Declines to release recruit Joseph Young and verbally committed top 100 player Naadir Tharpe has decided to reopen his recruitment. This, in the wake of the dismissal of Lacey and another player for assault and Greedy Peterson for unspecified reasons and the loss of top recruiter Pat Skerry to Pitt. Ugly.
Naadir Thorpe is suppose to be amazing, was surprised he committed to providence in the first place. If he gets released, I see him going to Indiana. Crean needs some more bluechips and thrope wants to go to a program where he can play right away.
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on June 04, 2010, 09:13:20 AM
Naadir Thorpe is suppose to be amazing, was surprised he committed to providence in the first place. If he gets released, I see him going to Indiana. Crean needs some more bluechips and thrope wants to go to a program where he can play right away.
Tharpe is 2011, he wasn't even eligible to sign a LOI yet, so there's no official release needed.
Where did you hear this? You too are from RI so was this in the PROJO or just on the Providence fanboards?
Quote from: jhags15 on June 04, 2010, 10:07:42 AM
Where did you hear this? You too are from RI so was this in the PROJO or just on the Providence fanboards?
http://hoopsblog.projo.com/2010/06/top-recruit-joe.html
I think there's more to the story than the "sick aunt".
Joe Young's father is on the coaching staff at Houston, really wanted his son to attend, yet his son signs with Providence. This didn't sit well with the father.
http://blogs.chron.com/cougars/2009/09/the_anguish_of_michael_young.html
Not only that, but there is some indication (denied by Michael Young) that Joe Young didn't want to play at UH because he thought Penders demoted his father.
At the end of the season, Houston coach Tom Penders resigns, and all of a sudden Joe Young wants to stay close to home to be with a sick aunt?
My guess is that the real reason Young didn't commit with UH in the first place was Penders--now that Penders is out, he wants to go to Houston.
I don't blame PC for playing hardball. Young's signing kept Keno from recruiting another player for that position/scholarship. There was no coaching change at PC. The LOI is supposed to be binding for both parties.
lose-lose situation. Just dumb to keep a kid who doesn't want to be there however pure or unpure his want for a transfer.
He's going to half-a$$ it this year then leave dodge. He's not going to forget what the university is doing to him.
Quote from: Stone Cold on June 05, 2010, 04:31:14 AM
lose-lose situation. Just dumb to keep a kid who doesn't want to be there however pure or unpure his want for a transfer.
Based on this logic, an LOI is worth nothing.
The LOI is supposed to protect both sides--schools can't unilaterally decide they no longer want a player and players can't just decide on their own they want to go elsewhere.
The NCAA opened pandoras box by granting waivers--first it was when there was a coaching change, next when a parent or sibling was sick, now its an "aunt."
I'm sympathetic to a coaching change--but I think the pendulum has swung to far away from the "you're signing with a school, not a coach" rule. Perhaps the coaching change wavier would apply only after playing for the new coach for a year. If you can't stand him after that, you can transfer then without sitting out a year.
But it wouldn't bother me if the NCAA came out and said no more waivers, period.
Quote from: Stone Cold on June 05, 2010, 04:31:14 AM
He's going to half-a$$ it this year then leave dodge.
If he half-a$$es it, a) he won't get much (if any) playing time, and b) may wind up kicked off the team altogether. Neither will result in an attractive list of transfer options for him.
Young isn't forced to attend Providence. He can sit out a year and suffer the loss of a year's eligibility. That's the penalty for changing your mind.
Quote from: Stone Cold on June 05, 2010, 04:31:14 AM
He's not going to forget what the university is doing to him.
Too bad he didn't think about what he is doing to the university.
Quote from: Marquette84 on June 05, 2010, 04:24:17 PM
Based on this logic, an LOI is worth nothing.
The LOI is supposed to protect both sides--schools can't unilaterally decide they no longer want a player and players can't just decide on their own they want to go elsewhere.
The NCAA opened pandoras box by granting waivers--first it was when there was a coaching change, next when a parent or sibling was sick, now its an "aunt."
I'm sympathetic to a coaching change--but I think the pendulum has swung to far away from the "you're signing with a school, not a coach" rule. Perhaps the coaching change wavier would apply only after playing for the new coach for a year. If you can't stand him after that, you can transfer then without sitting out a year.
But it wouldn't bother me if the NCAA came out and said no more waivers, period.
If he half-a$$es it, a) he won't get much (if any) playing time, and b) may wind up kicked off the team altogether. Neither will result in an attractive list of transfer options for him.
Young isn't forced to attend Providence. He can sit out a year and suffer the loss of a year's eligibility. That's the penalty for changing your mind.
Too bad he didn't think about what he is doing to the university.
You did see where BMA wrote: Tharpe is 2011, he wasn't even eligible to sign a LOI yet, so there's no official release needed.
In response to who is on his list... Tharpe said:
"Marquette, Seton Hall, Rutgers, Hofstra, Wake, Indiana, and some others"
http://twitter.com/NTharpe10
Quote from: Ners on June 05, 2010, 05:03:34 PM
You did see where BMA wrote: Tharpe is 2011, he wasn't even eligible to sign a LOI yet, so there's no official release needed.
He's talking about Young, not Tharpe. Young is 2010 and needs a release.
Quote from: bma725 on June 05, 2010, 06:16:44 PM
He's talking about Young, not Tharpe. Young is 2010 and needs a release.
As written in the opening post, Young needs a release, Tharpe is only a verbal commit and does not require a release. He is merely re-opening his recruitment.