|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1,749
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3868
Joined: 11/19/11
|
Some really week arguments against new rules
Jan 26, 2013, 11:20 AM
|
|
I still haven't decided whether the newest NCAA rule changes that affect recruiting are 'good' overall, or not. But my initial thought is they are. The only arguments against them in this SI article are really weak. I've always disliked the idea of forcing a 'level playing field' (so to speak)in general, and that seems to be the only argument for keeping the original restrictions. I mean, someone is upset because there won't be mandatory 'breaks' in communication? Poor, highly paid coaches. They may have to send a text a day to each recruit to check up or log onto Facebook nightly to check status, or something....? Seems whiney to me.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/college-football/news/20130125/ncaa-rulebook-changes-recruiting/index.html
|
|
|
|
 |
CU Medallion [67693]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115414
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: I'll give you my thoughts in about a "weak"
Jan 26, 2013, 11:23 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3868
Joined: 11/19/11
|
Sometimes typing on my phone is a pain...
Jan 26, 2013, 11:33 AM
|
|
...It's tedious to navigate every inch of a web page when your screen is so small. I'm happy I got it right in the text.
But thanks for your input, it was helpful in shedding light on the topic!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6057]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5232
Joined: 9/6/99
|
I could care less about how it effects the coaches. I am
Jan 26, 2013, 11:35 AM
|
|
concerned though with the well being of the high school student athlete. I just don't think the way things are setup is healthy for 17 and 18 year old kids. You want to know why there are so many issues with recruits and their lack of "commitment"...look no further than the NCAA and this open door to kids.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [55300]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58354
Joined: 7/18/07
|
Re: I could care less about how it effects the coaches. I am
Jan 26, 2013, 11:39 AM
|
|
Absolutely nothing could be said with anymore TRUTH!!!+
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [67693]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 115414
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3868
Joined: 11/19/11
|
Can't the kids just say "no"? I don't think they are....
Jan 26, 2013, 11:53 AM
[ in reply to I could care less about how it effects the coaches. I am ] |
|
....out there all alone. I think they get guidance and counseling from their HS coaches. A number of offers come through them, don't they? And surely if they can handle shutting down their classmates or girlfriends on social media and texts, they can deal with college coaches. Coaches who don't respect their wishes are telling them a lot about that school.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commissioner [925]
TigerPulse: 99%
Posts: 1468
Joined: 11/8/04
|
Day must not know month about it.***
Jan 26, 2013, 12:04 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [156]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 450
Joined: 12/27/99
|
Re: Some really week arguments against new rules
Jan 26, 2013, 12:12 PM
|
|
Would like to see the rules set to be more restrictive in terms of times and number of people doing the recruiting.
If the Gamecocks, Bulldogs, Tide each employ 200 people at $50,000/ year ($10 million/year)to personally stalk or service their recruits, do we want to try to match that?
That is unproductive allocation of resources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3868
Joined: 11/19/11
|
I guess I see it 100% opposite...
Jan 26, 2013, 12:17 PM
|
|
...The schools that stalk annoyingly are less likely to get the recruit they are stalking. If the kid had no parents or parent and no HS coaches, if not also other HS counselors, it would make sense. If you need strict rules on contact and engagement, why not just set up an NCAA group like a clearinghouse for each and every contact? That way you could check for all the other stuff that it illegal too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [156]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 450
Joined: 12/27/99
|
Re: I guess I see it 100% opposite...
Jan 26, 2013, 12:23 PM
|
|
What is the professional recruiter was kind of hot and slutty? You think that would turn off most high school kids?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3868
Joined: 11/19/11
|
That is a HUGE 'what-if'....
Jan 26, 2013, 12:27 PM
|
|
...What if the professional recruiter were a hypnotist???
Seriously, it's better to give the recruits and schools some freedoms and see if it gets abused. Somehow I have a hard time believing most recruits are so dainty they must be protected from the big, bad, evil recruiters.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [156]
TigerPulse: 88%
Posts: 450
Joined: 12/27/99
|
Re: That is a HUGE 'what-if'....
Jan 26, 2013, 2:48 PM
|
|
My point is that it is unhealthy to allow universities to throw near unlimited resources at recruiting (or coaching salaries for that matter). Alabama employeeing 100 recruiters is not inconceivable.
There are about 1000 division 1 football games per year. There will be 1000 wins and 1000 losses no matter if a $billion is spent on recruiting or $100.
In both cases Clemson and Alabama should have winning seasons. I would prefer to spend a little and win X games rather than spending a lot and win X games.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1346]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 3868
Joined: 11/19/11
|
Re: Re: That is a HUGE 'what-if'....
Jan 26, 2013, 4:55 PM
|
|
I get your point. But to me it makes more sense to limit how many are involved in recruiting than to micromanage recruiting activity. The kids aren't that helpless after all. And putting NCAA resources on the REAL cheating - like gift giving or questionable donors making good-ol-boy deals behind closed doors - seems like a better use of NCAA resources.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 13
| visibility 1,749
|
|
|
50
