kshoe Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 11 minutes ago, billiken_roy said: Martin is a total slime imo. he has already stolen two recruits committed elsewhere (tillmon and porter) now trying to take gordon. if i am a recruit, i would be thinking about the honor that the man is not showing by coming in and getting in the middle of these commits. imo it doesnt show much class and would give me pause to put my future in his hands. At least i would think twice about his word since he has no qualms about interferring in a promise a young man has with another program. of course the whole thing also doesnt say much for a recruit like porter or tillmon for reneging on their commit either. the whole thing definitely says one thing. the old mi$$ouri is back. sigh. Roy, his proper name is Mr. Integrity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Everyone of the recruiting guys that are now saying that Gordon now has a chance of changing his commitment all say they have nothing concrete to go on. So the whole thing is based on message board posts and people on twitter that have no connection to Gordon saying he is going to change his commitment. People are trying to create a narrative to try to convince Gordon to actually reconsider and to hurt SLU with other recruits. Who knows, he may change his mind just many any other teenagers. That is why you always worry about any recruit until the day he signs and never feel completely safe until the recruit shows up for classes. But, what it is being reported isn't journalism and isn't worth getting worried about at this point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 6 minutes ago, brianstl said: Everyone of the recruiting guys that are now saying that Gordon now has a chance of changing his commitment all say they have nothing concrete to go on. So the whole thing is based on message board posts and people on twitter that have no connection to Gordon saying he is going to change his commitment. People are trying to create a narrative to try to convince Gordon to actually reconsider and to hurt SLU with other recruits. Who knows, he may change his mind just many any other teenagers. That is why you always worry about any recruit until the day he signs and never feel completely safe until the recruit shows up for classes. But, what it is being reported isn't journalism and isn't worth getting worried about at this point. Agree with most of what you say, but this is a bit concerning "Reached out to his camp. He's not discussing at this time." If it is solid, not sure why "his camp" wouldn't just come out and say so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 9 minutes ago, brianstl said: Everyone of the recruiting guys that are now saying that Gordon now has a chance of changing his commitment all say they have nothing concrete to go on. So the whole thing is based on message board posts and people on twitter that have no connection to Gordon saying he is going to change his commitment. People are trying to create a narrative to try to convince Gordon to actually reconsider and to hurt SLU with other recruits. Who knows, he may change his mind just many any other teenagers. That is why you always worry about any recruit until the day he signs and never feel completely safe until the recruit shows up for classes. But, what it is being reported isn't journalism and isn't worth getting worried about at this point. At this point, it is a bunch of Mizzou fanboys posing as journalists hoping and wishing something happens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 8 minutes ago, brianstl said: Everyone of the recruiting guys that are now saying that Gordon now has a chance of changing his commitment all say they have nothing concrete to go on. So the whole thing is based on message board posts and people on twitter that have no connection to Gordon saying he is going to change his commitment. People are trying to create a narrative to try to convince Gordon to actually reconsider and to hurt SLU with other recruits. Who knows, he may change his mind just many any other teenagers. That is why you always worry about any recruit until the day he signs and never feel completely safe until the recruit shows up for classes. But, what is being reported isn't journalism and isn't worth getting worried about at this point. This is the problem I have with (some [most?]) Mizzou fans and most "casual" area basketball fans and the local sports media (save Cusumano, Ramsey, and EAJ). Their agenda seems to be to make and keep SLU a second-class citizen. But I also think that those among SLU fans who are using the non-journalism to impugn Cuonzo Martin aren't helping the climate, either. I really don't think he's done anything outside of the rules or unethical; however, just as Mizzou fan-nation wants to keep SLU down, SLU fan-nation retaliates by painting all things Mizzou in the most negative light possible, even going beyond what is warranted. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Just now, ACE said: Agree with most of what you say, but this is a bit concerning "Reached out to his camp. He's not discussing at this time." If it is solid, not sure why "his camp" wouldn't just come out and say so. Because there is nothing to talk about? What would his response be? "I put up a snapchat and a bunch of Mizzou fanboys saw that I visited my friend MPJ and misinterpreted everything? I was at SLU on Saturday. People need to chill." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 8 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said: This is the problem I have with (some [most?]) Mizzou fans and most "casual" area basketball fans and the local sports media (save Cusumano, Ramsey, and EAJ). Their agenda seems to be to make and keep SLU a second-class citizen. But I also think that those among SLU fans who are using the non-journalism to impugn Cuonzo Martin aren't helping the climate, either. I really don't think he's done anything outside of the rules or unethical; however, just as Mizzou fan-nation wants to keep SLU down, SLU fan-nation retaliates by painting all things Mizzou in the most negative light possible, even going beyond what is warranted. you dont think interferring in an agreement or promise a young man and his family made to another program before the other program renounces their mutual agreement is not unethical? now if the young man who for example was going to go to ohio state, announces he has to back out of his declaration for personal family reasons, and the then ohio state then says they understand and they agree the young man should seek other alternatives to best address his current situation, and then and only then another school and that young man agree to talk that is fine. but it should be in that order. both the young man and the intended school should announce that their agreement has been mutually cancelled before other parties get involved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 If I was a committed recruit and a bunch of Mizzou fanboys reached out to me on social media I would just ignore them. Just like Gordon is doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 7 minutes ago, billiken_roy said: you dont think interferring in an agreement or promise a young man and his family made to another program before the other program renounces their mutual agreement is not unethical? now if the young man who for example was going to go to ohio state, announces he has to back out of his declaration for personal family reasons, and the then ohio state then says they understand and they agree the young man should seek other alternatives to best address his current situation, and then and only then another school and that young man agree to talk that is fine. but it should be in that order. both the young man and the intended school should announce that their agreement has been mutually cancelled before other parties get involved. Roy, you forgot that Mr Integrity can do no wrong. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, ACE said: Agree with most of what you say, but this is a bit concerning "Reached out to his camp. He's not discussing at this time." If it is solid, not sure why "his camp" wouldn't just come out and say so. It might mean they don't want to talk for the kid, the person who he talked to hasn't talked to Gordon about it, the person in "his camp" is trying to push him somewhere else or they realize no matter what they say it won't matter to the people who keep talking about it. I hate the use of "his camp", because it can mean a whole lot of people with varying degrees of closeness to Gordon and some who might have agendas of their own. I will assume it wasn't a direct family member because family members tend to get anonymity with the label "a source extremely close to" the subject. Like I said, Gordon is a teenager. Many teenagers change their mind often. Gordon could decide he no longer wants to go to SLU. That said, there is no solid reason to be more concerned about that possibility today than 4 months ago. In fact, everyday that goes by the possibility decreases. We are 8 weeks away from NLI day. The clock is running out for a kid to change his mind, get a feel for what programs actually still want him at this time, to set up official visits and then to make a decision. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almaman Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 if nothing changes till 11/8 if he thens signs LOI could it be MU or any school for that matter, or does his verbal commitment require him to acknowledge that he is no longer verbally committed before signing LOI? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 7 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said: If I was a committed recruit and a bunch of Mizzou fanboys reached out to me on social media I would just ignore them. Just like Gordon is doing. I agree with you if it was just fanboys, however, one of those fanboys who was asking also happens to be a member of the media. At that point, a strong denial would be nice to end the nonsense. The non-response only feeds the speculation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 25 minutes ago, billiken_roy said: you dont think interferring in an agreement or promise a young man and his family made to another program before the other program renounces their mutual agreement is not unethical? now if the young man who for example was going to go to ohio state, announces he has to back out of his declaration for personal family reasons, and the then ohio state then says they understand and they agree the young man should seek other alternatives to best address his current situation, and then and only then another school and that young man agree to talk that is fine. but it should be in that order. both the young man and the intended school should announce that their agreement has been mutually cancelled before other parties get involved. Do you have evidence of tampering? If so, please fill me in. Other than that, verbal commitments are non-binding. Breaking it doesn't have to be mutual. It doesn't become binding until the recruit signs a letter of intent. (An oral agreement is worth the paper it's written on.) Either party is allowed to back out, and it is neither breaking a rule nor unethical. I agree that it's unethical — or shady and weaselly at best — to contact a recruit or his family (including social media) with the intent to persuade if he has committed to another school and hasn't reopened his recruitment. But have you seen evidence that Cuonzo Martin has been doing that, or are you just assuming it because he said after he took the job that he would, because of the unusual circumstances, check with a recruits coach to see if the commitment to another school were solid? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TaLBErt Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 53 minutes ago, Quality Is Job 1 said: This is the problem I have with (some [most?]) Mizzou fans and most "casual" area basketball fans and the local sports media (save Cusumano, Ramsey, and EAJ). Their agenda seems to be to make and keep SLU a second-class citizen. But I also think that those among SLU fans who are using the non-journalism to impugn Cuonzo Martin aren't helping the climate, either. I really don't think he's done anything outside of the rules or unethical; however, just as Mizzou fan-nation wants to keep SLU down, SLU fan-nation retaliates by painting all things Mizzou in the most negative light possible, even going beyond what is warranted. This is pretty solid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 1 hour ago, billiken_roy said: Martin is a total slime imo. he has already stolen two recruits committed elsewhere (tillmon and porter) now trying to take gordon. if i am a recruit, i would be thinking about the honor that the man is not showing by coming in and getting in the middle of these commits. imo it doesnt show much class and would give me pause to put my future in his hands. At least i would think twice about his word since he has no qualms about interferring in a promise a young man has with another program. of course the whole thing also doesnt say much for a recruit like porter or tillmon for reneging on their commit either. the whole thing definitely says one thing. the old mi$$ouri is back. sigh. Well while I agree with most of what you said, I do think it is only fair to remember that in both of the above instances the coaches the two technically committed with were fired thus changing their situations. I also understand that the Porter matter was more technical then specific to the coaching change since there were plenty of rumors that the father and so the son wanted out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, cheeseman said: Well while I agree with most of what you said, I do think it is only fair to remember that in both of the above instances the coaches the two technically committed with were fired thus changing their situations. I also understand that the Porter matter was more technical then specific to the coaching change since there were plenty of rumors that the father and so the son wanted out. until the ncaa changes the rules, the LOI is with the program concerned and not the coach. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 1 hour ago, ACE said: Agree with most of what you say, but this is a bit concerning "Reached out to his camp. He's not discussing at this time." If it is solid, not sure why "his camp" wouldn't just come out and say so. Could they have just said we have nothing to say on the matter - and so it gets paraphrased to what they posted? Brian is right - it is never over until it is over but lets not get worked about something that is just "fake news". Maybe Martin is connected with Putin and is having them put out all this disinformation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheeseman Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 1 minute ago, billiken_roy said: until the ncaa changes the rules, the LOI is with the program concerned and not the coach. I know Roy, but it is not at all uncommon for players to reconsider their commitment when the coach leaves for whatever the reason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 3 minutes ago, cheeseman said: I know Roy, but it is not at all uncommon for players to reconsider their commitment when the coach leaves for whatever the reason. and as long as the program(s) not involved in the loi wait until the dust settles and the committed school releases said player the new school has no business having any interaction with the player of concern. i do not believe that was the case with either porter or tillmon. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUTGR Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 2 hours ago, billiken_roy said: Martin is a total slime imo. he has already stolen two recruits committed elsewhere (tillmon and porter) now trying to take gordon. if i am a recruit, i would be thinking about the honor that the man is not showing by coming in and getting in the middle of these commits. imo it doesnt show much class and would give me pause to put my future in his hands. At least i would think twice about his word since he has no qualms about interferring in a promise a young man has with another program. of course the whole thing also doesnt say much for a recruit like porter or tillmon for reneging on their commit either. the whole thing definitely says one thing. the old mi$$ouri is back. sigh. Washington and Illinois fired the head coaches that recruited them. Martin didn't steal either one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobillsgo Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 14 minutes ago, MUTGR said: Washington and Illinois fired the head coaches that recruited them. Martin didn't steal either one. Oh, to be so naive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUTGR Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 2 minutes ago, gobillsgo said: Oh, to be so naive. They shouldn't fire coaches if they want recruits to stick around. Not many do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 19 minutes ago, MUTGR said: Washington and Illinois fired the head coaches that recruited them. Martin didn't steal either one. So you really believe Washington could have kept Porter if they had only held onto Romar for one more year? What blithering idiots they must have been to drive Porter into Martin's arms like that... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gobillsgo Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 5 minutes ago, MUTGR said: They shouldn't fire coaches if they want recruits to stick around. Not many do. Lmao. Think for yourself a little bit here. Why would they fire Romar at that point in time, if the Porters were still solid commits? romar was fired because the Porters were leaving. The porters didn't leave because romar was fired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MUTGR Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 8 minutes ago, hsmith19 said: So you really believe Washington could have kept Porter if they had only held onto Romar for one more year? What blithering idiots they must have been to drive Porter into Martin's arms like that... I don't know. I do know the only reason Roy has a problem with it is where they both ended up. If it was KU and Bill Self or anywhere else he would not have any problem with it. Dare I say if it was SLU he would be quite pleased. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.