He is on pace to set the single-season reception (93, Zaccheaus in 2018) and receiving yardage (1,203, Wicks in 2021) records.
Right now he’s at 88-1,199.
(Both, incidentally, are in the NFL — Eagles and Packers, respectively.)
5 Likes
I wouldn’t put 100 catches for 1,500 yards without the benefit of a bowl game out of reach.
https://x.com/nocontextcfb/status/1724504155358990590?s=20
Look closely for the forest amongst the trees
2 Likes
Heh! (need to look at the full version on Twitter to get it, plus be more up on college football than me)
1 Like
Hah yup. If true that could be one of the great all time oops moments in coaching.
1 Like
I had to read the replies to figure out what yall were on about lol
1 Like
I don’t think it’s real but would be hilarious if it is.
2 Likes
https://twitter.com/on3sports/status/1724564675919016285?s=46&t=IIkkMqQ8qIBkUJTInsw88Q
Coaching carousel is in full effect. This one makes no sense without additional context, to be honest.
3 Likes
I disagree slightly. Given the hype and the money they paid for him and the results he gave. Plus they had that mess with the UA sponsorship deal that I think he played in.
I don’t have a twitter account, could someone explain please?
1 Like
His location is Starkville, MS imputing that he is interviewing for their job.
The accuracy of the location may be open to question.
5 Likes
33-33 in 6 seasons, doesn’t like to recruit and isn’t promoting NIL. Low attendance at games. Buyout’s only 9 mil. Offense isn’t deemed innovative like it was 15 years ago. Job’s tougher next season in the new conference.
I can see reasons they want to fire him, but they just extended him after last season (not sure if they increased the buyout) and I don’t know if there’s a better replacement out there, especially as they enter the B1G next season.
2 Likes
Yeah having looked at some UCLA fan opinions of him it’s starting to clear up more. Seems like he doesn’t wanna recruit anymore and hates talking to donors, not a good recipe for success.
I also wonder who they hire as a replacement though, maybe they look to lure either Jonathan Smith or Jake Dickert away? Kelly for all his faults still had solid success there over the past three years. I guess UCLA as an administration didn’t view it as enough but I’ve never really believed that job to be super prestigious.
1 Like
Second team in the city? Not a great gig. Despite having a beautiful homefield the facilities aren’t anything special. And now you’re stuck handling a B1G schedule that will be totally feast or famine. Not the most appealing but I wouldn’t be surprised if they are prepared to drop serious coin to lure in a big name.
Tony Bennett hasn’t said no yet
12 Likes
Was waiting for the Virginia AG to threaten the NCAA with a lawsuit for JMU cause everyone know that would be coming.
I just have 0 sympathy for JMU since they knew what they signed up for and probably at some point voted for that rule.
Also, JMU’s football program is funded on the backs of their students by way of some of the highest student athletic fees in the country. 75% of their athletic department revenue comes from student fees. 2500 bucks a year per student as of a few years ago. Ours was like 650 or so. They’re burying their students under a mountain of additional student loan debt.
2 Likes
Wait, for real? They’re charging their students $2,500 per year to fund their athletic department? That’s a joke. I almost don’t believe it because it feels like somebody would have rebelled at this point. Can you opt out?
3 Likes
What is the purpose of the rule? I don’t deny that they know the rule (although I doubt they had a vote in it). But I can’t think of a reason for the rule that’s not punitive.
1 Like
The quote I’ve seen on this from the relevant NCAA committee is:
“Requirements for members transitioning into FBS are based on factors beyond athletics performance. They are intended to ensure schools are properly evaluating their long-term sustainability in the subdivision. Sponsoring sports at this level requires increased scholarships, expanded athletics compliance efforts, and additional academic and mental health support for student-athletes, and the transition period is intended to give members time to adjust to those increased requirements to position student-athletes at those schools for long-term success.”
And they basically don’t want to give waivers because they want the rules to be agreed on to apply to everyone, so their answer is “propose a rules change, don’t file a waiver.”
I have no opinion on whether that all makes sense or not.
Source article: NCAA denies James Madison’s second attempt at bowl waiver, per sources: What’s next for Dukes? - The Athletic
2 Likes
Info’s in that article I linked. Maybe someone can opt out, but considering how much effort they put into hiding the extent of the fee, they probably make it as hard as they can to opt out if it’s even possible.
“Buried in each student’s yearly cost of almost $23,000 was a required fee of $2,340 solely to finance the school’s sports teams. The money was not for using the gym, or for funding student clubs and activities. It was only for underwriting the costs of athletic teams — and a student could only find out about it by visiting and searching the school’s website.”
5 Likes