Mizzou forward Tyler Stone has sparked a debate in Kansas City. Back in April, Mizzou officials announced Stone and guard Miguel Pela would be transferring to other schools.
Per NCAA rules, both players would have to sit out for a year.
Meanwhile, the Tigers announced the arrival of two prized Juco recruits just two days later.
This was a hot topic in Kansas City sports talk radio this afternoon. The perception is this: Teams can "fire" a player AND he/she has to sit out a year. On some levels, that just doesn't seem right, especially when you listen to Stone's mother.
"I can’t see how a school can love him to death one year and the next year cut him loose," said his mother, Sharon Stone. "They had to get rid of somebody."
However, the NCAA rules are fairly clear that there are "participation expectations" on the field.
The professional equivalent would be getting one-year contracts with no guarantee for the future.
Mizzou head coach called the timing of Stone and Pela's transfer and the arrival of two juco players coincidental. He's aware of the reputation a coach gets when he runs players off like that.
"I don’t have a lot of guys go in and out of my program," he said. "My kids are like my family, and I want my family to be happy. If you’re not happy, then maybe this is not the right place."
I suspect "if you're not happy" really means "if you're not productive" because that's what college athletics comes down to. The two juco guys can help the team more than
This idea of players on these "renewable scholarships" has drawn the eye of the US Justice Departent's antitrust division as well.