Archived Topic

Heaps to start at Miami?

by NDCougar · 7/29/2014

Advertisement
F
frdbtr
Wouldn't shock me in the least. Heaps is the best practice QB in the nation. If he starts, he will lose that job part way through the season again, just like he has everywhere else he's been.
C
craigoscarson
If I were a gambling man near a casino... Heaps would make me a lot of money... betting against Miami
G
Guest
Yeah, as frdbtr says, Heaps may be the most amazing 7 on 7 QB ever. The problem is he can't face a rush to save his life.
S
scott715
Get ready to put up some money against Miami.
Advertisement
G
Gunk
He may start there but he won't finish there.



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
U
urroner
I still wish him the best and I hate Miami and I hate Florida State more than I hate the Ewets, but he hasn't done anything to make me wish him ill, unless it's playing against BYU. Heck, I don't hold a grudge against Bryant Gumbell (He who never met a mirror he didn't like and whom Will Rogers never met, if you know what I mean.) and Barry Switzer (http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=1755&dat=19850105&id=oNoeAAAAIBAJ&sjid=QWkEAAAAIBAJ&pg=5256,3718868" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;)
C
Cougs_Rule
THats awfully Christian of U-roner. Didnt Christians get eaten by Lions at one point? :-)

But I am with you. If we all were betting men, I would almost lay money (probably not very much, bc the odds would be so high and not require much to risk given all the doubting betters--and bc I wouldnt want to lose much) on Heaps to succeed. I am sure he learned much. I a sure Miami will have him on a short leash.

But as for being a quitter..............you mudslingers out there need to eat some crow. Whether the kid is functioning out of denial or not, it doesnt matter. The kid has not given up. Otherwise, based on your criteria of quitting (transfering out of a less than desirable situation) I expect you to also call Taysom, Uani, Beck, Hall, all quitters. #enterthecrickets
S
Schmoe
I don't think what anyone has said anything wishing ill on Jake, just trying to accurately predict what will happen based on previous experience. Good luck to Jake, but it won't surprise me if the pattern continues.
S
SpiffCoug
Actually, if you put money on Jake to do well, you'd could probably get some very good odds on that. So if he did play well, you'd make bank!



Whereas if you put on on him to continue to struggle and not do as well, the payout for the same bet wouldn't be nearly as great.
Advertisement
C
Cougs_Rule
Spiff, you stated that much more clearly than I did. I like the payout by odds.

So, what do folks think-- rationally? 50-1 odds Heaps plays well enough to keep his starting job? 100-1 he actually plays "well"?
S
SpiffCoug
5:3 doesn't play well

7:1 does play well.



So for a $100 bet, you'd win $700 for playing well and only about $150 if he didn't.
N
nuk13
This is his third team right? He's catching up with a lot of pros for the amount of teams he's played for. I don't understand why the ncaa doesn't have some rule on how many teams you can play for. People are upset at missionaries coming back and playing for the same team.
G
Gunk
SpiffCoug wrote:
5:3 doesn't play well

7:1 does play well.



So for a $100 bet, you'd win $700 for playing well and only about $150 if he didn't.


$50 bucks is $50 bucks. That's a %50 return on your...ummm..."investment."



Put $50 on him doing well and $50 on him doing poorly.
R
redneckjedi
nuk13 wrote:
This is his third team right? He's catching up with a lot of pros for the amount of teams he's played for. I don't understand why the ncaa doesn't have some rule on how many teams you can play for. People are upset at missionaries coming back and playing for the same team.


There's already a practical limit due to eligibility, because you have to sit out a year unless you've graduated. The absolute maximum would be 4, in the following scenario:



1. Player enrolls early, doesn't sign an LOI, plays a year at school 1. Eligibility clock begins, after the season he has 4 years to play 3.

2. Player goes on a mission for two years, transfers and plays a year at school 2. Doesn't have to sit out thanks to the Harvey Langi LOI loophole. After the seasion, 3 years to play 2.

3. Player transfers to school 3, sits out a redshirt year, plays a season. 1 year to play 1.

4. Player graduates from school 3, plans to do graduate school at school 4. He transfers and is eligible immediately, for 1 season.



You can also substitute a Div. II transfer for the graduate transfer or the LOI loophole transfer and get 4. But you've only got 4 years you can actually play.



That's a crazy scenario. Reality for most players is 3 schools, because unless you use the LOI loophole, the graduate transfer, or transfer to a lower division, your second and third transfers would both eat a year of eligibility, and you'd only wind up playing 3 seasons.



If you transfer at any time without a redshirt available (say, because you didn't play as a freshman, or you already transferred once), you are burning a year of eligibility. To me this is penalty enough. No need to put some artificial cap on the number of transfers or schools.
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.