Discussion in 'Recruiting Archive' started by Jared Grubbs, Apr 1, 2017.
this is new territory for us. We've lost coaches before but we've never been in position to really lose major incoming recruits nor following recruits. While Brad to NBA probably affected some recruits, at least they weren't immediately recruited by the new school, and I don't think we lost any (but others can correct me here). When Lick went to Iowa we weren't in the same universe of recruiting then.
Is it an indication we've joined the big boys that we are experiencing the dark underbelly of the NCAA (I mean there's even been a discussion of us restricting LOIs. never thought I'd see that)?
As I think back over the events of the last 7 days, I believe the real criminal/devil in the sequence of unfolding events is Gene Smith and the OSU administration. Because they/he wasn't doing his job and let things drag out with Thad before canning him, when all other schools had made their decisions in April-May, Butler lost its head coach, the assistants are left scrambling, the recruits are 10 days from being officially enrolled and are being dragged through an emotional mine field, Butler is scrambling to fill its position, conceivably more schools could be next in line to do the scrambling, the student/athletes at those domino effect schools could be affected, etc. The arrogance and incompetence, and greed of OSU set all this motion. I believe that the NCAA should be protecting all its members by preventing this from happening in the future. Here's my totally idealistic and unrealistic solution . . .
I know this will never happen, but I would like to see the NCAA create a rule that helps protect all the schools in the association, and prevents the big wealthy programs from running rough shod over the smaller schools without the big athletic budgets. The rule would also protect the interest of the students too so they don't get screwed over by the greedy adults. Three suggestions:
Set a date on the calendar (somewhere after the tourney and before the end of the school year, like May 15, June 1) after which schools cannot poach head coaches from other schools--for any reason.
If a school decides to can their coach, that's ok; they can promote from within, appoint an interim from within, grab an NBAer, hire someone on the coaching sidelines, etc. But they can't poach a coach from another school and set the turmoil and carnage in motion.
A student athlete cannot follow the coach to the new school and be immediately eligible. I know the National LOI is supposed to safeguard this, but enforcing it puts undue pressure on the two victims in the situation of poaching--the old school and the student. The student can leave the school that signed them and go to any other school without sanctions, but they can't follow the coach without sitting out a year. This may seem like it is punishing the kid for the HC's transgression, and I guess to some extend it is, but I'm hoping (probably a bit naively) that it might cause the coach to develop a bit of a conscience and understand the impact that their personal decision is having on all parties affected--especially the new recruits.
I will now climb down from my Pollyanna soapbox. I know these changes will never be enacted, but an idealist can dream, can't he?
Totally agree and mentioned this in one of my first reaction posts to the whole thing. Something should be done. Now if lavall is hired UW-M gets left holding the bag. Conspiracy theorist in me says some big schools do it on purpose. Realist in me says the NCAA is just bullocks as an organisation.
Sent from my iPhone using Butler Hoops
Agree totally. Smith should have had a plan if he worth his salt. It appears he never did.
Pretty weak Holt offered Weaver one day after bailing on Butler. I get it, but that's a dick move.
Been a recurring theme the past 72-96 hours.
So poaching a coach during the season is less injurious to the target school than poaching a coach in, say, June? I mean, if potential harm to the target school is the primary issue being addressed here, then the window for hiring that you're effectively creating is only 6-8 weeks long. That is untenable, unreasonable, and completely unlikely. Coaches at all levels would never accept such a restriction. Neither would the courts.
In regards to your third point, further restricting player mobility would, in effect, render the NLI obsolete. The NLI already favors the program rather than the player since the program can bind the player even if the coach departs. My recommendation for any highly regarded recruit would be not to sign a NLI, especially if the coach is on the hot seat or considered a target to be poached. The only real benefit that a NLI affords a highly regarded recruit is that it quiets the phone calls, texts, emails, and snail mail from the suitors.
In the end, I think all that can be done from the position of governance is to maintain the NLI and for the target programs not to relinquish the committed players. Restricting employment mobility beyond case-by-case contracts is a task that would never be taken up.
U say that but that 6-8 wk window is essentially NBA free agency applied to coaches. I'm sure there is a legal framework for it, and even suspect the NCAA might be able to enforce it but agree there is probably little will.
Alternatively how about doubling the buyout post may 15 then?
Are players technically employees? My understanding was not but I didn't follow the whole o bannon case and player pay very closely.
Anyone know of legal challenges to LOI concerning contractual obligation?
Sent from my iPhone using Butler Hoops
I really don't follow your point here. Sorry. The difference between NBA players and college coaches in terms of employment is substantial. For one, the terms of the free agency market is agreed upon by the players association (NBPA). College coaches as a whole, on the other hand, would never, ever agree upon restrictions that massively limit their vocational mobility. Moreover, even so-called mid- and low-major programs would never, ever agree upon restrictions that massively limit their employer options.
Any change in the buyout structure is a contractual issue between the two parties: the program and the coach.
No. If players were employees, then they should form a union and, for one, seek to alter the language of the NLI that gives the institutions the upper hand. If the NLI were fair, then the player wouldn't be held to the whims of the program when the coach departs after the athlete's pen hits the paper.
No mention of Butler but definitely talks up OSU, including saying he definitely wants to go for a visit. Talks about his relationship with CH and Schrage. This one isn't looking too good with the coaching change. This might be the only time I actually hope a high level recruit picks Nova.
Sent from my iPhone using Butler Hoops mobile app
Not looking good? It's over.
Agree. Rather him go anywhere other than OSU.
As is the case of many of the 2018 recruits, BU was facing an uphill battle. The new staff may consider other directions but if not stay the course and make new presentations until eliminated from consideration. It will be interesting watching a new approach by a "Butler Guy". I will say it was especially sweet when BU has beaten past recruits that chose to go elsewhere.
In the article he states the Nova is still his dream school.
Give 'em hell Jay!
Get Hunter and Bingham and call it a class.
I know its early in LaVall's tenure, but does anyone know who he is targeting for PG in 2018 class? Obviously he's meeting with Hunter today, but is LaVall targeting anyone else that Holtmann was pursuing (e.g. Weaver. Richardson, Ayo, Phinisee) or another guy that isn't on our radar?
Pure speculation, but Meyer is from the Lafayette area. Wouldn't surprise me to see us get moving on Phin.
As much as I love Phin, And I loved watching him play, everything I've heard and read suggest Purdue with IU in the secondary slot. I know we would have some serious grounds to make up here, but you never know.
Separate names with a comma.