DRC: Sources -- Austin Aune back with Mean Green as preparations for 2022 begin

[GrandGreen]

I like how some of you greet good news.  Aune coming back could not be viewed as anything but positive.

He still must win the job, and if nothing else sets a floor for NT qb play.  

[MeanGreen4Life1998]

Oh boy..

[greenminer]

3 hours ago, Jonnyeagle said:

I mean I think that’s a nice thing to say but this is also OUR program and shouldn’t we want it to be the best it can be?  I respect you as a poster and mean no disrespect but some of us are in this thing to win and not just get by and make for nice stories.

Edited January 21, 2022 by greenminer

[untbowler]

12 hours ago, Got5onIt said:

One more year for Seth, might as well do it all over again. 0-6 start anyone? 
At least we’re looking at a new coach for ‘23…..

SL will be back in 2023 unless he goes 1-11 or worse. He has to many connections and friends near the AD to be fired, unless he pulls a Portland St debacle level crash.

[GrandGreen]

1 minute ago, untbowler said:

SL will be back in 2023 unless he goes 1-11 or worse. He has to many connections and friends near the AD to be fired, unless he pulls a Portland St debacle level crash.

Strongly disagree.  Littrell will be gone if he does not have a winning record next season.

 

[untbowler]

Just now, GrandGreen said:

Strongly disagree.  Littrell will be gone if he does not have a winning record next season.

 

one can only hope, but not fully convinced it will happen. 

[drex]

Just when you thought it was safe to go back to the stadium.

[UNT18Grad]

Aune has started what? 20+ games for us now?...I seriously doubt he would come back if Littrell told him the job was an open competition next year.  Whether it's the right decision or not I can't imagine the job not being his to lose.

[97and03]

1 hour ago, UNT18Grad said:

Aune has started what? 20+ games for us now?...I seriously doubt he would come back if Littrell told him the job was an open competition next year.  Whether it's the right decision or not I can't imagine the job not being his to lose.

Or maybe he is smart enough to get a free Master’s degree while he still can? 
I am pretty sure they didn’t bring in two experienced QB transfers for shits and giggles. 

[meangreen11]

9 minutes ago, 97and03 said:

Or maybe he is smart enough to get a free Master’s degree while he still can? 
I am pretty sure they didn’t bring in two experienced QB transfers for shits and giggles. 

I get your point but JD Head only played one season and the kid from ACU hardly played last year due to a leg injury.  The UNC kid hardly played and really we have a very inexperienced QB room since Fine left us.

[UNT18Grad]

12 minutes ago, 97and03 said:

Or maybe he is smart enough to get a free Master’s degree while he still can? 
I am pretty sure they didn’t bring in two experienced QB transfers for shits and giggles. 

I'm pretty sure that decision was made with the assumption that Aune was gone.  I can't imagine that having 7 scholarship QB's is all part of the plan regardless of how good or bad most of them are.

[El Paso Eagle]

Why is the QB transfer from KY still on the team? Unless he can be moved to another position his scholarship should not be renewed. 

[UNT18Grad]

1 minute ago, El Paso Eagle said:

Why is the QB transfer from KY still on the team? Unless he can be moved to another position his scholarship should not be renewed. 

So all players who aren't good enough to play should just be removed from the team?  I'm sure that will be a great recruiting pitch to players interested in coming here.

[El Paso Eagle]

1 minute ago, UNT18Grad said:

So all players who aren't good enough to play should just be removed from the team?  I'm sure that will be a great recruiting pitch to players interested in coming here.

When you hit 6th or 7th string it should be considered. So you believe all scholarships should be renewed regardless of the players performance?

[UNT18Grad]

Just now, El Paso Eagle said:

When you hit 6th or 7th string it should be considered. So you believe all scholarships should be renewed regardless of the players performance?

Without a doubt.  When someone is recruited to play football at UNT the offer isn't conditional on their performance and quite frankly I'm not even sure if something like that is allowed.  Not saying this will happen with this specific player but many athletes are late bloomers that take 3 or 4 years to see the field, should they have been kicked off in year 2 because they were 3rd or 4th string?

You start removing kids who have done nothing wrong on or off the field other than not work their way up the depth chart and you're going to burn lots of bridges.  If anything a miss like that is on the coaches, not the kid.  They chose to offer someone who has no business at this level.

[Cr1028]

4 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

When you hit 6th or 7th string it should be considered. So you believe all scholarships should be renewed regardless of the players performance?

Usually that is way past the point you have encouraged them to use the portal.

[El Paso Eagle]

7 minutes ago, UNT18Grad said:

So all players who aren't good enough to play should just be removed from the team?  I'm sure that will be a great recruiting pitch to players interested in coming here.

PS - You do know this happens in BB quite often. Many transfers are strongly encouraged - in other words asked to move on

[El Paso Eagle]

1 minute ago, UNT18Grad said:

Without a doubt.  When someone is recruited to play football at UNT the offer isn't conditional on their performance and quite frankly I'm not even sure if something like that is allowed.  Not saying this will happen with this specific player but many athletes are late bloomers that take 3 or 4 years to see the field, should they have been kicked off in year 2 because they were 3rd or 4th string?

You start removing kids who have done nothing wrong on or off the field other than not work their way up the depth chart and you're going to burn lots of bridges.  If anything a miss like that is on the coaches, not the kid.  They chose to offer someone who has no business at this level.

You lost me here. You do know that FB scholarships are year-to-year.

[Cr1028]

1 hour ago, UNT18Grad said:

Aune has started what? 20+ games for us now?...I seriously doubt he would come back if Littrell told him the job was an open competition next year.  Whether it's the right decision or not I can't imagine the job not being his to lose.

Aune hasn’t been the game one starter for North Texas yet. I doubt Seth said, “hey, I’m pleased with where we’re at and I brought in 2 xfers just to give you plenty of backups in addition to Ruder.” Unless he moves in with the Mannings for the entire spring and has some quarterback renaissance, he won’t be the day 1 starter this year either.

Also, Aune didn’t become the starter until Mizzou so his record this season as a starter was 5-4 including the bowl game which isn’t as bad as some may think.

Edited January 21, 2022 by Cr1028

[UNT18Grad]

10 minutes ago, El Paso Eagle said:

You lost me here. You do know that FB scholarships are year-to-year.

If you can provide some sources I would love to see this information.  

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11775571/pac-12-passes-athlete-reforms-including-guaranteed-4-year-scholarships

Here is an article from 2014 and a quote from inside that article.  I know that we aren't in the Pac 12 but I would assume similar arrangements exist in most other conferences. 

According to the Pac-12's new rules, all athletic scholarships will be guaranteed for four years and "can neither be reduced nor canceled provided the student-athlete remains in good standing and meets his/her terms of the agreement." In addition, financial aid agreements offered to incoming athletes will be "for no less than four academic years" beginning in the 2015-16 academic year.

 

Whether it's technically "allowed" or not, having a conversation with an athlete and telling them you don't see a future where they touch the field here is one thing, removing them from scholarship for no reason other than performance whether they like it or not is a totally different situation and one that I doubt is allowed. 

Edited January 21, 2022 by UNT18Grad

[Cr1028]

12 minutes ago, UNT18Grad said:

If you can provide some sources I would love to see this information.  

(Coaches can decide not to renew your scholarship for the next year. This isn’t a case of the scholarship being “taken away” since they are typically only year-long contracts, but it can still come as a surprise to some student-athletes. Non-renewals can happen for various reasons, including a new coach joining the program, getting into trouble on or off the field, poor performance, etc)

https://www.ncsasports.org/recruiting/how-to-get-recruited/scholarship-facts

[UNT18Grad]

20 minutes ago, Cr1028 said:

(Coaches can decide not to renew your scholarship for the next year. This isn’t a case of the scholarship being “taken away” since they are typically only year-long contracts, but it can still come as a surprise to some student-athletes. Non-renewals can happen for various reasons, including a new coach joining the program, getting into trouble on or off the field, poor performance, etc)

https://www.ncsasports.org/recruiting/how-to-get-recruited/scholarship-facts

I saw that article but none of it is specific to football or even the NCAA.  It's hard to compare NAIA, D3, swimming, etc.  It is however a fact that the Power 5 conferences all guaranteed scholarships for 4 years in 2015, maybe the Group of 5 schools operate differently, but I wouldn't imagine they would put themselves at a further disadvantage by offering less than that same guarantee.

Additionally, in 2015, NCAA D1 colleges from the Power Five conferences (colleges in the Football Bowl Subdivision, plus Notre Dame) agreed to implement a rule that prevented multi-year D1 scholarships from being canceled or not renewed for any athletic reason.

[El Paso Eagle]

37 minutes ago, UNT18Grad said:

If you can provide some sources I would love to see this information.  

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/11775571/pac-12-passes-athlete-reforms-including-guaranteed-4-year-scholarships

Here is an article from 2014 and a quote from inside that article.  I know that we aren't in the Pac 12 but I would assume similar arrangements exist in most other conferences. 

According to the Pac-12's new rules, all athletic scholarships will be guaranteed for four years and "can neither be reduced nor canceled provided the student-athlete remains in good standing and meets his/her terms of the agreement." In addition, financial aid agreements offered to incoming athletes will be "for no less than four academic years" beginning in the 2015-16 academic year.

 

Whether it's technically "allowed" or not, having a conversation with an athlete and telling them you don't see a future where they touch the field here is one thing, removing them from scholarship for no reason other than performance whether they like it or not is a totally different situation and one that I doubt is allowed. 

https://informedathlete.com/the-facts-about-guaranteed-multi-year-ncaa-di-scholarships/

[MeanGreenTeeth]

Geez.  The guy is going to be closer in age to Ben Roethlisberger than to a Freshman.

[greenminer]

2 hours ago, El Paso Eagle said:

When you hit 6th or 7th string it should be considered. So you believe all scholarships should be renewed regardless of the players performance?

 

1 hour ago, El Paso Eagle said:

PS - You do know this happens in BB quite often. Many transfers are strongly encouraged - in other words asked to move on

I think a distinction could be made here.  Encouraging a player to hit the portal is different IMO than flat out telling them their scholarship is revoked, whether they stay or go.  I think the latter is what your initial post suggested, and likely doesn't happen.  A coach flat out revoking a kids scholarship, even if he's okay battling for PT from the bench, sets you up for ugly conversations and broken pipelines on the recruiting trail.

Edited January 22, 2022 by greenminer