An interesting debate. I'm sure most people would say that OU's AD made the right choice in letting those players go. But I'll play Devil's Advocate here: Those players signed binding contracts with the University, not Kelvin Sampson. If they had stayed around a year, they would have practiced with Griffin unofficially (didn't they get in a bit of trouble over that?), and would have seen his awesome potential. Last year, they end up with a lineup of Reynolds/Warren/James/Griffin/?. There's no doubt in my mind that that team wins the title. While these players have gone on to have successful careers elsewhere, they likely aren't going to win championships. College basketball players go to school for two main reasons: to try to improve their chances of making the NBA, and to win championships. They could have done both at OU. Maybe they would have hated Capel so much that they would have been willing to sit out two full seasons, as required when you don't get a release from the school. On the other hand, getting those kids on campus and actually participating with the team could have forced them to make a more informed decision. What do you think, RCT Nation? Knowing what you know now, would you have released those players?