(I just don’t know where I should be responding!)

No coach is perfect; for all his flaws, you could never say that Fulmer didn’t understand what cutting a scholarship of might mean to the long-term life of a player. He’s said before that most players who lose scholarships wind up back where they were before college, and for a lot of players that isn’t a pleasant return.

It’s really hard to make a fair judgment without the whole story on these players, but it’s not unreasonable to imagine that the new staff might be handling some of the players incorrectly. Your point about the difference between a rookie and a freshman or between a 2nd-year player and a sophomore is very correct. Yet all these coaches are very familiar with college coaching – more familiar than Weis was, in fact. So it’s hard to say.

But it’s fair enough to make a note that this staff may indeed be too impersonal with the players. I’m not saying that and I’m not even trying to suggest it to be so; the evidence right now merely cannot preclude that possibility.

But I’m obliged to say that I disagree, in general. Granting athletic scholarships to players is not a one-way street. They are expected to come to the university, work hard, produce, and make money for the athletic department (who in turn pays for scholarships). I am on academic scholarship at the University of Tennessee, and if I do not meet certain requirements, those scholarships are no longer offered. I don’t see why it should be any different in the football realm.

When you’ve got guys out there, like Nick Reveiz who, I believe, is a walk-on who earned a scholarship, it doesn’t seem fair that a guy like Morley should continually be granted mulligans. That said, I admire Morley’s tenacity and drive to get himself academically eligible again, but those efforts do no preclude him from having to continually make wise decisions.

But I think we just need more time and an entire season to see exactly how his personal relationships with his players are going to fully play out. You make good points though.

I take exception to your statement that Fulmer was more concerned with the players off-the-field and that Kiffen is just concerned with on-the-field results. Fulmer’s teams have been notorious for their of-the-field issues. So much so that the the award for the program with the most egregious arrest record is called the Fulmer Cup.

Couching the lack of program discipline as Fulmer’s concern for the players after their dismissal is somewhat short-sighted. If he was truly concerned for the players, he would have instituted the sort of strict discipline necessary to steer the bulk of the kids in the right direction. That’s what Kiffen did by dismissing Morley. Setting up an expectation that actions have consequence, and in doing so, teaching these kids perhaps the best life lesson they can learn.