Shirley to join Washington

Josh Shirley will join the Washington Huskies, the school announced today. Shirley had been vehemntly denying that he would play for the Huskies, who were among his final schools during his original recruitment. After being charged with felony theft in late-June (charges that are still pending, though could be lessened to misdemeanor) along with fellow then-incoming freshmen Paul and Shaq Richardson, Shirley and the Richardsons were release from their letters of intent by UCLA and denied admission.

Here’s a link to the announcement:

Facebook Twitter Plusone Digg Reddit Stumbleupon Tumblr Email
  • Coach Thom

    Surprise, surprise! Extremely disappointed in Josh. I was hoping he’d be man enough to face his mistakes, learn from them, and then become a better person. It was not to be.

  • Anonymous

    The charges were dropped? Is there doubt to whether he was involved or were they dropped on a technicality?

  • Josh Squirrelly

    Both Josh and his older brother have made bad mistakes in life, this rests on his parents. Way to go! Also, think about it guys, do we really want this guy playing such an important cerebral role on our defense? Not I, hopefully the rain in Seattle will help camouflage his tears, what a baby.

  • Pistalion

    Do we actually know what he did? Did he participate in the alleged purse snatching, did he just not do anything, did he not report? I wish I had more information about what happened. Unfortunately Josh and the Richardsons didn’t call Gold back so he doesn’t have enough info to provide a good reason for why this happened, and those people are the other people who know the story… Not. Talk to people in the athletic department, talk to people at the police department, campus police, talk to the AD, the Richardsons and Shirley’s Lawyer. Do Your Job.

  • Anonymous

    Didn’t the UW fans and supporters railed against Coach Neuheisel because he wasn’t a disciplinarian? Now their new coach took in a player that CRN disciplined and dismissed from his team. Kind of ironic.

  • BruinMan1972

    We have plenty of depth at linebacker anyway. No big loss. Lets not bring down the kid, as much as we as internet posters like to pretend we know everything we really don’t. Right or wrong I wish him the best. Isn’t that the Bruin Way?

  • j_doe

    Well, they did need someone to replace the guy who was dismissed for failing his drug test. Why not get a thief? That makes sense.

  • bruinova

    Props to UCLA for giving him a full release from his LOI so that he’s able to get a second chance and able to start college this fall. Hopefully he’s had quite a wake up call and will not take the second chance that UW has offered him lightly.

    Adversity does not build character, it reveals it. Good luck to Josh at UW in both his academics and athletics and I hope he goes 0-4 against UCLA and 4-0 against USC.

  • Resource Guy

    Sarkisian is from Pete’s school of recruiting. “I don’t know anything…it couldn’t have happened”. Sarkisian is not kidding anyone. He dropped his TE as a PR move knowing there were going to be questions when he picked up Shirley. Apparently Shirley would rather live life like a “Dawg” than a Bruin. I hope our O-line pancakes him on a regular basis.

  • JustSoYouKnow

    And if you’d really like to have a link to the story, as this promises…

    http://www.gohuskies.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/072210aaa.html

  • BruinFaithful

    What do you expect from a thief? Good riddance!!!!

  • A players mom

    Good luck to Josh, I wish him the best and if this helps him move forward and learn from his mistakes so be it. We released him from his LOI so he needs to do what he has to do to be a success. There are no guarantees in life and if his scholarship from UCLA is gone then he needs a fresh start. Seemingly nice kid who made a mistake that will follow him forever. Trust me I am loyal to UCLA but it is not for everyone.

  • BruinBall

    Washington…we take your felons!

  • Anonymous

    I guess stealing a purse is a lesser evil than winning a purse.

  • robear20

    Shirley is bad mouthing UCLA on his twitter account telling potential recruits to think twice about going….like the coaches somehow wronged him and lied to him about something.

    I felt bad for Shirley because I felt he may have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, but now I say good riddance.

  • RC3UCLA

    BruinMan & bruinova- Excellent commentary! I for one could not agree with you more…

  • Hollywood Bruin

    Robear20,

    Yeah, I heard about what he’s writing; the kid is upset. Regardless of what happened, he feels UCLA cut him off. Realistically, I don’t think anything he writes on twitter will have an impact on UCLA recruiting.

  • Anonymous

    this shows a lot of integrity on rick’s part to be willing to lose shirley by releasing him. it makes a strong statement about the program.

  • cliq

    would be nice to get more info if he really was involved or not.

    I would think CRN/AD/compliance would have sat down with him, gotten his side of the story, and determined if he was involved or not. And because he was dealt the same punishment, it implies that there was an equal share of involvement.

  • Anonymous

    How long before some writer comes out with a story on the southern cal coaching tree under cheat carrol? Sark and Lame have the same attitudes – Win at all costs, “we didn’t know about it”, “it is only cheating if you get caught”.

  • Boston Bruin

    cliq said:
    “would be nice to get more info if he really was involved or not.”

    No need for more information. There is no doubt that Shirley was involved; the actions of he and the Richardsons are on tape.

    “I would think CRN/AD/compliance would have sat down with him, gotten his side of the story, and determined if he was involved or not.”

    Why did you think those professional you cite did not do what you suggest? At the very least CRN and the recruiting coach, and most likely a legal official from UCLA, sat with Shirley, and probably his parents, and laid out the situation of the suspension.

    Do you think that Shirley read about the decision in the newspapers? Remember CRN has a law degree, he has been involved in law suits against the UW and NCAA (and won), he is fully aware of the legal implications of the actions he and the university have taken.

    “And because he (Shirley) was dealt the same punishment, it implies that there was an equal share of involvement.”

    Now you’re confusing criminal jurisprudence and ethics. (A very USC perspective). Call me old fashion, but being involved with friends stealing something and not doing anything because it might infringe on one’s ‘rep’ is certainly grounds for losing the privilege of gift bestowed upon one.

    We can imply that the charges against Shirley are not as great as those against the Richardsons since Shirley was allowed to leave police custody without having to post bail (own recognizance), but from a jurisprudence standpoint he can still be found guilty of being an accomplice to the crime.

    Very likely his court mandated sentence will not be as harsh as the Richardsons. Strictly a jurisprudence call based on discussions among prosecutor and the attorneys for the young men.

    But the ouster of the young men from the university was not based on jurisprudence, but instead on ethics. Consider that:
    (1) CRN’s own issue at UofW of being accused of not being more strict towards players with behavioral issues, and his recent handling of the EJ Woods issue,
    (2) the train-wreck that is USC in our own backyard, and
    (3) the UCLA Administration’s willingness to air the dirty laundry of coaches Jim Herrick and Bob Toledo

    This offers an insight into the way the university (and CRN) arrived at a decision about the young men.
    Theirs was not going to be a decision determined by the level of involvement; it was based on a code of ethics. While I have never seen the paperwork that bestows a scholarship to an athlete, I would be greatly surprised in this day-and-age if there was not a morals clause that is pointed out to students, i.e. accepting money, stealing, or moral turpitude.

    Shirley and the Richardsons were not dismissed from UCLA because of their level of potential criminal guilt of breaking a law of the State of California. Dismissal, I’m sure, was based on CRN, the AD and University officials seeing actions on tape that warranted invoking the morals clause of the contract the young men had entered into for a free education and the privilege of playing football at UCLA.

    The young men were given their release so that they can carry their personal ethical benchmark to wherever it takes them.

    In the case of Shirley it is to USC-North, which speaks volumes as to the young man’s character.

  • http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-then-20100619,0,4450391.story BruWin

    I wish Josh Shirley the best, I for one was super excited when he chose UCLA over SUC. I know he will do great at Washington, and I do look forward to seeing him do great things, I know he has learned his lesson – better to learn this lesson as a young man than later in life when life is not so forgiving.

  • BigDBruin

    I’m probably in the minority but I think the punishment was a handled incorrectly. If you compare what these kids did versus what other athletes have done and look at the punishment they received it seems severe. I’m not trying to underestimate the gravity of their transgression by any means, but wish that Rick had given them a chance to redeem themselves. I do however support and agree with coach RN’s decision and understand the message of zero tolerance he has sent to his team. Nevertheless, I think giving them their release instead of forcing them to confront their misdeed was less painless for all three.