PDA

View Full Version : Thompson and Hardrick to be let off team...



OU_Sooners75
4/25/2011, 04:37 AM
per OUhoops...This is from the free board over there:
http://ouhoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=22166

Hear are a couple things I've heard recently.

Nick Thompson has asked for his release to transfer and it should be announced soon.

Kyle Hardrick's status is still unknown, he is currently done for the semester as far as being on the team, so it looks doubtful if he will back. That frees up two more scholarships.

Hmmmm....and what was it some of you all told me when I mentioned something like this needs to happen for Kruger to get us back on track faster?

Boomer.....
4/25/2011, 07:46 AM
I'm glad. It seems like there were some disciplinary reasons behind Thompson sitting the second half of the year.

Bourbon St Sooner
4/25/2011, 08:20 AM
Thompson needed to go. Waste of a scholarship. I'm sure he was counseled out.

Gandalf_The_Grey
4/25/2011, 09:13 AM
I don't have a problem with us getting scholarships because these guys feel that they want to try something else. Now if Lon walked in and said, "you guys suck, I am taking your scholarship." I would have been upset.

Soonerjeepman
4/25/2011, 09:35 AM
I don't have a problem with us getting scholarships because these guys feel that they want to try something else. Now if Lon walked in and said, "you guys suck, I am taking your scholarship." I would have been upset.

as a coach making 2.4 million a yr...that is his job...I doubt he said "you suck" but definitely said "I see your role as ........." basically saying no time on the court and left it up to them.

The argument is that anyone on academic scholarship...it's pulled if they do not perform...no different here.

see we signed a 6'10 240lb juco out of Calif.

yankee
4/25/2011, 10:48 AM
Hmmmm....and what was it some of you all told me when I mentioned something like this needs to happen for Kruger to get us back on track faster?

I think I called your idea re+arded because you wanted to keep like 7 guys. I doubt anyone has a problem with Hardrick being cut, and most probably feel the same way about Thompson. Now, who were the other 3 guys you want off the team?:rolleyes:

badger
4/25/2011, 11:04 AM
Hmmmm....and what was it some of you all told me when I mentioned something like this needs to happen for Kruger to get us back on track faster?

Don't recall what I said, but I imagine it went something like this: Whatever Lon wants to do I'm fine with.

And, let me add that if what you wanted was something that Lon didn't want, I would have sided with Lon, since he is the savior of OU mens basketball and all :)

OU_Sooners75
4/25/2011, 01:58 PM
I think I called your idea re+arded because you wanted to keep like 7 guys. I doubt anyone has a problem with Hardrick being cut, and most probably feel the same way about Thompson. Now, who were the other 3 guys you want off the team?:rolleyes:


Actually you should read the post.
http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3190887&postcount=36

I said those 7 were the ones I would keep. I also said we should keep 8 to 9 guys for added depth. However, I did say that 2-3 scholarship players needed to go...and in saying so, I named 2 Walk-ons whom I didn't realize were walk-ons.

But hey...looks like Kruger told them what their roles were going to be and one player decided to leave and the other has academic problems.

stoopified
4/25/2011, 11:10 PM
In other news according to OUHoops Goff has signed a release from his LOI to OU. Makes me wonder if LK has another big on the hook?

StoopTroup
4/25/2011, 11:46 PM
Actually you should read the post.
http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3190887&postcount=36

I said those 7 were the ones I would keep. I also said we should keep 8 to 9 guys for added depth. However, I did say that 2-3 scholarship players needed to go...and in saying so, I named 2 Walk-ons whom I didn't realize were walk-ons.

But hey...looks like Kruger told them what their roles were going to be and one player decided to leave and the other has academic problems.

So....

Was that a STFU? :D

yankee
4/26/2011, 01:08 AM
Actually you should read the post.
http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3190887&postcount=36

I said those 7 were the ones I would keep. I also said we should keep 8 to 9 guys for added depth. However, I did say that 2-3 scholarship players needed to go...and in saying so, I named 2 Walk-ons whom I didn't realize were walk-ons.

But hey...looks like Kruger told them what their roles were going to be and one player decided to leave and the other has academic problems.

Ohhhh, I see you've changed your mind after you got called out on this post where you wanted to keep at most, 7 guys:
http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3189842&postcount=1

Ok then.

yankee
4/26/2011, 01:09 AM
So....

Was that a STFU? :D

Was mine a STFU post? :pop: :rolleyes:

OU_Sooners75
4/26/2011, 01:11 AM
Ohhhh, I see you've changed your mind after you got called out on this post where you wanted to keep at most, 7 guys:
http://www.soonerfans.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3189842&postcount=1

Ok then.


I didnt change my mind you dip****...what I did was say the essentially the same damn thing. That is to get rid of dead weight...much like you on this board. ;)

Now, STFU noob!

OU_Sooners75
4/26/2011, 01:12 AM
And yes, that last one was a STFU post....LOL

yankee
4/26/2011, 01:13 AM
I didnt change my mind you dip****...what I did was say the essentially the same damn thing. That is to get rid of dead weight...much like you on this board. ;)

Now, STFU noob!

Except it wasn't the same thing. But carry on.

OU_Sooners75
4/26/2011, 01:18 AM
Except it wasn't the same thing. But carry on.


Actually it was...the first one is what I would have done...and that was keep 7 players. The next one is editing my first statement in saying keeping 7, 8 or 9 players...and trimming the dead weight.

Don't act like you have never made a statement before, that you later edited or expanded on. :rolleyes:

yankee
4/26/2011, 01:20 AM
Actually it was...the first one is what I would have done...and that was keep 7 players. The next one is editing my first statement in saying keeping 7, 8 or 9 players...and trimming the dead weight.



Because people like myself, were amazed at your train of thought of only keeping at most 7 guys on the roster and trying to sign 5 more players this late in the off season. I'm glad I was able to help change your mind. It's too bad I didn't see this revised post of yours, I might have commended you on your changed attitude!

StoopTroup
4/26/2011, 01:25 AM
i STILL CAN'T HEAR ANYTHING...i HAVE THIS MUTED.

OU_Sooners75
4/26/2011, 01:25 AM
Since you seem like you want a dick measuring contest:


I do believe.

We do not have many open spots on our roster.

With that said, what does Kruger do?

I personally think he needs to do some spring cleaning with our roster.

Keep: Fitz, Pledger, Blair, Orsby, and Clark Maybe one or two others.

Then he needs to see if he can persuade some of his recruits from UNLV to OU.

Then he needs to attack the JUCO ranks and grab a few there.

It sucks having to cut anyone off from a scholarship, but we are loaded with a bunch of guys that can go elsewhere to play and that are not really D-1 caliber to begin with.

So, what do you think our new head coach should do?

Hmmm....spring cleaning = lose the dead weight


If he decides to keep everyone, than he is a very admirable man. I just dont see what it would hurt to get rid of some dead weight.

You all are acting like I am saying get rid of our entire roster...and that is not even close to what I am saying. I think keep the best 7-8 maybe even 9 guys.

If I couldnt get players to replace anyone, I probably wouldnt hack more than 2 or 3 guys at most.

But that is me....Of course, I want a contender, but I guess since we have suffered the worst two year span in OU basketball in my lifetime (35+ years) it is okay to have mediocrity now. :rolleyes:

Hmm...dead weight in that comment....

Also stated that if he wasn't able to get enough to fill the dropping of dead weight, to only drop 2 or 3 players.

Yeah...seems like I stayed with my first post and only expanded...never changed my mind, nor have I now.

But carry on with your dick measuring contest.

badger
4/26/2011, 09:54 AM
i STILL CAN'T HEAR ANYTHING...i HAVE THIS MUTED.

JEFF CAPEL'S REAL FIRST NAME IS FELTON!

:P there, I turned on the closed captioning for you.

Jason Alexander
4/26/2011, 03:33 PM
Now I've learned something today. He was here for 5 years and I never even really knew his name. Next you're probably going to tell me that Kruger's first name is Marion.

badger
4/26/2011, 04:09 PM
Now I've learned something today. He was here for 5 years and I never even really knew his name. Next you're probably going to tell me that Kruger's first name is Marion.

I saw this because of this report (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=11&articleid=20110411_11_A1_CUTLIN713238) on higher ed pay... guess who was one of the highest-paid employees of higher education in the state? Felton J. Capel. Huh???

http://i56.tinypic.com/xbe0kn.png

I also find it interesting that we list our coaches as "manager" and OSU lists their coaches as "head coach." At the same time, OSU lists their president as "executive" as we list ours as "president." So, whatever.

Anyway, since one of our residents likes to call Tiger Woods "Eldrick" repeatedly, I think I have found a new pet name for our ex-coach.

PS: Thread jacking over. Sorry for thread jacking.

texaspokieokie
4/26/2011, 04:24 PM
note that Kruger makes more than Capel did.

Boomer.....
4/26/2011, 04:32 PM
Well yeah. We had to pay an arm and a leg to get any good coach in here after the mess that Capel left us in.

badger
4/28/2011, 02:44 PM
I think it just got made official.

Link (http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/article.aspx?subjectid=233&articleid=20110428_233_0_NORMAN937219)

Except it's Goff and Nick.


Arent's presence becomes more important with Thursday's news that big men Nick Thompson and Robert Goff are no longer with the Sooners. Goff, actually, never joined. He did sign with OU while last November, when he was a preseason All-American for Hutchinson (Kan.) Community College, but asked out of his letter of intent as Kruger replaced former coach Jeff Capel. [

Boomer.....
4/28/2011, 03:04 PM
Kruger also announced Thursday that Nick Thompson, a junior on last year's team, and Robert Goff, a sophomore at Hutchinson (Kan.) Community College who signed with OU in November, have been released from their scholarships.

"Nick has expressed an interest to be closer to home," said Kruger. "We're understanding of that and wish him the best at his next stop.

"And with the coaching change here, Robert has also asked to be released from his letter of intent. We are granting that request, and likewise wish him well."

Thompson played in 17 of OU's 32 games this past season, averaging 4.4 points, 3.3 rebounds and 1.4 assists in 17.1 minutes per outing.


http://www.soonersports.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/042811aab.html

Mad Dog Madsen
4/28/2011, 03:40 PM
Dang! I had high hopes for Robert Goff. Seemed like a decent player and could've helped right away. Best of luck to him in the future. ...Oh yeah, Nick too. :D

Boomer.....
4/28/2011, 03:50 PM
Goff wasn't going to qualify anyways. He played horrible last year also.

sperry
4/29/2011, 08:17 PM
Actually it was...the first one is what I would have done...and that was keep 7 players. The next one is editing my first statement in saying keeping 7, 8 or 9 players...and trimming the dead weight.

Don't act like you have never made a statement before, that you later edited or expanded on. :rolleyes:



You were insinuating that we should get rid of Tyler Neal, which is just asinine.

OU_Sooners75
5/1/2011, 07:35 PM
You were insinuating that we should get rid of Tyler Neal, which is just asinine.


What exactly is asinine about it? The guy is not all that good. And if he is, he never showed any hints of it last season.

However, I never insinuated a damn thing about Neal. I said what I said nothing more, and that was to keep the five players I said to keep and about 2 to 3 other guys as well.

What was insinuated is that we have or had a bunch of players on our team that would not be on a lot of D-1 teams. And in saying so, I think/thought, that the new coach needed to come in and do a little cleaning and get rid of the dead weight.

If you think I was saying anything about Neal being dead weight...It must be back in your mind that he is.

jkjsooner
5/4/2011, 04:30 PM
as a coach making 2.4 million a yr...that is his job...I doubt he said "you suck" but definitely said "I see your role as ........." basically saying no time on the court and left it up to them.

The argument is that anyone on academic scholarship...it's pulled if they do not perform...no different here.

see we signed a 6'10 240lb juco out of Calif.

I completely disagree with your rationale. Anyone who is good enough to get an academic scholarship is plenty talented (smart) enough to do well enough to keep his or her scholarship. In 99% of the cases if they don't keep their scholarship it is their own fault.

In sports it is not the same. A scholarship guy might just not have what it takes once he/she arrives on campus. Or maybe he does but there happens to be better guys in front of him. In either case, it's possible no amount of work will improve the player's abilities enough for him/her to see the court/field.

Alternatively, the athlete might get injured just enough to impact his athleticism but not so much that he gets some type of hardship. I suppose the equivalent for an academic scholarship recipient would be if the student was hit in the head and suffered brain damage but that's rare.

The problem is when you yank a scholarship this has an impact on the players academics. Maybe he can transfer from OU to UCO (where he could play) but maybe that will severely impact his ability to graduate.

None of this even mentions the transfer restrictions on athletes - even when they have their scholarship lifted.

Anyway, I think you're talking apples and oranges when comparing academic scholarships to athletic.

pappy
5/4/2011, 06:26 PM
I completely disagree with your rationale. Anyone who is good enough to get an academic scholarship is plenty talented (smart) enough to do well enough to keep his or her scholarship. In 99% of the cases if they don't keep their scholarship it is their own fault.

In sports it is not the same. A scholarship guy might just not have what it takes once he/she arrives on campus. Or maybe he does but there happens to be better guys in front of him. In either case, it's possible no amount of work will improve the player's abilities enough for him/her to see the court/field.

Alternatively, the athlete might get injured just enough to impact his athleticism but not so much that he gets some type of hardship. I suppose the equivalent for an academic scholarship recipient would be if the student was hit in the head and suffered brain damage but that's rare.

The problem is when you yank a scholarship this has an impact on the players academics. Maybe he can transfer from OU to UCO (where he could play) but maybe that will severely impact his ability to graduate.

None of this even mentions the transfer restrictions on athletes - even when they have their scholarship lifted.

Anyway, I think you're talking apples and oranges when comparing academic scholarships to athletic.

I didn't have an academic scholarship so I don't know how they work, but I did have an athletic scholarship and a lot of people's misconception is that they think an athletic scholarship is for 4 years (5 if you redshirt), but that is not the case...an athletic scholarship is for 1 year and 1 year only and then if they decide to keep you, you have to re-sign another scholarship letter of intent thing. Just like you did before you attended the school.

I am completely fine with a coach deciding someone isn't talented enough of an athlete to be playing for their team especially at the Div-1 level and telling them they're welcome to be a walk on or continue going to school there, but they're gonna have to pay their own way, because scholarships are limited and right now we need to use it on someone else.

Soonerfan88
5/4/2011, 10:49 PM
I didn't have an academic scholarship so I don't know how they work, but I did have an athletic scholarship and a lot of people's misconception is that they think an athletic scholarship is for 4 years (5 if you redshirt), but that is not the case...an athletic scholarship is for 1 year and 1 year only and then if they decide to keep you, you have to re-sign another scholarship letter of intent thing. Just like you did before you attended the school.

Actually enforcing that 1 year renewal based on performance wouldn't be so bad if the NCAA didn't take away their right to play immediately at another college or penalize them if credits don't transfer so they now don't have enough hours to qualify as making adequate progress to a degree.

The letter of the rule may say it's renewed every year but if that kid is passing classes, coming to practice and trying, making all that meetings, etc but just isn't as good as the coach thought he was, then it's on the coach for making a bad evaluation. The kid doesn't deserve to have his college education derailed because of the coach's error.