(07-25-2014 11:00 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 10:37 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 10:19 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 09:29 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 09:23 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  I think that basketball recruiting is real shady. Football recruiting is probably no better, but players having guardian/handlers and schools offering jobs to a guy to get a kid seems almost like the schools are paying players through third party guardian/handlers. It seems like hiring a parent to lure a recruit smells different than hiring an nonrelative third party who in theory could pass along some of his wages to the player. Shady stuff.

Well, both moves are NCAA legal, but it certainly is different when the guy is a well-respected HS coach with a state championship, who is qualified for a #3 assistant's spot, vs. hiring an IT guy with no basketball experience. That guy would be gone the second Skal leaves.

Yes, huge difference IMO.

So all 3 of us are in agreement. There seems to be a difference between hiring a relative (parent) versus hiring a non-relative.

My thinking in regards to the hiring of the non-relative is that the non-relative will act as a pass through and the kid will end up getting a kickback. At that point the school is paying the kid to play, albeit indirectly through a middleman. I can clearly see how a non-relative could be paid $300,000 a year to do a job, which would probably normally pay $100,000 a year. I can see that other $200,000 going to kid and the non-relative could claim that he is just using his salary to take care of his protege.

The same thing could happen through a parent.

Not really and even if it did, people would understand it. Parents routinely take care of their kids through the time that a kid gets their first job out of college; and sometimes even after that. So the parent was going to be working anyway and in all liklihood the parent was going to be taking care of their kid anyway. Conversely, handlers are nothing but agents.

(07-25-2014 11:04 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:00 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 10:37 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 10:19 AM)Chappy Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 09:29 AM)TripleA Wrote:  Well, both moves are NCAA legal, but it certainly is different when the guy is a well-respected HS coach with a state championship, who is qualified for a #3 assistant's spot, vs. hiring an IT guy with no basketball experience. That guy would be gone the second Skal leaves.

Yes, huge difference IMO.

So all 3 of us are in agreement. There seems to be a difference between hiring a relative (parent) versus hiring a non-relative.

My thinking in regards to the hiring of the non-relative is that the non-relative will act as a pass through and the kid will end up getting a kickback. At that point the school is paying the kid to play, albeit indirectly through a middleman. I can clearly see how a non-relative could be paid $300,000 a year to do a job, which would probably normally pay $100,000 a year. I can see that other $200,000 going to kid and the non-relative could claim that he is just using his salary to take care of his protege.

The same thing could happen through a parent.

Not really and even if it did, people would understand it. Parents routinely take care of their kids through the time that a kid gets their first job out of college; and sometimes even after that. So the parent was going to be working anyway and in all liklihood the parent was going to be taking care of their kid anyway. Conversely, handlers are nothing but agents.

If you think that Memphis hired that mostly for his coaching skill you're not that observant. These parents aren't hired for what they can contribute to a program. I don't care if the parent knows how to shoot a basketball or was working IT prior to joining a staff. They are paying a family to come to a certain school. I bet if another school had made a better $$$ offer the kids would have gone there instead.

Here's an article for you... Memphis' Shadiest Loophole.

(07-25-2014 09:37 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  Why the hell did someone start a new thread on this when another one is already raging?

(07-25-2014 11:14 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:04 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:00 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 10:37 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 10:19 AM)Chappy Wrote:  Yes, huge difference IMO.

So all 3 of us are in agreement. There seems to be a difference between hiring a relative (parent) versus hiring a non-relative.

My thinking in regards to the hiring of the non-relative is that the non-relative will act as a pass through and the kid will end up getting a kickback. At that point the school is paying the kid to play, albeit indirectly through a middleman. I can clearly see how a non-relative could be paid $300,000 a year to do a job, which would probably normally pay $100,000 a year. I can see that other $200,000 going to kid and the non-relative could claim that he is just using his salary to take care of his protege.

The same thing could happen through a parent.

Not really and even if it did, people would understand it. Parents routinely take care of their kids through the time that a kid gets their first job out of college; and sometimes even after that. So the parent was going to be working anyway and in all liklihood the parent was going to be taking care of their kid anyway. Conversely, handlers are nothing but agents.

If you think that Memphis hired that mostly for his coaching skill you're not that observant. These parents aren't hired for what they can contribute to a program. I don't care if the parent knows how to shoot a basketball or was working IT prior to joining a staff. They are paying a family to come to a certain school. I bet if another school had made a better $$$ offer the kids would have gone there instead.

Here's an article for you... Memphis' Shadiest Loophole.

Except that was offered more cash elsewhere.

He took half of what he was offered to stay home in Memphis.

(07-25-2014 11:20 AM)Bambu Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:14 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:04 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:00 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 10:37 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  So all 3 of us are in agreement. There seems to be a difference between hiring a relative (parent) versus hiring a non-relative.

My thinking in regards to the hiring of the non-relative is that the non-relative will act as a pass through and the kid will end up getting a kickback. At that point the school is paying the kid to play, albeit indirectly through a middleman. I can clearly see how a non-relative could be paid $300,000 a year to do a job, which would probably normally pay $100,000 a year. I can see that other $200,000 going to kid and the non-relative could claim that he is just using his salary to take care of his protege.

The same thing could happen through a parent.

Not really and even if it did, people would understand it. Parents routinely take care of their kids through the time that a kid gets their first job out of college; and sometimes even after that. So the parent was going to be working anyway and in all liklihood the parent was going to be taking care of their kid anyway. Conversely, handlers are nothing but agents.

If you think that Memphis hired that mostly for his coaching skill you're not that observant. These parents aren't hired for what they can contribute to a program. I don't care if the parent knows how to shoot a basketball or was working IT prior to joining a staff. They are paying a family to come to a certain school. I bet if another school had made a better $$$ offer the kids would have gone there instead.

Here's an article for you... Memphis' Shadiest Loophole.

Except that was offered more cash elsewhere.

He took half of what he was offered to stay home in Memphis.

Good for him... will the next guy? How about when a school offers a mom a job?

(07-25-2014 11:14 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:04 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:00 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 10:37 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 10:19 AM)Chappy Wrote:  Yes, huge difference IMO.

So all 3 of us are in agreement. There seems to be a difference between hiring a relative (parent) versus hiring a non-relative.

My thinking in regards to the hiring of the non-relative is that the non-relative will act as a pass through and the kid will end up getting a kickback. At that point the school is paying the kid to play, albeit indirectly through a middleman. I can clearly see how a non-relative could be paid $300,000 a year to do a job, which would probably normally pay $100,000 a year. I can see that other $200,000 going to kid and the non-relative could claim that he is just using his salary to take care of his protege.

The same thing could happen through a parent.

Not really and even if it did, people would understand it. Parents routinely take care of their kids through the time that a kid gets their first job out of college; and sometimes even after that. So the parent was going to be working anyway and in all liklihood the parent was going to be taking care of their kid anyway. Conversely, handlers are nothing but agents.

If you think that Memphis hired that mostly for his coaching skill you're not that observant. These parents aren't hired for what they can contribute to a program. I don't care if the parent knows how to shoot a basketball or was working IT prior to joining a staff. They are paying a family to come to a certain school. I bet if another school had made a better $$$ offer the kids would have gone there instead.

Here's an article for you... Memphis' Shadiest Loophole.

Wait a minute. You are cracking me up. To be fair this type of stuff happens all the time. I remember reading that Tyler Hansbrough's mother got a job at UNC around the same time that Tyler Hansbrough was at UNC. How do we know she wasn't hired as an inducement to get Hansbrough to go to UNC?

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...fundraiser


Coach Lawson on the surface appears to be qualified, so his situation seems a lot different than Larry Brown hiring Ed Manning to get Danny Manning. What is really funny about your position is that Danny Manning (the former Tulsa coach) and Frank Haith (your current coach) have both technically been involved with shady stuff. So you shouldn't throw stones.

(07-25-2014 11:27 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:20 AM)Bambu Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:14 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:04 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:00 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  The same thing could happen through a parent.

Not really and even if it did, people would understand it. Parents routinely take care of their kids through the time that a kid gets their first job out of college; and sometimes even after that. So the parent was going to be working anyway and in all liklihood the parent was going to be taking care of their kid anyway. Conversely, handlers are nothing but agents.

If you think that Memphis hired that mostly for his coaching skill you're not that observant. These parents aren't hired for what they can contribute to a program. I don't care if the parent knows how to shoot a basketball or was working IT prior to joining a staff. They are paying a family to come to a certain school. I bet if another school had made a better $$$ offer the kids would have gone there instead.

Here's an article for you... Memphis' Shadiest Loophole.

Except that was offered more cash elsewhere.

He took half of what he was offered to stay home in Memphis.

Good for him... will the next guy? How about when a school offers a mom a job?

Like this school?

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...fundraiser

(07-25-2014 11:37 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:27 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:20 AM)Bambu Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:14 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 11:04 AM)PirateMarv Wrote:  Not really and even if it did, people would understand it. Parents routinely take care of their kids through the time that a kid gets their first job out of college; and sometimes even after that. So the parent was going to be working anyway and in all liklihood the parent was going to be taking care of their kid anyway. Conversely, handlers are nothing but agents.

If you think that Memphis hired that mostly for his coaching skill you're not that observant. These parents aren't hired for what they can contribute to a program. I don't care if the parent knows how to shoot a basketball or was working IT prior to joining a staff. They are paying a family to come to a certain school. I bet if another school had made a better $$$ offer the kids would have gone there instead.

Here's an article for you... Memphis' Shadiest Loophole.

Except that was offered more cash elsewhere.

He took half of what he was offered to stay home in Memphis.

Good for him... will the next guy? How about when a school offers a mom a job?

Like this school?

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba...fundraiser

That type of stuff is exactly what I mean. It's good that the Lawson's dad can actually coach, but it's just not viable to judge these hirings on a case-by case basis. They just need to outlaw the entire practice.

Okay, I didn't intend for this to become another platform for invisible hand to gripe about hiring relatives, or whatever. We beat that horse to death already.

My questions are:

1. What do you think about the idea that Skal, and more recruits like him, might opt for overseas money for a year, as Mudiay is doing, and Brandon Jennings is doing, rather than play college ball? Is this going to become more of a trend?

2. Do you think the D League should beef up salaries to attract one and done prospects who can't or don't want to attend college?

3. Do you think it should be legal to hire a parent/guardian/handler of a recruit as an assistant coach, when that specific person doesn't have any related qualifications? I'm obviously NOT talking about Keelon Lawson, who is a successful HS coach.

4. Breaking NCAA rules, especially paying recruits and associates under the table, is apparently a common thing in both football and basketball. Should this continue, or should something be done to clean it up? If so, what can be done?

(07-25-2014 12:02 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Okay, I didn't intend for this to become another platform for invisible hand to gripe about hiring relatives, or whatever. We beat that horse to death already.

My questions are:

1. What do you think about the idea that Skal, and more recruits like him, might opt for overseas money for a year, as Mudiay is doing, and Brandon Jennings is doing, rather than play college ball? Is this going to become more of a trend?

2. Do you think the D League should beef up salaries to attract one and done prospects who can't or don't want to attend college?

3. Do you think it should be legal to hire a parent/guardian/handler of a recruit as an assistant coach, when that specific person doesn't have any related qualifications? I'm obviously NOT talking about Keelon Lawson, who is a successful HS coach.

4. Breaking NCAA rules, especially paying recruits and associates under the table, is apparently a common thing in both football and basketball. Should this continue, or should something be done to clean it up? If so, what can be done?

1. Yes
2. No
3. I don't care if they have qualifications or not. It shouldn't happen.
4. Coordinate AAU reform with the AAU organizations as well as the NCAA & NBA. Or/and open the NBA back up to HS players.

(07-25-2014 09:34 AM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 09:25 AM)NBPirate Wrote:  Basketball recruiting IS shady. Shady as it gets.

Yep. Probably slightly worse than football, although most major schools break NCAA rules in both sports on a regular basis. The difference is, b/c basketball is more influenced by one player, elite BB recruits seem to attract guardians or handlers.

I have no idea how Hamilton came to be Skal's guardian, other than the fact that Skal came here as a kid from the Haiti earthquake.

The shady guardian/handler thing happens in football too.

Except when it does, Disney makes a movie to whitewash the whole thing.

(07-25-2014 12:21 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 12:02 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Okay, I didn't intend for this to become another platform for invisible hand to gripe about hiring relatives, or whatever. We beat that horse to death already.

My questions are:

1. What do you think about the idea that Skal, and more recruits like him, might opt for overseas money for a year, as Mudiay is doing, and Brandon Jennings is doing, rather than play college ball? Is this going to become more of a trend?

2. Do you think the D League should beef up salaries to attract one and done prospects who can't or don't want to attend college?

3. Do you think it should be legal to hire a parent/guardian/handler of a recruit as an assistant coach, when that specific person doesn't have any related qualifications? I'm obviously NOT talking about Keelon Lawson, who is a successful HS coach.

4. Breaking NCAA rules, especially paying recruits and associates under the table, is apparently a common thing in both football and basketball. Should this continue, or should something be done to clean it up? If so, what can be done?

1. Yes
2. No
3. I don't care if they have qualifications or not. It shouldn't happen.
4. Coordinate AAU reform with the AAU organizations as well as the NCAA & NBA. Or/and open the NBA back up to HS players.

3. Well, at least they stopped the hiring of handlers/parents to non-coaching positions, thanks to Calipari abusing it so much. Hiring a relative or guardian as a coach is still legal, so as long as it is, nothing will change, so why gripe about it continually?

And yes, I think being well qualified for the #3 assistant job makes a big difference, b/c EVERY #3 assistant who is otherwise qualified is hired for the recruits he can bring in.

(07-25-2014 01:10 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 12:21 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 12:02 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Okay, I didn't intend for this to become another platform for invisible hand to gripe about hiring relatives, or whatever. We beat that horse to death already.

My questions are:

1. What do you think about the idea that Skal, and more recruits like him, might opt for overseas money for a year, as Mudiay is doing, and Brandon Jennings is doing, rather than play college ball? Is this going to become more of a trend?

2. Do you think the D League should beef up salaries to attract one and done prospects who can't or don't want to attend college?

3. Do you think it should be legal to hire a parent/guardian/handler of a recruit as an assistant coach, when that specific person doesn't have any related qualifications? I'm obviously NOT talking about Keelon Lawson, who is a successful HS coach.

4. Breaking NCAA rules, especially paying recruits and associates under the table, is apparently a common thing in both football and basketball. Should this continue, or should something be done to clean it up? If so, what can be done?

1. Yes
2. No
3. I don't care if they have qualifications or not. It shouldn't happen.
4. Coordinate AAU reform with the AAU organizations as well as the NCAA & NBA. Or/and open the NBA back up to HS players.

3. Well, at least they stopped the hiring of handlers/parents to non-coaching positions, thanks to Calipari abusing it so much. Hiring a relative or guardian as a coach is still legal, so as long as it is, nothing will change, so why gripe about it continually?

And yes, I think being well qualified for the #3 assistant job makes a big difference, b/c EVERY #3 assistant who is otherwise qualified is hired for the recruits he can bring in.

..But not for the recruits that live in their household. It's more of a question of fairness of recruiting for other schools that I'm trying to point out. Also, why didn't Memphis go out and try to get him earlier if he was so qualified?

I'll apologize for overposting about this a bit, it's just that the issues are quite related. I'll let you have your more specific conversation about Labissiere though....

(07-25-2014 01:37 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 01:10 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 12:21 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 12:02 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Okay, I didn't intend for this to become another platform for invisible hand to gripe about hiring relatives, or whatever. We beat that horse to death already.

My questions are:

1. What do you think about the idea that Skal, and more recruits like him, might opt for overseas money for a year, as Mudiay is doing, and Brandon Jennings is doing, rather than play college ball? Is this going to become more of a trend?

2. Do you think the D League should beef up salaries to attract one and done prospects who can't or don't want to attend college?

3. Do you think it should be legal to hire a parent/guardian/handler of a recruit as an assistant coach, when that specific person doesn't have any related qualifications? I'm obviously NOT talking about Keelon Lawson, who is a successful HS coach.

4. Breaking NCAA rules, especially paying recruits and associates under the table, is apparently a common thing in both football and basketball. Should this continue, or should something be done to clean it up? If so, what can be done?

1. Yes
2. No
3. I don't care if they have qualifications or not. It shouldn't happen.
4. Coordinate AAU reform with the AAU organizations as well as the NCAA & NBA. Or/and open the NBA back up to HS players.

3. Well, at least they stopped the hiring of handlers/parents to non-coaching positions, thanks to Calipari abusing it so much. Hiring a relative or guardian as a coach is still legal, so as long as it is, nothing will change, so why gripe about it continually?

And yes, I think being well qualified for the #3 assistant job makes a big difference, b/c EVERY #3 assistant who is otherwise qualified is hired for the recruits he can bring in.

..But not for the recruits that live in their household. It's more of a question of fairness of recruiting for other schools that I'm trying to point out. Also, why didn't Memphis go out and try to get him earlier if he was so qualified?

I'll apologize for overposting about this a bit, it's just that the issues are quite related. I'll let you have your more specific conversation about Labissiere though....

Recruiting, like life, isn't fair, legal or illegal.

Memphis didn't go after Lawson before for 2 reasons:

1) Pastner has considered several Memphis HS coaches over the years. He has avoided hiring them, b/c he got feedback that it would cause hard feelings among other local HS coaches that could hurt future recruiting, and the city is our obvious honey hole.

2) The first Lawson son had already committed to us, and we were in a battle with UK for the second one. Up until the media story came out that Lawson was interested in a college position, and had been approached by other schools, Pastner saw no need to hire Lawson.

Once Lawson said his sons would go where he got a job, and it was legal to hire him, then Pastner would have been an idiot not to hire him, especially since Lawson was as qualified as anybody else available.

(07-25-2014 09:23 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 09:14 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This article was linked in another thread, but never discussed. It's an interesting subject, so it would be good to hear what those without a vested interest think.

Skal Labissiere is a 6'11" center, ranked #11 to #14 in Rivals/Scout/ESPN in the Class of 2015, and a refugee from the Haiti earthquake. He lives in Memphis now with a guardian, Gerald Hamilton, who works in the IT field.

Labissere has skills, if not that much basketball experience. He's probably an NBA stretch 4, who could play in the post, especially in college, and he is likely a one-and-done. Think Joel Embiid or perhaps Chris Bosh, although I'm not saying he has their skill level. That is more the type of player he is. But he is still damn good, perhaps a lottery pick in 2016.

Anyway, for the longest time, his recruitment seemed to be a battle between Memphis and Kentucky, with Memphis in the lead. But this week, it came to light that Ole Miss was deeply involved also, to the point that Andy Kennedy was considering offering an assistant's position to Gerald Hamilton, even though he has no basketball experience at all.

Hamilton has already raised a red flag by founding a non-profit that appears to simply be a donation fund for Skal.

Now, he and Skal say they are considering skipping college and going the Emmanuel Mudiay route.

What do you guys think of all this?

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketba...ing-battle

It brings me back to the hiring rule that I don't like being taken advantage of even with kids like the Lawsons in Memphis.

In today's unique environment of AAU where kids are being attached at the hip to adults looking to capitalize the NCAA really needs to look at limiting the ability of schools hiring assistants just to grab high level recruits.

What a crock of crap...being the father of a recruit shouldn't bar you from employment...that's un-American.

If you are qualified for a job, having kids shouldn't stop you from that job.

You can't look at employment in sports terms.

(07-25-2014 03:42 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 09:23 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 09:14 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This article was linked in another thread, but never discussed. It's an interesting subject, so it would be good to hear what those without a vested interest think.

Skal Labissiere is a 6'11" center, ranked #11 to #14 in Rivals/Scout/ESPN in the Class of 2015, and a refugee from the Haiti earthquake. He lives in Memphis now with a guardian, Gerald Hamilton, who works in the IT field.

Labissere has skills, if not that much basketball experience. He's probably an NBA stretch 4, who could play in the post, especially in college, and he is likely a one-and-done. Think Joel Embiid or perhaps Chris Bosh, although I'm not saying he has their skill level. That is more the type of player he is. But he is still damn good, perhaps a lottery pick in 2016.

Anyway, for the longest time, his recruitment seemed to be a battle between Memphis and Kentucky, with Memphis in the lead. But this week, it came to light that Ole Miss was deeply involved also, to the point that Andy Kennedy was considering offering an assistant's position to Gerald Hamilton, even though he has no basketball experience at all.

Hamilton has already raised a red flag by founding a non-profit that appears to simply be a donation fund for Skal.

Now, he and Skal say they are considering skipping college and going the Emmanuel Mudiay route.

What do you guys think of all this?

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketba...ing-battle

It brings me back to the hiring rule that I don't like being taken advantage of even with kids like the Lawsons in Memphis.

In today's unique environment of AAU where kids are being attached at the hip to adults looking to capitalize the NCAA really needs to look at limiting the ability of schools hiring assistants just to grab high level recruits.

What a crock of crap...being the father of a recruit shouldn't bar you from employment...that's un-American.

If you are qualified for a job, having kids shouldn't stop you from that job.

You can't look at employment in sports terms.

No but it should bar your kids from attending that institution.

(07-25-2014 03:48 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 03:42 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 09:23 AM)invisiblehand Wrote:  

(07-25-2014 09:14 AM)TripleA Wrote:  This article was linked in another thread, but never discussed. It's an interesting subject, so it would be good to hear what those without a vested interest think.

Skal Labissiere is a 6'11" center, ranked #11 to #14 in Rivals/Scout/ESPN in the Class of 2015, and a refugee from the Haiti earthquake. He lives in Memphis now with a guardian, Gerald Hamilton, who works in the IT field.

Labissere has skills, if not that much basketball experience. He's probably an NBA stretch 4, who could play in the post, especially in college, and he is likely a one-and-done. Think Joel Embiid or perhaps Chris Bosh, although I'm not saying he has their skill level. That is more the type of player he is. But he is still damn good, perhaps a lottery pick in 2016.

Anyway, for the longest time, his recruitment seemed to be a battle between Memphis and Kentucky, with Memphis in the lead. But this week, it came to light that Ole Miss was deeply involved also, to the point that Andy Kennedy was considering offering an assistant's position to Gerald Hamilton, even though he has no basketball experience at all.

Hamilton has already raised a red flag by founding a non-profit that appears to simply be a donation fund for Skal.

Now, he and Skal say they are considering skipping college and going the Emmanuel Mudiay route.

What do you guys think of all this?

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketba...ing-battle

It brings me back to the hiring rule that I don't like being taken advantage of even with kids like the Lawsons in Memphis.

In today's unique environment of AAU where kids are being attached at the hip to adults looking to capitalize the NCAA really needs to look at limiting the ability of schools hiring assistants just to grab high level recruits.

What a crock of crap...being the father of a recruit shouldn't bar you from employment...that's un-American.

If you are qualified for a job, having kids shouldn't stop you from that job.

You can't look at employment in sports terms.

No but it should bar your kids from attending that institution.

Why? They're student-athletes...not employees

Invisiblehand will sing a different tune when Frank Haith does it.

(07-25-2014 04:55 PM)Ramen_Tiger Wrote:  Invisiblehand will sing a different tune when Frank Haith does it.

Possibly. We'll see when the day comes. But for now, I don't like it for any school.

Skal is going to North Carolina