Braxton Bonds- CPA 2014 PG

#51
#51
Personally, I would prefer Tyndall not give Bonds the scholarship. No matter how much this team needs PG play this year, I was hoping we were done handing out 4 year scholarships to project guys. If he gives Lopez the scholly for 1 year and lets Campbell and Bonds be the teams 2 walk-ons I would like that better. Jmo

We have 2 scholarships open, Bonds and Lopez could get both this year. Next year Bonds could go back to being a walk on depending on how this recruiting class goes.

The only way I'm ok with bonds being a 4 year scholarship guy is if it means we are definitely getting Blackwell.
 
#52
#52
We have 2 scholarships open, Bonds and Lopez could get both this year. Next year Bonds could go back to being a walk on depending on how this recruiting class goes.

The only way I'm ok with bonds being a 4 year scholarship guy is if it means we are definitely getting Blackwell.

Depends on how good Bonds is. If he is SEC talent then fine give him a scholly. If he's only coming because it's instate and it might give Tyndall inroads to a higher ranked recruit. Then I say let him walk on. Package deals rarely work. And again, while I know your okay with pulling guys scholarships, I think a coach should avoid it if possible.
 
#53
#53
Depends on how good Bonds is. If he is SEC talent then fine give him a scholly. If he's only coming because it's instate and it might give Tyndall inroads to a higher ranked recruit. Then I say let him walk on. Package deals rarely work. And again, while I know your okay with pulling guys scholarships, I think a coach should avoid it if possible.

If it's discussed and agreed upon with the player in advance I don't see the issue?
 
#54
#54
If we do indeed get bonds do we hold on to him to have a better chance at Blackwell or do we let him go if a higher profile pg is interested and we have no open schollys ? A what if scenario but a interesting one IMO
 
#55
#55
If it's discussed and agreed upon with the player in advance I don't see the issue?

I have to agree here. If Bonds knows of the possibility up front, then it is somewhat different than just having the rug yanked from under him. He's already decided to come to UT as a walk-on, so it is obvious where he wants to be. If he gets a year free as a scholarship player, all the better for him.
 
#57
#57
If we do indeed get bonds do we hold on to him to have a better chance at Blackwell or do we let him go if a higher profile pg is interested and we have no open schollys ? A what if scenario but a interesting one IMO

I doubt Bonds is agreeing to come here without the certainty of having a spot, I'm sure he would have a walk on spot for as long as he wants, Tyndall's not gonna run him off with Blackwell still open.
 
#64
#64
Rather or not the person had no idea what they were talking about is to be determined lol
 
#65
#65
I was under the impression a walk on gets a full year scholly I'm sure I've heard of that somewhere

No a walk on is on the team but doesn't get a scholarship unless there is an open one (which is what could happen with Lopez or Bonds this year). Otherwise they have to pay their own way. Scholarships are year to year and not four year deals. So a walk on could be on scholarship one year if there's an extra and not the next. That seems to be a common misconception I see some people have.
 
#66
#66
A yr at CPA is probably not much less than a freshman year at UT. If he gets the full benefits of meals, apparel, etc, it''ll be less.
 
#68
#68
No a walk on is on the team but doesn't get a scholarship unless there is an open one (which is what could happen with Lopez or Bonds this year). Otherwise they have to pay their own way. Scholarships are year to year and not four year deals. So a walk on could be on scholarship one year if there's an extra and not the next. That seems to be a common misconception I see some people have.
I knew a walk on could get a scholly but didn't know the terms of how
 
#69
#69
Not sure how this is gonna work. The SEC mandate for walk on players is two per year. We already have two walk on players. I don't have a link but the SEC changed this rule a few years ago.
 
#70
#70
6'1" 170. Another one to fatten up!

I suppose he might still grow upwards a bit more as well.
 
#71
#71
If I had to guess, and this is purely me speculating, there is probably a rule that doesn't let him be on scholarship because of how late he was released from his Liberty scholarship. Why else would he not just be brought on on scholarship?

In that case, I would imagine we put Lopez on scholarship so that he technically isnt a walk on this year. Thus, allowing Bonds to be a second walk-on.

Again, this is just me thinking out loud.
 
#72
#72
We have 2 scholarships open, Bonds and Lopez could get both this year. Next year Bonds could go back to being a walk on depending on how this recruiting class goes.

The only way I'm ok with bonds being a 4 year scholarship guy is if it means we are definitely getting Blackwell.

This!!!!!
 
#74
#74
Not sure how this is gonna work. The SEC mandate for walk on players is two per year. We already have two walk on players. I don't have a link but the SEC changed this rule a few years ago.

We have 2 open scholarships, move 1/3 walkons to scholarship, problem solved.
 
#75
#75
If I had to guess, and this is purely me speculating, there is probably a rule that doesn't let him be on scholarship because of how late he was released from his Liberty scholarship. Why else would he not just be brought on on scholarship?

In that case, I would imagine we put Lopez on scholarship so that he technically isnt a walk on this year. Thus, allowing Bonds to be a second walk-on.

Again, this is just me thinking out loud.

Seems pretty plausible, better than my idea, I was thinking his uncle Barry was paying...
 

VN Store



Back
Top