I know that coming to a conclusion about any of this is premature. We do not have all the facts, either side of the story, or any conditions that were put in place before newbill was signed. But for arguments sake, lets say this plays out in the worst case scenario that has been mentioned on this board and other sources. Is this a fireable offense, and if so, should Coach Williams be fired for it. If this scenario has played out as it has, I have to say yes.
The number one source of pride for me in watching in marquette hasn't been the winning or success our players have had in the pros, its really been the way the program and the school have handled themselves with class. I remember 2 years ago during March madness, wesley matthews had an interview with greg gumbel that my brother watched, and he commented "Wow, he was very articulate and handled himself really well." programs like Kentucky may win, but they do their university at times a great disservice in how they do it. Constantly recruiting one and dones, and hiring a coach of moral ambiguity have led to constant pot shots not just towards the basketball program, but at the university as a whole. If this event is as bad as some have imagined and speculated, this is an offense that I believe can not be overlooked. To ruin a young mans (some would say still a kid) life in the hopes of improving your basketball program is not something that I want roaming around in Marquettes closet, and while it may be an action taken simply by a coach, it is an action that permeates through more than just the basketball team and its staff, but rather through the whole university.
Coach Williams silence on this issue has also not done the University any favors. By keeping quiet, he has allowed this story to linger, fester, and to allow heresay and rampant spectulation grab ahold of it like a run away train, making any explanation now feel more like a cover job rather than a truthful representation of the facts. You can knock Calipari all you want for the controversy surronding him, but if anything, he has always gotten in trouble for trying to help his players. Pitinos actions a year ago were highly immoral, but does it have anywhere near the implications or effect on anyone on the Louisville team that our staffs has had on one of our own? I mention again at the end of this that this is a story done on speculation and is only to be considered if the worst scenario that has been mentioned, or one close to it is true. We could find out in some time that this was done was not anything like we have come to think of it as. But if it is, it would be a blackeye on this program that can never be fully healed, and in my opinion, action mus than be taken.
Let's keep this simple: no.
I may be mistaken, but aren't you the same poster that just requested all the threads be merged?
This is the most ridiculous load of crap ever posted. I won't even take the time to break it down. Grow Up.
Everyone needs to chill out and paragraphs are your friend. Reading that was a headache.
Quote from: mu-rara on July 02, 2010, 10:36:35 AM
This is the most ridiculous load of crap ever posted. I won't even take the time to break it down. Grow Up.
I really don't see how this can be considered a load of crap.
Quote from: mu-rara on July 02, 2010, 10:36:35 AM
This is the most ridiculous load of crap ever posted. I won't even take the time to break it down. Grow Up.
Well, I don't know why you would take the time. Even he didn't. Paragraphs are supposed to be our friend.
We don't even know the whole story, much less enough of it to fire Buzz.
Quote from: Lacrosse218 on July 02, 2010, 10:38:07 AM
Everyone needs to chill out and paragraphs are your friend. Reading that was a headache.
Looks like you beat me to it.
Ruining a young man's life?
Permeating the whole university?
A blackeye on this program that can never be healed?
Are you for real?
Good Lord, I hope for your sake the basketball program never gets in any real trouble. You might be forced to call for the Jesuits to shut down the entire university.
And to answer your question ... no. Of course not.
Quote from: Moonboots on July 02, 2010, 10:39:20 AM
Well, I don't know why you would take the time. Even he didn't. Paragraphs are supposed to be our friend.
We don't even know the whole story, much less enough of it to fire Buzz.
I never said we knew the whole story, and i never said we should fire buzz. I mentioned many times that this story is based on speculation, and should only be considered if the worst scenario that has been written about on this board and others is true.
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on July 02, 2010, 10:33:32 AM
it is an action that permeates through more than just the basketball team and its staff, but rather through the whole university.
By this I assume you mean a crazy small % who participate in online chat rooms about the basketball team during summer break.
I would guess the majority and I mean true majority fall somewhere between general indifference to "oh we signed a new guy"
I feel bad for DJ - but the hyperbole train has completely fallen off the tracks
QuoteCoach Williams silence on this issue has also not done the University any favors. By keeping quiet, he has allowed this story to linger, fester, and to allow heresay and rampant spectulation grab ahold of it like a run away train, making any explanation now feel more like a cover job rather than a truthful representation of the facts.
You realize of course that once Newbill signs the release he becomes an uncommitted recruit and no one from the university can comment on him again, right? While people may not like the way things went down, would compounding the situation and committing an NCAA violation make it any better?
Quote from: Marquette_g on July 02, 2010, 10:48:03 AM
By this I assume you mean a crazy small % who participate in online chat rooms about the basketball team during summer break.
I would guess the majority and I mean true majority fall somewhere between general indifference to "oh we signed a new guy"
I feel bad for DJ - but the hyperbole train has completely fallen off the tracks
I'll give you that one. That comment by me was definitly a little strong. What i was trying to get at was that if what happened is true, I feel like it goes directly against what in my opinion makes Marquette so unique.
Yikes! I'm firmly in the "I don't like what we just did" camp, but even if the worst interpretation is true, which is that we dumped a signed player because a better one came long with no extenuating circumstances, I wouldn't fire Buzz for it. Maybe a "Don't do that again because it casts a poor light on this university and it's just not right or the way we will do things here" discussion in private is in order. But that's about it.
However things actually went down, Buzz took action that is within the NCAA rules in order to make his team better. No, this is in no way a firable offense. In fact, it's not even an "offense."
someone explain to me how anyone would be on Buzz for this.
I haven't been on scoop for some weeks before rumors of DJ/Wilson began and honestly minus a the usual insiders and MU fanboys here no one gives a crap.
MU added a great Player in Wilson, thats what everyone is hearing on the news and people that like MU basketball but aren't obsessed enough to come on here and post about how Buzz should be fired because he got a hangnail don't give a crap. What they know, and what they care about is MU will be scary good for the next few years and I hope Buzz continues to recruit and get the best players available. If that means some heartbreaks, yeah this sucks but Newbill will bounce back, Yous will make it into a program he fits in and Buzz will put together great teams for a long time
Are you for real?
We have something here in Dallas on Monday's during the Cowboy season called: "Overreaction Monday." Basically, the concept was formed from fans who go way overboard or to extremes in their reactions to the results of the Cowboys games. I'd have to qualify this thread and idea as the ULTIMATE OVERREACTION.
Please - DJ's life isn't ruined. It was questionable at best if other Big East schools formally offered him a scholarship. We'll see where he signs now that he's not going to MU. If he goes to a Mid-Major, it simply means he's viewed as a mid-major talent. If he is at this very moment at HIGH MAJOR talent - he'll land in a BCS conference other than the Big East. Also, the fact MU offered him, might actually raise his stock - as we are a high-major program, that is an upper-echelon team in the Big East. The rationale: If MU thought he was good enough - why shouldn't we..at very least, take a closer look?
Just stirring up the pot....
Ben Brust was allowed to get out of his NLI to Iowa and go to Wisconsin. I know it's a different situation, but the bar has been set for DJ to appeal to be allowed to "transfer" within the Big East (assuming there actually are Big East offers out there).
I'm at the point where I'd like to start throwing punches when it comes to some of these posts.
Good Lord this might be the worst post ever. Just get over it for fucks sake.
This topic should get it's own board where all these ridiculous threads can go to die. Better yet, it's own website, like some of the obscure blogs Chicos has been linking. Oh, I know, this should clearly get its own cable network, the NWN (Newbill Wilson Network). We could have 1 program a day that updated everyone on the latest developments of this riveting saga, and the rest of the time it would show crap that nobody cares about, like reruns of womens softball, volleyball, field hockey, wrestling, and Badgers basketball, and we would charge every cable subscriber in the country $1/month for the privilege.
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on July 02, 2010, 11:06:45 AM
Ben Brust was allowed to get out of his NLI to Iowa and go to Wisconsin. I know it's a different situation, but the bar has been set for DJ to appeal to be allowed to "transfer" within the Big East (assuming there actually are Big East offers out there).
If I'm not mistaken, there is, under certain circumstances, a process by which Newbill still could attend a Big East school. He would first have to get his NLI to Marquette declared "null and void," which, it would seem, probably would not be too difficult at this point.
So this business about him never being able to go to a Big East school may not be accurate.
Quote from: Jay Bee on July 02, 2010, 11:08:46 AM
I'm at the point where I'd like to start throwing punches when it comes to some of these posts.
This post nails down something else we need to remember. THIS IS A MESSAGE BOARD! Its a plae where different ideas should be thrown out there, and different opinions should be heard. To misrepresent facts is one thing, but opinions are fine. You just got worked up by me, a person who has an eagle about to kill a rabbit as my picture. And within this thread, i have been rebuked by the HBO power agent Ari gold, and the well trimmed mustache of Scott Merrit. this is not stuff to get that worked up over! These posts maybe complete bull crap, you might completely disagree with them, but I hope they are interesting, at least entertaining, and if that doesn't cut it, hopefully comical. And think all of us, including myself, need to remember that we come to this board for enjoyment and to have fun, and that believe it or not, none of us are taken that seriously.
Please, can we give all these threads there own section on the board. This is getting ridiculous. Enough already. This site will soon be just a board dedicated to the discussion of one issue.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 02, 2010, 11:14:48 AM
If I'm not mistaken, there is, under certain circumstances, a process by which Newbill still could attend a Big East school. He would first have to get his NLI to Marquette declared "null and void," which, it would seem, probably would not be too difficult at this point.
So this business about him never being able to go to a Big East school may not be accurate.
Actually, getting it declared null and void is a very specific thing for very specific reasons, several of which wouldn't come into play here because they are based upon waiting until classes start, which isn't likely to happen.
Is it a fireable offense? Maybe to some...
But as long as the Big East and the NCAA allow this to happen, programs across the nation have the latitude to continue to do so.
Take it up with those bodies.
Hope that Buzz does what is best from here on.
And you're not gonna gear anything until th legal eagles at the athletic dept let them
This is also a place where, whether you like it or not, you're representing yourself as part of the Marquette community. For better or worse, a college sports message board isn't the same as some other random board like fans of collector cars, video games, or even pro sports. A college sports fan base is always associated with the school, particularly for a place like MU where alumni make up the vast majority of the fan base, as opposed to a place like Texas or Ohio State. This entire fiasco, from the handling of everything by the coaching staff, to the reaction of our fans on message boards, hasn't reflected well on the Marquette community, and personally, I'm embarrassed by the whole thing.
Did you read IWB's response? Why would you write this after seeing that?
I do not like how Buzz handled this situation but I don't think it is a fireable offense.
Quote from: MUHoopsfan6 on July 02, 2010, 11:33:43 AM
Did you read IWB's response? Why would you write this after seeing that?
??
Quote from: MUHoopsfan6 on July 02, 2010, 11:33:43 AM
Did you read IWB's response? Why would you write this after seeing that?
Just curious, but who are you referring to with that post?
Quote from: Litehouse on July 02, 2010, 11:31:36 AM
This is also a place where, whether you like it or not, you're representing yourself as part of the Marquette community. For better or worse, a college sports message board isn't the same as some other random board like fans of collector cars, video games, or even pro sports. A college sports fan base is always associated with the school, particularly for a place like MU where alumni make up the vast majority of the fan base, as opposed to a place like Texas or Ohio State. This entire fiasco, from the handling of everything by the coaching staff, to the reaction of our fans on message boards, hasn't reflected well on the Marquette community, and personally, I'm embarrassed by the whole thing.
I think a rodent reading all of this holier than thou morale high horse BS on here the last couple of days could only reach the conclusion that they were correct in their assumptions of MU. Makes me sick.
Quote from: bma725 on July 02, 2010, 11:21:33 AM
Actually, getting it declared null and void is a very specific thing for very specific reasons, several of which wouldn't come into play here because they are based upon waiting until classes start, which isn't likely to happen.
Not necessarily. At least no by my reading of thje NLI provisions:
Admissions Requirement. This NLI shall be declared null and void if the institution named in this document
notifies me in writing that I have been denied admission or, by the opening day of classes in fall 2010, has failed to provide me with written notice of admission, provided I have submitted a complete admission application. It is my obligation to provide, by request, my academic records and an application for admission to the signing institution. If I fail to submit the necessary academic credentials and/or application to determine an admission decision prior to September 1, the NLI shall be declared null and void.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/NLI+Provisions/Letter+Becomes+Null+and+Void
So, by my reading at least, if MU sends Newbill a letter denying him admission - as the school is entitled to do at any time - the NLI would be declared null and void.
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on July 02, 2010, 10:41:53 AM
I never said we knew the whole story, and i never said we should fire buzz. I mentioned many times that this story is based on speculation, and should only be considered if the worst scenario that has been written about on this board and others is true.
Either way your post is Sh##.
We have hit rock bottom with this thread being posted. None of us know the details. This is the end of the story. Really. . . let's end this madness and over the top reaction. I'm done.
Quote from: 79Warrior on July 02, 2010, 11:49:30 AM
Either way your post is Sh##.
Then its sh##. At least its something different to read.
Then maybe Fr. Wild should fire himself also.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on July 02, 2010, 11:41:09 AM
I think a rodent reading all of this holier than thou morale high horse BS on here the last couple of days could only reach the conclusion that they were correct in their assumptions of MU. Makes me sick.
I didn't write that as some holier than thou BS, I wrote it in response to some of the "Hey, it's just a message board" excuses for making all these ridiculous posts. I'm embarrssed by the over-reactions of fans on both sides, from the fire Buzz threads, to the threads drawing comparisons to schools like FSU and USC. Even if the IWB version is 100% true, I'm not thrilled we took a conditional NLI knowing the kid might not end up here because I think the negatives outweigh the positives. I tend to believe events were closer to IWB's account and Newbill knew this was a possibility. I questioned why we signed Newbill in the first place since he would be our 6th guard and we had a much bigger need up front. I'm happy we have Wilson now, but we should have never let Newbill sign the NLI in the first place.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 02, 2010, 11:46:29 AM
Not necessarily. At least no by my reading of thje NLI provisions:
Admissions Requirement. This NLI shall be declared null and void if the institution named in this document notifies me in writing that I have been denied admission or, by the opening day of classes in fall 2010, has failed to provide me with written notice of admission, provided I have submitted a complete admission application. It is my obligation to provide, by request, my academic records and an application for admission to the signing institution. If I fail to submit the necessary academic credentials and/or application to determine an admission decision prior to September 1, the NLI shall be declared null and void.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/NLI+Provisions/Letter+Becomes+Null+and+Void
So, by my reading at least, if MU sends Newbill a letter denying him admission - as the school is entitled to do at any time - the NLI would be declared null and void.
Problem is that only comes into play if the NLI is still in effect prior to it being declared null and void, meaning that the player has not yet requested or been granted a release. If he/she has already been released then that is no longer an option.
Quote from: Litehouse on July 02, 2010, 11:56:19 AM
I didn't write that as some holier than thou BS, I wrote it in response to some of the "Hey, it's just a message board" excuses for making all these ridiculous posts. I'm embarrssed by the over-reactions of fans on both sides, from the fire Buzz threads, to the threads drawing comparisons to schools like FSU and USC. Even if the IWB version is 100% true, I'm not thrilled we took a conditional NLI knowing the kid might not end up here because I think the negatives outweigh the positives. I tend to believe events were closer to IWB's account and Newbill knew this was a possibility. I questioned why we signed Newbill in the first place since he would be our 6th guard and we had a much bigger need up front. I'm happy we have Wilson now, but we should have never let Newbill sign the NLI in the first place.
I wasn't necessarily referring to you or the entirety of your post (which I happen to agree with) but the section about how it reflected on the MU community. Should have bolded that poart of your statement. my bad.
Quote from: Litehouse on July 02, 2010, 11:56:19 AM
I didn't write that as some holier than thou BS, I wrote it in response to some of the "Hey, it's just a message board" excuses for making all these ridiculous posts. I'm embarrssed by the over-reactions of fans on both sides, from the fire Buzz threads, to the threads drawing comparisons to schools like FSU and USC. Even if the IWB version is 100% true, I'm not thrilled we took a conditional NLI knowing the kid might not end up here because I think the negatives outweigh the positives. I tend to believe events were closer to IWB's account and Newbill knew this was a possibility. I questioned why we signed Newbill in the first place since he would be our 6th guard and we had a much bigger need up front. I'm happy we have Wilson now, but we should have never let Newbill sign the NLI in the first place.
Thats the whole thing though. This is a message board. This is where you can venture into the ridculous arguments. This is where you can throw out controversial, maybe even radical ideas/opinions. I don't even nessicarrily agree with my post on this issue, but I think its an interesting take on the situation thus far. My post, whether you disagree with it or not, cited no incorrect information, misquoted no one, and from the very beginning was represented as a piece that was meant to be interpreted in the context of a worst case scenario, and at its heart was never meant to be taken that seriously. If someone were to base their opinions on Marquette from a message board, do you really want a person like that to be part of the Marquette community?
Quote from: Pakuni on July 02, 2010, 11:46:29 AM
Not necessarily. At least no by my reading of thje NLI provisions:
Admissions Requirement. This NLI shall be declared null and void if the institution named in this document notifies me in writing that I have been denied admission or, by the opening day of classes in fall 2010, has failed to provide me with written notice of admission, provided I have submitted a complete admission application. It is my obligation to provide, by request, my academic records and an application for admission to the signing institution. If I fail to submit the necessary academic credentials and/or application to determine an admission decision prior to September 1, the NLI shall be declared null and void.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/NLI+Provisions/Letter+Becomes+Null+and+Void
So, by my reading at least, if MU sends Newbill a letter denying him admission - as the school is entitled to do at any time - the NLI would be declared null and void.
Except that he never sent in a complete admission application, which is, according to the NLI (in the Chico style)
HIS responsibility.
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on July 02, 2010, 12:02:13 PM
Thats the whole thing though. This is a message board. This is where you can venture into the ridculous arguments. This is where you can throw out controversial, maybe even radical ideas/opinions. I don't even nessicarrily agree with my post on this issue, but I think its an interesting take on the situation thus far. My post, whether you disagree with it or not, cited no incorrect information, misquoted no one, and from the very beginning was represented as a piece that was meant to be interpreted in the context of a worst case scenario, and at its heart was never meant to be taken that seriously. If someone were to base their opinions on Marquette from a message board, do you really want a person like that to be part of the Marquette community?
Did you live under power lines as a kid, or something?
Quote from: KipsBayEagle on July 02, 2010, 10:33:32 AM
I know that coming to a conclusion about any of this is premature. We do not have all the facts, either side of the story, or any conditions that were put in place before newbill was signed. But for arguments sake, lets say this plays out in the worst case scenario that has been mentioned on this board and other sources. Is this a fireable offense, and if so, should Coach Williams be fired for it. If this scenario has played out as it has, I have to say yes.
The number one source of pride for me in watching in marquette hasn't been the winning or success our players have had in the pros, its really been the way the program and the school have handled themselves with class. I remember 2 years ago during March madness, wesley matthews had an interview with greg gumbel that my brother watched, and he commented "Wow, he was very articulate and handled himself really well." programs like Kentucky may win, but they do their university at times a great disservice in how they do it. Constantly recruiting one and dones, and hiring a coach of moral ambiguity have led to constant pot shots not just towards the basketball program, but at the university as a whole. If this event is as bad as some have imagined and speculated, this is an offense that I believe can not be overlooked. To ruin a young mans (some would say still a kid) life in the hopes of improving your basketball program is not something that I want roaming around in Marquettes closet, and while it may be an action taken simply by a coach, it is an action that permeates through more than just the basketball team and its staff, but rather through the whole university.
Coach Williams silence on this issue has also not done the University any favors. By keeping quiet, he has allowed this story to linger, fester, and to allow heresay and rampant spectulation grab ahold of it like a run away train, making any explanation now feel more like a cover job rather than a truthful representation of the facts. You can knock Calipari all you want for the controversy surronding him, but if anything, he has always gotten in trouble for trying to help his players. Pitinos actions a year ago were highly immoral, but does it have anywhere near the implications or effect on anyone on the Louisville team that our staffs has had on one of our own? I mention again at the end of this that this is a story done on speculation and is only to be considered if the worst scenario that has been mentioned, or one close to it is true. We could find out in some time that this was done was not anything like we have come to think of it as. But if it is, it would be a blackeye on this program that can never be fully healed, and in my opinion, action mus than be taken.
No. This is not a "fireable" offense.
Mistake? Probably.
Miscommunication? Yes.
Fireable? Nope.
This is one of the dumber posts I have read in a long while. You have got to have better things to do with your time
Look i'll just end this thread right here. I think that if you push a recruit you have signed to a nli out the door at the drop of a hat without any notice to the player because someone better became available after the signing deadline 2 months before school starts, making it impossible for him to sign with another big east school which he has offers from, that is a fireable offense. In no way did I ever mention that this is what happened. In no way did i advocate the firing of Buzz Williams. If you disagree with this that is fine. If you agree with it, that is fine. This is what the first post said in less verbose language. We can all stop talking about this since it clearly has upset everyone far too much.
I do not think it is a fireable offense. However, I can see the Fr. Wild telling Buzz to never do it again. Given that, a repeat of this would be a fireable offense.
Not a violation. At worst, Newbill's version is 100% true, no rules were broken but in this case Buzz made a decision to cut/recruit over a kid. In this scenario, Buzz is a ruthless a-hole hypocrite who made a cold-blooded decision to do what he thought would make his team better, hurt feelings be damned. Or, IWB's could be pretty close to the truth and we have a failure to make sure that all parties involved understood what was being said. Not a firing offense.
If this turns into a pattern, then many more are going to have issues, just as many came to have issues with Crean, but were willing to hold their tongues while he was our coach and winning. But in the end, not a firing offense.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 02, 2010, 11:46:29 AM
Not necessarily. At least no by my reading of thje NLI provisions:
Admissions Requirement. This NLI shall be declared null and void if the institution named in this document notifies me in writing that I have been denied admission or, by the opening day of classes in fall 2010, has failed to provide me with written notice of admission, provided I have submitted a complete admission application. It is my obligation to provide, by request, my academic records and an application for admission to the signing institution. If I fail to submit the necessary academic credentials and/or application to determine an admission decision prior to September 1, the NLI shall be declared null and void.
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/NLI+Provisions/Letter+Becomes+Null+and+Void
So, by my reading at least, if MU sends Newbill a letter denying him admission - as the school is entitled to do at any time - the NLI would be declared null and void.
Are you seriously making the argument that no school is obligated to their end of the NLI because at any time they can simply send a letter denying admission?
Seriously--under what circumstances would a school be compelled to honor the NLI? If they can void it simply by sending a letter saying that admission is denied, the obligation effectively doesn't exist.
Under the NLI guidelines, the system is
supposed to protect both sides. The kid has a guaranteed scholarship, and the school doesn't have to worry that a committed recruit will go elsewhere.
Of course that assumes that schools have a reasonably objective admission criteria.
But since you claim a school can deny admission at any time for any reason, there would
never be a situation in which they have to honor their end of the NLI!! They can
always send a letter denying admission, which discharges any and all obligations they have under the NLI program.
I'm sorry, but I give Marquette more credit than that. I don't believe the admissions office takes their marching orders from the the AD or the basketball coach.
But if this does turn out to be true, then the NCAA is going to act to tighten the loophole. There is no way that they are going to continue to let 17 and 18 year olds sign a letter that implies that there is a guaranteed scholarship, but in reality obligates a school to provide nothing.
Quote from: tower912 on July 02, 2010, 01:29:36 PM
Not a violation. At worst, Newbill's version is 100% true, no rules were broken but in this case Buzz made a decision to cut/recruit over a kid. In this scenario, Buzz is a ruthless a-hole hypocrite who made a cold-blooded decision to do what he thought would make his team better, hurt feelings be damned. Or, IWB's could be pretty close to the truth and we have a failure to make sure that all parties involved understood what was being said. Not a firing offense.
If this turns into a pattern, then many more are going to have issues, just as many came to have issues with Crean, but were willing to hold their tongues while he was our coach and winning. But in the end, not a firing offense.
I agree with all of this but MU could make it clear to Buzz that from now on he must honor NLIs except in cases of academic or character/legal issues. If they choose not to make that stipulation then the next time this happens, the people that are now outraged at Buzz should be ready/willing to turn their anger toward MU.
I don't have a problem if MU tells Buzz to not do this in the future. We will have to see if the next president takes that stance.
Quote from: Marquette84 on July 02, 2010, 03:01:03 PM
Are you seriously making the argument that no school is obligated to their end of the NLI because at any time they can simply send a letter denying admission?
Seriously--under what circumstances would a school be compelled to honor the NLI? If they can void it simply by sending a letter saying that admission is denied, the obligation effectively doesn't exist.
Under the NLI guidelines, the system is supposed to protect both sides. The kid has a guaranteed scholarship, and the school doesn't have to worry that a committed recruit will go elsewhere.
Of course that assumes that schools have a reasonably objective admission criteria.
But since you claim a school can deny admission at any time for any reason, there would never be a situation in which they have to honor their end of the NLI!! They can always send a letter denying admission, which discharges any and all obligations they have under the NLI program.
I'm sorry, but I give Marquette more credit than that. I don't believe the admissions office takes their marching orders from the the AD or the basketball coach.
But if this does turn out to be true, then the NCAA is going to act to tighten the loophole. There is no way that they are going to continue to let 17 and 18 year olds sign a letter that implies that there is a guaranteed scholarship, but in reality obligates a school to provide nothing.
I can't begin to tell you how wrong you are. Nowhere in the NLI guidelines does it guarantee a player a scholarship unless and until that player is admitted. If that were the case, how the heck did Damian Saunders get the boot from Marquette?
But here's a crazy thought ... instead of ranting and tossing out a bunch of straw men (I, in fact, never said a school could deny admission "at any time for any reason"), why do not your best to educate yourself (you obviously have not), acquaint yourself with the facts, then get back to me on where I'm wrong.
I'll start you off, then you can put your Marquette education to good use do the rest yourself. From the official National Letter of Intent home page:
"By signing a National Letter of Intent, a prospective student-athlete agrees to attend the designated college or university for one academic year. Pursuant to the terms of the National Letter of Intent program, participating institutions agree to provide athletics financial aid for one academic year to the student-athlete, provided he/she is admitted to the institution and is eligible for financial aid under NCAA rules." http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/About+the+NLI/
While you're at it, please provide some legal citations supporting your apparent belief that American universities and colleges are legally bound to admit certain students, namely those who have been offered an athletic scholarship.
Put your big brain to work.
What you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
His admission is supposedly being denied because he did not submit paperwork. There is no other indication that he is not qualified except for that problem. The question is did MU basketball staff tell him to take his time or is Newbill making that up. Besides that, I believe MU would have been hot on Vander's case, if he was missing something and it is hippocritical not to treat the recruits the same. We also do not know if admissions said he was denied or if basketball staff told him you will not be accepted, because he did not complete the paper work. I wonder if Wilson even has his paper work in yet, given that he just got his release. That is why I believe it is a correctable error and this is just a flimsy excuse to get a better player. It really is bending the intent of the qualifying admissions rule, which should not happen at a Jesuit University.
I wouldn't be surprised if the guy who started this thread is an attorney or a writer for a local paper. Certainly blowing this out of proportion. Yeah, this doesn't look good... but fire Williams?!? Over reaction at it's best.
Quote from: bilsu on July 02, 2010, 03:55:24 PM
His admission is supposedly being denied because he did not submit paperwork. There is no other indication that he is not qualified except for that problem. The question is did MU basketball staff tell him to take his time or is Newbill making that up. Besides that, I believe MU would have been hot on Vander's case, if he was missing something and it is hippocritical not to treat the recruits the same. We also do not know if admissions said he was denied or if basketball staff told him you will not be accepted, because he did not complete the paper work. I wonder if Wilson even has his paper work in yet, given that he just got his release. That is why I believe it is a correctable error and this is just a flimsy excuse to get a better player. It really is bending the intent of the qualifying admissions rule, which should not happen at a Jesuit University.
Nobody, at least not anybody official or close to the situation, has said his admission is being denied because he did not do his paperwork, nor would MU need that as an excuse to deny him. In fact, they don't need any reason to deny him. As long as the denial isn't based on a specifically prohibited act of discrimination, they can deny him or anyone else.
People seem to be grappling with this. Marquette is under no obligation to admit DJ Newbill simply because he was offered a scholarship and signed a LOI. He could be as qualified as they come, and have his paperwork in at the soonest possible moment, and it still wouldn't obligate Marquette to admit him.
IMO, the importance of the application isn't that it somehow gets MU out on a technicality, although it does. The real importance to me is that it indicates DJ may have known there was a good chance he wasn't going to end up at MU this year, so why bother filling out that pesky application.
Quote from: Litehouse on July 02, 2010, 04:11:05 PM
IMO, the importance of the application isn't that it somehow gets MU out on a technicality, although it does. The real importance to me is that it indicates DJ may have known there was a good chance he wasn't going to end up at MU this year, so why bother filling out that pesky application.
Ding! Ding! Ding!
I wish someone could/would explain how a kid who has the opportunity to attend a dream school would sit on his application for weeks, if not months, if there really werne't anything more to the situation.
congrats - one of the longest thought out, stupid posts I have ever read on this message board....
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on July 02, 2010, 11:06:45 AM
Ben Brust was allowed to get out of his NLI to Iowa and go to Wisconsin. I know it's a different situation, but the bar has been set for DJ to appeal to be allowed to "transfer" within the Big East (assuming there actually are Big East offers out there).
There aren't any now, that's the problem. If this happened months ago the kid has a chance. But according to Rosiak, he was offered by West Virginia....unless Rosiak is wrong or lying.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 02, 2010, 03:32:57 PM
I can't begin to tell you how wrong you are. Nowhere in the NLI guidelines does it guarantee a player a scholarship unless and until that player is admitted. If that were the case, how the heck did Damian Saunders get the boot from Marquette?
I ask a question, and you respond by telling me I'm wrong. Nice.
Why don't you answer the question?
Let me repeat it for you: Are you seriously making the argument that no school is obligated to their end of the NLI because at any time they can simply send a letter denying admission?
You seem fixated on the fact that the NLI is only valid
if the school admits a student. Yet you also claim the school has an "absolute right to admit or deny anyone admission for whatever reason it chooses."
Denying admission by definition voids the LOI.
Which means the university has an absolute right to void the LOI for any reason it chooses.
Is THAT your view?
Quote from: Pakuni on July 02, 2010, 03:32:57 PM
(I, in fact, never said a school could deny admission "at any time for any reason"),
Let me refresh your memory:
"Marquette University has the
absolute right to admit or deny anyone admission for whatever reason it chooses, so long as there is not discrimination on the basis of a that person being in a protected class"
Are you really going to be such a weasel as to hide behind the fact I left off your disclaimer of "member of a protected class"? Or that you said "deny admission for whatever reason it chooses" rather than "at any time for any reason"
That would be pathetic even by your normal standards.
Quote from: Pakuni on July 02, 2010, 03:32:57 PM
I'll start you off, then you can put your Marquette education to good use do the rest yourself. From the official National Letter of Intent home page:
"By signing a National Letter of Intent, a prospective student-athlete agrees to attend the designated college or university for one academic year. Pursuant to the terms of the National Letter of Intent program, participating institutions agree to provide athletics financial aid for one academic year to the student-athlete, provided he/she is admitted to the institution and is eligible for financial aid under NCAA rules."
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/About+the+NLI/
Good--you found the NLI. How about YOU put YOUR brain to work and READ it, please.
Then do me the courtesy of answering my question:
Under what circumstances (if any) would a school be compelled to honor this NLI if the condition that voids the NLI is at the whim of the school?
Quote from: Pakuni on July 02, 2010, 03:32:57 PM
While you're at it, please provide some legal citations supporting your apparent belief that American universities and colleges are legally bound to admit certain students, namely those who have been offered an athletic scholarship.
For what end?
The intent of the NLI is to protect both the school and the student. Student gets a scholarship, the school gets assurances that the student won't attend another school.
If you're right, then the NLI provides the student with a false sense of security that he will recieve a scholarship. The school can deny admission right up until the first day of classes. The school can legally void the NLI simply by denying admission for any reason--legitimate or not.
If you're right, then the document is inappropriate for its purpose and needs to be revised.
Somehow, I think you're wrong--I don't think schools can deny admission in order to get out their NLI obligations. I think they are obilgated to use some reasonably objective criteria.
But if you're right, then the NCAA needs to investigate and make changes because even if it is legally permissible, its not what they want.
Quote from: tower912 on July 02, 2010, 01:29:36 PM
Not a violation. At worst, Newbill's version is 100% true, no rules were broken but in this case Buzz made a decision to cut/recruit over a kid. In this scenario, Buzz is a ruthless a-hole hypocrite who made a cold-blooded decision to do what he thought would make his team better, hurt feelings be damned. Or, IWB's could be pretty close to the truth and we have a failure to make sure that all parties involved understood what was being said. Not a firing offense.
If this turns into a pattern, then many more are going to have issues, just as many came to have issues with Crean, but were willing to hold their tongues while he was our coach and winning. But in the end, not a firing offense.
Well said
Quote from: Litehouse on July 02, 2010, 04:11:05 PM
IMO, the importance of the application isn't that it somehow gets MU out on a technicality, although it does. The real importance to me is that it indicates DJ may have known there was a good chance he wasn't going to end up at MU this year, so why bother filling out that pesky application.
Not if you believe what his coach said....take your time on the essay, make sure you do it right. Etc, etc.
Besides, that sound like one of the lamest excuses out there. If the coaches still wanted him, they would be all over him to get his paperwork in. Sure as hell looks obvious that they wanted him to take as long as he needed and then some.
Quote from: Marquette84 on July 02, 2010, 05:32:27 PM
I ask a question, and you respond by telling me I'm wrong. Nice.
Why don't you answer the question?
Let me repeat it for you: Are you seriously making the argument that no school is obligated to their end of the NLI because at any time they can simply send a letter denying admission?
You seem fixated on the fact that the NLI is only valid if the school admits a student. Yet you also claim the school has an "absolute right to admit or deny anyone admission for whatever reason it chooses."
Denying admission by definition voids the LOI.
Which means the university has an absolute right to void the LOI for any reason it chooses.
This is a silly, fallacious argument.
My position is simple, factual and has been stated, repeatedly. You can read it in several other places on this board.
QuoteLet me refresh your memory:
"Marquette University has the absolute right to admit or deny anyone admission for whatever reason it chooses, so long as there is not discrimination on the basis of a that person being in a protected class"
Are you really going to be such a weasel as to hide behind the fact I left off your disclaimer of "member of a protected class"? Or that you said "deny admission for whatever reason it chooses" rather than "at any time for any reason"
Sigh ... as always, when Marquette84's positions are being ripped to shreds, he brings out the personal insults.
Though I think it is amusing that you would call another a "weasel" for pointing out your habit of manipulating, misrepresenting and editing other's posts to suit your argument.
The sad part is, I know you know I'm right. You've provided not one scintilla of evidence disputing anything I've said. So, instead, you call names and make insults.
QuoteUnder what circumstances (if any) would a school be compelled to honor this NLI if the condition that voids the NLI is at the whim of the school?
A school is compelled to honor the NLI once it grants a student-athlete admission. Says so, right there in writing. I thought that was obvious by now.
I'm sorry you, even after reading all about the NLI, are not able come to grips with the fact the NLI offers a student very little protection.
QuoteThe intent of the NLI is to protect both the school and the student. Student gets a scholarship, the school gets assurances that the student won't attend another school.
You can say it all you want, but this is not how it works. Read the NLI. Nowhere does it state this. I don't know what else I can say here. I've provided absolute proof that an NLI does not provide any assurances of a scholarship until after a student-athlete receives admission. If you cannot or will not accept that, that's your problem.
QuoteIf you're right, then the NLI provides the student with a false sense of security that he will recieve a scholarship. The school can deny admission right up until the first day of classes.
Only those students who don't read the NLI will have a false sense of security.
Or those who, like you, read it, but refuse to believe it.
Though, historically speaking, a student should feel comfortable that once he signs an NLI and meets NCAA qualifications, he's getting that scholie. Exceptions happen, but they're fortunately very rare.
Didn't Marquette deny Damian Saunders admission almost right up to the first day of classes? Even though he had a signed NLI?
QuoteThe school can legally void the NLI simply by denying admission for any reason--legitimate or not.
Whether a reason is legitimate or not is up to the individual school. Some schools would reject a student with a marijuana arrest. Many others would not. Is a legitimate reason? Who gets to decide? Should someone else get to determine what's right for Marquette or Wisconsin or any other school when it comes to who is and who is not admitted? Is there some guidebook out there that lists legitimate and illegitimate reasons to deny a student admission? Is there a special federal panel that determines the legitimacy of denials?
QuoteIf you're right, then the document is inappropriate for its purpose and needs to be revised.
It's only inappropriate in your mind because you thought (think?)it is something that it very clearly is not, nor was it intended to be. You misunderstand the purpose. It's purpose is not, nor was it intended to be, an unconditional guarantee that a student-athlete would receive a scholarship the moment he signs the letter.
QuoteSomehow, I think you're wrong--I don't think schools can deny admission in order to get out their NLI obligations. I think they are obilgated to use some reasonably objective criteria.
So, you're not going to offer any factual support for your argument. Just what you "somehow think."
Fine.
Then I'm sure the NCAA will step in soon, reinstate DJ Newbill's scholarship to Marquette and send Jamil Wilson packing.
Until that time, why not get to work finding this set of objective criteria?
Look at the Saunders case.
By the NCAA's objective criteria, he should have receivbed his scholarship from Marquette.
But Marquette instead chose to deny him admission, and therefore a scholarship, by the purely arbitrary measure of its own academic standars - standards that were different for others.
QuoteBut if you're right, then the NCAA needs to investigate and make changes because even if it is legally permissible, its not what they want.
It is exactly what they want. It gives a great deal of protection to the schools and very little to the athlete.
I am a huge Marquette basketball fan. I am also a voracious reader and reasonably plugged into the Marquette athletic department. Until reading about this situation on this board I had no idea what was going on. Trust me, this is not a big deal and the university isn't the least concerned about it or Buzz.
Everyone else has turned the page. You should too.
Quote from: Avenue Commons on July 02, 2010, 07:48:42 PM
I am a huge Marquette basketball fan. I am also a voracious reader and reasonably plugged into the Marquette athletic department. Until reading about this situation on this board I had no idea what was going on. Trust me, this is not a big deal and the university isn't the least concerned about it or Buzz.
Everyone else has turned the page. You should too.
That's what scares some people, the fact they are least concerned about it. As if the personal, human impact side is a non issue. "Just business"
Short answer: No.
Long answer: Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
Quote from: Pakuni on July 02, 2010, 06:15:49 PM
This is a silly, fallacious argument.
My position is simple, factual and has been stated, repeatedly. You can read it in several other places on this board.
Sigh ... as always, when Marquette84's positions are being ripped to shreds, he brings out the personal insults.
Though I think it is amusing that you would call another a "weasel" for pointing out your habit of manipulating, misrepresenting and editing other's posts to suit your argument.
The sad part is, I know you know I'm right. You've provided not one scintilla of evidence disputing anything I've said. So, instead, you call names and make insults.
A school is compelled to honor the NLI once it grants a student-athlete admission. Says so, right there in writing. I thought that was obvious by now.
I'm sorry you, even after reading all about the NLI, are not able come to grips with the fact the NLI offers a student very little protection.
You can say it all you want, but this is not how it works. Read the NLI. Nowhere does it state this. I don't know what else I can say here. I've provided absolute proof that an NLI does not provide any assurances of a scholarship until after a student-athlete receives admission. If you cannot or will not accept that, that's your problem.
Only those students who don't read the NLI will have a false sense of security.
Or those who, like you, read it, but refuse to believe it.
Though, historically speaking, a student should feel comfortable that once he signs an NLI and meets NCAA qualifications, he's getting that scholie. Exceptions happen, but they're fortunately very rare.
Didn't Marquette deny Damian Saunders admission almost right up to the first day of classes? Even though he had a signed NLI?
Whether a reason is legitimate or not is up to the individual school. Some schools would reject a student with a marijuana arrest. Many others would not. Is a legitimate reason? Who gets to decide? Should someone else get to determine what's right for Marquette or Wisconsin or any other school when it comes to who is and who is not admitted? Is there some guidebook out there that lists legitimate and illegitimate reasons to deny a student admission? Is there a special federal panel that determines the legitimacy of denials?
It's only inappropriate in your mind because you thought (think?)it is something that it very clearly is not, nor was it intended to be. You misunderstand the purpose. It's purpose is not, nor was it intended to be, an unconditional guarantee that a student-athlete would receive a scholarship the moment he signs the letter.
So, you're not going to offer any factual support for your argument. Just what you "somehow think."
Fine.
Then I'm sure the NCAA will step in soon, reinstate DJ Newbill's scholarship to Marquette and send Jamil Wilson packing.
Until that time, why not get to work finding this set of objective criteria?
Look at the Saunders case.
By the NCAA's objective criteria, he should have receivbed his scholarship from Marquette.
But Marquette instead chose to deny him admission, and therefore a scholarship, by the purely arbitrary measure of its own academic standars - standards that were different for others.
It is exactly what they want. It gives a great deal of protection to the schools and very little to the athlete.
All that seems to matter to you is that little clause that says a player must be admitted for the NLI to be valid.
When you couple that with your statement that the school has absolute right to deny admission for any reason, it means that a coach has absolute right to ignore any signed NLI he doesn't want to honor. You may not want to say it in those words, but you've made it amply clear that's what you believe the NLI says, period, end of story, no room for discussion.
I think that's ethically wrong and borderline immoral even if it IS the letter of the law. You think it's the kids fault for not reading the fine print of the NLI closely enough.
I'll simply go back to my initial position. If every school in D1 used the same loophole that Buzz did with Newbill, it would create an unsustainable situation, and the NCAA would act and close the loophole.
I don't believe for a second that the
intent of the NLI is to give schools an absolute right to get out from any NLI for whatever reason they want simply by withholding admission.
Contrary to your statement that this happens and had gone on for a long time, it doesn't. You couldn't cite a single comparable situation where a school over-signed then dumped a player in the absence of of any transfers, injuries or non-qualifiers (and, no, Saunders isn't comparable).
And regardless of whether you think MU has the legal right to do so or not, It would sadden me tremendously if MU's admissions office took orders from the athletic department and denied admission to a student athlete for the sole purpose of reneging on their commitment to a young man in the event a better player comes along.
So in the end, you win the legal argument. You believe that MU (and every other D1 school) has the legal right to screw incoming recruits out of what they thought was a commitment for a scholarship.
While might be technically
correct, you'll never be
right.
Wow, can KipsBay be fired from posting for the worst post ever? Sorry, as stupid a suggestion as the first one.
This is absolutely not a fireable offense. If we are discussing the same thing about TJ Oldpaper next year, and Brad Tulipboro the year after, and the pending NCAA sanctions the year after that, it's a different story.
I would be very upset if Marquette fired Buzz over this, but I would be equally upset if Buzz didn't learn from this and amend his own behavior in the future.
Yea, let us fire Buzz for this and kill any chance we have to be a good basketball program.
Maybe MU can hire Chico's to run around NIKE Coache's Clinics during the summer with a sign saying, "Coach at MU. We'll fire you for non-violations."