Mizzou Links, 5-25-10

by Bill C. on May 25, 2010 5:23 AM CDT in News

Mizzou Basketball Links

Our friends at Rock Chalk Talk are having a nice giggle over the "ha ha, Mike Anderson's not perfect" article making the rounds yesterday.

AP: Scholarship policy sparks ethics debate

After scoring just 22 points all season in mop-up duty, Missouri freshman forward Tyler Stone has no illusions of bolting college for the NBA after a single year.

Instead, the 6-foot-7 Memphis native is a different sort of one-and-done: a college athlete leaving a school sooner than his family expected as a prized recruit takes over his scholarship.

“I can’t see how a school can love him to death one year and the next year cut him loose,” said his mother, Sharon Stone. “They had to get rid of somebody.

...

Stone, meanwhile, will play for midmajor Southeast Missouri of the Ohio Valley Conference after sitting out the required year for Division I transfers. He declined an interview request, but his mother spoke with the AP at length in several interviews and made it clear that her son was pushed out.

She described a celebratory spring break barbecue touting her son’s first year in college. Her son went back to campus afterward and, hours later, called with unexpected news. “He came back” to Columbia “Monday and said, ‘I have to transfer,’ ” she recalled. “I thought he was going to graduate from that school.”
ESPN.com: On runoff scholarships and college hoops

My theory all along with Stone was that he was basically given the "You probably won't ever play here; you can stay here if you want, but if you want to play, you probably have to transfer" speech. Gotta be honest: I'm not entirely convinced that still didn't happen. If there's any sort of "angry mother" aspect to Ms. Stone's quotes (since she's the only one who said anything), then I could see that still having played out that way.

At the same time, that might not be what happened, and while I hate that Mizzou is involved in the reason why it came about, I think this is an interesting conversation to have. The one-year scholarship has been in use for quite a while, and Stone or no Stone, I'm sure this has happened at every single D1 school by now. Is it unethical? Is it how things must be? Honestly, the biggest problem I have with it is that players still have to sit out a year if/when they're forced to transfer. I wouldn't mind seeing the wait canceled in cases where players are forced out ... though that would open up a large batch of issues regarding having to reveal who was "forced" out and who were just told they would never see the field/court. Anyway ... touchy issue.

Do you like this story?

Comments

KenPom is unconvincing

While the original foul shooting blog post is simplistic, so is his response. How many times have you seen a guy get two fouls in the first eight minutes and then sit for the rest of the half? Is that really the best call?

Also, his tied at half analysis is weak. He ignores the alternative, which is “I have a substantial lead at half because I played my best player.”

by AlaTiger on May 25, 2010 7:01 AM CDT reply actions

back to yesterdays articles...

There can be some muddied waters in conversation, however, what happened, happened, and if I don’t perform at a job, even though I had some sort of contract, then they will replace me. Some people don’t perform at the next level, however, I don’t think Coach pushed him that hard. I also Believe Tyler’s Mother was more for academics, which I see her point. He didn’t, however, come to Mizzou on an academic scholarship. I wish him the best of luck, and I’m sure he will be happy once the season starts and he sees more playing time.

by Tobilas Latham on May 25, 2010 10:53 AM CDT reply actions

my rant

first of all, thank you to tyler stone for your time as part of the mizzou family. i appreciate the hard work you put in last year. good luck at semo. i hope you do well, but if not, i really don’t care that much either way.

kids aren’t stupid. they know whether they are good enough to play and if not, they know they have to leave if they want to get on the court. i would be very surprised if anderson came out and said ‘you have to transfer’. that’s not what he’s about from what i’ve seen. but, i think he would honestly tell the kid what his prospects were and let him decide. maybe the real mistake was offering him in the first place.

moms, on the other hand, are completely irrational when it comes to objectively analyzing their kids. i’m sure she thinks she’s protecting her kid, but i think she comes off as whiny and bitter. tyler made a good choice by shutting up, as nothing good can come from him bitching like his mom.

bottom line, imo anderson has earned the benefit of doubt until proven otherwise. i trust the direction he has for the program and how he’s going about it. i want him to win most importantly and be as classy as possible while doing it. claiming the moral high ground is great, but i’d like to win big (at least once).

by Wooderson on May 25, 2010 11:10 AM CDT reply actions

I just left a comment at RCT...

…and it ended up a lot longer than I intended, so I’ll go ahead and post it here too.

Really, I hate talking about this whole thing because it’s hard to rationalize what happened without sound extremely cold. But the fact is, if you’re given an academic scholarship, that scholarship can be rescinded if it turns out you aren’t the student it was expected you would become when you were awarded the scholarship (in other words, if you get a low GPA the first year or something). You usually aren’t given a four-year scholarship without some sort of minimum ongoing requirements attached. I wasn’t, anyway.

From the cold, calculating, business side of athletics scholarships, it works exactly the same way. If it turns out that you aren’t the high-D1 caliber athlete that you were expected to become, then your scholarship can be rescinded just the same.

Like I said on Rock M this morning, I still think it’s reasonably likely that Anderson told Stone that he could stay if he wanted, but he would likely never see the court. I could see an angry mother turning that into "You have to leave." But even if it unfolded in the most cold way possible, it happens with academic scholarships too.

And for all this talk of wanting to get rid of the one-year scholarship idea (an idea with which I don’t necessarily disagree), it could have consequences. If a coach knows he’s stuck with a kid for four years no matter what, he’d be less likely to take a chance on a longshot like Stone in the first place, which could be detrimental — yeah, Stone didn’t make it, but at least he got the chance, right?

Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1

by Bill C. on May 25, 2010 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions

I'm curious

Did the Jayhawks have to give anything up last year to bring in the ~~mercs~~Henry brothers? If nothing else, those were spots that could have gone to players more likely to stick with the program for the long haul. I imagine that pretty much every big-time program has gone through this situation more than a few times.

by Gaknar on May 25, 2010 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions

KU did have two players either transfer or "transfer" last year, yes.

Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1

by Bill C. on May 25, 2010 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions

Gaknar...the answer is yes, two guys left...

and you are absolutely right that this situation goes on all over the place and probably even in football as well.

That’s the only reason I posted the fanshot. There is a certain Mizzou website, NOT ROCK M NATION, that had a field day declaring Bill Self a slime ball last year when a similar looking thing happened at Kansas.

For me the article on Anderson was in no way an indication that he’s a bad person/coach/whatever, it was just a bit of a redeeming moment. Just shows how common it is and while not all transfers are under these conditions it’s pretty obvious when they are and most of the time it’s a situation where the kid just isn’t ever going to play so it works.

53 Conference Championships!! and now 6 IN A ROW!!! Holy Hell...Good Luck with That!!

by Owen on May 25, 2010 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions

Fair.

"Don’t want to spend my night waiting in line unless it’s for more beer."
--EssBee, on LoneStarBall, Jan. 21, 2010

by ghtd36 on May 25, 2010 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions

Beyond fair.

Especially as it pertains to, um, other websites.

http://www.RockMNation.com
Follow RMN on Twitter!

by RPT on May 25, 2010 9:58 PM CDT up reply actions

For what it's worth

I was good friends with one of the assistant basketball managers. he said for tournament play, sutton was above stone on the “Depth Chart”. That is how incapable he was.

"As loud as the ovations are for big 3s or for thunderous dunks, some of the biggest roars you hear at Mizzou Arena these days are for steals, shot clock violations, and forcing opponents into timeouts in their own backcourt. Just as Anderson has crafted himself a team built on defensive intensity, he's built himself a fan base that echoes that same value system." - RPT

by tigr on May 25, 2010 12:45 PM CDT reply actions

Doyal at CBSSports is calling for the death penalty against OU basketball

Justified? Too much? Never going to happen? I can’t imagine the NCAA would do that after seeing the fallout from SMU. Also, while Big XII basketball would normally be strong enough to survive it, the conference is already suffering from a weakened reputation due to the Big Ten expansion talk. Going nuclear on Oklahoma at this time might be the last thing the conference needs.

by Gaknar on May 25, 2010 2:50 PM CDT reply actions

I was going to link to that tomorrow...

…first things first: they’re never going to do the death penalty again now that they know how effective it is. It wouldn’t be quite as deadly for a basketball team as it was for SMU football (finding 13 good players to play for you instead of 85 is a little easier), but still … besides, if they didn’t do it with Baylor basketball, they’re not going to do it with OU.

Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1

by Bill C. on May 25, 2010 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions

Baylor vs. OU

I don’t think the OU program ought to get the death penalty, but they’re a better candidate for crushing sanctions than most any I can think of. It. Just. Keeps. Happening. And unless I’m failing to recall something about the Baylor fiasco, I think it’s a different animal. That was the worst behavior I’ve ever seen in a program, but much of it had to do with a moral repulsiveness that wasn’t just about NCAA rules. It wasn’t a pattern of recurring violations over a period of years. It was a crime, in every sense.

by Michael Atchison on May 25, 2010 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions

I'll be amazed if they don't get crushed...

…and yeah…I guess technically Baylor’s problems were NCAA-related…just humanity-related. To my original point, though, I don’t even know what would have to happen for someone to get the death penalty these days. If all is proven true, I figure OU will get hit really hard in terms of lost scholarships and the like, but no death penalty.

(Then again, even Doyel probably doesn’t believe the death penalty thing — he’s just really good at going a step further than most people do.)

Rock M Nation
I'm on Twitter! http://www.twitter.com/billconnelly1

by Bill C. on May 25, 2010 4:44 PM CDT up reply actions