Absolutely not.
Portal
- Thread starter chito_and_leon
- Start date
I agree with Dough. Clarkson has NBA athleticism along with an outside shot, and most importantly, he can defend NBA players.
Haggerty can score if he gets inside and draw fouls. I'm not disputing that. He also doesn't have an NBA level 3 pt shot....yet. He could develop that with more work but in this age of NBA basketball you're either an inside post player or an outside threat or some unique combination of both (Jokic, Holmgren, Wembananya). Haggerty is a good college player who has figured out the refereeing and getting those calls but the quickness and athleticism he'd be going against at that level would never allow him to get that step to the basket. Hell, Shaq Harrison is closer to the NBA than Haggerty
Yes, he's still in the league.
You probably should...there's a team down the road that's on the verge of a title who's pretty damn good.
I can’t dredge up any affinity for a team in okc.
That said I did see the last 6 minutes of their most recent playoff game when channel surfing. No doubt they are good. But I don't feel any connection to them.
Shaq Harrison is playing in Europe somewhere.
DaQuan Jeffries, however, plays for the Hornets. Was starting at one point I believe. Which probably tells you how horrible the Hornets are, no offense to him.
DaQuan Jeffries, however, plays for the Hornets. Was starting at one point I believe. Which probably tells you how horrible the Hornets are, no offense to him.
It probably took you an hour to watch those six minutes. That last minute did drag on for awhile.
I watched the Pacers/Knicks game last night and the winner there would probably be 4th if they were in the West.
Thunder, Denver and maybe even Minnesota appear better than either of those two.
And yet I still think he’s a worse player…. Go figure.
because he is a worse player. I'm not even trying to hate but I think he would be chewed alive in the NBA.
Most on this board swore Clarkson would never play in the NBA if I recall. I believe he has now scored more points in the NBA than any other TU player. We tend to be a bit jaded on kids who leave us for other schools
I still won't claim him. The two things those two players share in common is that they were selfish players and they only gave us one year. That could have been a contributing factor to our jadedness.
I remembered him as one year, but now that you mention it I think you are right about that. I forgot about his freshman year and just remembered his second year when he took over the team as a sophomore.
He was here two seasons and appeared in 58 games. If memory serves, he returned and completed his degree.
He has also scored more money in the NBA than any other TU player, I would wager.
I absolutely believe that to be true. As I recall, he had a pretty nice contract when he went to the Lakers. And wasn't he sixth man of the year one time?
Clarkson signed a 2 year $28M contract last year. He has made over $110M and counting for his career.
I doubt either school can count on any donations. He doesn't seem to carry any allegiances, except to himself.
Last edited:
Can anyone think of a single basketball player who has made a named or endowed gift to the athletic department? I could probably name 20 football players, and a half dozen or so golfers, soccer players, baseball team members each.
As you know, I don’t like discussing donors in this forum, I think it should be subject to a ban, but basketball needs to step up.
As you know, I don’t like discussing donors in this forum, I think it should be subject to a ban, but basketball needs to step up.
This board is probably not a place for who has not donated. Maybe to discuss Corporations but not basketball or football players. The important thing is that the NIL bucket has been enlarged significantly for both sports this year and is apparent.
Players that jump don't seem to care about their education, so why should the fans. Players that stay, I think the fans care deeply about their education.
Statement From Justin Moore on The House Settlement - Tulsa
As you may know, the landscape of college athletics is changing rapidly. Most recently, the formal approval of the settlement in the House v. NCAA case has o...
The sad and unfortunate outcome of this mess is that so many kids won't get their education. The NCAA's advertised talking point of:
“Almost All of Us Will be Going Pro in Something Other Than Sports.”
has essentially been completely wiped out in the major sports. The lack of governance means they're all becoming pros for a short window of time for what will amount to peanuts in the long run versus a degree that would have paid them dividends for the 40 years following the end of their professional dreams. The bag men are going to get rich, the fans of college sports will become more disenfranchised, and the kids will be discarded when their eligibility expires.
Hence why I said we should drop the sham of them being granted scholarships and make every single one of them pay the university to attend classes….either while they’re part of the athletic (semi-pro) league or afterwards. Their choice.
And if they don’t make enough to cover their tuition by the time they’re cut from the team… or they spend all their money on ritz crackers and Enya albums….so be it. They chose to be professionals rather than students. They can get loans like everyone else.
Certainly cant argue with your point with with regard to the "revenue sports". About the only positive that I've been able to glean from this self inflicted shiz show is that the scholarship pool now is greater for the olympic sports
It’s interesting to watch kids reactions when they hear they aren’t going to be getting free money from the television ad sales from the public’s interest in another sport and instead their sport is being eliminated or glide pathed to elimination over five years. And that’s quietly happening at the lower P4.
The increase in roster limits is interesting because schools aren’t giving any or relatively little money to the Olympic sports. I hear OU may spend as little as $500,000 total on them and some none at all. So kids can get a full scholarship instead of a .3 scholarship but won’t get cash. That might be better than a .3 and $10,000 even if it hits their pride and IG cred.
We could actually see lower P4 Olympics coming to Tulsa because the aid package, academic awards and tax benefits are better than what the P4 can pay a cross country runner. We could get really good really quick in our established sports with some planning and targeted recruiting. Especially since we will have cap room unlike OU.
It will certainly stretch the distance between schools with professional football and little or nothing else making millions and schools like Tulsa a tier down with football and basketball raising money to partially fund everything else and balance the books.
The increase in roster limits is interesting because schools aren’t giving any or relatively little money to the Olympic sports. I hear OU may spend as little as $500,000 total on them and some none at all. So kids can get a full scholarship instead of a .3 scholarship but won’t get cash. That might be better than a .3 and $10,000 even if it hits their pride and IG cred.
We could actually see lower P4 Olympics coming to Tulsa because the aid package, academic awards and tax benefits are better than what the P4 can pay a cross country runner. We could get really good really quick in our established sports with some planning and targeted recruiting. Especially since we will have cap room unlike OU.
It will certainly stretch the distance between schools with professional football and little or nothing else making millions and schools like Tulsa a tier down with football and basketball raising money to partially fund everything else and balance the books.
We can thank Jerry O & the fundraising team/contributors for a lot of that.
That's not exactly fair to the non stars that don't get paid as much, and keep the unity of the team each year in football, and other sports.
I saw that South Carolina's WBB team had a collective GPA last year of 3.67. Paige Bueckers, who for a while got more NIL $$ than any other college athlete, male or female, graduated with about that GPA. Kids who value education are doing well. The issue is less NIL and more societal. The % of HS grads who continue their education after HS is decreasing significantly, especially among young male HS grads, even though research shows that there has never been a bigger difference in life outcomes between people with a college degree and those without. People with a college degree live longer, make more $$, have less chronic illness, are less likely to abuse drugs, are less likely to go to jail, are less likely to get divorced and on and on. But as a society, we are undermining the value of education for political reasons and then you have kids who don't think college is important in the first place and would be working at an Amazon fulfillment center but can get paid more to play FB or BB and of course they jump to the next big check.
If they had something in their contracts that stated if their nil equated to more than twice the value of the total cost of attendance then they would be responsible for tuition, that would be a deal I think they could live with. But the competition with other universities would probably kill that kind of stipulation.
There's a lot of angsty stuff in the professional endurance athlete world about how professional athletes spend half their time cultivating an image through marketing and social media to be able to afford sponsorships to be able to train, and most cannot afford to be fulltime. And frustration that the $$ goes to the stars not the best runners or cyclists. It's going to become the same for college athletes other than BB or FB. Look at Livvy Dunne. They can make a lot more from non-university endorsements than from the schools but that's a lot of work.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
🏀 Recruiting TU Basketball Offers -- Class of 2025, 2026 and beyond- Latest: Bill Lowery
-
-