Jump to content
Buffalo Bulls - UB Fan Forum

James Graham III


Recommended Posts

18 hours ago, John said:

I think he should play this year and let the chips fall wherever. We need to field a more competitive team this year so we don’t lose more fans and especially more season ticket holders who are leaving and not showing up for games as evidenced by many empty seats. 

Giving a few less minutes to Adams, Chatman, and Smith to get Graham on the court is not improving this team in any meaningful way. The only outcome that it possibly flips is the 6 point home loss in the opener to FDU. This team is getting killed and Graham isn't going to save fans' attention. If we're truly "rebuilding" this year then burning a year of Graham's eligibility would be coaching malpractice and frankly would be unfair to him. Is there any guarantee that he'd even be eligible beyond the 14 day window of the TRO? We want to burn his year of eligibility for a single away game where we'll be 20 point underdogs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, trueblue32 said:

Giving a few less minutes to Adams, Chatman, and Smith to get Graham on the court is not improving this team in any meaningful way. The only outcome that it possibly flips is the 6 point home loss in the opener to FDU. This team is getting killed and Graham isn't going to save fans' attention. If we're truly "rebuilding" this year then burning a year of Graham's eligibility would be coaching malpractice and frankly would be unfair to him. Is there any guarantee that he'd even be eligible beyond the 14 day window of the TRO? We want to burn his year of eligibility for a single away game where we'll be 20 point underdogs?

It would be coaching malpractice to not play him. Literally every head coach across the country is playing or planning to play their two time transfers. So why hold out a player who could impact things? If the NCAA closes the 14 day window then I’m sure playing 1 game won’t count towards burning his eligibility. Right now, take advantage. It’s a free for all. You play the kid. Worry about the rest later

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, DaBulls99 said:

In case some of you missed it - the NCAA backtracked and said that if anyone plays during this 14 day window and the ban is re-instated after the 14 days, they would lose a season of eligibility. Doubt he plays now. 

Lol at the NCAA. Thanks for the update. We haven’t heard the final word on this yet. Still seeing tweets about how many programs are planning to play their two time transfers. Something is gonna give.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DooleyBull06 said:

It would be coaching malpractice to not play him. Literally every head coach across the country is playing or planning to play their two time transfers. So why hold out a player who could impact things? If the NCAA closes the 14 day window then I’m sure playing 1 game won’t count towards burning his eligibility. Right now, take advantage. It’s a free for all. You play the kid. Worry about the rest later

DooleyBull06 is sure that playing 1 game won’t count towards burning his eligibility (it literally does, barring an injury that would require a medical waiver) so we will burn a year of free college, living paid for, and development towards a professional basketball career. Not my life so who cares right

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, trueblue32 said:

DooleyBull06 is sure that playing 1 game won’t count towards burning his eligibility (it literally does, barring an injury that would require a medical waiver) so we will burn a year of free college, living paid for, and development towards a professional basketball career. Not my life so who cares right

Look man, I wasn’t coming at you. Just a simple disagreement. For the ncaa to burn a year of eligibility when a player played under a court ruling would be very wrong. But hey it’s the ncaa. But also as I said, the situation was fluid and has changed since this morning. So whatever. Whatever helps UB win

Edited by DooleyBull06
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/15/2023 at 7:52 PM, DooleyBull06 said:

For the ncaa to burn a year of eligibility when a player played under a court ruling would be very wrong.

The court ruling would have only applied to the one person at West Virginia who brought the suit.  Without the stipulation one game played by someone else could have cost a year of eligibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...