Re: NCAA.

[Jon Macomber]

I'm not sure what to say - it just seems like a curious 
statement.  The emphasis should still be on getting good kids 
that graduate (excepting those who leave early to play 
professionally).  I guess I still want to believe that 
college ball is about more then just Wins and Losses.  That 
statement just seemed rather harsh, but maybe you're just 
more realistic.

Jon

---- Original message ----
> Date: Tue, 1 Mar 2005 11:53:06 EST
> From: address@hidden  
> Subject: Re: [UC Basketball] NCAA.  
> To: address@hidden
>
>
> In a message dated 3/1/2005 11:08:48 A.M. Eastern Standard 
Time,  
> address@hidden writes:
>
> > I  would lose a scholarship over playing a second rated 
> player who would  graduate.
>
> I CAN'T BELIEVE YOU SAID THAT!!!!!
>
> I don't want to get  personal but wow - why even bother 
> following college sports?  This  kind of attitude kills 
> (killed?) the game.  That's all I'll say,  but... Wow...
>
> Jon
>
>
>
> Where have you been? UC has only been doing exactly that 
forever. You don't  
> think they could have got a player with at least average or  
better basketball 
> skills with good academics that would probably graduate  
instead of Banks, 
> Philgram, Whaley, and a ton of other guys in the past. Like  
I've said before UC 
> has to take chances on guys like that to get the talent 
they  do. It's all 
> right with me because I want to see a top 25 team and if 
that's  what it takes 
> go for it. Actually some of these guys do work out and 
graduate so  it's not 
> all bad. I think you overreacted because you are usually 
pretty sharp  on most 
> things. Don't even think about telling me you would give 
Paswalllly or  someone 
> like him a scholarship because I wouldn't believe you. Ha  
Don