[SamuelMcF]

We actually DO now have a clue thanks to some info per the other site, and it's not a great look for Terry.

---

Yes, it is clear that something new happened. The range of things that could happen 1.5 years after he departed Stanford has nothing to do with coaching style or experience at Stanford. It may include any of the following:
1) Slander from someone at Stanford saying something negative about TT
2) Stanford denying a request that TT made such as access to facilities or free tuition to take classes
3) Stanford asking TT for something that he doesn't think is fair (i.e. paying back tuition or room and board or some other benefit perhaps for NCAA compliance reasons) after he declared for the draft
4) An academic issue: denying credit in classes that he thought he should have gotten credit for

Not sure what else it could be, but this is clearly a new issue and he feels Stanford needs to come clean with an explanation.  My guess is there is some petty issue that Stanford was trying to pursue with him, and his response is, really?

2b

[SamuelMcF]

We actually DO now have a clue thanks to some info per the other site, and it's not a great look for Terry.

---

Yes, it is clear that something new happened. The range of things that could happen 1.5 years after he departed Stanford has nothing to do with coaching style or experience at Stanford. It may include any of the following:
1) Slander from someone at Stanford saying something negative about TT
2) Stanford denying a request that TT made such as access to facilities or free tuition to take classes
3) Stanford asking TT for something that he doesn't think is fair (i.e. paying back tuition or room and board or some other benefit perhaps for NCAA compliance reasons) after he declared for the draft
4) An academic issue: denying credit in classes that he thought he should have gotten credit for

Not sure what else it could be, but this is clearly a new issue and he feels Stanford needs to come clean with an explanation.  My guess is there is some petty issue that Stanford was trying to pursue with him, and his response is, really?

2b

[OutsiderFan]

So has the old axiom about not airing your dirty laundry in public now been replaced with "if you have a big enough audience to embarrass the other party, go right ahead and air that dirty laundry in public" ?

[OutsiderFan]

So has the old axiom about not airing your dirty laundry in public now been replaced with "if you have a big enough audience to embarrass the other party, go right ahead and air that dirty laundry in public" ?

[TrumpCard]

I was under the impression that former players did receive free tuition to complete their degree.  Is that only when the player stays long enough to get reasonably close to graduation?  I am not sure whether Terry even enrolled for a full academic year, nor do I know anything about the number of units he took or his grades.

[TrumpCard]

I was under the impression that former players did receive free tuition to complete their degree.  Is that only when the player stays long enough to get reasonably close to graduation?  I am not sure whether Terry even enrolled for a full academic year, nor do I know anything about the number of units he took or his grades.

[SamuelMcF]

I was under the impression that former players did receive free tuition to complete their degree.  Is that only when the player stays long enough to get reasonably close to graduation?  I am not sure whether Terry even enrolled for a full academic year, nor do I know anything about the number of units he took or his grades.

Yes. At least half of degree completed is apparently the cutoff for that. (The only exception being early medical retirements who remain on campus, which are honored no matter what.)

[SamuelMcF]

I was under the impression that former players did receive free tuition to complete their degree.  Is that only when the player stays long enough to get reasonably close to graduation?  I am not sure whether Terry even enrolled for a full academic year, nor do I know anything about the number of units he took or his grades.

Yes. At least half of degree completed is apparently the cutoff for that. (The only exception being early medical retirements who remain on campus, which are honored no matter what.)

[Goose]

Yes. At least half of degree completed is apparently the cutoff for that. (The only exception being early medical retirements who remain on campus, which are honored no matter what.)

I didn't know that was the case. I think it is a very generous position on Stanford's part. If an athlete leaves voluntarily after their second (or later) year, I would expect that the University owes them nothing. It was their choice. I wonder about other students who leave to start a business or similar. Do they get the same deal? I tend to doubt it, but I obviously don't know. If they don't, wouldn't that be an NCAA violation (if such a concept still exists)?

[Goose]

Yes. At least half of degree completed is apparently the cutoff for that. (The only exception being early medical retirements who remain on campus, which are honored no matter what.)

I didn't know that was the case. I think it is a very generous position on Stanford's part. If an athlete leaves voluntarily after their second (or later) year, I would expect that the University owes them nothing. It was their choice. I wonder about other students who leave to start a business or similar. Do they get the same deal? I tend to doubt it, but I obviously don't know. If they don't, wouldn't that be an NCAA violation (if such a concept still exists)?

[82lsju]

MBB post today on Facebook (with pictures of the players)

Four players from our last three seasons are heading to [color=var(--accent)]NBA Summer League[/color]

Tyrell Terry - Dallas Mavericks
KZ Okpala - Miami Heat
Oscar da Silva - Oklahoma City Thunder
Ziaire Williams - Memphis Grizzlies

---

Yes. At least half of degree completed is apparently the cutoff for that. (The only exception being early medical retirements who remain on campus, which are honored no matter what.)

I didn't know that was the case. I think it is a very generous position on Stanford's part. If an athlete leaves voluntarily after their second (or later) year, I would expect that the University owes them nothing. It was their choice. I wonder about other students who leave to start a business or similar. Do they get the same deal? I tend to doubt it, but I obviously don't know. If they don't, wouldn't that be an NCAA violation (if such a concept still exists)?

I'm surprised this is the policy and I agree this seems really generous for players who elect to leave

[82lsju]

MBB post today on Facebook (with pictures of the players)

Four players from our last three seasons are heading to [color=var(--accent)]NBA Summer League[/color]

Tyrell Terry - Dallas Mavericks
KZ Okpala - Miami Heat
Oscar da Silva - Oklahoma City Thunder
Ziaire Williams - Memphis Grizzlies

---

Yes. At least half of degree completed is apparently the cutoff for that. (The only exception being early medical retirements who remain on campus, which are honored no matter what.)

I didn't know that was the case. I think it is a very generous position on Stanford's part. If an athlete leaves voluntarily after their second (or later) year, I would expect that the University owes them nothing. It was their choice. I wonder about other students who leave to start a business or similar. Do they get the same deal? I tend to doubt it, but I obviously don't know. If they don't, wouldn't that be an NCAA violation (if such a concept still exists)?

I'm surprised this is the policy and I agree this seems really generous for players who elect to leave

[DC 86]

I'm surprised this is the policy and I agree this seems really generous for players who elect to leave

Surprising and generous considering that most players who leave early are embarking on lucrative professional careers.

Tyrell Terry's contract has $4.6 million guaranteed.

I don't understand the rationale for this policy.

[DC 86]

I'm surprised this is the policy and I agree this seems really generous for players who elect to leave

Surprising and generous considering that most players who leave early are embarking on lucrative professional careers.

Tyrell Terry's contract has $4.6 million guaranteed.

I don't understand the rationale for this policy.

[82lsju]

I'm surprised this is the policy and I agree this seems really generous for players who elect to leave

Surprising and generous considering that most players who leave early are embarking on lucrative professional careers.

Tyrell Terry's contract has $4.6 million guaranteed.

I don't understand the rationale for this policy.

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

[82lsju]

I'm surprised this is the policy and I agree this seems really generous for players who elect to leave

Surprising and generous considering that most players who leave early are embarking on lucrative professional careers.

Tyrell Terry's contract has $4.6 million guaranteed.

I don't understand the rationale for this policy.

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

[Goose]

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

I tend to agree. The counter-argument (a very pragmatic one I admit.) is that you want to attract guys who are potentially "good enough" to play professionally. Agreeing to pay their tuition if they leave early (but not too early)answers the question "What if I don't make it?" and also encourages guys who do make it to set an example and finish their degrees later. Granted, when somebody get a 4 mil plus contract, it is basically a moot point, but OTOH some guys get drafted in the 5th round (or not at all) and end up empty. Knowing you can come back and be sure you won't have to pay is a big deal in those cases. In the near future, I wouldn't be surprised if guys who "test the waters" and don't make it can come back and actually play in college. That would make this problem go away.

[Goose]

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

I tend to agree. The counter-argument (a very pragmatic one I admit.) is that you want to attract guys who are potentially "good enough" to play professionally. Agreeing to pay their tuition if they leave early (but not too early)answers the question "What if I don't make it?" and also encourages guys who do make it to set an example and finish their degrees later. Granted, when somebody get a 4 mil plus contract, it is basically a moot point, but OTOH some guys get drafted in the 5th round (or not at all) and end up empty. Knowing you can come back and be sure you won't have to pay is a big deal in those cases. In the near future, I wouldn't be surprised if guys who "test the waters" and don't make it can come back and actually play in college. That would make this problem go away.

[82lsju]

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

I tend to agree. The counter-argument (a very pragmatic one I admit.) is that you want to attract guys who are potentially "good enough" to play professionally. Agreeing to pay their tuition if they leave early (but not too early)answers the question "What if I don't make it?" and also encourages guys who do make it to set an example and finish their degrees later. Granted, when somebody get a 4 mil plus contract, it is basically a moot point, but OTOH some guys get drafted in the 5th round (or not at all) and end up empty. Knowing you can come back and be sure you won't have to pay is a big deal in those cases. In the near future, I wouldn't be surprised if guys who "test the waters" and don't make it can come back and actually play in college. That would make this problem go away.

if they "don't make it" they can apply for financial like other students.  Decisions have consequences.

[82lsju]

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

I tend to agree. The counter-argument (a very pragmatic one I admit.) is that you want to attract guys who are potentially "good enough" to play professionally. Agreeing to pay their tuition if they leave early (but not too early)answers the question "What if I don't make it?" and also encourages guys who do make it to set an example and finish their degrees later. Granted, when somebody get a 4 mil plus contract, it is basically a moot point, but OTOH some guys get drafted in the 5th round (or not at all) and end up empty. Knowing you can come back and be sure you won't have to pay is a big deal in those cases. In the near future, I wouldn't be surprised if guys who "test the waters" and don't make it can come back and actually play in college. That would make this problem go away.

if they "don't make it" they can apply for financial like other students.  Decisions have consequences.

[PVTree]

If this is the issue, I, for one, am relieved that it is not a basketball issue, but a financial/policy issue.

[PVTree]

If this is the issue, I, for one, am relieved that it is not a basketball issue, but a financial/policy issue.

[DC 86]

if they "don't make it" they can apply for financial like other students.  Decisions have consequences.

Right, it seems we're actually incentivizing some athletes into taking a longshot chance at the pros knowing they have a backup plan funded by the university. Do our rivals have similar policies in place? I suppose if this is the standard FBS-wide then it may be necessary for Stanford to match other schools in how they deal with early entrants, but I don't know how it works at Cal, USC, ND et al.

[DC 86]

if they "don't make it" they can apply for financial like other students.  Decisions have consequences.

Right, it seems we're actually incentivizing some athletes into taking a longshot chance at the pros knowing they have a backup plan funded by the university. Do our rivals have similar policies in place? I suppose if this is the standard FBS-wide then it may be necessary for Stanford to match other schools in how they deal with early entrants, but I don't know how it works at Cal, USC, ND et al.

[BostonCard]

If you don't want student/athletes to be considered employees, then there can't be a direct connection between the student/athletes providing labor and getting the educational benefit.  "We will only give you a scholarship while you are playing" is pretty coercive.  Of course the other extreme opens the system up to abuse (someone who gains admission and a scholarship to the school but drops their athletic participation at the first opportunity.  So, somewhere in between makes sense, and the student/athlete being on the team for at least two years seems like a reasonable place to draw the line.

BC

[BostonCard]

If you don't want student/athletes to be considered employees, then there can't be a direct connection between the student/athletes providing labor and getting the educational benefit.  "We will only give you a scholarship while you are playing" is pretty coercive.  Of course the other extreme opens the system up to abuse (someone who gains admission and a scholarship to the school but drops their athletic participation at the first opportunity.  So, somewhere in between makes sense, and the student/athlete being on the team for at least two years seems like a reasonable place to draw the line.

BC

[chrisk]

If Terry were to endow a scholarship, Stanford might be willing to make him the first recipient.

It would seem that with more players leaving early, Stanford’s policy should not be a surprise to him.

[chrisk]

If Terry were to endow a scholarship, Stanford might be willing to make him the first recipient.

It would seem that with more players leaving early, Stanford’s policy should not be a surprise to him.

[winflop]

We actually DO now have a clue thanks to some info per the other site, and it's not a great look for Terry.

---

Yes, it is clear that something new happened. The range of things that could happen 1.5 years after he departed Stanford has nothing to do with coaching style or experience at Stanford. It may include any of the following:
1) Slander from someone at Stanford saying something negative about TT
2) Stanford denying a request that TT made such as access to facilities or free tuition to take classes
3) Stanford asking TT for something that he doesn't think is fair (i.e. paying back tuition or room and board or some other benefit perhaps for NCAA compliance reasons) after he declared for the draft
4) An academic issue: denying credit in classes that he thought he should have gotten credit for

Not sure what else it could be, but this is clearly a new issue and he feels Stanford needs to come clean with an explanation.  My guess is there is some petty issue that Stanford was trying to pursue with him, and his response is, really?

2b

I see no reason why Stanford shouldn't just come out and nip this in the bud with a statement like:

Like many other Division I universities, Stanford scholarship athletes have the option to leave school early and return to school at a later time. However, the student-athlete must complete two full academic years in order to be eligible for continuation of their scholarship benefits.

[winflop]

We actually DO now have a clue thanks to some info per the other site, and it's not a great look for Terry.

---

Yes, it is clear that something new happened. The range of things that could happen 1.5 years after he departed Stanford has nothing to do with coaching style or experience at Stanford. It may include any of the following:
1) Slander from someone at Stanford saying something negative about TT
2) Stanford denying a request that TT made such as access to facilities or free tuition to take classes
3) Stanford asking TT for something that he doesn't think is fair (i.e. paying back tuition or room and board or some other benefit perhaps for NCAA compliance reasons) after he declared for the draft
4) An academic issue: denying credit in classes that he thought he should have gotten credit for

Not sure what else it could be, but this is clearly a new issue and he feels Stanford needs to come clean with an explanation.  My guess is there is some petty issue that Stanford was trying to pursue with him, and his response is, really?

2b

I see no reason why Stanford shouldn't just come out and nip this in the bud with a statement like:

Like many other Division I universities, Stanford scholarship athletes have the option to leave school early and return to school at a later time. However, the student-athlete must complete two full academic years in order to be eligible for continuation of their scholarship benefits.

[SamuelMcF]

We actually DO now have a clue thanks to some info per the other site, and it's not a great look for Terry.

---

Yes, it is clear that something new happened. The range of things that could happen 1.5 years after he departed Stanford has nothing to do with coaching style or experience at Stanford. It may include any of the following:
1) Slander from someone at Stanford saying something negative about TT
2) Stanford denying a request that TT made such as access to facilities or free tuition to take classes
3) Stanford asking TT for something that he doesn't think is fair (i.e. paying back tuition or room and board or some other benefit perhaps for NCAA compliance reasons) after he declared for the draft
4) An academic issue: denying credit in classes that he thought he should have gotten credit for

Not sure what else it could be, but this is clearly a new issue and he feels Stanford needs to come clean with an explanation.  My guess is there is some petty issue that Stanford was trying to pursue with him, and his response is, really?

2b

I see no reason why Stanford shouldn't just come out and nip this in the bud with a statement like:

Like many other Division I universities, Stanford scholarship athletes have the option to leave school early and return to school at a later time. However, the student-athlete must complete two full academic years in order to be eligible for continuation of their scholarship benefits.

Because 1. it doesn't matter and will blow over shortly, and 2. Terry has not actually publicly stated this as the reason he's mad.

[SamuelMcF]

We actually DO now have a clue thanks to some info per the other site, and it's not a great look for Terry.

---

Yes, it is clear that something new happened. The range of things that could happen 1.5 years after he departed Stanford has nothing to do with coaching style or experience at Stanford. It may include any of the following:
1) Slander from someone at Stanford saying something negative about TT
2) Stanford denying a request that TT made such as access to facilities or free tuition to take classes
3) Stanford asking TT for something that he doesn't think is fair (i.e. paying back tuition or room and board or some other benefit perhaps for NCAA compliance reasons) after he declared for the draft
4) An academic issue: denying credit in classes that he thought he should have gotten credit for

Not sure what else it could be, but this is clearly a new issue and he feels Stanford needs to come clean with an explanation.  My guess is there is some petty issue that Stanford was trying to pursue with him, and his response is, really?

2b

I see no reason why Stanford shouldn't just come out and nip this in the bud with a statement like:

Like many other Division I universities, Stanford scholarship athletes have the option to leave school early and return to school at a later time. However, the student-athlete must complete two full academic years in order to be eligible for continuation of their scholarship benefits.

Because 1. it doesn't matter and will blow over shortly, and 2. Terry has not actually publicly stated this as the reason he's mad.

[Goose]

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

I tend to agree. The counter-argument (a very pragmatic one I admit.) is that you want to attract guys who are potentially "good enough" to play professionally. Agreeing to pay their tuition if they leave early (but not too early)answers the question "What if I don't make it?" and also encourages guys who do make it to set an example and finish their degrees later. Granted, when somebody get a 4 mil plus contract, it is basically a moot point, but OTOH some guys get drafted in the 5th round (or not at all) and end up empty. Knowing you can come back and be sure you won't have to pay is a big deal in those cases. In the near future, I wouldn't be surprised if guys who "test the waters" and don't make it can come back and actually play in college. That would make this problem go away.

if they "don't make it" they can apply for financial like other students.  Decisions have consequences.

Indeed decisions can have consequences. Stanford is apparently mitigating those consequences in order to attract better players. Does it work? I don't know, but knowing Stanford it isn't likely they are doing it by accident.

---

Because 1. it doesn't matter and will blow over shortly, and 2. Terry has not actually publicly stated this as the reason he's mad.

#2 is the real important one. Trying to guess why somebody is "mad" is a fools errand. If he isn't saying, it could be anything.

[Goose]

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

I tend to agree. The counter-argument (a very pragmatic one I admit.) is that you want to attract guys who are potentially "good enough" to play professionally. Agreeing to pay their tuition if they leave early (but not too early)answers the question "What if I don't make it?" and also encourages guys who do make it to set an example and finish their degrees later. Granted, when somebody get a 4 mil plus contract, it is basically a moot point, but OTOH some guys get drafted in the 5th round (or not at all) and end up empty. Knowing you can come back and be sure you won't have to pay is a big deal in those cases. In the near future, I wouldn't be surprised if guys who "test the waters" and don't make it can come back and actually play in college. That would make this problem go away.

if they "don't make it" they can apply for financial like other students.  Decisions have consequences.

Indeed decisions can have consequences. Stanford is apparently mitigating those consequences in order to attract better players. Does it work? I don't know, but knowing Stanford it isn't likely they are doing it by accident.

---

Because 1. it doesn't matter and will blow over shortly, and 2. Terry has not actually publicly stated this as the reason he's mad.

#2 is the real important one. Trying to guess why somebody is "mad" is a fools errand. If he isn't saying, it could be anything.

[winflop]

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

I tend to agree. The counter-argument (a very pragmatic one I admit.) is that you want to attract guys who are potentially "good enough" to play professionally. Agreeing to pay their tuition if they leave early (but not too early)answers the question "What if I don't make it?" and also encourages guys who do make it to set an example and finish their degrees later. Granted, when somebody get a 4 mil plus contract, it is basically a moot point, but OTOH some guys get drafted in the 5th round (or not at all) and end up empty. Knowing you can come back and be sure you won't have to pay is a big deal in those cases. In the near future, I wouldn't be surprised if guys who "test the waters" and don't make it can come back and actually play in college. That would make this problem go away.

if they "don't make it" they can apply for financial like other students.  Decisions have consequences.

Indeed decisions can have consequences. Stanford is apparently mitigating those consequences in order to attract better players. Does it work? I don't know, but knowing Stanford it isn't likely they are doing it by accident.

---

Because 1. it doesn't matter and will blow over shortly, and 2. Terry has not actually publicly stated this as the reason he's mad.

#2 is the real important one. Trying to guess why somebody is "mad" is a fools errand. If he isn't saying, it could be anything.

If he's not saying, it's just a baseless statement

[winflop]

paying for them to attend class after leaving early is absurd, if they need help paying for it they can apply for financial aid like everyone else.  If an athlete decides to stop playing their sport after two years (for non-medical reasons) they don't get their classes paid for, leaving early should be no different.

I tend to agree. The counter-argument (a very pragmatic one I admit.) is that you want to attract guys who are potentially "good enough" to play professionally. Agreeing to pay their tuition if they leave early (but not too early)answers the question "What if I don't make it?" and also encourages guys who do make it to set an example and finish their degrees later. Granted, when somebody get a 4 mil plus contract, it is basically a moot point, but OTOH some guys get drafted in the 5th round (or not at all) and end up empty. Knowing you can come back and be sure you won't have to pay is a big deal in those cases. In the near future, I wouldn't be surprised if guys who "test the waters" and don't make it can come back and actually play in college. That would make this problem go away.

if they "don't make it" they can apply for financial like other students.  Decisions have consequences.

Indeed decisions can have consequences. Stanford is apparently mitigating those consequences in order to attract better players. Does it work? I don't know, but knowing Stanford it isn't likely they are doing it by accident.

---

Because 1. it doesn't matter and will blow over shortly, and 2. Terry has not actually publicly stated this as the reason he's mad.

#2 is the real important one. Trying to guess why somebody is "mad" is a fools errand. If he isn't saying, it could be anything.

If he's not saying, it's just a baseless statement

[oldalum]

If it's the tuition, he's not going to say anything more because it would backfire with the contract he signed. He was probably just feeling some spite and trying to create some trouble for Stanford; if so, reflects poorly on him. But they'll let him back in for classes, anyway, if he wants and will pay up.

[oldalum]

If it's the tuition, he's not going to say anything more because it would backfire with the contract he signed. He was probably just feeling some spite and trying to create some trouble for Stanford; if so, reflects poorly on him. But they'll let him back in for classes, anyway, if he wants and will pay up.

[2006alum]

TT should follow the high road his older and wiser fellow Stanford BBall alum Nneka has set; she hasn't badmouthed USA Basketball even after she was royally screwed over by them. She is the epitome of CLASS. Someone whining about paying tuition while on a $6m+ guaranteed contract would really benefit from adopting her grace and humility.

[2006alum]

TT should follow the high road his older and wiser fellow Stanford BBall alum Nneka has set; she hasn't badmouthed USA Basketball even after she was royally screwed over by them. She is the epitome of CLASS. Someone whining about paying tuition while on a $6m+ guaranteed contract would really benefit from adopting her grace and humility.