catdaddyp

LB Nick Mayle in the portal. Thats 4 LBs since the SG.

https://www.news-press.com/story/sports/college/fgcu/2015/10/16/college-sports-scholarships-not-four-year-guarantees/74009542/ I could very well be wrong. I got out of coaching in 2016 so this is new to me. Looks like a handful of schools outside of the Big 10 have done the same thing. Interesting….

Yes, thank you. We are saying the same thing in regards to scholarship offers.

Are you saying most schools don’t offer scholarships year by year? I can assure you that’s how it works. They then are renewed on a yearly basis. My confusion was towards the 4 year offering. As that’s something I hadn’t heard of before.

That part makes sense. You see scholarships continue to be honored due to a variety of reasons as long as the player is still at the school. Where I did not understand is if it was a 4 year scholly even when transferring. That did not make sense. So with these scholarship players transferring out, it doesn’t matter what the amount of year guarantee may or may not be, as they will no longer be at the school.

That’s how most schools do it. Which is why I was surprised to hear UA offered 4 year terms. I can’t see much advantage to that setup if that’s truly the case.

What you are saying is different than what @Akron1 said. So there is definitely a misinterpretation of information somewhere.

That would make sense as that’s what most schools would do. I’m trying to wrap my head around how a scholarship is upheld for 4 years if the player has transferred to another school. In this case, how would Akron be held responsible for a 4 year commitment when the player has moved on and potentially on scholarship elsewhere. It makes sense if the kid was still attending the school and no longer on the team. But in this case all the players we’ve heard about have entered the transfer portal and and intend to move on to other schools, so I’m struggling to understand how the 4 year offer still applies.

I would assume if they were on scholarship at another D1 school, we would be placing them on scholarship as well. It seemed we were below the 85 scholarship limit before, but now probably sit at or above it. @LZIp is on top of that and I’m anxious to see where things stand when he’s had time to fully updated.

So if a player transfers to another school, does that mean the school gives the remaining scholarship money to the former player in the form of a payout or does the scholarship money go back to the school and just taken away from the athletic department?

I was making my comment in jest. But the fact remains that we are 3-27 over the past 3 years. There is a need for an overall talent upgrade across the roster, which is currently happening. Walk-ons are vital to all programs and many will be awarded scholarships during their time on the team. With that being said, there was an unusual amount of walk-ons compared to scholarship players on this roster heading into the spring. That needed adjustment.

Interesting. Most schools give scholarships on a year to year basis with the assumption that it will apply for their full time at the school as long as the student athletes meets the requirements. If UA guarantees it for a full 4 years, does that mean if a kid quits, or is dismissed from the team, or enters the portal but chooses to return to UA - but not on a football basis - is the scholarship still honored?

Looks like Nick Dottore is also in the portal. JoeMo is really showing these walk-ons who’s boss. 🙃

In the first half, did our offense ever line up in any formations with less than 3 WRs? If so, how did our defense align? All I recall seeing in the second half was either 4 WR sets or 3 WRs with 1 TE. We always had 4 players along the defensive line, but it looked like it was typically with 2 players listed as OLBs lined up at edge positions like DEs and one (or both depending on distance) had the traditional DEs bumped inside as DTs. I noticed Fann was playing DT in the 2nd half and looked disinterested the majority of the time. @LoyalZIP @bigjim @Captain Kangaroo

Not going to pin this one as it doesn’t fit the territory requirements, but how about QB Justin Rogers? I believe JoeMo offered him out of high school, so there is probably some type of relationship there. He hasn’t quit lived up to his potential and would fit this offense perfectly. Might be wishful thinking, but who knows? HS film below. https://www.hudl.com/video/3/4483542/581fce23f5605e19502c85ed

Bump for Joey Marousek’s removal. Hopefully, we’ll receive news of a talented QB transferring in soon.

I can’t speak to Jankowski as I missed him play in the first half, but like I mentioned earlier, I was surprised by the lack of zip Marousek had on his passes. He got the ball to his receivers well enough, but we would likely struggle if he had to play meaningful minutes for an extended amount of time. Irons has the ability to make most throws, but he’s inconsistent. We definitely need another talented QB to compete with Irons for starting minutes. You’re right about the portal. It isn’t going to work out for hundreds of players. Spots are at a premium with the 85 scholarship limit being restored. Sooner or later, the portal will gain some balance as we are seeing an extreme version of transfers this year.

Unfortunately, it’ll probably get worse before it gets better. NCAA has distanced themselves from NIL and don’t seem to know how - or want to - enforce the confusing guidelines that are currently in place.

Excuse my ignorance as I just started following Akron football closely last season, but who is PCCC?

I didn’t get to see Jankowski in action, but if Cloud sees any PT besides mop up duty in a blowout then we are in trouble.

The majority of sets I saw in the 2nd half were out of 11 personnel. Usually with the TE lined up at what would be around wingback depth. I don’t recall seeing the TE split out like JoeMo likes to do at times. I don’t think I saw more than 5 or 6 different plays ran in the the second half. Most were just variations off the same play calls.

Agreed. I didn’t see that one coming. As stated yesterday, I thought both Irons and Marousek did some good things in the SG, but both also had their head scratcher throws. It was my first time seeing Marousek live and he didn’t have the kind of zip on his passes I expected, but it was still enough to get the job done. I was firmly in the camp of another QB needing to be brought in after yesterday and before this transfer news. I hate that Marousek is leaving, as he could be serviceable, but on the same side of things we would probably struggle if he had to play too many meaningful minutes.

Happens to me on a daily basis. 😂

I suspect Whigan will get a long look at LT. Gray and Daniels may prove to struggle against the quicker edge rushers we’ll face. I really like the depth on the OL. I only saw the second half, but I didn’t see too much difference between the two OLs as far as production. Like you mentioned, it was mostly passes and very few of the RPOs went for runs. Edit: Forgot to add - Although our QBs looked good at times, I’ve joined the camp about the need to bring in another competitor in that room. Irons may have the arm strength to make most throws, but he needs to be more consistent.

Not official. I could be wrong, but using context clues. When asked about how the teams were split up today, Moorhead said he tried to keep certain players together for consistency - or something along those lines. Makes the most sense for the OL. It’s common to keep the 1st team OL and 2nd team OL together for the spring games regardless of the format.