Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board

BobcatAttack.com Message Board
Ohio Basketball
Topic:  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .

Topic:  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
Author
Message
bornacatfan
General User



Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,706

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/15/2014 11:14:35 PM 
perimeterpost wrote:
I find it odd that the language being used with Tariq's handler, and other players' handlers, is that their expectation is if there's a coaching change then an LOI release should be automatic and the new coach is expected to go to the back of the line and enter the recruiting process just like everybody else. It completely cuts off the idea that the person who signed the LOI should FIRST give the new coach a listen, and then if things don't click an immediate release should be granted.

In sales we talk about not selling on the cancellation. In other words, don't get the customer to buy your product today by selling them on their ability to return it for a refund if they change their mind. Too often, they change their mind. Its better to make a sale that will stick by selling it as a completed transaction.

So my question is, how are these LOIs sold? Are they sold as a commitment to the coach or to the school? Does the coach reassure them by saying "look, I'm not going anywhere, but if I do, you can back out, no problem, the school will understand."? Or is it not mentioned at all, and if not should it be? I ask because this won't be the last time we see a recruit want to transfer during a coaching change, but am curious to know if there's any way to try to avoid it from happening like this.



It is a 2 way agreement between the school and the recruit binding each to each other. In basketball once a player verbals other coaches usually respect the kid's choice and move on. With the small numbers of kids on scholly and the fear of reprisal there is not much poaching that goes on once a solid verbal is given. Quite opposite of football where a verbal is a general lean till signing day and coaches don't quit recruiting a kid till he signs. 

Quick Guide to the NLI

Full Disclosure.....I HAVE NEVER WORKED IN COMPLIANCE ....(nor have I stayed in a Holiday Inn recently) but have retained the verbiage from the NLI. It is pretty specific as to coaching changes. That may answer your question. If not I am sure our friend that has worked in compliance will come and correct me. 

I understand I have signed this NLI with the institution and not for a particular sport or coach. If a coach leaves the institution or the sports program (e.g., not retained, resigns), I remain bound by the provisions of this NLI. I understand it is not uncommon for a coach to leave his or her coaching position.


 


never argue with idiots, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Winter comes and asks how you spent your summer.....

The game loves and rewards those who love and reward the game

Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,016

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/15/2014 11:36:24 PM 
Thanks, borna.  That's interesting info on the NLI disclosure.  I didn't realize it was stated so specifically that the letter of intent was tied to the school and not the coach.  


The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
perimeterpost
General User



Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 3,165

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 12:38:35 AM 
bornacatfan wrote:
perimeterpost wrote:
I find it odd that the language being used with Tariq's handler, and other players' handlers, is that their expectation is if there's a coaching change then an LOI release should be automatic and the new coach is expected to go to the back of the line and enter the recruiting process just like everybody else. It completely cuts off the idea that the person who signed the LOI should FIRST give the new coach a listen, and then if things don't click an immediate release should be granted.

In sales we talk about not selling on the cancellation. In other words, don't get the customer to buy your product today by selling them on their ability to return it for a refund if they change their mind. Too often, they change their mind. Its better to make a sale that will stick by selling it as a completed transaction.

So my question is, how are these LOIs sold? Are they sold as a commitment to the coach or to the school? Does the coach reassure them by saying "look, I'm not going anywhere, but if I do, you can back out, no problem, the school will understand."? Or is it not mentioned at all, and if not should it be? I ask because this won't be the last time we see a recruit want to transfer during a coaching change, but am curious to know if there's any way to try to avoid it from happening like this.




It is a 2 way agreement between the school and the recruit binding each to each other. In basketball once a player verbals other coaches usually respect the kid's choice and move on. With the small numbers of kids on scholly and the fear of reprisal there is not much poaching that goes on once a solid verbal is given. Quite opposite of football where a verbal is a general lean till signing day and coaches don't quit recruiting a kid till he signs.

Quick Guide to the NLI

Full Disclosure.....I HAVE NEVER WORKED IN COMPLIANCE ....(nor have I stayed in a Holiday Inn recently) but have retained the verbiage from the NLI. It is pretty specific as to coaching changes. That may answer your question. If not I am sure our friend that has worked in compliance will come and correct me.

I understand I have signed this NLI with the institution and not for a particular sport or coach. If a coach leaves the institution or the sports program (e.g., not retained, resigns), I remain bound by the provisions of this NLI. I understand it is not uncommon for a coach to leave his or her coaching position.



that's about as explicit as you can get. Great find borna, thanks for sharing. I hope everyone who was so quick to decry the actions of our AD as "disgusting" see this.


MY STATE. MY TEAM.

Back to Top
  
Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 2,992

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 2:55:03 PM 
bornacatfan wrote:


I understand I have signed this NLI with the institution and not for a particular sport or coach. If a coach leaves the institution or the sports program (e.g., not retained, resigns), I remain bound by the provisions of this NLI. I understand it is not uncommon for a coach to leave his or her coaching position.


 


The emperor has no clothes!  None!

Good grief.  I see it.  And, it is total B.S.  This is a one-sided document, written by the NCAA to keep student athletes under their thumb. They are basically forced to sign it to get a scholarship at any institution.

And, I stand by my post.  Ohio University should immediately release any player who requests a release after their head coach departs.  As should every single other institution.  I am disgusted by any institution that refuses to do so, especially my alma mater.

Have you even played this out at all?  How about the kid just says, fine, I'll show up.  And then gets his revenge.  A 0,0 GPA and hit to the APR and sows discontent among the players.....   Seriously.  What is in it for the university other than screwing with the kid?  What?

Release them.  Every time. 

Anyway, you ain't changing my mind and it appears I'm not changing yours.  Let's move on.


Last Edited: 4/16/2014 3:08:04 PM by Ohio69


Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

Back to Top
  
jumper80
General User

Member Since: 5/11/2006
Post Count: 123

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 3:07:48 PM 
Ohio69 wrote:
bornacatfan wrote:


I understand I have signed this NLI with the institution and not for a particular sport or coach. If a coach leaves the institution or the sports program (e.g., not retained, resigns), I remain bound by the provisions of this NLI. I understand it is not uncommon for a coach to leave his or her coaching position.


 


The emperor has no clothes!  None!

Good grief.  I see it.  And, it is total B.S.  This is a one-sided document, written by the NCAA to keep student athletes under their thumb. They are basically forced to sign it to get a scholarship at any institution.

Ya'll are on the wrong side of history on this one.

And, I stand by my post.  Ohio University should immediately release any player who requests a release after their head coach departs.  As should every single other institution.  I am disgusted by any institution that refuses to do so, especially my alma mater.



Yawn

 
Back to Top
  
Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 2,992

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 3:10:21 PM 
jumper80 wrote:
Ohio69 wrote:
bornacatfan wrote:


I understand I have signed this NLI with the institution and not for a particular sport or coach. If a coach leaves the institution or the sports program (e.g., not retained, resigns), I remain bound by the provisions of this NLI. I understand it is not uncommon for a coach to leave his or her coaching position.


 


The emperor has no clothes!  None!

Good grief.  I see it.  And, it is total B.S.  This is a one-sided document, written by the NCAA to keep student athletes under their thumb. They are basically forced to sign it to get a scholarship at any institution.

Ya'll are on the wrong side of history on this one.

And, I stand by my post.  Ohio University should immediately release any player who requests a release after their head coach departs.  As should every single other institution.  I am disgusted by any institution that refuses to do so, especially my alma mater.




Yawn


Wake up.


Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

Back to Top
  
Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 3:50:52 PM 
Ohio69 wrote:
bornacatfan wrote:


I understand I have signed this NLI with the institution and not for a particular sport or coach. If a coach leaves the institution or the sports program (e.g., not retained, resigns), I remain bound by the provisions of this NLI. I understand it is not uncommon for a coach to leave his or her coaching position.


 


The emperor has no clothes!  None!

Good grief.  I see it.  And, it is total B.S.  This is a one-sided document, written by the NCAA to keep student athletes under their thumb. They are basically forced to sign it to get a scholarship at any institution.



I agree.  It would be one thing if players received guaranteed four year scholarships.  But so long as coaches can yank scholarships out from under a kid after one year, players have to make sure they are comfortable with the coaching staff. 
Back to Top
  
colobobcat66
General User

Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,158

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 5:06:22 PM 
Flomo-genized wrote:
Ohio69 wrote:
bornacatfan wrote:



I understand I have signed this NLI with the institution and not for a particular sport or coach. If a coach leaves the institution or the sports program (e.g., not retained, resigns), I remain bound by the provisions of this NLI. I understand it is not uncommon for a coach to leave his or her coaching position.



The emperor has no clothes! None!

Good grief. I see it. And, it is total B.S. This is a one-sided document, written by the NCAA to keep student athletes under their thumb. They are basically forced to sign it to get a scholarship at any institution.



I agree. It would be one thing if players received guaranteed four year scholarships. But so long as coaches can yank scholarships out from under a kid after one year, players have to make sure they are comfortable with the coaching staff.

I hear the one year argument a lot. I'm just wondering if that happens a lot and if it's somewhat responsible for the explosion of transfers. I doubt it, but does anyone have any insights into how often this happens.
Back to Top
  
bornacatfan
General User



Member Since: 8/3/2006
Post Count: 5,706

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 6:05:48 PM 
colobobcat66 wrote:
[
I hear the one year argument a lot. I'm just wondering if that happens a lot and if it's somewhat responsible for the explosion of transfers. I doubt it, but does anyone have any insights into how often this happens.

to be honest about the ONLY time I have heard it happen is when a new coach comes in and a kid is let go (though the majority of those happen at Power conference schools) or a scholarship is not honored for discipline problems or ongoing academic adventures. I have RARELY heard of a kid who was let go to make room for another in a stable program. That is so rare that when Indiana started doing it opposing schools made a new verb and labelled it "creaning" a player. Those actions do not fall under the pervue of the NLI because they happen after the initial 2 semesters. The NLI *would/should* apply if the coach (old or new) had another late commit  and decided they wanted to let you go before you arrive on campus. They would be bound to have you attend for at least 2 semesters. In most cases of injuries I have seen the NLI in place took care of the athlete and he began school with a guaranteed scholly. 

I see it a lot more in track and field, baseball and Olympic sports.....my brother being one of those let go to make room for another incoming track/cross country star. It is something I have always paid attention to since he was relieved of his ride. 

SOooooo. Let me get this straight......A kid reads through the entire NLI and looks at the accmpanying financial aid package that the school is committing to and understands it. He locks that school into a scholarship for 2 semesters and they lock him into coming school for 2 semesters after a long courtship where he has visited campus(es) courtesy of the institution (s) The NLI is binding only for that first year. Transfers past that follow a different set of rules. He has decided he loves the campus and academics and chooses that place over every other school he visits. He has done his due diligence and asked the coach what his future looks like.  He reads that coaching changes are a part of the deal and chooses to sign the document along with the handlers/parents/guardians. The school has entertained him and academics, coachng staff and even in our case, Dr McDavis has taken time to meet with him.  Folks  are saying the kid should automatically be granted a release without meeting the new coach....irregardless of everything else that transpired? 

In most cases it is a moot point and he is granted a release anyway. I am not sure why this is getting so much traction and folks are not looking at anything past the coach who recruited him leaving. I have seen many recruits who are in the middle of this....zach hahn and Matt Howard come to mind when Lickliter left. I asked both of them sitting there in the New Castle Arena what they were going to do....they both said "well, we will meet with the new staff and see what they say, we love Butler but will cross any other bridges once we see who the new coach is..." That is the usual situation I have seen. Moist parents, advisors and AAU coaches know reopening can easily happen but also know the recruiting process is a big picture thing. 

No one has to sign the letter. There are some really good players who schools would hold ships for because they are that good. In reality, once a kid signs he is relieved that is over and the coaches breathe a sigh of relief and move on to the next needs. 

After reading and rereading the NLI and Finance agreement several times over I do not see what the big hoo ha is all about. Wait a couple of days see what pops with the new coach and if you still are putting basketball and coaches ahead of the school and the program then look for a place to land. If you are that much in demand in the first place don't sign it. See who you can rely on to keep your ship open while you wait for other offers or feel confident that the staff will keep your spot. 

 


never argue with idiots, they bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

Winter comes and asks how you spent your summer.....

The game loves and rewards those who love and reward the game

Back to Top
  
perimeterpost
General User



Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 3,165

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 6:44:23 PM 
Ohio69 wrote:
bornacatfan wrote:



I understand I have signed this NLI with the institution and not for a particular sport or coach. If a coach leaves the institution or the sports program (e.g., not retained, resigns), I remain bound by the provisions of this NLI. I understand it is not uncommon for a coach to leave his or her coaching position.



The emperor has no clothes! None!

Good grief. I see it. And, it is total B.S. This is a one-sided document, written by the NCAA to keep student athletes under their thumb. They are basically forced to sign it to get a scholarship at any institution.

And, I stand by my post. Ohio University should immediately release any player who requests a release after their head coach departs. As should every single other institution. I am disgusted by any institution that refuses to do so, especially my alma mater.

Have you even played this out at all? How about the kid just says, fine, I'll show up. And then gets his revenge. A 0,0 GPA and hit to the APR and sows discontent among the players..... Seriously. What is in it for the university other than screwing with the kid? What?

Release them. Every time.

Anyway, you ain't changing my mind and it appears I'm not changing yours. Let's move on.




hyperbole much? just because a school doesn't release a kid THE SECOND the coach leaves doesn't mean they will NEVER release him. You're trying to paint the issue in unrealistic extremes. your "revenge" scenario makes no sense, just like your insistence that a written agreement be tied to the coach's employment.


MY STATE. MY TEAM.

Back to Top
  
Ohio69
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 2,992

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 7:30:29 PM 

Not that I want my opinion on this topic tied to John Calipari, but I hear he is now saying kids should be able to transfer and not even sit out a year when a coach leaves. 

This train is coming folks.

Anyway, lets talk about Saul Ball instead.



Can somebody hit a pull up jumper for me?.....

Back to Top
  
.
General User

Member Since: 2/3/2005
Post Count: 2,949

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 7:38:37 PM 
If Coach Cal ever opened a Kia dealership, he'd sell so many they couldn't make them fast enough.


Back to Top
  
Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 8:14:37 PM 
bornacatfan wrote:

SOooooo. Let me get this straight......A kid reads through the entire NLI and looks at the accmpanying financial aid package that the school is committing to and understands it. He locks that school into a scholarship for 2 semesters and they lock him into coming school for 2 semesters after a long courtship where he has visited campus(es) courtesy of the institution (s) The NLI is binding only for that first year. Transfers past that follow a different set of rules. He has decided he loves the campus and academics and chooses that place over every other school he visits. He has done his due diligence and asked the coach what his future looks like.  He reads that coaching changes are a part of the deal and chooses to sign the document along with the handlers/parents/guardians. The school has entertained him and academics, coachng staff and even in our case, Dr McDavis has taken time to meet with him.  Folks  are saying the kid should automatically be granted a release without meeting the new coach....irregardless of everything else that transpired? 


Yes.  The fact that the school has recruited a player doesn't give that school any more right to the player's services than a prospective employer has to my services after flying me out for a job interview.  The school hasn't given these kids anything of value yet, so I don't see why they should be bound to the institution.

Ultimately, the NLI is, in my opinion, an illegitimate contract.  While the top 20 or so players in the country every year could feasibly elect not to sign a letter of intent, for the overwhelming majority of players they have no choice.  They either sign it, or they will not be able to play college basketball.  It's a take-it-or-leave-it agreement, with no room for negotiation (a classic contract of adhesion in legal terms). 

Compounding matters, players will often sign a NLI before they've even reached the age of majority (i.e., 18), meaning that they lack the legal capacity to enter into the contract in the first place.

Moreover, in my view, the NLI represents an illegal price fixing agreement.  In no other industry would we accept all potential employers in the field colluding together to decide how much they will pay their employees.  Heck, courts have even said that it is illegal for universities to agree on the terms of the academic scholarships they will offer to prospective students.  If it weren't for the NCAA's rules, does anyone doubt that schools would compete to attract a talented prospect like Owens?  I can virtually guarantee that OU would, at a minimum, have offered him a guaranteed 4-year scholarship had Owens had any real negotiating power.

At the end of the day, I don't understand why some would hold 18-to-22 year old kids to a higher standard than the adults who receive hundreds of thousands (or in some cases, millions) of dollars to coach them.  If coaches can come and go as they please, without sitting out a year in the process, then the players should be able to do the same.  After all, universities invest as much, if not more, in advancing their coaches' careers as they do their players'.

All that having been said, I agree that this particular situation is a little overblown, as we will undoubtedly release Owens if he presses the point.  But I don't think he should have to press the point.  In any event, there most certainly are cases where forcing a kid to meet with a new coaching staff before obtaining his release could have a serious negative impact on his ability to sign on elsewhere.  While we have been blessed with a fast-acting, decisive AD, many schools aren't.  Marshall's coaching search has been dragging on for over a month.  I don't know if Marshall is taking the same approach with their recruits that we are, but if so, those kids have been twisting in the wind for over 30 days, while other suitors fill their scholarships during the open recruiting period.  That's unfair.


Last Edited: 4/16/2014 8:25:31 PM by Flomo-genized

Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,016

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 8:44:59 PM 
Flomo-genized wrote:
. . . . Moreover, in my view, the NLI represents an illegal price fixing agreement.  In no other industry would we accept all potential employers in the field colluding together to decide how much they will pay their employees. [Emphasis Mine] . . .
 This my major disagreement with your position.  I don't think, the Northwestern football team not withstanding, that student athletes are employees of the university.  And, I don't think academic institutions are just another industry.  I guess we'll just have wait and see how this all plays out in the courts over the next several years.  


The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 8:57:59 PM 
OhioCatFan wrote:
Flomo-genized wrote:
. . . . Moreover, in my view, the NLI represents an illegal price fixing agreement. In no other industry would we accept all potential employers in the field colluding together to decide how much they will pay their employees. [Emphasis Mine] . . .
This my major disagreement with your position. I don't think, the Northwestern football team not withstanding, that student athletes are employees of the university. And, I don't think academic institutions are just another industry. I guess we'll just have wait and see how this all plays out in the courts over the next several years.


That's a reasonable view. I tend to disagree given the expectations and demands placed on the athletes, but reasonable mind can differ.

In any event, the characterization of players as employees is largely irrelevant in my view. If the Ivy League schools were found to have violated the Sherman Act when collectively agreeing how much financial aid they would each award particular students in the 1990s, I don't see how NCAA restrictions on compensation can possibly be legal. As you note, though, time will tell.

Last Edited: 4/16/2014 8:58:43 PM by Flomo-genized

Back to Top
  
OhioCatFan
General User



Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 14,016

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 9:08:25 PM 
Thanks, Flomo . . . for your tempered reply.  I agree that reasonable minds can differ.  Wish that more discussions on this board were respectful.  However, we are tame compared to other boards, such as eagleoutsider.com or owlpoop.com.  


The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA

"It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right."

Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org

Back to Top
  
colobobcat66
General User

Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,158

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 9:13:27 PM 
Flomo-genized wrote:
bornacatfan wrote:


SOooooo. Let me get this straight......A kid reads through the entire NLI and looks at the accmpanying financial aid package that the school is committing to and understands it. He locks that school into a scholarship for 2 semesters and they lock him into coming school for 2 semesters after a long courtship where he has visited campus(es) courtesy of the institution (s) The NLI is binding only for that first year. Transfers past that follow a different set of rules. He has decided he loves the campus and academics and chooses that place over every other school he visits. He has done his due diligence and asked the coach what his future looks like. He reads that coaching changes are a part of the deal and chooses to sign the document along with the handlers/parents/guardians. The school has entertained him and academics, coachng staff and even in our case, Dr McDavis has taken time to meet with him. Folks are saying the kid should automatically be granted a release without meeting the new coach....irregardless of everything else that transpired?


Yes. The fact that the school has recruited a player doesn't give that school any more right to the player's services than a prospective employer has to my services after flying me out for a job interview. The school hasn't given these kids anything of value yet, so I don't see why they should be bound to the institution.

Ultimately, the NLI is, in my opinion, an illegitimate contract. While the top 20 or so players in the country every year could feasibly elect not to sign a letter of intent, for the overwhelming majority of players they have no choice. They either sign it, or they will not be able to play college basketball. It's a take-it-or-leave-it agreement, with no room for negotiation (a classic contract of adhesion in legal terms).

Compounding matters, players will often sign a NLI before they've even reached the age of majority (i.e., 18), meaning that they lack the legal capacity to enter into the contract in the first place.

Moreover, in my view, the NLI represents an illegal price fixing agreement. In no other industry would we accept all potential employers in the field colluding together to decide how much they will pay their employees. Heck, courts have even said that it is illegal for universities to agree on the terms of the academic scholarships they will offer to prospective students. If it weren't for the NCAA's rules, does anyone doubt that schools would compete to attract a talented prospect like Owens? I can virtually guarantee that OU would, at a minimum, have offered him a guaranteed 4-year scholarship had Owens had any real negotiating power.

At the end of the day, I don't understand why some would hold 18-to-22 year old kids to a higher standard than the adults who receive hundreds of thousands (or in some cases, millions) of dollars to coach them. If coaches can come and go as they please, without sitting out a year in the process, then the players should be able to do the same. After all, universities invest as much, if not more, in advancing their coaches' careers as they do their players'.

All that having been said, I agree that this particular situation is a little overblown, as we will undoubtedly release Owens if he presses the point. But I don't think he should have to press the point. In any event, there most certainly are cases where forcing a kid to meet with a new coaching staff before obtaining his release could have a serious negative impact on his ability to sign on elsewhere. While we have been blessed with a fast-acting, decisive AD, many schools aren't. Marshall's coaching search has been dragging on for over a month. I don't know if Marshall is taking the same approach with their recruits that we are, but if so, those kids have been twisting in the wind for over 30 days, while other suitors fill their scholarships during the open recruiting period. That's unfair.


let's just let any athlete play wherever he wants and let the schools have as many players on scholarship as they want, and pay them whatever they want to pay them, why don't we just get rid of college sports and let them play in the pros if they can. Let's just have complete chaos in college sports.
Back to reality. The athletes play by standards that keep the playing field as level as possible among participating teams. These teams are part of the NCAA. The comparison to employees in the working world doesn't compute if that employee signs an employment contract which the coaches have. If they leave, there are consequences- like the buy- out that Ohio is getting from JC.
Re: LOI being "illegitimate", I wonder if parents have to sign for minors.
Bottom line, if the signee wants out, he's going to get out. Let it play out.
Back to Top
  
perimeterpost
General User



Member Since: 7/6/2010
Post Count: 3,165

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 9:15:06 PM 
Flomo-genized wrote:
bornacatfan wrote:


SOooooo. Let me get this straight......A kid reads through the entire NLI and looks at the accmpanying financial aid package that the school is committing to and understands it. He locks that school into a scholarship for 2 semesters and they lock him into coming school for 2 semesters after a long courtship where he has visited campus(es) courtesy of the institution (s) The NLI is binding only for that first year. Transfers past that follow a different set of rules. He has decided he loves the campus and academics and chooses that place over every other school he visits. He has done his due diligence and asked the coach what his future looks like. He reads that coaching changes are a part of the deal and chooses to sign the document along with the handlers/parents/guardians. The school has entertained him and academics, coachng staff and even in our case, Dr McDavis has taken time to meet with him. Folks are saying the kid should automatically be granted a release without meeting the new coach....irregardless of everything else that transpired?


Yes. The fact that the school has recruited a player doesn't give that school any more right to the player's services than a prospective employer has to my services after flying me out for a job interview. The school hasn't given these kids anything of value yet, so I don't see why they should be bound to the institution.

Ultimately, the NLI is, in my opinion, an illegitimate contract. While the top 20 or so players in the country every year could feasibly elect not to sign a letter of intent, for the overwhelming majority of players they have no choice. They either sign it, or they will not be able to play college basketball. It's a take-it-or-leave-it agreement, with no room for negotiation (a classic contract of adhesion in legal terms).

Compounding matters, players will often sign a NLI before they've even reached the age of majority (i.e., 18), meaning that they lack the legal capacity to enter into the contract in the first place.

Moreover, in my view, the NLI represents an illegal price fixing agreement. In no other industry would we accept all potential employers in the field colluding together to decide how much they will pay their employees. Heck, courts have even said that it is illegal for universities to agree on the terms of the academic scholarships they will offer to prospective students. If it weren't for the NCAA's rules, does anyone doubt that schools would compete to attract a talented prospect like Owens? I can virtually guarantee that OU would, at a minimum, have offered him a guaranteed 4-year scholarship had Owens had any real negotiating power.

At the end of the day, I don't understand why some would hold 18-to-22 year old kids to a higher standard than the adults who receive hundreds of thousands (or in some cases, millions) of dollars to coach them. If coaches can come and go as they please, without sitting out a year in the process, then the players should be able to do the same. After all, universities invest as much, if not more, in advancing their coaches' careers as they do their players'.

All that having been said, I agree that this particular situation is a little overblown, as we will undoubtedly release Owens if he presses the point. But I don't think he should have to press the point. In any event, there most certainly are cases where forcing a kid to meet with a new coaching staff before obtaining his release could have a serious negative impact on his ability to sign on elsewhere. While we have been blessed with a fast-acting, decisive AD, many schools aren't. Marshall's coaching search has been dragging on for over a month. I don't know if Marshall is taking the same approach with their recruits that we are, but if so, those kids have been twisting in the wind for over 30 days, while other suitors fill their scholarships during the open recruiting period. That's unfair.




good idea, let's turn student athletes into student employees. First order of business- no more scholarships. Done. And since you believe a commitment should be to a coach and not to a school the coach will now be responsible for employing his players. The university will add into the coach's compensation the dollar value of 13 scholarships, it is the coach's responsibility to manage his team's payroll. Student athlete employees will be paid on salary, not hourly, there is no over time. Paychecks will be issued every two weeks. Full tuition is due at the beginning of the semester however, student's may need to take out a personal loan to cover these upfront expenses. Please note that Ohio is an at will state which means employees can be fired anytime for any reason. No more "unfair" LOIs also means coaches can recruit many more players than they have spots for and only offer jobs to the best ones at the last minute. Other potential employees will be out of luck. Sorry, its a tough job market out there.

let's stop pretending that binding agreements like an LOI only benefit the university and not the student athlete as well.


MY STATE. MY TEAM.

Back to Top
  
Flomo-genized
General User

Member Since: 12/20/2004
Post Count: 574

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 9:53:43 PM 
The idea that providing student-athletes the same rights that all other students enjoy would create unmitigated chaos is laughable. MLB owners warned of many of the same doomsday scenarios if baseball players were ever granted the right to free agency, and we have all seen how that worked out.

Whenever players inevitably gain greater rights, the structure of college sports will adjust. But there will still be roster limits, players will still get scholarships, and life will go on. It'll just be fairer.
Back to Top
  
colobobcat66
General User

Member Since: 9/1/2006
Location: Watching the bobcats run outside my window., CO
Post Count: 4,158

Status: Offline

  Message Not Read  RE: Saul Talked with TO Yesterday . . .
   Posted: 4/16/2014 10:27:41 PM 
Flomo-genized wrote:
The idea that providing student-athletes the same rights that all other students enjoy would create unmitigated chaos is laughable. MLB owners warned of many of the same doomsday scenarios if baseball players were ever granted the right to free agency, and we have all seen how that worked out.

Whenever players inevitably gain greater rights, the structure of college sports will adjust. But there will still be roster limits, players will still get scholarships, and life will go on. It'll just be fairer.
memo:these students are not the same as all other students-they are subject to rules placed in them by the NCAA, like them or not. Comparing this to baseball free agency leaves out things like the draft, payroll limits, dolling out of huge tv monies, etc. a little apples and oranges, but that's okay if you think they're that similar.
There will be change in player rights, as there should be,for sure, but the problem is that the have nots in football, like Ohio, may not be in the winner category.

Last Edited: 4/16/2014 10:31:09 PM by colobobcat66

Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  26 - 45  of 45 Posts
Jump to Page:  < Previous    1 | 2
View Other 'Ohio Basketball' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             







Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties