SEC passes grad transfer rule....
Of course this allows Malik Zaire to transfer there now.
http://www.tampabay.com/sports/college/sec-rule-change-clears-way-for-m…
since this only benefits Florida this year, I'd thought the SEC would agree to release themselves from this rule, but not until next year. Strange that everyone agrees Florida should get a potentially better QB.
They would rather help only Florida so long as they can hurt Michigan.
As someone who lives in SEC country they are first and foremost pro anything good for the SEC versus any other school or conference. They will even root for bitter enemies when playing schools from other conferences.
Fans down here HATE it when I ask if they know the winningest college football program of all time and that answer is not from the SEC.
Have a lot of LSU fans for friends, and I know they would never root for Bama over anyone else...
Yeah, they come across as complete tools. Conference priide is the dumbest thing ever, because there's few games between the conferences that you can prove which is better in a given year. You'd need something like the ACC challenge in basketball, at least
Well after 2 in a row at Staee, Rutgers and Maryland, and Pedo St, and now homer ref spotgate, i loathe this conference and root against any other team. But even if none of that occured, i could never wish Ohio well. It's like down south they don't know what a rivalry is and they're still bitter about the civil war or something
"Always the caveat that I hope they win if said win directly benefits UofM."
That pretty much negates everything else you said about not rooting for other B1G teams.
Of course it is.
This is so SEC. Have some rule that allows them to pretend they care about academics. The moment such a rule might interfere with ability to win football games, change the rule.
It's actually a good rule that all conferences should have...so naturally the SEC nixed it.
Nope. Do any of the P5 conferences have a simlar rule? Nope.
So, the SEC has a rule that nobody else has, and they've modified it but they still have it, and nobody else has it, and they're doing something underhanded to win games?
I don't get it.
Every school in the Big Ten has this rule, so the conference doesn't need a rule. The SEC rule was designed to prevent member schools from having sham graduate players, because at least some SEC schools all didn't require graduate transfers to actually attend classes (see: Florida, MSU).
The SEC has a rule that others don't need. It shouldn't be a matter of pride to them, or you.
Now, you get it.
how could Wisconsin be in the Zaire sweepstakes when Fla wasn't, until the SEC changed their rule?
Btw - I don't have a dog in this fight either way, so there's no "pride" invovled on my part.
"Presumably" really doesn't tell me anything.
I'd like to see that rule that all Big Ten schools have about not taking grad transfers with shaky academic histories....
The SEC rule that was just changed was 3 year a ban on taking grad transfers IF prior grad transfers didn't make sufficient academic progress. The ban was just reduced to 1 year so yes, you don't understand the rule you're talking about nor the point others have made.
The rule had nothing to do with taking grad transfers with "shakey academic histories" and if a kid didn't have the minimum requirements for a grad program of a B1G school he would't be an option anyway.
the same rule, so the conference doesn't need one. And I've been told that good academic schools don't need a rule like that. And now I've been told that the reason Florida was being kept from recruiting Zaire was because he didn't make academic progress, and that ban has been cut from a wating period of 3 years to 1, but, Zaire is good to go for a Big Ten grad program.
What's the difference between "didn't make sufficient academic progress" and "shaky academic history"? If Zaire had not had prior issues, the SEC rule would never have been a an issue.
I believe that the rule was triggered because prior Florida grad transfers had not made sufficient academic progress, not because Zaire had not made sufficient academic progress. In other words, if the SEC schools grad transfer program appears to be a sham from an academic perspective due to a history of grad transfers not making academic progress, then the SEC school is banned from taking grad transfers.
MGoGoGo
Wait.. what?
You were showing your ass and it turns out you don't even know what situation was being discussed?
An ACC education at work. Maybe you can get a refund?
+1 to you, brave sir.
Haha no dog in this fight. Yea sure. Youre funny man.
You may not be aware but as a general rule ACC fans don't like SEC teams.
I do have a dear friend who is a Michigan grad and big supporter and family members who make annual pilgrimages to Ann Arbor for a football game. I'm coming up this year as well. It just don't see how the SEC having a rule no one else has and then revising it is something to make fun of; unless of course it's just the accepted narrative to always make fun of the SEC. Maybe that's the deal.
Maybe the deal is that B10 schools don't need their conference to force them to keep up APR standards. The B10 has 4 schools in the 1990s. The SEC has one. The B10 has one team below 970. The SEC has 5.
Looking further, though, I can see why an ACC fan would want a rule like the SEC has. ACC APR rates stink. One above 990, 7 below 970 (including one, FSU, with an astonishingly bad 939 - worst P5 score in the nation).
As I've said in other threads about the issue, I don't think that adding Zaire is such a boon for Florida. He's fine, but adding a QB with 4 weeks to learn the playbook is generally not a good plan. Rudock ended up being a great addition to our team, but not even Harbaugh could get him sufficiently prepared for week 1. McElwain and Nussmeier are no Harbaugh. I don't even think it's a guarantee that Zaire starts. It's an interesting development, but I don't think it moves the needle for this game.
And if Zaire doesn't go to Florida, he could wind up at Wisconsin where he would face Michigan in week 11. I think Zaire's addition to Wisconsin would hurt our chances of winning that game more than his addition to Florida would hurt us against the Gators.
Absolutely. I don't think we should that upset about this rule change - I think Florida State is probably mad as hell at this rule change. They will probably be going into their game against Florida with 1 loss and trying to keep their playoff spot intact, and Week 12 Zaire will be much more of an asset than Week 1 Zaire.
i will order one. please make mine a 2XXL.
What if you gave Nuss a Man-Cheetah to work with?
Sometimes you just need to inject a very short, elderly man dressed as a cheatah into the conversation :)
Goes against the meritocracy philosophy, but "if you have two quarterback, you have none". Splitting snaps in camp to determine who should start could mean neither is prepared to play a P5 team the first week.
Obviously everyone will get reps, but if they decide to go with Zaire, they will probably want to get him as many reps with the starting WRs as possible to gain some chemistry. Also, Zaire is a much more mobile QB, so the longer they go without making a decision on the starter, the less time they have to game plan and practice specific plays they want that QB to be familiar with.
Wasn't aware I said they should choose a starter before he arrives... Just saying it is better to choose a starter once its a clear decision. If that decision isn't clear by week 3 or 4 of camp, it could be a destraction and hurt preparation.
Last season, I think it could have been a distraction for UM with how late the decision was pushed off (if it was actually as late as when it got leaked). We opened against Hawaii though, not a top 25 team.
At some point you have to choose. They can't be the exact same. At some point you have to choose what you value most in your QB and go with it. A meritocracy doesn't mean you don't make a choice at the detriment of your team. It means a choice is never final. If the backup plays better than the starter, they become the starter.
The starting QBs gets at least 75% of the reps because they need the reps to prepare for the game. Not all backup and 3rd string QBs get plenty of reps to prepare for the opponent.
would be taking subsequent reps with the #1's and the backups take reps with the #2's and so on. I also believe that the public and the opposition are the only people who don't know who the starter will be for (at least) the last two weeks of fall camp. The only people with their dicks in their hands (as you so elequently stated) are the reporters. If a reporter was privy to the starters identity he better keep it between him and perhaps his wifey. I'm sure he will have to have sworn to secrecy under pain of death and banishment, (not necessarily in that oreder).
who used to work with college football team. I can say that is false. The starters gets more reps than backup and 3rd stringers combined when it comes to gameplan. Backup and especially 3rd stringer don't do much during walkthrough.
You're confusing drills and gameplanning/walkthrough. Starters need every reps they can get to prepare.