That's a little surprising, grade issues possibly?
I don't get this. So he still burns a year by playing at a JUCO thus leaving him with three years of eligibility. For what? He gets to play instead of sitting at a DI school.With a medical hardship waiver, he will be a redshirt freshman at the JUCO next season. If he had transferred directly to a D-I school, he would have been ineligible to play next season under the transfer rules.
I don't get this. So he still burns a year by playing at a JUCO thus leaving him with three years of eligibility. For what? He gets to play instead of sitting at a DI school.
I think there is more to it. I don't think he found himself wanted at any school he was interested in so he chose to camp out at a JUCO hoping that he could attract the attention of some other schools.
EDIT: He probably wasn't wanted by any DI school because most here unwilling to touch a player mindfcuked by Hewitt. Who knows how many sessions on the couch it will take to fix him.
...and have a chance to play his final 3 years in D-I for a coach who doesn't have his head completely lodged up his own a$$hole.
Jim, you lost me at this part. Hewitt is gone, so Lockett had a great opportunity to play significant minutes under a good coach for four years at an A10 school. I still haven't heard a logical explanation why he would sacrifice one of those years at a JUCO, regardless how how good it is. There has to be more to the story that we don't know.
I never envisioned Lockett being a major contributor here anyway. Jackson obviously was a different story. Having him back to play the SF spot this season would've been huge for us.
Yeah, we're definitely on the same page here regarding Jackson. Paulsen obviously told Lockett, Jackson and Porter something they didn't want to hear, and they all have every right to move on if that's the case.
I think we all agree that we only want guys here who buy in 100-percent to the new coach's system and insistence on sound fundamentals and accountability. Based on what we saw year, I imagine many of them are suffering from a severe case of culture shock.
Think about the edge intensity with which our teams used to play under Larranaga, and contrast that with the Hewitt years.
Not every kid is willing or able to play for a demanding coach. A lot of the kids we signed probably liked Hewitt because he's so laid back and isn't obsessive about the details. Who wouldn't want to play for a coach who claps when you turn the ball over and keeps you on the floor when you blow your defensive assignment 5 trips in a row?
Of course, there's that whole "winning" thing. We have a winning coach -- now we need to get back to bringing in winning players again.
And who knows, maybe Abram, Murrell, Livingston and Dixon come in, surprise everyone, and make us forget about Jackson, Lockett and Porter right away?
No offense to the kids who left, but I've forgotten about them already.
We never won anything with them, so what's the difference?
Jim, you lost me at this part. Hewitt is gone, so Lockett had a great opportunity to play significant minutes under a good coach for four years at an A10 school. I still haven't heard a logical explanation why he would sacrifice one of those years at a JUCO, regardless how how good it is. There has to be more to the story that we don't know.
If you guess "impregnated a girl" you'll be right about 70% of the time in these cases.
Hopefully now that the Confederate Flag is down, there will be less out of wedlock births in the black community so Planned Parenthood can't sell fetuses anymore.
Huh. That last paragraph seems somewhat non-sensical now that I re-read it. Still gonna leave it in though.
How is everyone's summer going?
Well since you asked, I passed out drunk at the beach and got sunburned on my taint.
Paulsen obviously told Lockett, Jackson and Porter something they didn't want to hear, and they all have every right to move on if that's the case.