys. Think Boise State upsetting Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl with the Statue of Liberty shenanigans. A few playmakers plus great coaching beat out a bunch of playmakers and decent-to-good coaching.

So, back to the transfer. Plucking a kid from a school like Bowling Green could literally be the difference between a MAC title (and New Year's Day 6 run) or that team not even making a bowl game. In other words, a big fish in a little pond, versus a big fish in a biggish (bigly?) pond like Florida or OSU. That player might even be the difference between the new coach having a decent transition and racking up some wins while they change the system around (hello, Josh Heupel).

So in theory, the transfer thing kind of works. It should probably be case-by-case.
 
Good on UCF. It's the right thing for them to do for a backup who is from Nebraska and had pre-UCF ties to Frost. At the same time, I understand why they initially held off on the release to avoid a flood of their better players following Frost to NU.
If, following your premise, the release is truly in the best interest of the student athlete, why not release others who might want to follow Frost if they determine that is in their best interest? Seems to me that any institution that with holds a release from a player who wants to move on to better his career opportunity is counter productive if that individual does not want to remain at that institution.
 
Last edited:



I don't mind kids following a coach in theory:
  • If things are humming along well, the coach stays forever (Osborne, Saban, JoePa) and builds a consistent system over years and years. Kids aren't apt to leave because the coach doesn't leave and the system is more or less the same.
  • If the coach is terrible, he gets booted and tries his system elsewhere. Any maybe it works at the new school. West Coast kids who are now under a new coach who runs a Triple Option should be able to get some choices about where they go.

When you get down to mid-majors it becomes tricky though. Let's use Urban Meyer as an example. He started at Bowling Green, went to Utah (before they were a Pac-12 member) and then to Florida and Ohio State. Now, Urban took a break between Gainesville and Columbus, but had he went straight to OSU, I wouldn't have too much issue with a Gator kid transferring to be a Buckeye. Florida doesn't hurt for recruits or resources. Neither does Ohio State.

But, had the same thing happened between Bowling Green -> Utah or between Utah -> Florida, you'd have problems. Why? Because there are appreciable gaps in overall talent/success between those schools. Bowling Green is a decent mid-major, but Utah was clearly a good enough G5 team to crack into a Power 5 conference. And again, there's a gap between the Utes and Gators.

If Urban had recruited a 4 or 5 star QB to play at Bowling Green, that single player could be a MASSIVE difference. Just look at some of Nebraska's recent games against Wyoming, Fresno State, McNeese State and even the NIU loss. Two or three big playmakers can make a MASSIVE difference in a well-coached midmajor team. You put an electric QB and WR duo on the field or maybe a great DE/LB blitz combo and you've got a team that can hang (kinda) with the big boys. Think Boise State upsetting Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl with the Statue of Liberty shenanigans. A few playmakers plus great coaching beat out a bunch of playmakers and decent-to-good coaching.

So, back to the transfer. Plucking a kid from a school like Bowling Green could literally be the difference between a MAC title (and New Year's Day 6 run) or that team not even making a bowl game. In other words, a big fish in a little pond, versus a big fish in a biggish (bigly?) pond like Florida or OSU. That player might even be the difference between the new coach having a decent transition and racking up some wins while they change the system around (hello, Josh Heupel).

So in theory, the transfer thing kind of works. It should probably be case-by-case.

Unfortunately case by case sets precedence. Good example is Dixon. Once they allowed one they had to allow all.
 
I don't mind kids following a coach in theory:
  • If things are humming along well, the coach stays forever (Osborne, Saban, JoePa) and builds a consistent system over years and years. Kids aren't apt to leave because the coach doesn't leave and the system is more or less the same.
  • If the coach is terrible, he gets booted and tries his system elsewhere. Any maybe it works at the new school. West Coast kids who are now under a new coach who runs a Triple Option should be able to get some choices about where they go.

When you get down to mid-majors it becomes tricky though. Let's use Urban Meyer as an example. He started at Bowling Green, went to Utah (before they were a Pac-12 member) and then to Florida and Ohio State. Now, Urban took a break between Gainesville and Columbus, but had he went straight to OSU, I wouldn't have too much issue with a Gator kid transferring to be a Buckeye. Florida doesn't hurt for recruits or resources. Neither does Ohio State.

But, had the same thing happened between Bowling Green -> Utah or between Utah -> Florida, you'd have problems. Why? Because there are appreciable gaps in overall talent/success between those schools. Bowling Green is a decent mid-major, but Utah was clearly a good enough G5 team to crack into a Power 5 conference. And again, there's a gap between the Utes and Gators.

If Urban had recruited a 4 or 5 star QB to play at Bowling Green, that single player could be a MASSIVE difference. Just look at some of Nebraska's recent games against Wyoming, Fresno State, McNeese State and even the NIU loss. Two or three big playmakers can make a MASSIVE difference in a well-coached midmajor team. You put an electric QB and WR duo on the field or maybe a great DE/LB blitz combo and you've got a team that can hang (kinda) with the big boys. Think Boise State upsetting Oklahoma in the Orange Bowl with the Statue of Liberty shenanigans. A few playmakers plus great coaching beat out a bunch of playmakers and decent-to-good coaching.

So, back to the transfer. Plucking a kid from a school like Bowling Green could literally be the difference between a MAC title (and New Year's Day 6 run) or that team not even making a bowl game. In other words, a big fish in a little pond, versus a big fish in a biggish (bigly?) pond like Florida or OSU. That player might even be the difference between the new coach having a decent transition and racking up some wins while they change the system around (hello, Josh Heupel).

So in theory, the transfer thing kind of works. It should probably be case-by-case.
Case-by-case? Who's the judge and jury? The NCAA.

The problem with exceptions is they tend to lead to more exceptions ... and the door left slightly ajar all of the sudden becomes wide open.

As for freedom of movement ... 99% of Americans live and work in an environment where you have freedom of movement ... from one employer to the next or one institution to another. Shouldn't college athletes have the same opportunity? Coaches despite long term contracts have almost 100% freedom of movement. If a non-student athlete chose to go to Florida and then a year later transferred to Ohio State ... assuming they meet the academic admission standards ... they'd be allowed to do so.

The grad transfer rule has made college basketball quite interesting and has enpowered student athletes.
 
Why does allowing him to get a scholarship free up one of the UCF scholarships? Are they holding a scholarship for Vedral even though he has enrolled and is attending classes at NU? He can't make use of that scholarship while attending NU, so for what purpose can they be said to be holding the scholarship for him? Or if they withdraw his scholarship there (assuming they are doing this fruitless holding) does that automatically free him from restrictions? I suppose I could read the rule somewhere, but it just makes no sense.
 
and it frees up a schollie at UCF too, right, so there is actually self-interest in this decision by UCF...
Bingo. I don't buy the UCF altruism angle. It was practical, not beneficent.
 



Why does allowing him to get a scholarship free up one of the UCF scholarships? Are they holding a scholarship for Vedral even though he has enrolled and is attending classes at NU? He can't make use of that scholarship while attending NU, so for what purpose can they be said to be holding the scholarship for him? Or if they withdraw his scholarship there (assuming they are doing this fruitless holding) does that automatically free him from restrictions? I suppose I could read the rule somewhere, but it just makes no sense.
Seems to me not releasing a scholarship is an attempt to discourage a player from transferring in the first place, since he'd have to pay his own way, as Vedral did before he was released.
 
So they are holding a scholarship and reducing the number of players they can have on scholarship all for a person enrolled at a different school? Doesn't make any sense.
 

So they are holding a scholarship and reducing the number of players they can have on scholarship all for a person enrolled at a different school? Doesn't make any sense.
Bingo. I don't buy the UCF altruism angle. It was practical, not beneficent.
Why does allowing him to get a scholarship free up one of the UCF scholarships? Are they holding a scholarship for Vedral even though he has enrolled and is attending classes at NU? He can't make use of that scholarship while attending NU, so for what purpose can they be said to be holding the scholarship for him? Or if they withdraw his scholarship there (assuming they are doing this fruitless holding) does that automatically free him from restrictions? I suppose I could read the rule somewhere, but it just makes no sense.

I agree with East of Eden ... I do not believe UCF was counting Vedral against the 85 person scholarship limit. They're refusal to release him was more to dissuade student athletes from leaving period.
 

GET TICKETS


Get 50% off on Omaha Steaks

Back
Top