New Football Commit

[D UP Clones]

Well so far you've come up with no names except for a couple Rutgers basketball guys which indicates it's a huge advantage. You're giving excuses for recruiting which may be relevant for one kid a year at best in an effort to be the littlest little brother you can be. It's ridiculous and it's something that does not matter. If it did, the Big Ten wouldn't have been awful for 8 years.

Said the Hawk fan. No facts support him.... no evidence can he find.... but he is right dang it!

When shot down on every baloney post of his, he returns to hawk fan rules, call ISU little brother.

I've told you this before. Do you really think people can't follow your posting history?

Now run back to your hawk board with your tail between your legs..

 

[rholtgraves]

So you are asking me to prove they take partial qualifiers when they have no rules against it? And academic records are confidential? See below. Next.

I listed a player I know was not a full qualifier earlier. I am not going to say his name. This isn't about running down the players. This about lying about entrance requirements.

Fact: the big ten has no partial qualifier rule and they are on record saying they like giving those kids a chance. Again, not hard to search and find.

http://www.scout.com/college/rutgers/story/1474411-partial-qualifiers-adjusting-at-rutgers

This article uses the term partial qualifier but they shouldn't bc there is no such thing under NCAA rules. You either qualify or don't. Now what does happen and happens in all conferences is that a person is admitted into school NCAA rules initially that they don't qualify but the teams appeal the ruling and NCAA has ability to say ok you can go to school but bc of bad coursework in high school or something along those lines you can't play your first year.
this is what happened in the Rutgers article you posted and also what happened with Ben Mclemore and Jamari Traylor at KU. KU is in the Big 12 by the way.

Now what you may be thinking of is the non qualifying rules that some conferences have. That is something different all together. That's the NCAA saying they didn't qualify and they don't get a waiver. The big 12 has a non qualifier rule but I don't know about the Big 10. But I am not aware of any non qualifier going to Iowa, a non qualifier can't receive a scholarship and can't practice with the team for a year. Most kids aren't going to pay their own way for a year so they go to JUCO.

 

[D UP Clones]

Partial qualifiers are not (were not) eligible to play as freshman. They lost a full year of eligibility. If the DEnd you are referring to is who I think you are referring to, he played as a true freshman. Undersized? Just finished his senior year as a starter? Currently 21 years old. Did not even red shirt.

That rule change a while ago. They just redshirt now with no loss of eligibility.

 

[D UP Clones]

This article uses the term partial qualifier but they shouldn't bc there is no such thing under NCAA rules. You either qualify or don't. Now what does happen and happens in all conferences is that a person is admitted into school NCAA rules initially that they don't qualify but the teams appeal the ruling and NCAA has ability to say ok you can go to school but bc of bad coursework in high school or something along those lines you can't play your first year.
this is what happened in the Rutgers article you posted and also what happened with Ben Mclemore and Jamari Traylor at KU. KU is in the Big 12 by the way.

Now what you may be thinking of is the non qualifying rules that some conferences have. That is something different all together. That's the NCAA saying they didn't qualify and they don't get a waiver. The big 12 has a non qualifier rule but I don't know about the Big 10. But I am not aware of any non qualifier going to Iowa, a non qualifier can't receive a scholarship and can't practice with the team for a year. Most kids aren't going to pay their own way for a year so they go to JUCO.

Yeah, they changed what they call them. They are still not full qualifiers. See the Rutgers article. They do not lose eligibility any longer.

Read the opening of the article. They have to redshirt and they can practice.

 

[ribsnwhiskey]

Different day, same CyTwins..

Different day, same Jeffrey..

How is a guy with 8 posts already familiar with regular posters on here? Hmmmmmm I wonder.........................

 

[Tre4ISU]

This article uses the term partial qualifier but they shouldn't bc there is no such thing under NCAA rules. You either qualify or don't. Now what does happen and happens in all conferences is that a person is admitted into school NCAA rules initially that they don't qualify but the teams appeal the ruling and NCAA has ability to say ok you can go to school but bc of bad coursework in high school or something along those lines you can't play your first year.
this is what happened in the Rutgers article you posted and also what happened with Ben Mclemore and Jamari Traylor at KU. KU is in the Big 12 by the way.

Now what you may be thinking of is the non qualifying rules that some conferences have. That is something different all together. That's the NCAA saying they didn't qualify and they don't get a waiver. The big 12 has a non qualifier rule but I don't know about the Big 10. But I am not aware of any non qualifier going to Iowa, a non qualifier can't receive a scholarship and can't practice with the team for a year. Most kids aren't going to pay their own way for a year so they go to JUCO.

That happened with a football player here as well.

 

[gnarlyboy]

That rule change a while ago. They just redshirt now with no loss of eligibility.

So you are saying 'partial qualifiers' could play as freshman 3 1/2 years ago? I'm not talking about the 'academic redshirts', as they are now called going forward.

 

[Tre4ISU]

Said the Hawk fan. No facts support him.... no evidence can he find.... but he is right dang it!

When shot down on every baloney post of his, he returns to hawk fan rules, call ISU little brother.

I've told you this before. Do you really think people can't follow your posting history?

Now run back to your hawk board with your tail between your legs..

Yeah, big Hawk fan here. Plenty of evidence of that. You have given as much evidence as I have. I'll give you one: Adrian Witty. Your turn. Give a name. I assume since it's such a huge deal this should be easy but I suppose you will hide behind the shield of "not running players down."

 

[rholtgraves]

Yeah, they changed what they call them. They are still not full qualifiers. See the Rutgers article. They do not lose eligibility any longer.

But you do realize the Rutgers case you listed is the same as the KU case? Big 12 takes 'partial qualifiers'.

Show me where a kid was actually declared a non qualifier and decided to pay his own way for a year and lose a year of eligibility instead of go to JUCO... I'll be waiting

 

[D UP Clones]

Yeah, big Hawk fan here. Plenty of evidence of that. You have given as much evidence as I have. I'll give you one: Adrian Witty. Your turn. Give a name. I assume since it's such a huge deal this should be easy but I suppose you will hide behind the shield of "not running players down."

I gave you two Rutgers names. Listen I get it .. uphold the big ten image at all costs even though the evidence says otherwise.

This is the usual routine and I realize it bothers you when someone knows better and can support it with facts.

No ISU fan calls ISU little brother when factually they aren't. ISU is by far the biggest university in the state. Tough for you to accept I know.

I've proven my point over and over. Good luck, hawk.

 

[D UP Clones]

But you do realize the Rutgers case you listed is the same as the KU case? Big 12 takes 'partial qualifiers'.

Show me where a kid was actually declared a non qualifier and decided to pay his own way for a year and lose a year of eligibility instead of go to JUCO... I'll be waiting

One more time, I can find the big 12 rule. Please show me the big ten rule. I will wait for that.

 

[Tre4ISU]

I gave you two Rutgers names. Listen I get it .. uphold the big ten image at all costs even though the evidence says otherwise.

This is the usual routine and I realize it bothers you when someone knows better and can support it with facts.

No ISU fan calls ISU little brother when factually they aren't. ISU is by far the biggest university in the state. Tough for you to accept I know.

I've proven my point over and over. Good luck, hawk.

Yeah, well those two Rutgers guys are the same situation as Ben McLemore so they don't count. It is flattering, though, that you notice so much about me. I really do appreciate that even if I'm a little creeped out.

 

[Cydkar]

or "heated rivalry".

Or "wrong board".

 

[gnarlyboy]

I'd pay good money to see D UP Clones v HerkyFan in a cage death match.

 

[ripvdub]

Take this possible match to the rivalry board please

 

[weR138]

Boy, I agree with you. I use the second-best method, I put all the hawk people on my ignore list. It's nice not seeing their remarks pop up.

Yeah, I have for some but damn...it's the football forum and about a recruit. I shouldn't have to keep adding to my ignore list.

 

[dshindy]

Idk why there is an ISR page. I've literally never been and I always get my hawk talk fill from the football and basketball forums.

Not sure if this is the right place to post about Vance but I'm glad we got him. Hope we hold onto him.

 

[bringmagicback]

oh look another recruiting thread taken over by jealous hawk fans who cant figure out whats wrong with them posting on an ISU board. Sad.

 

[Cyclonic1]

I have every hok fan and asshat that I have found over the years on my IGNORE list.
Trey is not on that list.

 

[BlackHawk]

I gave you two Rutgers names. Listen I get it .. uphold the big ten image at all costs even though the evidence says otherwise.

This is the usual routine and I realize it bothers you when someone knows better and can support it with facts.

No ISU fan calls ISU little brother when factually they aren't. ISU is by far the biggest university in the state. Tough for you to accept I know.

I've proven my point over and over. Good luck, hawk.

You know your athletics are sad when a fanbase resorts to touting student population size or 3rd largest stadium in the conference as some kind of achievement. I think Iowa fans are ok with having better sports teams, and being the school people outside of the state think of when they think of Iowa.