Jump to content

Recruiting - 2018 class


NextYearBill

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 5.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

20 minutes ago, brianstl said:

It isn't sour grapes.  It is how the NCAA operates.  UNC skates by for years on a slam dunk academic case because they are a blue blood.  A program like Mizzou burns Ohio St after burning another Big 10 program and a PAC 12 program in the decommit game and those investigators will quickly jump to attention when those programs complain because Mizzou isn't considered a blue blood.

 Mizzou represents the perfect NCAA target. They are not a blue blood program, but they are a member of a major conference. Not just any conference, but a junior member of the NCAA's favorite target the SEC.  The NCAA can look tough be targeting a major conference program without worrying about losing money by hurting a blue blood.

Will you turn your evidence over to the NCAA to assist in the investigation?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, brianstl said:

It isn't sour grapes.  It is how the NCAA operates.  UNC skates by for years on a slam dunk academic case because they are a blue blood.  A program like Mizzou burns Ohio St after burning another Big 10 program and a PAC 12 program in the decommit game and those investigators will quickly jump to attention when those programs complain because Mizzou isn't considered a blue blood.

 Mizzou represents the perfect NCAA target. They are not a blue blood program, but they are a member of a major conference. Not just any conference, but a junior member of the NCAA's favorite target the SEC.  The NCAA can look tough be targeting a major conference program without worrying about losing money by hurting a blue blood.

No doubt there's a lot of truth to what you're saying regarding how the NCAA operates, but I just don't think it will hold water, and the NCAA won't "prosecute."  Verbal commitments are non-binding by NCAA Clearinghouse rules, so that rules out anything pertaining to Watson and Jontay Porter.  In the case of the others, they requested releases from their letters of intent after the coaches who recruited them were fired.  Once they were granted a release, they were free to accept grant-in-aid from another school.

Where are all these schools that would complain to the NCAA about Missouri?  If they didn't want to release the players from their LOI, no one forced them to.  And the new coaches at those programs would say, "Thanks, but no, thanks.  I need to build my program with guys who want to be here under my program."

What's the difference between a transfer from a four-year school and a player who decommits or requests a release from a LOI?  Not much.  The former has already used some eligibility and must sit out a year; other than that, both groups have felt it best to seek new horizons.  That 's all there is to it.  Mizzou has a bunch of players who've decommitted or requested release from LOI; SLU has a bunch of players who've transferred.  And they'll both — most likely — be a whole lot better in 2017-18 than they would have been otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, brianstl said:

It is crazy that now over two classes Martin has received commitments from six high school players and everyone of those players was a decommitment from another school.  

I would bet that has never happened before.  It doesn't matter if anything illegal has happened or not.  That is going to attract NCAA investigators as the major programs start to complain about what has happened.

This is what you said, but Roberts was a decommit from another school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, STL Hoops Insider said:

I think we should get back to talking about players SLU is actually recruiting, enough Mizzou talk. 

Ok, then how come you posted about Watson's visit with KSDK last night after this post in the othe thread, in which he spoke nothing about SLU. He only spoke about a school west of STL. ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

Where are all these schools that would complain to the NCAA about Missouri?  If they didn't want to release the players from their LOI, no one forced them to.  And the new coaches at those programs would say, "Thanks, but no, thanks.  I need to build my program with guys who want to be here under my program."

This is true, the likelihood of NCAA action without complaints from some member school is not high. It is also true that a new coach is better off without any player under LOI that wants to transfer. Let's face it, a team has to play like a team if they are going to be a winning team. A kid that does not want to be in a team may not be easy to deal with from the point of view of a new coach. You just do not want a bunch of kids playing by and for themselves and their own greater glory, regardless of their talent. Individual talent without team play does not go very far. Martin has been effective at poaching players from other teams, now he needs to be equally effective at molding them into a team that plays together and wins. We have yet to see if he can pull it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, FromDaEastSide said:

Ok, then how come you posted about Watson's visit with KSDK last night after this post in the othe thread, in which he spoke nothing about SLU. He only spoke about a school west of STL. ?

Closure. His reasons and thoughts have been debated for weeks, thought it was important to hear his side from him 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Quality Is Job 1 said:

No doubt there's a lot of truth to what you're saying regarding how the NCAA operates, but I just don't think it will hold water, and the NCAA won't "prosecute."  Verbal commitments are non-binding by NCAA Clearinghouse rules, so that rules out anything pertaining to Watson and Jontay Porter.  In the case of the others, they requested releases from their letters of intent after the coaches who recruited them were fired.  Once they were granted a release, they were free to accept grant-in-aid from another school.

Where are all these schools that would complain to the NCAA about Missouri?  If they didn't want to release the players from their LOI, no one forced them to.  And the new coaches at those programs would say, "Thanks, but no, thanks.  I need to build my program with guys who want to be here under my program."

What's the difference between a transfer from a four-year school and a player who decommits or requests a release from a LOI?  Not much.  The former has already used some eligibility and must sit out a year; other than that, both groups have felt it best to seek new horizons.  That 's all there is to it.  Mizzou has a bunch of players who've decommitted or requested release from LOI; SLU has a bunch of players who've transferred.  And they'll both — most likely — be a whole lot better in 2017-18 than they would have been otherwise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...