I would take him also. The more the better, as long as they don't get much if any money.
It's Official: JRent
- Thread starter IAChief32
- Start date
Looks like you were right about B1G, IAChief.
From FLO....
<< FloWrestling has been able to confirm through the Renteria family that Jason has been granted a full release, including Big 10 schools.>>
They say he's still undecided about where to go at this point.
you don't turn away that kind of talent, come on home son.
Plenty of workout partners, bring on the 33/41 log jam. Let’s get slushy!
People need to remember Renteria has wanted to wear a Iowa singlet since he was really young.I posted yesterday that it had legs and now it also has arms.
Thus is all conjecture! It’s just your opinion, man..
I mean, have you even read the release document? Because I haven’t.
Never go against @IAChief32. Never.
With this now full release, an obvious result of push back from JRent; it’s pretty clear he wants to go B10. With clear favorite being Iowa. My opinion has changed, I think it’s all Iowa. It’s nice if/when we get him, the lineup looks good for a few years...
Honest question; who is closer (wrestling shape wise) to wrestling 41? DeSanto or JRent?
Honest question; who is closer (wrestling shape wise) to wrestling 41? DeSanto or JRent?
@IAChief32 may or may not be writing for Flo
https://www.flowrestling.org/articles/6207373-jason-renteria-being-pursued-by-iowa
It could all work out. Would be very nice to have JRent back in the fold.
It's all good as long as 174/184 get the attention they need going forward. Also 157 although if Young ends up there then it buys a bit more time and maybe Nelson there too and we are covered.
I would certainly welcome JRent to the team and think he would make us better. One has to worry about how much scholly $ we are putting into 133 and 141 (and 149 two years from now) with DeSanto, Cashman, Renteria (if he comes), Turk, Happel, and Murin. All are very good/great, but that is 6 guys probably with mid AA potential for two/three weights - none are screaming NC. I love DeSanto's potential and I think he could be in the NC discussion in a couple years, but I I don't see that in the others. I would rather have 1 or 2 absolute hammers - even if it takes a year or two. This influx makes the chance of us getting a hammer at these two weights much less likely due to scholarship money limitations.
It’s simple. Others will loose and/or a reduction in scholarships as they become juniors, seniors and don’t start.
Fair point. How do you rank our 133-141-pounders in terms of likelihood to win an NCAA title? For the sake of argument include Renteria.
Yup ! Just have Kennedy’s $$$ ready for him Im all amped up its gonna a greaaat year
Possible:
DeSanto
Possible but unlikely:
JRent/Murin - tie
Very unlikelies:
Happel
Cashman - lot of time to improve. Could be at 125 if Lee takes a RS.
Turk - just because he is older/has less time
I like all those guys. Just hope the $ tied up in them doesn't limit our ability to go all in on studs at 174/184.
Last edited:
I think JRent should verbal that he is going to Iowa.
Nope.
https://www.athleticbusiness.com/go...wer-conference-to-guarantee-scholarships.html
"The Big Ten has become the first major conference to guarantee scholarships to all student-athletes through the duration of an athlete's enrollment at one of its universities.
Any student-athlete recruited to a Big Ten institution through the offer of an athletic scholarship will be guaranteed the following throughout the course of their enrollment:
- The scholarship will neither be reduced nor cancelled provided he or she remains a member in good standing with the community, the university and the athletics department."
Last edited:
<<It’s simple. Others will loose and/or a reduction in scholarships as they become juniors, seniors and don’t start.>>
Reduction of scholarships is not allowed unless there are code of conduct issues.
Reduction of scholarships is not allowed unless there are code of conduct issues.
Just curious if it is OK to stipulate that they will, for example, get 0.5 scholly if they AA a previous year, 0.4 scholly if they were a starter at the BTT, or 0.2 scholly if they are a nonstarter the prior year?
Or does it have to be, for example, a 0.5 scholly/year regardless if they are a NC or nonstarter?
Are they able to increase a scholly from 0.3 to 0.5 if there is more available or if they want to reward a wrestler for better performance?
Or does it have to be, for example, a 0.5 scholly/year regardless if they are a NC or nonstarter?
Are they able to increase a scholly from 0.3 to 0.5 if there is more available or if they want to reward a wrestler for better performance?
It can be increased for whatever reason the coaches want but not reduced because of lack of athletic production.
So a coach can start a kid with minimal money with incentives based on production.
It is unlikely guys like Cashman and Turk are getting significant scholarship money.
Whoa Spooner dont get soft on us “unlikely” that is not the Spooner we all know and love. Just busting chops I agree though I would imagine those guys are on or will be min. Sports scholly money. I would love to be a fly on the wall when TnT and Co. are making these Decisions.
Last edited:
Thanks.
There is no limit on the amount of slush money that can be given or withdrawn based on performance though, is that correct? The NCAA does not regulate that from what I am gathering.
I thought the consensus was everyone is feeling pretty good about Kennedy for 174 in a few years and thinking we could manage until then? Or is he projected at 184?
So papa, how does this change the structure of scholarship money promises in real life these days? Old days, I am assuming a wrestler was promised, say, 0.5 scholly and told it could vary year to year if they are not a starter and could increase if they are NC,etc.
Does that same wrestler now get promised 0.2 or 0.3 scholly and told that it could increase if they are a starter, etc. Seems like any promise of scholarship money these days has to be based on their floor and not average expectation as it cannot be reduced.
This rule makes a lot more sense for FB and BB where the scholarship cap isn't as important.
Does that same wrestler now get promised 0.2 or 0.3 scholly and told that it could increase if they are a starter, etc. Seems like any promise of scholarship money these days has to be based on their floor and not average expectation as it cannot be reduced.
This rule makes a lot more sense for FB and BB where the scholarship cap isn't as important.
It just means coaches have to be even more prudent. I think there is an increase of kids being urged to "retire" for medical reasons. These are the kids that didn't meet expectations, likely won't start or meet those expectations going forward, would have gotten reductions years ago and got "injured". They get to keep their aid and it doesn't go against the 9.9
Really?
For 83% of D1 squads, that would be great. But for the top 5%, not so much.....
Latest posts
-
-
Hawkeyes Host Fast-Rising 2025 Three-Star DB, Graceson Littleton
- Latest: Eliot Clough
-
-
-
