The reforms at the governing level are still a work in progress.
http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/colle...1461875693
Quote:The Division I Council, composed primarily of athletic directors, voted in favor of the ban earlier this month, while the Division I Board of Directors, mostly university presidents, overturned it Thursday. Barnes called the intervention of the presidents a “step back” in the long reform process the NCAA has undertaken over the last few years.
“We’ve spent 24-plus months restructuring governance of the NCAA to put the practitioners back in the decision-making process, and that’s the ADs,” Barnes said Thursday afternoon. “And here we are, the ADs making a decision that is then rescinded by the presidents.”
“This really flies in the face of why we restructured the governance system.”
Sometime next summer, there will be a more structured and permanent set of rules in place for this. Until then, I guess Head Hog Brett Bielema can go to that previously scheduled camp at Rutgers University.
Quote:Opponents of the camps say they are simply recruiting events held outside the recruiting calendar.
The Big Ten turned out to be the only Power Five conference in the D-I Council to oppose the ban. The Big 12 and Pac-12 joined the SEC and ACC in voting for the ban, even though a significant number of coaches within those conferences favored satellite camps. Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott later said the conference’s representative on the council did not vote the league’s position in backing the ban.
(04-28-2016 05:36 PM)murrdcu Wrote: [ -> ]The reforms at the governing level are still a work in progress.
http://www.post-gazette.com/sports/colle...1461875693
Quote:The Division I Council, composed primarily of athletic directors, voted in favor of the ban earlier this month, while the Division I Board of Directors, mostly university presidents, overturned it Thursday. Barnes called the intervention of the presidents a “step back” in the long reform process the NCAA has undertaken over the last few years.
“We’ve spent 24-plus months restructuring governance of the NCAA to put the practitioners back in the decision-making process, and that’s the ADs,” Barnes said Thursday afternoon. “And here we are, the ADs making a decision that is then rescinded by the presidents.”
“This really flies in the face of why we restructured the governance system.”
Sometime next summer, there will be a more structured and permanent set of rules in place for this. Until then, I guess Head Hog Brett Bielema can go to that previously scheduled camp at Rutgers University.
Quote:Opponents of the camps say they are simply recruiting events held outside the recruiting calendar.
The Big Ten turned out to be the only Power Five conference in the D-I Council to oppose the ban. The Big 12 and Pac-12 joined the SEC and ACC in voting for the ban, even though a significant number of coaches within those conferences favored satellite camps. Pac-12 Commissioner Larry Scott later said the conference’s representative on the council did not vote the league’s position in backing the ban.
Well if we ever move to a P4 we need desperately to scrap the inept and nutless NCAA!
I'm against these camps.
It's purely based on the inherent advantage of not living up north.
The biggest problem is there is no end to recruiting season.
I want to see restrictions and rules that are fair across the board.
(04-28-2016 09:00 PM)murrdcu Wrote: [ -> ]The biggest problem is there is no end to recruiting season.
I want to see restrictions and rules that are fair across the board.
Amen! These kids need less attention, not more. IMO they shouldn't be contacted during their school year. Recruiting should be confined to the Summer of their Junior years and then have signing in the Spring of their Senior years. Any coach that texts, visits, writes, or in anyway communicates with a Sophomore, Freshman, or underclassman should lose their rights to coach by the enforcement committee.
Now, the people whining about how unfair the ban was claim that they are sticking up for the kids, that these camps offer opportunities to kids who could not otherwise travel long distances to these camps. Of course, that's bunk.
1. For every kid from the talent rich South that gets snapped up by a Big Ten program, that means another kid from another part of the country loses their opportunity. That's because of a pesky little thing called scholarship limits.
2. If it's all about the kids then why are coaches so concerned with finding kids from other regions of the country? It's almost as if the coaches judge their local products to be inferior in some way. It would lean one to think that these coaches are interested in improving their own team's competitiveness and by extension their own job security. That doesn't make sense though because all we've heard from the demagogues is that the game is all about the student athlete and that a quality education in and of itself is the highest pursuit. Hmmm...
3. Referring back to #1, if we want to extend opportunities to more kids then why don't we loosen the scholarship restrictions? How about we're allowed to sign 30 kids a year and keep 150 players on scholarship at one time? Wouldn't that give more kids the opportunity to play Division 1 football? Some would say that would adversely affect competitive balance, but I thought we weren't supposed to be concerned with competitive balance?
For the record, I actually have no problem with the camps. I do think they should be regulated just as any recruiting venture should be...and make no mistake, these things are a recruiting venture. I'm sick of the sanctimony though from all the 'do-gooders' who feign interest in helping other people.
(04-29-2016 02:33 AM)AllTideUp Wrote: [ -> ]Now, the people whining about how unfair the ban was claim that they are sticking up for the kids, that these camps offer opportunities to kids who could not otherwise travel long distances to these camps. Of course, that's bunk.
1. For every kid from the talent rich South that gets snapped up by a Big Ten program, that means another kid from another part of the country loses their opportunity. That's because of a pesky little thing called scholarship limits.
2. If it's all about the kids then why are coaches so concerned with finding kids from other regions of the country? It's almost as if the coaches judge their local products to be inferior in some way. It would lean one to think that these coaches are interested in improving their own team's competitiveness and by extension their own job security. That doesn't make sense though because all we've heard from the demagogues is that the game is all about the student athlete and that a quality education in and of itself is the highest pursuit. Hmmm...
3. Referring back to #1, if we want to extend opportunities to more kids then why don't we loosen the scholarship restrictions? How about we're allowed to sign 30 kids a year and keep 150 players on scholarship at one time? Wouldn't that give more kids the opportunity to play Division 1 football? Some would say that would adversely affect competitive balance, but I thought we weren't supposed to be concerned with competitive balance?
For the record, I actually have no problem with the camps. I do think they should be regulated just as any recruiting venture should be...and make no mistake, these things are a recruiting venture. I'm sick of the sanctimony though from all the 'do-gooders' who feign interest in helping other people.
It's okay to call a narcissistic hypocrite a narcissistic hypocrite. Somehow "do gooders" gives them too much of a connotation of being clueless but okay.
Why can't we sign more kids? Because then whiny azzed state directional schools will claim they can't field a team because big state U is taking all of the recruits. The proliferation of all of these small schools wanting FBS status was made possible in part by reductions in scholarship limits for larger schools.
And to my earlier point if they are doing this for the "kids" then they would keep those ignorant jerks in class and wouldn't disturb them every day with texts & tweets, phone calls, and every manner of distraction. And if they wanted those jerks to be more team oriented they wouldn't tell them every day of the damn year since the 9th grade how they are the most wonderful gift to football ever. They take kids with issues, build them up with a super ego, imbue them with a gross sense of entitlement, never deny them a want, and then are shocked when they act foolishly, can't cooperate with teammates, and commit crimes. The recruiting process is in part to blame for all of it!
It really is about nothing more than wanting to dip into another person's bowl.
(04-29-2016 02:52 PM)HeartOfDixie Wrote: [ -> ]It really is about nothing more than wanting to dip into another person's bowl.
Hmm! Well they better not double dip!
Seriously the biggest issue I see is that now there will literally be no down time for the coaches or the kids at all. I guess folks don't realize how sacrosanct Spring Break is for everybody. Personally I believe nobody should be recruited or contacted until their Junior year and then only during the Summer months. Spring signing for their Sr. Year is fine. It's all way out of control.