[TIMSCAR20]

How is an opportunity justification for anything? We're basically having a GNED class here and almost all of you are failing.

Are you speaking about Seth or Ritchie? I don't know how you can blame Seth for leaving to go to Duke.

The Ritchie situation is different because he was only here 2 seasons and it did put the program in a bind. I thought he was the right coach for the job and was sad to see him go but I understand given his relationship with Tony Bennett. There is no right or wrong here to me. Coaches leave jobs just like coaches are fired from jobs.

[LUconn]

I'm talking about Seth. How can I not blame him? I'm holding him (and his father) to the standard of someone with integrity not against a standard of loose NCAA regulations. Did Duke offer him a scholarship out of high school? Did anybody besides us? No. This program's future was being constructed around him and his signed LOI. He didn't have to put us in that position. If he didn't want to play for us, he could have prepped or something like a ton of under recruited kids do. Heck I bet he could have walked on at Duke. The Curry family isn't exactly hurting to pay tuition.

I realize that most people would have done what he did. Most of you have even said so. In the corporate world, most wouldn't hesitate to leave a company that has invested heavily in them for both of their benefits, for a better paying position at a different company. But that's kind of sad.


And then there's the debate about whether or not it's even that "better paying position". He isn't even projected as being drafted. And he's had a way better career at Duke than I predicted. At worst, we could have gotten him not drafted. Although I truly believe he would have been special here. If us LU diehards can't even see the value in him staying vs leaving for Duke, what hope do we even have in the future of this program? Every good player would obviously be better served parlaying the stage we give them into a better program, no? And by gosh, we're really happy for them when they do. Glad we could help out!

[TIMSCAR20]

I'm talking about Seth. How can I not blame him? I'm holding him (and his father) to the standard of someone with integrity not against a standard of loose NCAA regulations. Did Duke offer him a scholarship out of high school? Did anybody besides us? No. This program's future was being constructed around him and his signed LOI. He didn't have to put us in that position. If he didn't want to play for us, he could have prepped or something like a ton of under recruited kids do. Heck I bet he could have walked on at Duke. The Curry family isn't exactly hurting to pay tuition.

I realize that most people would have done what he did. Most of you have even said so. In the corporate world, most wouldn't hesitate to leave a company that has invested heavily in them for both of their benefits, for a better paying position at a different company. But that's kind of sad.


And then there's the debate about whether or not it's even that "better paying position". He isn't even projected as being drafted. And he's had a way better career at Duke than I predicted. At worst, we could have gotten him not drafted. Although I truly believe he would have been special here. If us LU diehards can't even see the value in him staying vs leaving for Duke, what hope do we even have in the future of this program? Every good player would obviously be better served parlaying the stage we give them into a better program, no? And by gosh, we're really happy for them when they do. Glad we could help out!

Most of what you are saying is valid. However Scholarships are year to year. So in the same fashion that a player can have his scholarship stripped and given to someone else why can't a player look to better himself if given the opportunity? There is no loyalty or committment in college athletics. I would love it to be true but it is not. Seth out-performed his Libety Scholarship the same way other players have under-performed their scholarship and ended up transferring. It happens.

As far as helping or hurting his chances to play in the NBA, personally I think it hurt. Talking with the scouts that many times guys transferring up actually hurts them. Jason Conley leaving VMI to go to Missouri is a prime example. He lead the nation in scoring at 29.5 ppg as a Freshman! Had he had eye popping numbers like that for 4 years it would have been hard not to at least draft him. He went to Mizzou and fizzled big time.

So I get what you are saying. I really do. It is just not the way the system works in corp America or in NCAA athletics.

[bballfan84]

I'm talking about Seth. How can I not blame him? I'm holding him (and his father) to the standard of someone with integrity not against a standard of loose NCAA regulations. Did Duke offer him a scholarship out of high school? Did anybody besides us? No. This program's future was being constructed around him and his signed LOI. He didn't have to put us in that position. If he didn't want to play for us, he could have prepped or something like a ton of under recruited kids do. Heck I bet he could have walked on at Duke. The Curry family isn't exactly hurting to pay tuition.

I realize that most people would have done what he did. Most of you have even said so. In the corporate world, most wouldn't hesitate to leave a company that has invested heavily in them for both of their benefits, for a better paying position at a different company. But that's kind of sad.

And then there's the debate about whether or not it's even that "better paying position". He isn't even projected as being drafted. And he's had a way better career at Duke than I predicted. At worst, we could have gotten him not drafted. Although I truly believe he would have been special here. If us LU diehards can't even see the value in him staying vs leaving for Duke, what hope do we even have in the future of this program? Every good player would obviously be better served parlaying the stage we give them into a better program, no? And by gosh, we're really happy for them when they do. Glad we could help out!

Were you defending the guys in the past 5 years when their scholarships were taken from them. Like Scar said it goes both ways (its a business) I think you are taking this too personal with the Curry and McKay situation.

[LUconn]

A couple of things. I think you picture me as some angry unabomber type pounding my fists on the keyboard to post on here, but I can assure you I have not taken his transfer personal. It doesn't affect my day to day life one bit except for the occasional day dream of what might have been. I just simply take the time to let everybody know that there is not some consensus of it "being the right move". It's like a persistent statement on here that is one of those things that becomes truth because it's repeated over and over and over.

I specifically mentioned a business parallel to let it be known that "it's a business" is not an excuse. If so, it would be considered "business" for the hobby lobby dude to pay for abortions for his employees instead of fighting it tooth and nail. Business is not void of values and integrity.

Also, can you give me an example of a player whose scholly was not renewed that had offers to play elsewhere? The majority of the time that happens with guys who pretty much understand they need to improve tremendously to get renewed the next year and that the first year is basically a gift. In the case of somebody like McMasters, who had big time offers and just puttered out, I wouldn't be against keeping him on for 4 years in the hopes he "gets it". That type of thing doesn't happen enough to consider something like that as a waste. Coaches are normally taking a flyer on a project guy anyway.

[olldflame]

I really don´t know how many scholarships have actually been taken from players here. Asaad Woods would be one, but I´m pretty sure he was told up front he had a year to show he was good enough to help the program, and it didn´t happen. Not sure about Johnny Stephene. Most of the guys who left simply wanted to go somewhere they could play more like Bill Weaver, or where there weren´t so many rules like Chris Perez.

[Purple Haize]

LUConn said: If us LU diehards can't even see the value in him staying vs leaving for Duke......

Could you be more specific? I don't think anyone thinks him LEAVING has more value to LU than his STAYING. I think it's debatable whether there was value in it for him. I would argue yes, because even if he stayed there would be questions about him. So why not go on the big stage and be a big fish in a big pond.

[NotAJerry]

I'm glad we're all in agreement that the end justified the means.

There was nothing wrong with the means.

[LUconn]

Sometimes I wonder why I even bother to post on here. I just wrote a 2 post thesis on the whole thing with solid arguments all the way around and that's your response? This happens every time we talk about this. Now I need somebody to tell me, "Let's go ahead and win an FCS championship on a consistent basis before we start thinking about moving up," and you can ignore my thoughts on that too. So I guess my response should be:

There was nothing wrong with the means.

Yeah-huh

[Purple Haize]

Sometimes I wonder why I even bother to post on here. I just wrote a 2 post thesis on the whole thing with solid arguments all the way around and that's your response? This happens every time we talk about this. Now I need somebody to tell me, "Let's go ahead and win an FCS championship on a consistent basis before we start thinking about moving up," and you can ignore my thoughts on that too. So I guess my response should be:

There was nothing wrong with the means.

Yeah-huh

I was just asking a clarifying question. Geez.

[NotAJerry]

Ah, so it appears that literally everybody is disagreeing with your convoluted nonsense, yet you're best defense is how much you've written on it.

Simply put, Seth did nothing wrong. He played his hardest while he was here. He was given the opportunity to play for a much better team in a much better conference for arguably the best coach in the sport right now. He would have been stupid to turn it down.

The moment you devote as much irrational angst to the other players who have left, mostly for a step down in competition, then you're point might gain a touch of validity. Until then it just seems like an obsessive ex girlfriend justifying comical views/beliefs just to feel better about herself.

[Dr. Sheh]

I'll just say I agree with LUconn. No need to restate his succinct and thoughtful posts.

[LUconn]

Sometimes I wonder why I even bother to post on here. I just wrote a 2 post thesis on the whole thing with solid arguments all the way around and that's your response? This happens every time we talk about this. Now I need somebody to tell me, "Let's go ahead and win an FCS championship on a consistent basis before we start thinking about moving up," and you can ignore my thoughts on that too. So I guess my response should be:

There was nothing wrong with the means.

Yeah-huh

I was just asking a clarifying question. Geez.

Sorry, that was all to NAJ's post

Ah, so it appears that literally everybody is disagreeing with your convoluted nonsense, yet you're best defense is how much you've written on it.

Simply put, Seth did nothing wrong. He played his hardest while he was here. He was given the opportunity to play for a much better team in a much better conference for arguably the best coach in the sport right now. He would have been stupid to turn it down.

The moment you devote as much irrational angst to the other players who have left, mostly for a step down in competition, then you're point might gain a touch of validity. Until then it just seems like an obsessive ex girlfriend justifying comical views/beliefs just to feel better about herself.

You just restated the same stuff with no regard to anything I've countered it with along with some insulting stuff thrown in for good measure.

[bballfan84]

A couple of things. I think you picture me as some angry unabomber type pounding my fists on the keyboard to post on here, but I can assure you I have not taken his transfer personal. It doesn't affect my day to day life one bit except for the occasional day dream of what might have been. I just simply take the time to let everybody know that there is not some consensus of it "being the right move". It's like a persistent statement on here that is one of those things that becomes truth because it's repeated over and over and over.

I specifically mentioned a business parallel to let it be known that "it's a business" is not an excuse. If so, it would be considered "business" for the hobby lobby dude to pay for abortions for his employees instead of fighting it tooth and nail. Business is not void of values and integrity.

Also, can you give me an example of a player whose scholly was not renewed that had offers to play elsewhere? The majority of the time that happens with guys who pretty much understand they need to improve tremendously to get renewed the next year and that the first year is basically a gift. In the case of somebody like McMasters, who had big time offers and just puttered out, I wouldn't be against keeping him on for 4 years in the hopes he "gets it". That type of thing doesn't happen enough to consider something like that as a waste. Coaches are normally taking a flyer on a project guy anyway.

I was picturing you more like this guy

[Purple Haize]

No problem LU. NAJ has that effect on people! It's why I am on his ignore list. Now you will be too!

[El Scorcho]

I just don't see where he was committed to LU for anything more than what he gave us. It's not his fault we put all of our eggs in one basket. He committed to come to LU and play. He did that for a year and decided it wasn't for him. That's okay with me. The reasons why he decided to do that don't really matter to me.

When it comes to players, I think the decision to transfer should be treated equally regardless of the player's talent level. As long as they don't transfer mid-season, I've got not beef.

[adam42381]

Players transfer all the time for various reasons. I hate Duke, but think it was the right move. You guys are entitled to your opinions. The majority is also entitled to theirs.

[BJWilliams]

As with BYD, I dont have a dog in the fight with Duke/UNC, and my only real connection with UVa is that my sister graduated from there in 2000 (she now lives in Dallas, TX Sly so if you or the Mrs ever make a stop by White House Black Market there, maybe youll see her), that said, I was bummed to see Seth Curry go when he did, but to be frank, it wouldnt really have mattered to me if he stayed or left. Im glad he did well at Duke, but I really dont come down on either side of the "was it a good move or not" debate. He made a decision that he felt was in his best interest...that's all. Yeah it had a significant effect, but I think that even if he had stayed here, it would have still had just as significant an effect. Was it the "right thing to do?" Pardon the Jesus Juke but only God knows that for sure.

[JK37]

In all of the debate, I've lost sight of the question. Am I the only one? Are we debating whether or not the move to Duke was better for Seth, or are we asking if it was right/wrong for him to make the decision to transfer, as he did?

Question 1: Is Seth better off for transferring to Duke?
My answer: Yes. As an aspiring pro, he has spent the last three seasons playing for arguably the greatest basketball coach of our generation, competing numerous times on national and regional television, and playing alongside and against a higher level of athlete night-in and night-out. Whether he makes the NBA or not (and I'm in the camp that he'll get a shot as a FA), I believe he has improved himself and prepared himself in a better way for the NBA by playing at Duke, as opposed to remaining at Liberty.

Question 2: Was Seth's decision to transfer to Duke morally right?
My answer: I do not believe his decision was wrong, and for the reasons listed in my answer to Question 1, I believe it was right for him. Therefore, morally, it was right. A scholarship is a one-year commitment, and it is renewed each successive year by agreement between student-athlete and institution. The institution is most often represented by the head coach. If an institution can choose to not renew a student-athlete's scholarship, then a student-athlete has just as much right to refuse his end of the agreement and elect to transfer to another institution.

Question 1 may be more open to debate, but Question 2 is ironclad.

[adam42381]

In all of the debate, I've lost sight of the question. Am I the only one? Are we debating whether or not the move to Duke was better for Seth, or are we asking if it was right/wrong for him to make the decision to transfer, as he did?

Question 1: Is Seth better off for transferring to Duke?
My answer: Yes. As an aspiring pro, he has spent the last three seasons playing for arguably the greatest basketball coach of our generation, competing numerous times on national and regional television, and playing alongside and against a higher level of athlete night-in and night-out. Whether he makes the NBA or not (and I'm in the camp that he'll get a shot as a FA), I believe he has improved himself and prepared himself in a better way for the NBA by playing at Duke, as opposed to remaining at Liberty.

Question 2: Was Seth's decision to transfer to Duke morally right?
My answer: I do not believe his decision was wrong, and for the reasons listed in my answer to Question 1, I believe it was right for him. Therefore, morally, it was right. A scholarship is a one-year commitment, and it is renewed each successive year by agreement between student-athlete and institution. The institution is most often represented by the head coach. If an institution can choose to not renew a student-athlete's scholarship, then a student-athlete has just as much right to refuse his end of the agreement and elect to transfer to another institution.

Question 1 may be more open to debate, but Question 2 is ironclad.

This.

[LUconn]

In all of the debate, I've lost sight of the question. Am I the only one? Are we debating whether or not the move to Duke was better for Seth, or are we asking if it was right/wrong for him to make the decision to transfer, as he did?

Question 1: Is Seth better off for transferring to Duke?
My answer: Yes. As an aspiring pro, he has spent the last three seasons playing for arguably the greatest basketball coach of our generation, competing numerous times on national and regional television, and playing alongside and against a higher level of athlete night-in and night-out. Whether he makes the NBA or not (and I'm in the camp that he'll get a shot as a FA), I believe he has improved himself and prepared himself in a better way for the NBA by playing at Duke, as opposed to remaining at Liberty.

Question 2: Was Seth's decision to transfer to Duke morally right?
My answer: I do not believe his decision was wrong, and for the reasons listed in my answer to Question 1, I believe it was right for him. Therefore, morally, it was right. A scholarship is a one-year commitment, and it is renewed each successive year by agreement between student-athlete and institution. The institution is most often represented by the head coach. If an institution can choose to not renew a student-athlete's scholarship, then a student-athlete has just as much right to refuse his end of the agreement and elect to transfer to another institution.

Question 1 may be more open to debate, but Question 2 is ironclad.

I'm in agreement with the premise of this post, and it being broken up into 2 questions. And I agree that your first is debatable and the answer is unknowable since we can't view an alternate reality. But there are facts and case studies for both sides.

But your "ironclad" answer to question 2 is wonky. Because it was beneficial to him, it was therefore morally right? Is hedonism the school of thought around here?

[flameshaw]

I believe he should have established his fastball first before throwing so many sliders.

[alabama24]

Regardless of NCAA regulations of the length of scholarship, there is an implication from both parties that the athlete is coming there for his college career, not as a one year free agent.

That "implication" is yours alone. How many of the "best" b-ballers actually last 4 years? 2?

[JK37]

LUconn: my answer to Question 2 went beyond what was beneficial for Seth. That simply has to be established first in order to move on to the real reason his decision is morally acceptable.

BYD: I may not always agree with you, but I'm usually able to respect your points of view because they're reasonably defended. But you're really defending this position on the basis of an "implication" between college coaches and prospective student-athletes?! I am often accused of believing in a utopian atmosphere in collegiate athletics. But even I can recognize how the balances of the business side of athletics justifies Seth's right to make such a decision. One-year offers are not commonplace, but they are used on rare occasions. So you're statement that they're never used is false. However, I'll give it to you.

But, BYD, just as coaches so rarely ever make such an offer, and just as student-athletes so rarely commit for only one year, coaches often tell players that they (coach) plan on staying at the institution for the duration of the student-athlete's career, only to leave prior to the student-athlete's graduation when a better offer comes their way. Furthermore, an institution doesn't confer with the student-athlete regarding the job security of the coaching staff at the time of the offer of a scholarship. Additionally, coaches - and institutions - possess the right to not renew the scholarship offer at the conclusion of any of the student-athlete's years prior to the expiration of eligibility. Are you willing to say such practice is also morally reprehensible?

Point being, the one-year tenure of all offers of scholarship on the basis of athletic performance at NCAA member institutions reflects the balance and fairness required for all parties to coexist equally in the relationship. It also offers a firm foundation for the moral basis of Seth's right to make the decision he made. He fulfilled all responsibilities of his contract. And at the end of that contract's term, he entered into a contractual agreement with another institution of his choosing. There is NOTHING reprehensible about that line of decision-making.

[lynchburgwildcats]

Just because Liberty was apparently the only D1 school to give him a scholarship doesn't mean he owed or owes Liberty anything. He owed nothing to Liberty. Liberty, like any other D1 institution rather you want to admit to the truth or not, was using him like a serf in the European Middle Ages to make money while only "paying" him the bare minimum to get by in the tuition and room and board. If one is going to subject them self to the bondage of serfdom, might as well do it for one of the best "Lords."