http://www.pgcrosschecker.com/...le.aspx?article=2292
-----------------------------
Original Post
Replies sorted oldest to newest
USC imposes the same restriction on itself. The Big 10 needs to solve its own problems. The schools have lots to offer and can choose to make major commitments to do it. Most simply lack the desire to do all they can to overcome the weather. And the only things that would actually level the field are either global warming or a summer season. Of the two, global warming probably has the better chance of happening.
I shed no tears for the Big 10(11).
They are likely about to embark on an expansion that could decimate college football as we know it...growing to perhaps 16 teams to become the dominant super-duper of all super conferences...eliminating the Big East, shaking up the Big 12, SEC, ACC and Pac-10...and along the way and perhaps forever shutting out the mid-majors and their chances of winning a national championship in football.
No leveling of the playing field there.
Minnesota coach? Very good guy as best as I can tell. Big 10(11) really worried about leveling the playing field in a consistent fashion? Not a chance.
I hope NE/MW baseball survives/thrives and flourishes, but the B10(11) gets no sympathy from me.
They are likely about to embark on an expansion that could decimate college football as we know it...growing to perhaps 16 teams to become the dominant super-duper of all super conferences...eliminating the Big East, shaking up the Big 12, SEC, ACC and Pac-10...and along the way and perhaps forever shutting out the mid-majors and their chances of winning a national championship in football.
No leveling of the playing field there.
Minnesota coach? Very good guy as best as I can tell. Big 10(11) really worried about leveling the playing field in a consistent fashion? Not a chance.
I hope NE/MW baseball survives/thrives and flourishes, but the B10(11) gets no sympathy from me.
I like the part where the coach isn't worried about the innocent players that get screwed by not getting scholarship money after being promised some, only about his poor school not being treated fairly.
quote:Originally posted by Three Bagger:
I like the part where the coach isn't worried about the innocent players that get screwed by not getting scholarship money after being promised some, only about his poor school not being treated fairly.
Bagger, I must have missed that part. Where did he say that?
This thread is going to take on the Civil War part II flair, and we all know how that turned out
. While I'm a pure bred Northerner, I'm even more true to fair play. If the rules are not the same for everyone then level the playing field. In the end, IMHO, the South and West will still meet in Omaha but in the name of "fair play" lets all play by the same rules. Unless there is some fear by those who take advantage of loopholes I've met Coach Anderson and my sons college coach was his Assistant coach at UM. He's a quality guy who gave his opinion and not a rip on the crosschecker piece, but a more in depth conversation on the topic would probably been a more interesting article.
rz:
The rule that creates a problem for Minnesota is a conference rule. All that is needed to level the playing field is for the Big 10 to make the change. I agree with you, though. The field should be level. You just can't change the weather. justbaseball also makes some good points to the Big 10s approach to football. It will be interesting to see how all this evolves. Heck, the Big 10 schools in essence have the resources to build indoor stadiums for their baseball teams should they so choose.
The rule that creates a problem for Minnesota is a conference rule. All that is needed to level the playing field is for the Big 10 to make the change. I agree with you, though. The field should be level. You just can't change the weather. justbaseball also makes some good points to the Big 10s approach to football. It will be interesting to see how all this evolves. Heck, the Big 10 schools in essence have the resources to build indoor stadiums for their baseball teams should they so choose.
quote:Originally posted by jemaz:
rz:
The rule that creates a problem for Minnesota is a conference rule.
So all D1 conferences with the exception of the Big10 allow over recruiting? Or, is it only a few that do?
Heck, the Big 10 schools in essence have the resources to build indoor stadiums for their baseball teams should they so choose.
The Univ of WI Hockey program which is a National powerhouse for both the Mens and Womens programs, and the Mens is a revenue producing sport did not have the money to build a hockey practice facility. I don't think your statement can be made without more inside knowledge of the conference and their institutions fiscal policies. In order to secure private funds you need a successful competitive program. A catch 22 scenario.
FWIW- The Big10 football conference is a border line joke IMO, not enough schools for divisions and too many for a single. Besides, it takes two to tango if any schools decide to move.
quote:FWIW- The Big10 football conference is a border line joke IMO, not enough schools for divisions and too many for a single. Besides, it takes two to tango if any schools decide to move.
The revenue the B10(11) gets with their TV contract will surely capture 1-5 schools (rumors are Missouri, Pitt, Rutgers, Syracuse...maybe Texas? Notre Dame will be in if they want too).
Its not a borderline joke to the other 5 football schools in the Big East...nor to the Big 12 from what I understand. SEC taking it very seriously as well according to articles.
All of those schools will take a short term loss (penalty fees from the old league) for what they think they'll get from the move.
Its a takeover (of sorts) off the college football landscape. And to be honest, I say "fair enough." But don't whine about other sports where there's a natural built-in advantage. JMO.
quote:Originally posted by justbaseball:
And to be honest, I say "fair enough." But don't whine about other sports where there's a natural built-in advantage. JMO.
Can't argue that it is a "money game" but at least all football schools play by the same recruiting rules and the Big10 takes it to another level with tougher entrance requirements. Isn't recruiting inequalities what's in question? 11.7 means 11.7 IMO
rz:
The Big 10 schools each receive $22 million per year from television money. It is a choice they can make or choose not to make. Ohio State has an annual athletic budget of more than $100 million. The Big 10 as a whole is a money making machine, even if certain schools are not quite as successful.
As far as "over-recruiting" this could be called that -- which is what the Minnesota coach wants -- but it also is making sure that the meager scholarship money that is available is utilized to the fullest.
Personally, I like the Big 10 rule (which, as I said, USC also uses) but keep in mind that it is a Big 10 coach who wants to be able to use this tactic since he believes it puts him at a disadvantage that is too great. He says he would restrict it elsewhere, but not eliminate it. But even if the NCAA restricted the practice, the Big 10 is still at a disadvantage unless the conference chooses to adjust its own situation.
What I think in the end, though, is that as long as the weather is a factor, most best players will choose to play in warm-weather locations. The indoor stadiums (which Minnesota has) would negate some (but not all) of that advantage.
By the way, I lived in Champaign for a few years and had an inside relationship with and understanding of the University Illinois fiscal policies and the operation of its athletic department in the late 1980s under Neil Stoner.
The Big 10 schools each receive $22 million per year from television money. It is a choice they can make or choose not to make. Ohio State has an annual athletic budget of more than $100 million. The Big 10 as a whole is a money making machine, even if certain schools are not quite as successful.
As far as "over-recruiting" this could be called that -- which is what the Minnesota coach wants -- but it also is making sure that the meager scholarship money that is available is utilized to the fullest.
Personally, I like the Big 10 rule (which, as I said, USC also uses) but keep in mind that it is a Big 10 coach who wants to be able to use this tactic since he believes it puts him at a disadvantage that is too great. He says he would restrict it elsewhere, but not eliminate it. But even if the NCAA restricted the practice, the Big 10 is still at a disadvantage unless the conference chooses to adjust its own situation.
What I think in the end, though, is that as long as the weather is a factor, most best players will choose to play in warm-weather locations. The indoor stadiums (which Minnesota has) would negate some (but not all) of that advantage.
By the way, I lived in Champaign for a few years and had an inside relationship with and understanding of the University Illinois fiscal policies and the operation of its athletic department in the late 1980s under Neil Stoner.
rz1
He says in the story that he wants to be able to over recruit by a couple of players like they do in the South. Over recruiting leads to guys getting the shaft like the story says.
He says in the story that he wants to be able to over recruit by a couple of players like they do in the South. Over recruiting leads to guys getting the shaft like the story says.
Having said that, I think that over recruiting should not be allowed by any schools.
quote:Originally posted by jemaz:
The Big 10 schools each receive $22 million per year from television money. It is a choice they can make or choose not to make. Ohio State has an annual athletic budget of more than $100 million. The Big 10 as a whole is a money making machine, even if certain schools are not quite as successful.
Since most of these institutions are State schools you need to answer to the State government on your spending practices and I don't know if I could swallow a money poured into a sport that cannot compete. Build a multi-million dollar stadium to cater to a program that cannot pull it's weight on a National scene is not fiscally responsible. Your arguments have merit but the bottom line in this discussion is not spending, it's recruiting isn't it?
As far as "over-recruiting" this could be called that -- which is what the Minnesota coach wants -- but it also is making sure that the meager scholarship money that is available is utilized to the fullest.
I read his issue as being he cannot spend his dollar on players that are tied up during the signing periods and then screwed in the end. He buys his 11.7 but is not allowed access to all the products on the shelf that might be available.
Personally, I like the Big 10 rule (which, as I said, USC also uses) but keep in mind that it is a Big 10 coach who wants to be able to use this tactic since he believes it puts him at a disadvantage that is too great. He says he would restrict it elsewhere, but not eliminate it. But even if the NCAA restricted the practice, the Big 10 is still at a disadvantage unless the conference chooses to adjust its own situation.
I don't think Conference administrators are smart enough to sell the "woe is me" pitch, they know that weather puts them behind the 8-ball to begin with and don't agree with the over-recruiting shell game and have stuck by their guns. I imagine if calmer minds got together there would probably be a give-n-take arrangement between the NCAA and Big10 that protects "late year" losses but outlaws hoarding.
What I think in the end, though, is that as long as the weather is a factor, most best players will choose to play in warm-weather locations. The indoor stadiums (which Minnesota has) would negate some (but not all) of that advantage.
While UM plays games at the Metrodome I don't believe they practice there
By the way, I lived in Champaign for a few years and had an inside relationship with and understanding of the University Illinois fiscal policies and the operation of its athletic department in the late 1980s under Neil Stoner.
Gas was 1.20 a gallon in 1990 also
quote:Originally posted by Three Bagger:
rz1
He says in the story that he wants to be able to over recruit by a couple of players like they do in the South. Over recruiting leads to guys getting the shaft like the story says.
I don't think his Southern issue are with "a couple" of players which may protect a program from draft and/or academic drops, it was more about specific programs/conferences tying up stables of players.
Access to the CWS was regionalized until the 80's when Maine represented the Northeast region a couple of times and got stomped. The warm weather schools whined it wasn't fair schools like Maine had access to the CWS completely ignoring they had represented themselves very well in the past. The other arguement was if northeast schools were not winning the CWS why have them there. Holy Cross in 1952 is the only northeast team to win the CWS.
"I think you're going to see more programs dropped and de-emphasized," he said Saturday after the Gophers split a Big Ten doubleheader with the Iowa Hawkeyes. "We have to do things in college baseball to make the game better in all parts of the country, if we want to preserve our game and we want to grow and we want to continue to be popular.
I agree with the part that college baseball should be doing everything for all parts of the country...it can only help everyone.
I agree with the part that college baseball should be doing everything for all parts of the country...it can only help everyone.
quote:All NCAA Division I baseball schools are allowed the equivalent of 11.7 full rides. Most of the major conferences around the country, however, can "over-commit" beyond the 11.7 scholarships and worry about it later, he said. Big Ten schools, however, cannot.
I re-read this article before posting. Why not get the Big 10 to conform their rules to the rest of the country?
I believe the Big Ten sees overcommitting as lack of integrity. It's promising something that may not be deliverable. It would be nice if the rest of the country conformed to the Big Ten.quote:Originally posted by ClevelandDad:quote:All NCAA Division I baseball schools are allowed the equivalent of 11.7 full rides. Most of the major conferences around the country, however, can "over-commit" beyond the 11.7 scholarships and worry about it later, he said. Big Ten schools, however, cannot.
I re-read this article before posting. Why not get the Big 10 to conform their rules to the rest of the country?
quote:Originally posted by ClevelandDad:
I re-read this article before posting. Why not get the Big 10 to conform their rules to the rest of the country?
I had three questions.....
While the quote says "most" conferences over recruit, what is "most", 60%...90%?
How many of the teams in those "most" conferences practice the "hide the recruit" tactic?
Why is baseball the only sport that allows "over recruiting" on a conference level, or is it?
IMO Coach Andersons problem is an afterthought of the initial reason schools do it and that was to protect themselves from losing players to conference teams, not the National teams. However over time baseball recruiting has become more of a National stage thus affecting teams coast to coast. It's not that Northern teams are losing out on Southern recruits it's that Northern talent is going South and becoming part of those "stash stables", thus thinning the pool Northern teams have to draw from. Unless the Earth tips over, Southern baseball will always be "the region". The Big10 allowing over recruiting will not fix the problem because if you can't fill a 5# bag with quality apples, how are you going to fill a 10# bag. The only fix is bringing the sport on the same plane as other sports in regard to recruit signing rules.
It happens in football all the time only in much more of an extreme way and the details are slightly different (involving the jettisoning of fifth-year seniors, guys who have not cut it, etc... along with a lot of gray-shirting, which is much easier in football than baseball because of the timing of the season).
quote:Originally posted by jemaz:
It happens in football all the time only in much more of an extreme way and the details are slightly different (involving the jettisoning of fifth-year seniors, guys who have not cut it, etc... along with a lot of gray-shirting, which is much easier in football than baseball because of the timing of the season).
I don't see the similarities, football signs the number of recruits that it has available scholarships for. If for some reason they lose a player they either go back on the recruiting road or give the scholarship to a non-scholarship player.
I had no idea the Big10 had this rule in place. I can see where this would be a disadvantage. But I can also see where this could be used as an advantage as well.
The weather is a factor. Many kids growing up in cold weather when given the option of playing in warm weather , practicing in warm weather will jump at that opportunity.
I do believe everyone should be playing by the same rules. Either make everyone adopt that rule or get rid of it. JMO
The weather is a factor. Many kids growing up in cold weather when given the option of playing in warm weather , practicing in warm weather will jump at that opportunity.
I do believe everyone should be playing by the same rules. Either make everyone adopt that rule or get rid of it. JMO
quote:Originally posted by Coach_May:
The weather is a factor. Many kids growing up in cold weather when given the option of playing in warm weather , practicing in warm weather will jump at that opportunity.
I do believe everyone should be playing by the same rules. Either make everyone adopt that rule or get rid of it. JMO
Just curious; how could the Big10 rule be an advantage as well?
-------------
Actually, rz, what a lot of college football programs do -- especially the big ones -- is that they target their recruits. They sign who they want and who they can get. If that number exceeds the total number of scholarships available (the max total is 85, I believe) then they jettison players -- from the groups I mentioned above. It is as cut throat as it can get, although perhaps the Big 10 does not do this and thus your lack of familiarity.
Jemaz, being a backwoods Northern guy 
I've never heard of that practice.
In regard to football. When reading sites like Scout.com and listening to recruiting analysts they always mention that the Univ of Y has x number of scholly's available and after NLI day they fill their quota. I don't think I've ever heard of this under-handiness and you would think it would be well documented and shared by those who were screwed after the fact with lawsuits following close behind
.
Then again I primarily watch the dreaded Big10 who while being a greedy S0B by some opinions, seems to live above the "moral board" when recruiting is involved.
In regard to football. When reading sites like Scout.com and listening to recruiting analysts they always mention that the Univ of Y has x number of scholly's available and after NLI day they fill their quota. I don't think I've ever heard of this under-handiness and you would think it would be well documented and shared by those who were screwed after the fact with lawsuits following close behind
Then again I primarily watch the dreaded Big10 who while being a greedy S0B by some opinions, seems to live above the "moral board" when recruiting is involved.
Well I think it's important to remember that baseball is different than any other sport. Look at basketball and football--those players HAVE to go to school. Baseball players do not.
Actually the girls are prettier down south, so the northern schools will always be at a disadvantage. 
.
It's a good thing you're already in Baseball Heaven SoS! I don't think that peepwall is going to provide enough protection for you. It's best you jump in the ol' minivan and skedaddle. Our Northern girls have a pretty good aim...not too much mascara to interfere with their eagle vision!
Watch out SoS! You better floor it! Yikes! That had to hurt!
.
It's a good thing you're already in Baseball Heaven SoS! I don't think that peepwall is going to provide enough protection for you. It's best you jump in the ol' minivan and skedaddle. Our Northern girls have a pretty good aim...not too much mascara to interfere with their eagle vision!
Watch out SoS! You better floor it! Yikes! That had to hurt!
.
rz, don't forget that scholarships are for one year only. Also, keep an eye out (especially this time of year) for football players to announce that they are transferring, with some choosing to sit out a year and some choosing to move to a school in a lower division where missing a year is not required. And, as I mentioned in an earlier post, look for lots of rising fifth-year seniors to leave the program.
SOS
First of all there are beautiful women in the North
Secondly what do beautiful women have to do with baseball and the schedules//
Another small mind at work>
I think your profile says a lot about you even if you think you are a comic
First of all there are beautiful women in the North
Secondly what do beautiful women have to do with baseball and the schedules//
Another small mind at work>
I think your profile says a lot about you even if you think you are a comic
quote:Originally posted by Bulldog 19:
Well I think it's important to remember that baseball is different than any other sport. Look at basketball and football--those players HAVE to go to school. Baseball players do not.
There's differences in all sports, but, the commonality is a certain # of scholarships available during a recruiting season. During the summer baseball programs may rescind the NLI of an existing player but that scholarship would not have been available on the books during that past recruiting year. I can't imagine a blue chip player sitting in the weeds for a year banking on a coaches promise that a scholarship would become available the summer before school starts.
After thinking about it I guess there is a "dirty" way a coach could stash players. Lets say he has 4 full scholarships to give. On paper he has a 33% (?) min offer so he can put 12 players in his pocket with a verbal offer which may or may not be an accurate % and when signing day comes he could officially offer 4 full rides leaving 8 players without offers. The recruiting season is over for the most part and these players are in a boat without oars. The coach then goes to these kids and says "go up and play for my buddy at Juco ABC, he can give you 100%, have a great year, and we'll see what we can do for you next year". Makes me want to gag but this would essentially fulfill the "stable conspiracy".
It's been a long time but I think that is what ASU was accused of doing years ago.
quote:During the summer baseball programs may rescind the NLI of an existing player but that scholarship would not have been available on the books during that past recruiting year. I can't imagine a blue chip player sitting in the weeds for a year banking on a coaches promise that a scholarship would become available the summer before school starts.
This happens all the time. A coach informs an existing scholarship player that he won't be getting it renewed next season. It happened regularly at my son's school. It happened to his freshman year roommate after his soph year. One thing that ammazed me was the constant turn over of players over the 4 years. I remember talking to several parents who were so excited about their player only to see their son's essentially get cut after their first year. Sports is a nasty business and you participate with your eyes wide open.
Football players go to college but back in my day it was watered down. You picked your easy courses like basket weaving 101. I hope it has changed since those days.
There is a huge difference between football's 85 full ride scholarships vs. baseball's 11.7. That's why its not an issue in football. They have 85 kids on scholarship with maybe, 30 kids playing in a game (with substitutions on both sides of the ball). Baseball has 11.7 which may represent the total number of kids on the field in one game with pitchers.
That is why you have to have good grades to play college BB. The academic money is almost always more than the BB money in the NCAA programs.
rz1 - The football practices that jemaz describes are fairly common. You are right, the PR says school-X has 18 scholarships to offer in football and they sign 18 kids...but look later in the year (you're gonna have to dig) and see that they've really awarded 21 or 22. Then watch the 5th year seniors or "disgruntled" players leave the program and somehow it all works out!
And my guess (although I don't know since I don't follow any B10(11) teams) is that it happens there too.
Lawsuits? Hardly. Scholarships are year-by-year. No basis for a lawsuit. The real "fix" is for the NCAA to insist upon multi-year scholarships...but it won't happen...coaches/ADs just won't go for it.
Since I've had two sons recruited for baseball, the multi-year scholarship commitment question is one we asked in both cases. Almost all (but not all) schools insisted that their school's policies would not allow them to reduce or eliminate a scholarship year-to-year except in the case of academic or disciplinary reasons. Maybe this is applied broadly in some cases? Maybe not?
While I am no fan of the B10(11) for other reasons, I do applaud them if they're sticking to some good principles in recruiting.
And my guess (although I don't know since I don't follow any B10(11) teams) is that it happens there too.
Lawsuits? Hardly. Scholarships are year-by-year. No basis for a lawsuit. The real "fix" is for the NCAA to insist upon multi-year scholarships...but it won't happen...coaches/ADs just won't go for it.
Since I've had two sons recruited for baseball, the multi-year scholarship commitment question is one we asked in both cases. Almost all (but not all) schools insisted that their school's policies would not allow them to reduce or eliminate a scholarship year-to-year except in the case of academic or disciplinary reasons. Maybe this is applied broadly in some cases? Maybe not?
While I am no fan of the B10(11) for other reasons, I do applaud them if they're sticking to some good principles in recruiting.
quote:Originally posted by justbaseball:
rz1 - The football practices that jemaz describes are fairly common. You are right, the PR says school-X has 18 scholarships to offer in football and they sign 18 kids...but look later in the year (you're gonna have to dig) and see that they've really awarded 21 or 22. Then watch the 5th year seniors or "disgruntled" players leave the program and somehow it all works out!
And my guess (although I don't know since I don't follow any B10(11) teams) is that it happens there too.
JB, I'm sure that is a common football occurrence and I've seen it happen at the UW. What happens here is that a worthy existing non-scholarship player is usually awarded the recovered scholly, or it is held for the next recruiting class. After the March(?) football signing date I would imagine the talent pool is rather thin with "worthy" recruits.
The same could be said in the baseball arena. I know at my sons school there were post-season casualties of scholarship players and I can't recall a time when an incoming Freshman was signed because that litter was already picked over. What they used the scholly for was JC players who could enroll that Fall, or even the second semester of that year right before the season began. That IMO, is a legit way even though I disagree that a kid had to lose a scholly to make it happen.
I'm having a hard time explaining my thoughts ......even to myself
Correct me if I'm wrong but recruiting for the "next level" from a player/parents perspective is about the student-athlete and not a college programs claim to fame, isn't it? Why would you want to give permission and promote all schools to over-recruit when the only potential losers are some of the kids? With a card blanche attitude to over recruit you are bound to have even more kids with no where to go after the official NLI's are released.
Chewing off just enough to make you full allows others less fortunate to nibble on the remains. No one is left starving digging through the garbage, there is still a class struggle but the minions are more content, and those perched on their thrones can say they threw leftovers to the masses. That was coach Andersons message IMO
quote:Originally posted by rz1:quote:Originally posted by justbaseball:
rz1 - The football practices that jemaz describes are fairly common. You are right, the PR says school-X has 18 scholarships to offer in football and they sign 18 kids...but look later in the year (you're gonna have to dig) and see that they've really awarded 21 or 22. Then watch the 5th year seniors or "disgruntled" players leave the program and somehow it all works out!
And my guess (although I don't know since I don't follow any B10(11) teams) is that it happens there too.
JB, I'm sure that is a common football occurrence and I've seen it happen at the UW. What happens here is that a worthy existing non-scholarship player is usually awarded the recovered scholly, or it is held for the next recruiting class. After the March(?) football signing date I would imagine the talent pool is rather thin with "worthy" recruits.
The same could be said in the baseball arena. I know at my sons school there were post-season casualties of scholarship players and I can't recall a time when an incoming Freshman was signed because that litter was already picked over. What they used the scholly for was JC players who could enroll that Fall, or even the second semester of that year right before the season began. That IMO, is a legit way even though I disagree that a kid had to lose a scholly to make it happen.
I'm having a hard time explaining my thoughts ......even to myselfso I reverted to a time line for visualization. I started from the day a coach can contact a player and ended the time those recruits began college, and in-between plugged in numbers and checkpoint dates. For the life of me I can see no positive gain from a players standpoint for being associated with a program that over-recruits.
Correct me if I'm wrong but recruiting for the "next level" from a player/parents perspective is about the student-athlete and not a college programs claim to fame, isn't it? Why would you want to give permission and promote all schools to over-recruit when the only potential losers are some of the kids? With a card blanche attitude to over recruit you are bound to have even more kids with no where to go after the official NLI's are released.
Chewing off just enough to fill up allows others less fortunate to nibble on the remains. No one is left starving and digging through the scraps to sustain. There will always be a class struggle but the minions will be more content with the thoughts of "fair play", and those perched on their thrones can say they threw leftovers to the masses. That was Coach Andersons desire IMO