- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Josh Mcneil update 12/20/2012
Posted on 12/20/12 at 12:37 pm to LSUTil_iDie
Posted on 12/20/12 at 12:37 pm to LSUTil_iDie
This is not a case of miscommunication like the Adam Taylor one. McNeil told the staff he was committing and the staff kind of gave a wink with the caveat that his grades must get in order. Same as Gardner. Not committed but if the grades are there then they are. Basically a commit but not officially.
Now I can understand people questioning which situations are different from others when it comes to grades. We currently have kids committed that are grade risks and yet they are officially commits. Why is the situation different and what is the line of thinking? I can come up with many different reasons this could be the case but none are any different than guys like Cutrer, Lawson or Robinson. Imo a grade risk is a grade risk. If the plan is to take them if the grades are there then why not just accept the commitements of Gardner and McNeil? If they don't qualify then what does it matter? If they do then it's just the plan working out. Ikm sure the staff has their reason and I'm not questioning their thinking or strategy. I'm just looking for ideas from others to try and figure out how the situations are different.
Now I can understand people questioning which situations are different from others when it comes to grades. We currently have kids committed that are grade risks and yet they are officially commits. Why is the situation different and what is the line of thinking? I can come up with many different reasons this could be the case but none are any different than guys like Cutrer, Lawson or Robinson. Imo a grade risk is a grade risk. If the plan is to take them if the grades are there then why not just accept the commitements of Gardner and McNeil? If they don't qualify then what does it matter? If they do then it's just the plan working out. Ikm sure the staff has their reason and I'm not questioning their thinking or strategy. I'm just looking for ideas from others to try and figure out how the situations are different.
Posted on 12/20/12 at 12:42 pm to lsufanva
quote:
Imo a grade risk is a grade risk.
Yeah but it is different coming from HS versus JUCO. There aren't many HS classes that LSU won't accept. Graduating HS is graduating HS.
Also, if a player doesn't qualify out of HS, you can always send him to JUCO or a prep academy like Hargrave, and then sign him again in six months.
Different story for JUCO. First of all, if JUCO's can't get it done in the classroom, they are more or less finished. There is not another JUCO to send them to.
Secondly, if we want the JUCO guys there in the Spring, and they didn't take the right classes to make that happen, we're SOL and so are they. Josh McNeil sounds Phil Loadholt all over again.
Posted on 12/20/12 at 12:45 pm to lsufanva
Well from what I understand it's not a grade issue but a credit issue like it was with Fanaika. All he has to do is take the right classes in the spring and he can be here for summer/fall camp. Is that about the gist of it?
Popular
Back to top
![logo](https://images.tigerdroppings.com/images/layout/TDIcon.jpg)