MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: ToddRosiakSays on November 12, 2010, 09:45:03 AM
-
Buzz on signees, recruiting
Sorry I wasn't able to get this posted sooner, but here is what coach Buzz Williams had to say about Juan Anderson and Derrick Wilson in his annual signing day news conference on Thursday.
http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/sports/107489383.html
-
Known for his brutal honestly, I really like hearing this from him:
I think Chris Otule as a sophomore, Davante Gardner as a freshman, are probably bigger than what you think. Bigger and better.
-
Interesting Buzz brought up DJ Newbill when Rosiak didn't specifically ask about him..but more the situation:
Do you like having that extra scholarship going into the spring, considering how much player turnover there is at that time of year: "Back to that, I know I probably lost some people that may have thought I was a good guy. I didn't do anything wrong on DJ, even though I couldn't say anything about that. The timing made it look like I did something wrong, but I didn't do anything wrong."
Interesting..
-
Interesting Buzz brought up DJ Newbill when Rosiak didn't specifically ask about him..but more the situation:
Do you like having that extra scholarship going into the spring, considering how much player turnover there is at that time of year: "Back to that, I know I probably lost some people that may have thought I was a good guy. I didn't do anything wrong on DJ, even though I couldn't say anything about that. The timing made it look like I did something wrong, but I didn't do anything wrong."
Interesting..
Interesting indeed. Of course some will refuse to believe that version of things, and continue to subscribe to the rumors and innuendo they like to reference here without providing any specifics or details for reasons they can't seem to articulate. They will continue to take the word of Newbill and his goofball coaches over that of Buzz even though there is nothing to warrant that position.
-
Interesting indeed. Of course some will refuse to believe that version of things, and continue to subscribe to the rumors and innuendo they like to reference here without providing any specifics or details for reasons they can't seem to articulate. They will continue to take the word of Newbill and his goofball coaches over that of Buzz even though there is nothing to warrant that position.
Perhaps if you had the insight of a true insider you would see Buzz Williams for the scoundrel he really is. Since you are on the wrong side of the velvet rope you cannot possibly know. I wish you could know the truth but it is too horrible to see the light of day.
-
Interesting indeed. Of course some will refuse to believe that version of things, and continue to subscribe to the rumors and innuendo they like to reference here without providing any specifics or details for reasons they can't seem to articulate. They will continue to take the word of Newbill and his goofball coaches over that of Buzz even though there is nothing to warrant that position.
A knife in the back is most painful when it comes from one who professes to love you. This is, for Buzz, his first real "Et tu, Brutus" moment. Rest assured it won't be his last.
-
Interesting indeed. Of course some will refuse to believe that version of things, and continue to subscribe to the rumors and innuendo they like to reference here without providing any specifics or details for reasons they can't seem to articulate. They will continue to take the word of Newbill and his goofball coaches over that of Buzz even though there is nothing to warrant that position.
Later on in the paragraph, Buzz basically admits to dropping Newbill for basically talent alone: "(Y)ou never want to settle and take a mid-major-plus guy, and that scholarship holds you, prevents you from taking a high-major guy four months later."
Buzz may *think* he did nothing wrong, but I disagree and hope he doesn't do it again.
-
Perhaps if you had the insight of a true insider you would see Buzz Williams for the scoundrel he really is. Since you are on the wrong side of the velvet rope you cannot possibly know. I wish you could know the truth but it is too horrible to see the light of day.
Thanks Chicos...your insider connections are always valued...and now I know why you "squirm."
-
Thank God the season starts tonight! I'm Newbilled out.
-
Another DJ Newbill thread to go along with the Crean thread?
Can we talk next about the nickname fiasco, Scoop vs Scout, and MU Football too?
let me quote myself
stop it, @ssholes
There is a real MARQUETTE game tonight for the first time in seven months.
-
Thanks Chicos...your insider connections are always valued...and now I know why you "squirm."
SalsaMan is being sarcastic/funny. Pretty good/accurate imitation, though.
-
Later on in the paragraph, Buzz basically admits to dropping Newbill for basically talent alone:
He did? I guess people will read that the way they want to. The comment is relative to keeping a scholarship open as opposed to simply taking 'a guy' to use it up. Where exactly did he say he dropped Newbill to sign Wilson? I look forward to reading that.
-
He said he did not want bigmen who clog up the middle, which is what I have been saying. Some posters do not agree with me on this, but Buzz wants a center that can be mobile enough to get out of the way. A center that can play more than 6' to 7' from the basket. You will see that type of center when Gardner gets in better shape.
-
Interesting indeed. Of course some will refuse to believe that version of things, and continue to subscribe to the rumors and innuendo they like to reference here without providing any specifics or details for reasons they can't seem to articulate. They will continue to take the word of Newbill and his goofball coaches over that of Buzz even though there is nothing to warrant that position.
Yes, because we should always take the word of the coaches, politicians, leaders of the world and forget the little guy, forget what the players say.
Are you serious? I mean really, are you being serious? Should we take the word of Jim Calhoun...he's a coach, he says he didn't cheat and did nothing wrong? Or is that an exception because he isn't OUR coach?
You'll forgive me but all these coaches are in it for the same thing...to make lots of $$$ and to win. Buzz is right that he technically did nothing wrong...by the rules. The question becomes was it the right thing to do. Big difference. That's what is at issue, not whether any rule was broken. No one EVER said a rule was broken in that situation. The question was and is whether it was the RIGHT THING TO DO
-
Thanks Chicos...your insider connections are always valued...and now I know why you "squirm."
If you only knew
-
Buzz may *think* he did nothing wrong, but I disagree and hope he doesn't do it again.
Ding a ding a ding.
-
Ding a ding a ding.
Funny how in the Crean thread..you defend Crean till death..and make mention that the degree of hatred some have for Crean is unbelievable...YET NOW...
when there is a thread that indicts Buzz...you run rampant with the "hate," "if you only knew," "is it the right thing to "do," - and you accuse others of having an agenda. You my friend, are a real piece of work.
-
This newbill bs is getting ridiculous. We got a better player and that's that. It may look bad but that is the nature of college basketball and recruiting. If we had signed newbill and found out he was only somewhat good and lost out on Wilson, the majority would be in an uproar. He's moved on. The coaches have moved on and all will be ok at the end of the day because by the looks of it we are signing better players that fit our mold to a T. So can we please move on. Itsstarting toget really old. And while I'm ranting here. Who cares what IU or Crean are doing. I could really care less. It's warrior basketball season and I couldn't be more excited about the potential of the players we have now and about the players that are coming aboard. Go warriors.
-
....and as you rail against politicians and coaches and trusting their words, perhaps you should add internet posters in there, also.
-
Funny how in the Crean thread..you defend Crean till death..and make mention that the degree of hatred some have for Crean is unbelievable...YET NOW...
when there is a thread that indicts Buzz...you run rampant with the "hate," "if you only knew," "is it the right thing to "do," - and you accuse others of having an agenda. You my friend, are a real piece of work.
The "logic" he often displays leaves a lot to be desired.
-
The Newbill situation is a catch-22. All we have to go on is Newbill's story because for Buzz to come out with his version would constitute an NCAA violation. I believe the bulk of what IWB said, that an offer was made contingent on Williams not finding a player that better suited what he was looking for. Well, that player showed up, Newbill was left on the outside, and felt jilted because he thought the contingent offer was iron-clad when that was never the case. My guess is Buzz brings it up because he still feels bad about how it played out, and hopefully he learns from the mistake of allowing Newbill to believe he was headed for Marquette. In the end, my guess is that from a PT perspective, Southern Miss will be a better fit for Newbill, and from a player perspective, Wilson is a better fit as a high-major player for Marquette than Newbill was. And hopefully, Buzz will learn from the incident and we won't see another recruitment play out like this in the future.
-
Isn't there a game tonight or something?
-
Are you serious? I mean really, are you being serious? Should we take the word of Jim Calhoun...he's a coach, he says he didn't cheat and did nothing wrong? Or is that an exception because he isn't OUR coach?
Yep. I am 100% serious. Buzz has been here for going on three years, and outside of the word of the supposedly harmed individuals, there is no track record or evidence of Buzz doing anything other than the right thing. He says that he didn't do anything wrong where Newbill is concerned. Why should we not take him at his word? His checkered past of consistently doing things the wrong way? A consistent pattern of lying? Or is it simply that you are believing what you want to believe? We have now heard from both sides. You are choosing to take the word of the 'wronged player' and a guy with a video camera. That's ok, but lets at least call it what it is.
Now, if you have the information on all the "stupid," questionable things that Buzz has done, then I suggest you do the right thing and put it out there. Otherwise, I suggest you shut the %$@* up and simply acknowledge that you are part of the problem. If you truly know of the things that Buzz is doing that put the program at risk, then who is really the problem, those of us who take him at his word, or those who supposedly know different, and do nothing but provide veiled references to what a scumbag Buzz is on a message board? Pathetic!
-
You'll forgive me but all these coaches are in it for the same thing...to make lots of $$$ and to win. Buzz is right that he technically did nothing wrong...by the rules. The question becomes was it the right thing to do.
You'll forgive me, but where exactly did he reference not breaking the rules?
"Back to that, I know I probably lost some people that may have thought I was a good guy. I didn't do anything wrong on DJ, even though I couldn't say anything about that. The timing made it look like I did something wrong, but I didn't do anything wrong.
Now you are even modifying what he actually says to fit your agenda.
-
Yes, because we should always take the word of the coaches, politicians, leaders of the world and forget the little guy, forget what the players say.
Are you serious? I mean really, are you being serious? Should we take the word of Jim Calhoun...he's a coach, he says he didn't cheat and did nothing wrong? Or is that an exception because he isn't OUR coach?
You'll forgive me but all these coaches are in it for the same thing...to make lots of $$$ and to win. Buzz is right that he technically did nothing wrong...by the rules. The question becomes was it the right thing to do. Big difference. That's what is at issue, not whether any rule was broken. No one EVER said a rule was broken in that situation. The question was and is whether it was the RIGHT THING TO DO
I get it. We can't believe Buzz because Jim Calhoun is a liar. False syllogisms - A) Jim Calhoun is a coach, B) Jim Calhoun is a liar, C) therefore all coaches are liars - illuminate nothing but the prejudice of the person suggesting them.
-
:) :oAs aforementioned--Let's cut this GD Newbill crap out. It's done. OK! How many other coaches have done this and probably got away with it. This is hard-nose D-1 Basketball. A good scholie get is PF Angelo Chol in California. We did it with Anderson, why not Chol.
-
Chicos: THE RIGHT THING TO DO is shut the F*CK up.
-
Why not Chol? Because at this point, the odds of getting a Top 100 recruit who you haven't previously been in on are pretty much zero. Might as well hope for Amir Williams or Michael Chandler, both of whom are rated higher and live closer to Marquette than Chol does.
I think we're far more likely to nab someone like God's Gift Achiuwa, who Buzz already has a good relationship with and is supposedly seriously considering us, or Martin Breunig, who is currently local and also has shown interest in us and vice versa.
-
I get it. We can't believe Buzz because Jim Calhoun is a liar. False syllogisms - A) Jim Calhoun is a coach, B) Jim Calhoun is a liar, C) therefore all coaches are liars - illuminate nothing but the prejudice of the person suggesting them.
Wasn't that a true false question on the LSAT years ago?
-
If Buzz's wife says hello to Chicos' wife at a shopping mall near our NCAA destination, he will have the same affinity for our current coach as he does our former coach (who is currently paying an AAU coach as a member of his staff and now has at least 7 players from that AAU program...within the rules).
-
Yes, because we should always take the word of the coaches, politicians, leaders of the world and forget the little guy, forget what the players say.
Are you serious? I mean really, are you being serious? Should we take the word of Jim Calhoun...he's a coach, he says he didn't cheat and did nothing wrong? Or is that an exception because he isn't OUR coach?
You'll forgive me but all these coaches are in it for the same thing...to make lots of $$$ and to win. Buzz is right that he technically did nothing wrong...by the rules. The question becomes was it the right thing to do. Big difference. That's what is at issue, not whether any rule was broken. No one EVER said a rule was broken in that situation. The question was and is whether it was the RIGHT THING TO DO
I really respect most people's opinions here so I don't want to get into a b*&^h fight. All I will say is that the nature of college sports is our fault. We are the one's wanting to run a guy out of town the second they start losing. Coaches are the ones that will jump when a better opportunity is on the table. Kids are the ones that want to go to the program that will increase their chances of getting to the next level. As long as Buzz is following the rules, I don't give an "f" if the guy might hurt a kid's feelings. Buzz has mouths to feed too. And if he can make a winning team that handle themselves in a way that represents my university, I will be happy.
If people are in need of a coach that will always take the moral high ground, then your never going to get it because the nature of college sports doesn't allow it. Sad, but its the truth. So deal with it.
-
It continues to be a rough week for Chicos...as Buzz would say...character revealed. But, I personally don't want Chicos to stop posting here, as it is somewhat fun to watch him dig his own grave deeper and deeper.
-
He did? I guess people will read that the way they want to. The comment is relative to keeping a scholarship open as opposed to simply taking 'a guy' to use it up. Where exactly did he say he dropped Newbill to sign Wilson? I look forward to reading that.
He clearly infered he dropped a mid-major talent for a high-major one. I would have thought an MU edcuation would have taught you to not be so literal.
-
This newbill bs is getting ridiculous. We got a better player and that's that.
Right. Cause the ends always justify the means. ::)
Isn't there a game tonight or something?
Yes there is.
Chicos: THE RIGHT THING TO DO is shut the F*CK up.
Classy.
-
It continues to be a rough week for Chicos...as Buzz would say...character revealed. But, I personally don't want Chicos to stop posting here, as it is somewhat fun to watch him dig his own grave deeper and deeper.
Rough week? It's been a great week. 44th straight positive subs quarter.
I went to the MU game on Saturday, I was looking for you but you didn't show up.
I met up with a lot of former MU buddies and employees of the Athletic Department.
I saw the Cowboys get crushed and that meant Wade was fired.
My son had the time of his life in Wisconsin
I watched a lot of you go into self-destruct mode based on what was happening a few states to the east.
It's been a great week, Ners. A great week.
Best of all, I learned that coaches do no wrong (well, some coaches) and we should all be lemmings, never challenge authority or the status quo, and certainly accept only one version of a story. Rock on!! Woo Hoo. Oh, and Vander Blue is here because of Maymon....forgot about that one.
-
He clearly infered he dropped a mid-major talent for a high-major one. I would have thought an MU edcuation would have taught you to not be so literal.
Do you mean "implied?"
-
He clearly infered he dropped a mid-major talent for a high-major one. I would have thought an MU edcuation would have taught you to not be so literal.
No, inferring is what you're doing as a result of your predispositions on this particular issue.
Implying is what you're claiming he did.
One would have thought an MU education would have taught you the difference. ;)
But his comments could just as easily - and perhaps more logically - be read the other way: he was asked about holding a scholie open to spring and gave that reply.
Either way, people have and will continue to view this through the prism of their own making. Those who want to believe Buzz did something bad, will call him a liar for saying he didn't. Those who think he did nothing wrong, will use these comments to justify that stance.
And those of us willing to admit we don't know what happened, probably never will know what happened and don't play the role of Super Internet Insider will shrug our shoulders and say "meh."
-
No, inferring is what you're doing as a result of your predispositions on this particular issue.
Implying is what you're claiming he did.
One would have thought an MU education would have taught you the difference. ;)
BWAHAHAHAHA!!! You got me.
-
Best of all, I learned that coaches do no wrong (well, some coaches) and we should all be lemmings, never challenge authority or the status quo, and certainly accept only one version of a story. Rock on!! Woo Hoo. Oh, and Vander Blue is here because of Maymon....forgot about that one.
Unfortunately, you still haven't learned that your opinion is not going to be shared by everyone no matter how many times you state it over and over and over and over again.
BTW, we're still waiting for your rebuttal on the Vander-Maymon thread (aka the Derrick Wilson thread). I assume you're still sticking with your version of the story since you brought it up again on this thread...even after being pantsed by IWB on the other thread.
Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?
-
And those of us willing to admit we don't know what happened, probably never will know what happened and don't play the role of Super Internet Insider will shrug our shoulders and say "meh."
+99% (as in 99% of MU fans have moved on and no longer care)
-
Rough week? It's been a great week. 44th straight positive subs quarter.
I went to the MU game on Saturday, I was looking for you but you didn't show up.
I met up with a lot of former MU buddies and employees of the Athletic Department.
I saw the Cowboys get crushed and that meant Wade was fired.
My son had the time of his life in Wisconsin
I watched a lot of you go into self-destruct mode based on what was happening a few states to the east.
It's been a great week, Ners. A great week.
Best of all, I learned that coaches do no wrong (well, some coaches) and we should all be lemmings, never challenge authority or the status quo, and certainly accept only one version of a story. Rock on!! Woo Hoo. Oh, and Vander Blue is here because of Maymon....forgot about that one.
Interesting that you're doing cartwheels over your favorite NFL team getting destroyed so that a coach you disapproved of would get crapcanned. Knowing that you'll actively root against your own team because you don't like the coach troubles me on soooo many levels.
-
But it doesn't surprise you.
-
I really respect most people's opinions here so I don't want to get into a b*&^h fight. All I will say is that the nature of college sports is our fault. We are the one's wanting to run a guy out of town the second they start losing. Coaches are the ones that will jump when a better opportunity is on the table. Kids are the ones that want to go to the program that will increase their chances of getting to the next level. As long as Buzz is following the rules, I don't give an "f" if the guy might hurt a kid's feelings. Buzz has mouths to feed too. And if he can make a winning team that handle themselves in a way that represents my university, I will be happy.
If people are in need of a coach that will always take the moral high ground, then your never going to get it because the nature of college sports doesn't allow it. Sad, but its the truth. So deal with it.
Erick
I agree with much of what you said...it is our fault.
Secondly, I'm not looking for a saint out there...Al was not a saint, (Hank probably was), Rick certainly wasn't, Lord knows Dukiet wasn't, same with KO, MD, Crean. I get it, we all get it. On the other hand, we can't be here bit&*(ing and whining when other schools are recruiting our verballed kids when we're out there doing the same. We can't be crying about our reputation of cutting players loose and not honoring scholarships etc because we deserve every bit of it, we can't be running around preaching holier than thou program that doesn't squirm itself across the line when it we do enough of it on our own.
Buzz is a good guy, I truly believe that. Those posters on here that know me personally and have actually had a conversation with me about it will back me up on that. I think he's well intentioned. That can be said about a lot of coaches out there that were good guys, were well intentioned but either blindly or intentionally did things they shouldn't. Many times, with those other coaches, it became "oh that's just X being X"...no harm no foul.
-
Chicos - why not post what you know and if you won't then let it go? Hey, that rhymes! Gotta' be a haiku in there somewhere.
-
But it doesn't surprise you.
Actually, it kinda does.
-
Unfortunately, you still haven't learned that your opinion is not going to be shared by everyone no matter how many times you state it over and over and over and over again.
BTW, we're still waiting for your rebuttal on the Vander-Maymon thread (aka the Derrick Wilson thread). I assume you're still sticking with your version of the story since you brought it up again on this thread...even after being pantsed by IWB on the other thread.
Ignorance is bliss, isn't it?
Reserach shows that volume and repetition doesn't work:
http://www.miller-mccune.com/politics/to-reach-consensus-lets-talk-less-25256/ (http://www.miller-mccune.com/politics/to-reach-consensus-lets-talk-less-25256/)
-
Best of all, I learned that coaches do no wrong (well, some coaches) and we should all be lemmings, never challenge authority or the status quo, and certainly accept only one version of a story. Rock on!! Woo Hoo.
How exactly are you NOT accepting only one version of the story? Do you ever read your own posts? You really are a hypocrite.
-
Erick
I agree with much of what you said...it is our fault.
Secondly, I'm not looking for a saint out there...Al was not a saint, (Hank probably was), Rick certainly wasn't, Lord knows Dukiet wasn't, same with KO, MD, Crean. I get it, we all get it. On the other hand, we can't be here bit&*(ing and whining when other schools are recruiting our verballed kids when we're out there doing the same. We can't be crying about our reputation of cutting players loose and not honoring scholarships etc because we deserve every bit of it, we can't be running around preaching holier than thou program that doesn't squirm itself across the line when it we do enough of it on our own.
You do realize that you are largely the only one who takes a "holier than thou" approach..and wants/expects the MU program to be, beyond squeaky clean. I don't ever recall complaining about other schools recruiting our verbaled commits..and actually don't recall much chatter at all about that..you may not like it..but it is par for the course in high major ball these days. Oversigning happens at virtually every high major program..Crean did it..Buzz did it...everyone's issue with you is simply your DOUBLE STANDARD to where the behavior is excusable when excerised by Tom Crean..but deplorable when exercised by Buzz Williams.
As I said previously...the only reason I want to see Tom Crean fail is to simply shut you up. That said..he did land some good players..but of course you find NOTHING squirmy about hiring the son of an AAU programs coach - that has now sent 7 kids the way of IU....nor do you find it at all squirmy that Crean gave a walk on slot to the son of one of the Indiana Elite's Board of Directors sons? Business as usual..no quid prop quo here right? Scratch my back, I'll scratch yours? I'm sure if Buzz did something like this..it definitely would make you squirmy..
-
Can't some of your guys take the bitch fighting to PMs? (see what I did there?)
Seriously. We're getting into mirco-analysis of every post.
Clarify your stance and agree to disagree, boys.
Some of you guys are just hunting each other down looking for a reason to fight, and for no good reason.
-
Erick
I agree with much of what you said...it is our fault.
Secondly, I'm not looking for a saint out there...Al was not a saint, (Hank probably was), Rick certainly wasn't, Lord knows Dukiet wasn't, same with KO, MD, Crean. I get it, we all get it. On the other hand, we can't be here bit&*(ing and whining when other schools are recruiting our verballed kids when we're out there doing the same. We can't be crying about our reputation of cutting players loose and not honoring scholarships etc because we deserve every bit of it, we can't be running around preaching holier than thou program that doesn't squirm itself across the line when it we do enough of it on our own.
Buzz is a good guy, I truly believe that. Those posters on here that know me personally and have actually had a conversation with me about it will back me up on that. I think he's well intentioned. That can be said about a lot of coaches out there that were good guys, were well intentioned but either blindly or intentionally did things they shouldn't. Many times, with those other coaches, it became "oh that's just X being X"...no harm no foul.
well said
-
Can't some of your guys take the bitch fighting to PMs? (see what I did there?)
Seriously. We're getting into mirco-analysis of every post.
Clarify your stance and agree to disagree, boys.
Some of you guys are just hunting each other down looking for a reason to fight, and for no good reason.
Agreed. That was my point in the other thread. And I apologize for jumping into the fray which certainly didn't make things any better.
-
Interesting Buzz brought up DJ Newbill when Rosiak didn't specifically ask about him..but more the situation:
Do you like having that extra scholarship going into the spring, considering how much player turnover there is at that time of year: "Back to that, I know I probably lost some people that may have thought I was a good guy. I didn't do anything wrong on DJ, even though I couldn't say anything about that. The timing made it look like I did something wrong, but I didn't do anything wrong."
Interesting..
What would have been more interesting if you actually quoted the ENTIRE thing. I can only imagine if StillAWarrior, Marquette84, myself, Hilltopper, or any number of others had done what you did....you and the posse would have gone crazy.
It changes more than a bit when you put the ENTIRE quote...but I'm sure you did that on accident. ::)
"Back to that, I know I probably lost some people that may have thought I was a good guy. I didn't do anything wrong on DJ, even though I couldn't say anything about that. The timing made it look like I did something wrong, but I didn't do anything wrong. But I think because of the turnover rate in coaches, players, in high schools, AAU...it's a cyclical machine, and that machine runs 365 days a year. And I don't think you can ever pass on a for-sure high-major guy, if he's the character that you want to be around. But at the same time, you never want to settle and take a mid-major-plus guy, and that scholarship holds you, prevents you from taking a high-major guy four months later. I think as you build your roster, if you can take a transfer, a redshirt guy, if you can sign a guy in the late spring because he signed in November with a coach that left...you always want to at least be available. I think we've kind of done that. We didn't do it in Class No. 1 because we weren't in that position relative to our roster to be able to do that. We were just signing the best players that we could sign. But now there's a little bit more of a tunnel vision on what we're trying to do and how we're trying to do it, and to always have a scholarship, I think, is good. And as of today, we still have a scholarship."
-
So, at worst, a mistake that he will learn from.
-
Interesting that you're doing cartwheels over your favorite NFL team getting destroyed so that a coach you disapproved of would get crapcanned. Knowing that you'll actively root against your own team because you don't like the coach troubles me on soooo many levels.
It's professional sports, a huge difference. The players are paid. If the team isn't going to try, I'm not going to cheer for them. Mike Jenkins and two other players this week admitted to giving up on plays and not trying.
And yes, I desire better for my teams than a 3rd rate castoff coach and have said that since the day he was hired. I'm glad he's gone. It couldn't get any worse.
-
BTW, we're still waiting for your rebuttal on the Vander-Maymon thread (aka the Derrick Wilson thread). I assume you're still sticking with your version of the story since you brought it up again on this thread...even after being pantsed by IWB on the other thread.
I responded already Mustache...the logic doesn't jive. Why does it not surprise me that you would like a male pantsing another male? I'll bet you go the little blue pill out for that.
-
How exactly are you NOT accepting only one version of the story? Do you ever read your own posts? You really are a hypocrite.
If you accept a position that doesn't come from 12th street on the MU campus you are railed here as anti-Buzz and anti-MU. I think Buzz's complete statement (you know the one that Ners conveniently cut off the critical parts) shows exactly what he did and backs up what many have said. He went for a better player and threw the kid to the curb. End of story.
-
So, at worst, a mistake that he will learn from.
If so, that would make me happy, but let's not suggest this is "at worst". Lives are affected by this stuff....the kid couldn't go to a Big East school any longer after signing. He had an offer from one and could have gone elsewhere. MU and Buzz have to be smarter about this stuff.
-
Alternate scenario: After the contact with Brad Forster, an MU alum,Newbill would have been ineligible at MU (Buzz can't actually talk about it). This comes to light and Buzz less than artfully communicates that Newbill can't come (hence the lack of application being filled out). Newbill, being a kid, doesn't communicate that with phillycoach, just saying that he had been dumped. At the same time, Jamil decides(late) to transfer into the scholarship slot that had been available (but not publicly known) for a few weeks. Newbill ends up playing D1 basketball. Just a thought. But it also explains the mysterious post from Marquette basketball office this summer asking everyone to be careful about contact with recruits. But reading the end of the quote, it sure looks like Buzz will, in the future, keep a slot open for a late transfer/decommit, learning from an awkward situation. Learning something. Instead of repeating the same thing over and over and over and over and over.
-
If so, that would make me happy, but let's not suggest this is "at worst". Lives are affected by this stuff....the kid couldn't go to a Big East school any longer after signing. He had an offer from one and could have gone elsewhere. MU and Buzz have to be smarter about this stuff.
You are ridiculous...and yes..I could have included the entire statement..it doesn't change anything. He wasn't even asked about DJ in the original question..but took the question to address the issue. Furthermore..what he went on to say doesn't mean he "cut" DJ to pick up Wilson (or a better player).
Give it up already. It is amazing that you choose to take DJ Newbill and his camp 100% at their word and Buzz and MU as being the liars. So Newbill said he had an offer from WVU...EVER heard of a kid saying he has offers form schools and in actuality..they really don't. Some kids take a school as being interested..as having an offer. But again..you are the insider to all things college basketball due to your post at DirecTV..so you know the scoop..just like you did on the Vander Blue/Maymon recruitments.
Keep digging..deeper and deeper and deeper..
-
Chicos neither said, nor did he imply, that Buzz lied.
-
For what it's worth=== Liam McMorrow had 4 pts and 9 boards (5 offense) for Tennessee Tech as they where beaten by North Carolina State. Interested on how he will perform next game. But, WE ARE MARQUETTE!!!!
-
Thanks for the Liam update. He was the one guy I was eager to see play for MU that regretfully wasn't able to.
-
Newbill started for Southern Miss tonight and scored nine points in their win against South Florida.
-
Yes, because we should always take the word of the coaches, politicians, leaders of the world and forget the little guy, forget what the players say.
Are you serious? I mean really, are you being serious? Should we take the word of Jim Calhoun...he's a coach, he says he didn't cheat and did nothing wrong? Or is that an exception because he isn't OUR coach?
I find it ironic how you question politicians in this sentence while sounding just like one with your "don't forget the little guy" and trying to link Buzz to Calhoun. Do you have a point other than every profession has some members that are liars?...that doesn't need to be stated. You often criticize the fans on this site for being harder on TC than previous coaches, yet I'm not sure you're not harder on Buzz than you were on TC.
-
I responded already Mustache...the logic doesn't jive. Why does it not surprise me that you would like a male pantsing another male? I'll bet you go the little blue pill out for that.
The logic most definitely does jive. Your weak, back-pedaling attempt to refute it was embarassing, even for you.
At least you're being mature about it and questioning my sexuality. Cura personalis, right?
-
You are ridiculous...and yes..I could have included the entire statement..it doesn't change anything.
It changes everything. And you would have gone ballistic if some other posters had done that to cherry pick a quote. What you left out changes A LOT....it's his entire justification and begs the question from day one that so many people were asking here...WTF were you doing signing the kid in the first place?
Please show me where I said Buzz lied...this should be good....but you certainly are calling a DJ a liar saying he didn't have an offer. I love it when fans hear call players liars...that's always good for recruiting. ::)
-
It changes everything. And you would have gone ballistic if some other posters had done that to cherry pick a quote. What you left out changes A LOT....it's his entire justification and begs the question from day one that so many people were asking here...WTF were you doing signing the kid in the first place?
Please show me where I said Buzz lied...this should be good....but you certainly are calling a DJ a liar saying he didn't have an offer. I love it when fans hear call players liars...that's always good for recruiting. ::)
Ners can fight his own battle son this silly debate, but I need to point out your first reply in this thread:
"Yes, because we should always take the word of the coaches, politicians, leaders of the world and forget the little guy, forget what the players say.
Are you serious? I mean really, are you being serious? Should we take the word of Jim Calhoun...he's a coach, he says he didn't cheat and did nothing wrong? Or is that an exception because he isn't OUR coach?"
So, in response to this issue, you strongly imply that the word of coaches is not to be believed and mock those who would think otherwise.
How exactly is that not to be taken as a statement of your belief that Buzz is lying?
Is this not the logical deduction here:
1. Buzz says A.
2. Chicos says in response that coaches words are not to be believed.
3. Buzz is a coach.
4. Chicos believes Buzz's words are not to be believed.
If you believe Buzz is lying here - and clearly you do, based on your dozens of posts on Newbill - at least man up and admit it. Have some courage in your convictions.
-
Alternate scenario: After the contact with Brad Forster, an MU alum,Newbill would have been ineligible at MU
Let's assume you're right. Someone on MU's staff launched an investigation into the situation with Newbil and Forster. The investigation showed that the incident constituted an NCAA rules violation that rendered Newbill ineligible to play for Marquette. MU's self-imposed punishment was to strip Newbill of his scholarship.
Am I right so far?
Yet, what you don't say if this violation occurred (and MU took remedial action to self-punish), they would also have had to self-report the violation to the NCAA.
Unless I missed it, we didn't do that. Oops. That's another violation since according to NCAA bylaws, schools are required to report any violations they find in house.
Furthermore, I think the NCAA might look a bit askance at our self-imposed "punishment" which had the effect of conveniently freeing a scholarship at the exact time it was needed to sign a better player. They might view our motives behind our self-imposed punishment as less-than-sincere.
(Buzz can't actually talk about it).
Are you suggesting that it would be against NCAA rules for Buzz or MU to say anything about Newbill? If so, then you are implying that we have committed another violation, since it was someone at MU that said that Newbill didn't complete his application.
Frankly, I think you're incorrect on this point. Newbill signed an LOI--Buzz can talk all he wants. He is only restricted from commenting on a player before he signs an LOI.
This comes to light and Buzz less than artfully communicates that Newbill can't come (hence the lack of application being filled out). Newbill, being a kid, doesn't communicate that with phillycoach, just saying that he had been dumped.
Except we know that according to NCAA rules, the application wasn't even due until the first day of classes. Plus, given that you said we already knew that Newbill couldn't play for us because of the earlier Forster violation--the application would be completely irrelevant.
I don't think you've thought through the implications of what you've just alleged. In your haste to create a scenario that absolves Buzz of looking like a bad guy for merely running off a player in order to sign a better one, you accuse an MU of two (possibly three) rules violations: lack of institutional control by failing to control a booster, failing to self-report an identified violation, and the staff making an improper public statement regarding Newbill.
I think the truth is far less damaging to MU, but less flattering to Buzz. I think Buzz merely ran off Newbill in order to land a better player by coercing him to request a release from the LOI. Only Newbill can initiate such a request--and that's exactly what he did.
-
Ners can fight his own battle son this silly debate, but I need to point out your first reply in this thread:
"Yes, because we should always take the word of the coaches, politicians, leaders of the world and forget the little guy, forget what the players say.
Are you serious? I mean really, are you being serious? Should we take the word of Jim Calhoun...he's a coach, he says he didn't cheat and did nothing wrong? Or is that an exception because he isn't OUR coach?"
So, in response to this issue, you strongly imply that the word of coaches is not to be believed and mock those who would think otherwise.
How exactly is that not to be taken as a statement of your belief that Buzz is lying?
Is this not the logical deduction here:
1. Buzz says A.
2. Chicos says in response that coaches words are not to be believed.
3. Buzz is a coach.
4. Chicos believes Buzz's words are not to be believed.
If you believe Buzz is lying here - and clearly you do, based on your dozens of posts on Newbill - at least man up and admit it. Have some courage in your convictions.
This is not as black and white as you make it out to be.
There are ways one can interpret the statement where both sides can be correct:
1. When Buzz says "I did nothing wrong", he may be referring in the narrowest sense with respect to NCAA rules. He somehow convinced Newbill to request a release from his NLI. Ergo no rules violation occurred. He's not debating that he screwed Newbill. Is Buzz lying? No, not under the narrowest NCAA rules definition of right vs. wrong. Yes, if you believe that its wrong not to take every possible action to honor the promise to Newbill.
2. Buzz may be commenting in the first person, while some interpret it as representing the program as a whole. "I did nothing wrong" is not a lie--because it was Monarch or Collins or Benford that actually took care of the dirty work. Is Buzz lying--well, no, because it was his staff, not him.
3. There is a certain degree of misalignment between Buzz's words and actions. He says he did nothing wrong with Newbill, but he's changing his policy and holding a scholarship this year. If there's nothing wrong with what happened last year with Newbill, why not sign the best available player now (before he signs with another school)? If a better player comes along, why not just do the same thing you did with Newbill?
-
Ners can fight his own battle son this silly debate, but I need to point out your first reply in this thread:
"Yes, because we should always take the word of the coaches, politicians, leaders of the world and forget the little guy, forget what the players say.
Are you serious? I mean really, are you being serious? Should we take the word of Jim Calhoun...he's a coach, he says he didn't cheat and did nothing wrong? Or is that an exception because he isn't OUR coach?"
So, in response to this issue, you strongly imply that the word of coaches is not to be believed and mock those who would think otherwise.
How exactly is that not to be taken as a statement of your belief that Buzz is lying?
Is this not the logical deduction here:
1. Buzz says A.
2. Chicos says in response that coaches words are not to be believed.
3. Buzz is a coach.
4. Chicos believes Buzz's words are not to be believed.
If you believe Buzz is lying here - and clearly you do, based on your dozens of posts on Newbill - at least man up and admit it. Have some courage in your convictions.
Good Lord. I do not believe he is lying. I believe that HE believes he did nothing wrong and was within the confines of the rules...technically. That is what I believe. He says in his own words that he took a better player and as such, Newbill was out....nothing "wrong" in his view by the letter of the NCAA rules with what he did. He is absolutely correct.
The question goes beyond that, which is whether it's the right thing to do...you know...HONOR a commitment. You do understand the difference, right? Why aren't you asking Buzz to step up "at least be a man and admit it...have some courage in his convictions" and flat out admit what he did? Or do you only throw that at posters and not coaches?
Nowhere did I say or imply he is lying. I'm getting tired of your bullshyte suggesting I did.
Coaches, just like politicians and many others, speak certain ways, often with plausible deniability, etc. The point being that just because someone says something (i.e. a coach) doesn't mean he\she has given the entire, complete answer, but rather the answer that best serves that person. That doesn't make them liars, despite your illogical conclusion. It does make them measured.
Point blank, your "logical deduction", is full of crap.
-
The point being that just because someone says something (i.e. a coach) doesn't mean he\she has given the entire, complete answer, but rather the answer that best serves that person.
Like Newbill's coach, or someone else in his camp, could have done?
-
Can't we all just agree that no matter how many times it's proven to be true, Chicos will never admit that he's wrong? I'm as guilty as anyone at trying to get Chicos to man up, but it's clear he's simply not going to. Even if he did finally admit to being incorrect on this topic or the Vander-Maymon topic, who cares? Would it really make anyone's life better? No. Would it stop him from doing it in the future? Doubtful. In any event, if anyone else would like to continue to argue, have at it, but I apologize for my part of this pointless debate.
GO MARQUETTE!
-
I'm free, I'm free. I've finally put Chicos on "Ignore," and my life has turned around. Free at last, thank, God Almighty, I'm free at last.
-
I'm free, I'm free. I've finally put Chicos on "Ignore," and my life has turned around. Free at last, thank, God Almighty, I'm free at last.
You'll certainly have a lot more free time not having to wade through all this BS
-
Can't we all just agree that no matter how many times it's proven to be true, Chicos will never admit that he's wrong?
While he may be wrong on the Vander/Maymon topic, he is 100% spot on this time. I like Buzz, but he basically admitted that he dropped Newbill for Jamil for talent reasons alone.
Why don't Buzzophiles just admit this is the case? Why do they blame Newbill? Or his coach? Or Brad Forester? Hmmmm.... Why are they so uncomfortable with the truth???
-
While he may be wrong on the Vander/Maymon topic, he is 100% spot on this time. I like Buzz, but he basically admitted that he dropped Newbill for Jamil for talent reasons alone.
Why don't Buzzophiles just admit this is the case? Why do they blame Newbill? Or his coach? Or Brad Forester? Hmmmm.... Why are they so uncomfortable with the truth???
Because...
1) We don't actually know it's the truth and/or...
2) We think that all of the above named deserve some share of the blame and/or...
3) Some people don't think it's wrong to drop a player in order to get more talented one, especially considering it's within NCAA rules to do so.
-
Because...
3) Some people don't think it's wrong to drop a player in order to get more talented one, especially considering it's within NCAA rules to do so.
I have a lot more respect for people who would just say this instead of contriving some story to completely absolve Buzz of any wrongdoing, however within the NCAA rules it might be.
-
I have a lot more respect for people who would just say this instead of contriving some story to completely absolve Buzz of any wrongdoing, however within the NCAA rules it might be.
But, here is where the shades of gray really come into play. First, I do not acknowledge that this is necessarily what happened, despite what some of you are choosing to read into Buzz's comments. That aside, speaking on a more general basis, there may be variables that could make this a scenario I am ok with. What if the coach knows that a marginal BE player would in fact be better off playing elsewhere? What of the coach realizes the player isn't as good as he initially thought? What of the coach questions the players ability to make it in the program long-term? Questions of work ethic or commitment? Wouldn't he be acting in the best interest of the player as well in the program in a case like that? The fact is, recruiting mistakes happen. Lord knows they happened with regularity around here the past decade+ (For the record, I don't recall hearing as much about all of this commitment honoring back then when guys like Kevin Menard, Krunti Hester, Ron Howard, etc. chose to transfer.), and frankly, it is a coach's responsibility to correct them.
Buzz says he didn't not do the wrong thing relative to DJ Newbill (again, despite some of you choosing to modify his words so you can infer that he was saying he 'didn't break the rules'), and I believe him. Why? Form my perspective, in his time here, he has earned that benefit of the doubt.
-
Would you people shut the f up about this already.
-
I have a lot more respect for people who would just say this instead of contriving some story to completely absolve Buzz of any wrongdoing, however within the NCAA rules it might be.
Bingo
It's funny how one group demands that people "man up" and just admit it, yet at the very same time they are in full spin cycle like a dryer when the shoe is on the other foot. Manning up is only one way apparently....because shades of gray are only to be used for their arguments, not anyone else.
-
Because...
1) We don't actually know it's the truth and/or...
2) We think that all of the above named deserve some share of the blame and/or...
3) Some people don't think it's wrong to drop a player in order to get more talented one, especially considering it's within NCAA rules to do so.
The problem is that people keep putting up alternate theories that are either outright violations of NCAA rules, make no sense given other known facts, or are otherwise not credible or demonstrate a lack of familiarity with the rules.
First, earlier in the thread someone tried to blame Brad Forster for speaking with Newbill, thus making Newbill ineligible. Yet if that was the case, MU was obligated to report it as a violation to the NCAA. MU didn't do that, hence the "Brad Forster is to blame" theory is simply not credible.
Second, People keep bringing up the application--yet we know that the truth is that the application was not yet due!! Why do people have such a hard time admitting this fact? What part of the deadline do they not understand? Newbill faces a late-August deadline for getting his application in--and in early July he's dumped for not getting it in? He still had another month or two! Even if you don't believe the story that Newbill was told to "take his time and get it right", why don't you believe the NCAA forms that explicitly state when the application is due?
Third, there is no credibility to the allegation that Newbill's coach can be blamed. MU gave Newbill an LOI to sign and Newbill signed it. The NLI is a national form that neither MU, Newbill, or Newbill's coach could alter. No coach--not even the storied Bob Hurley--can do ANYTHING to affect the commitment between school and player after that NLI has been signed by a player.
Fourth, people keep bringing up some supposed agreement that Buzz made with Newbill to go to prep school. Yet we know that the NCAA has barred such arrangements. As with the Forster theory, this one alleges an NCAA rules violation. Yes, I know someone will bring up Villanova--but in that case it was the players option---VU only had 11 scholarship players at the time. The player himself didn't want to burn up a year of eligibility, and if he wanted to attend there was a place on the roster for him.
Fifth, people keep saying that the rules permit MU to drop a player. Wrong. The NLI gives the athletic department zero leeway in withdrawing an NLI. There are a very limited number of ways a school gets out of an NLI--NONE of them are in the hands of the athletic department, and NONE of them applied in Newbill's case. He was not denied admission. He did not make himself ineligible under NCAA rules. He did not fail to meet NCAA academic minimums. In fact, the only way the athletic department can get out of the NLI is to have the PLAYER request a release from his NLI--which is exactly what Newbill did.
Fifth, people keep saying that "Buzz can't talk" about the situation. BS. A coach can't talk about a player BEFORE he signs an NLI. Newbill signed an LOI. Therefore, Buzz could have explained the entire situation.
Sixth, the comment about NCAA rules permitting teams to drop one player for a better one ONLY applies to those who have been in the program for a year--the school's only option is to not renew a scholarship. There is NO provision to pull a scholarship from a player that signed an NLI.
Which brings us to the only credible explanation--which Buzz more or less admitted in the most recent interview: He had a chance to get a better player, so he dumped Newbill.
Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship. Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach.
-
Buzz says he didn't not do the wrong thing relative to DJ Newbill (again, despite some of you choosing to modify his words so you can infer that he was saying he 'didn't break the rules'), and I believe him. Why? Form my perspective, in his time here, he has earned that benefit of the doubt.
If Buzz feels he did nothing wrong by DJ why did he feel compelled to change his recruiting policy? Why is he choosing to hold an open scholarship if he feels there was nothing wrong in signing a player now and then replacing him next June or July if a better player comes along?
-
The problem is that people keep putting up alternate theories that are either outright violations of NCAA rules, make no sense given other known facts, or are otherwise not credible or demonstrate a lack of familiarity with the rules.
First, earlier in the thread someone tried to blame Brad Forster for speaking with Newbill, thus making Newbill ineligible. Yet if that was the case, MU was obligated to report it as a violation to the NCAA. MU didn't do that, hence the "Brad Forster is to blame" theory is simply not credible.
Second, People keep bringing up the application--yet we know that the truth is that the application was not yet due!! Why do people have such a hard time admitting this fact? What part of the deadline do they not understand? Newbill faces a late-August deadline for getting his application in--and in early July he's dumped for not getting it in? He still had another month or two! Even if you don't believe the story that Newbill was told to "take his time and get it right", why don't you believe the NCAA forms that explicitly state when the application is due?
Third, there is no credibility to the allegation that Newbill's coach can be blamed. MU gave Newbill an LOI to sign and Newbill signed it. The NLI is a national form that neither MU, Newbill, or Newbill's coach could alter. No coach--not even the storied Bob Hurley--can do ANYTHING to affect the commitment between school and player after that NLI has been signed by a player.
Fourth, people keep bringing up some supposed agreement that Buzz made with Newbill to go to prep school. Yet we know that the NCAA has barred such arrangements. As with the Forster theory, this one alleges an NCAA rules violation. Yes, I know someone will bring up Villanova--but in that case it was the players option---VU only had 11 scholarship players at the time. The player himself didn't want to burn up a year of eligibility, and if he wanted to attend there was a place on the roster for him.
Fifth, people keep saying that the rules permit MU to drop a player. Wrong. The NLI gives the athletic department zero leeway in withdrawing an NLI. There are a very limited number of ways a school gets out of an NLI--NONE of them are in the hands of the athletic department, and NONE of them applied in Newbill's case. He was not denied admission. He did not make himself ineligible under NCAA rules. He did not fail to meet NCAA academic minimums. In fact, the only way the athletic department can get out of the NLI is to have the PLAYER request a release from his NLI--which is exactly what Newbill did.
Fifth, people keep saying that "Buzz can't talk" about the situation. BS. A coach can't talk about a player BEFORE he signs an NLI. Newbill signed an LOI. Therefore, Buzz could have explained the entire situation.
Sixth, the comment about NCAA rules permitting teams to drop one player for a better one ONLY applies to those who have been in the program for a year--the school's only option is to not renew a scholarship. There is NO provision to pull a scholarship from a player that signed an NLI.
Which brings us to the only credible explanation--which Buzz more or less admitted in the most recent interview: He had a chance to get a better player, so he dumped Newbill.
Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship. Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach.
Well laid out. Prediction, instead of someone having a discussion of your points, you will be attacked personally, ridiculed, etc.
-
How dare anybody impugn Buzz's integrity with such distorted information.
-
Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship. Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach.
Your rundown was decent, though not completely accurate, but then you threw the hypotheticals and opinions in during this last paragraph and killed your credibility.
-
I have a lot more respect for people who would just say this instead of contriving some story to completely absolve Buzz of any wrongdoing, however within the NCAA rules it might be.
I think that since Buzz did not break any rules, he was simply doing his job (put together a team that he believes has the best chance to win) by replacing one player with a more talented one.
-
Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship. Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach.
Probably the single most hysterical comment written on this topic. SJS goes through and attempts to discredit any other theory, yet is able to comfortably subscribe to the one above. For the record, that is not an attack on SJS the person, it is an attack on a very ridiculous argument with no basis whatsoever. If you have something concrete to support your suggestion that Buzz is simply a bad guy, please share it with us. Again, something supported by facts would be appreciated, not pure conjecture or a rehash of the theory you put forth above. Just like Chico, you are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to DJ Newbill and his camp, as opposed to Buzz, because they have done so much to earn it the last 2-3 years. I wonder why.
-
I think that since Buzz did not break any rules, he was simply doing his job (put together a team that he believes has the best chance to win) by replacing one player with a more talented one.
And he should just "man up" and own to this...right? Isn't that what you are clamoring for from others? Why beat around the bush?
-
Probably the single most hysterical comment written on this topic. SJS goes through and attempts to discredit any other theory, yet is able to comfortably subscribe to the one above. For the record, that is not an attack on SJS the person, it is an attack on a very ridiculous argument with no basis whatsoever. If you have something concrete to support your suggestion that Buzz is simply a bad guy, please share it with us. Again, something supported by facts would be appreciated, not pure conjecture or a rehash of the theory you put forth above. Just like Chico, you are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to DJ Newbill and his camp, as opposed to Buzz, because they have done so much to earn it the last 2-3 years. I wonder why.
Just like I said...right on queue
By the way, using your logic you can never believe anyone or anything other than what comes out of the basketball department since they will NEVER be in the same position to have that 2 - 3 years (and growing) benefit of the doubt. Do you know FINALLY understand why some of us think that is silly beyond belief?
-
Just like I said...right on queue
By the way, using your logic you can never believe anyone or anything other than what comes out of the basketball department since they will NEVER be in the same position to have that 2 - 3 years (and growing) benefit of the doubt. Do you know FINALLY understand why some of us think that is silly beyond belief?
Please point out to me where the personal attack is.
It seems I am the only one using any logic at all. What is it inBuzz Williams' track record that makes you doubt his version of things? You look at the circumstances and conclude that he flat out cut the kid lose. Period. End of story. He says you're wrong. So please, explain to me what DJ Nebill and friends have done to earn your trust, that Buzz Williams has not done?
Unlike some, I am willing to acknowledge I could be wrong on this, but until I see more reason or a pattern of behavior to support your version if things, I see no reason to do so. You talk about all of the questionable or 'stupid' things that Buzz has done over the past year or so, yet are unwilling or unable to provide any specifics. So why should any of us believe any of it given some of the obvious bias you have demonstrated since he's been here (five years has gione awfully fast)? SJS just came out and said he thinks Buzz is a bad guy. Why? Other than an accusation he flat out denies, what has he done to deserve that?
-
While he may be wrong on the Vander/Maymon topic, he is 100% spot on this time. I like Buzz, but he basically admitted that he dropped Newbill for Jamil for talent reasons alone.
Why don't Buzzophiles just admit this is the case? Why do they blame Newbill? Or his coach? Or Brad Forester? Hmmmm.... Why are they so uncomfortable with the truth???
Your interpretation of what Buzz said has resulted in you forming an opinion. I have no problem with that. When you insist your interpretation and opinion equates to a truth (that we'll never know) I take issue.
-
What is amazing to me is how 84, Chicos want to take what Buzz was asked..and replied to be his admission that he cut DJ Newbill for a better player. It all depends how you want to look at Buzz..if you are looking for any chance to crucify him..you will interpret what he said to be that he cut DJ Newbill. Couple of facts:
1) Buzz wasn't asked specifically about DJ Newbill..yet CHOSE to take the question asked and comment on the DJ situation. The question asked was pertaining to THIS YEAR's recruiting class at present: Do you like having that extra scholarship going into spring, considering how much player turnover there is at that time of the year?
Buzz said - Back to that..I know I lost some people on that...I didn't do anything wrong on DJ. The timing made it look like I did something wrong, but I didn't do anything wrong.
The point being...it looked like he cut DJ and took Jamil...based on the timing of the events.
He then continues to answer the original question..as asked..pertaining to keeping a scholarship open for spring...because there are transfers...why sign a mid-major plus guy..when a high major guy may come available in spring? We are now at that point at MU where we can afford to keep one open..because we have enough depth on roster as is...tht if we roll the dice and don't take a plyaer now..and still "miss" on a spring guy..not the end of the world.
My take..he specifically CHOSE to mentione the DJ case..because he knew if he answered the question presented to him..as he did without saying something about DJ...people would take what he said to be exactly an explanation as TO the whole Newbill fiasco.
Again..if you are looking to crucify Buzz and that is your agenda..you see it differently...if you feel Buzz has earned the benefit of the doubt..and exhibited good character in his time at MU..you take him at his word.
-
Probably the single most hysterical comment written on this topic. SJS goes through and attempts to discredit any other theory, yet is able to comfortably subscribe to the one above. For the record, that is not an attack on SJS the person, it is an attack on a very ridiculous argument with no basis whatsoever. If you have something concrete to support your suggestion that Buzz is simply a bad guy, please share it with us. Again, something supported by facts would be appreciated, not pure conjecture or a rehash of the theory you put forth above. Just like Chico, you are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to DJ Newbill and his camp, as opposed to Buzz, because they have done so much to earn it the last 2-3 years. I wonder why.
Please--if you think I'm incorrect on any of the points, please outline exactly why you think so. Cite the incorrect interpretations of NCAA rules. Create a scenario that is consistent with known facts.
Calling me hysterical, making accusations of "taking sides", or accusing me of not using facts doesn't endear me to giving your argument any consideration--especially when you offer no support in fact.
I'm more than willing to give you the benefit of the doubt if you could offer a plausible explanation that is not predicated on MU committing an NCAA rules violation, or inconsistent with known facts.
So far, the only scenario that I can see that is consistent with NCAA rules, every statement out of the MU camp, every statement out of Newbill's camp, and all known facts is that Buzz coerced Newbill to ask out of his NLI.
Let's go through the other alternatives, one by one:
1. Forster's conversation made Newbill ineligible.
I claim this is implausible because if it were true, then MU would have had to report it to the NCAA. We didn't report it, therefore, I don't feel the theory is plausible.
2. Newbill's coach is somehow to blame.
I pointed out that this is implausible because MU issued the LOI, and Newbill signed it. As we learned with Hurley and Taylor, no matter how much a coach whines, he has absolutely zero impact an NLI--its between the school and the player. Period.
3. Newbill didn't understand the separate agreement to make his NLI conditional.
The NLI states that no other conditions apply and voids any verbal agreements that may have been made prior to the NLI. Plus, the NCAA issued a rule prohibiting any side deals to the NLI. If MU made a conditional offer to Newbill (i.e., if we get a better player you're going to Prep School), it would be an NCAA violation. Therefore, this is not a plausible explanation.
4. Buzz can't speak to the issue.
The NCAA rules preclude a coach from speaking BEFORE the NLI is signed. Newbill actually signed an NLI. Buzz may not have want to speak, but to say that rules precluded him from speaking is not correct.
5. Newbill didn't complete his application.
And he had another six to eight weeks to do so. According to the NLI that he and MU both agreed to, he had until the first day of classes to get it in. The university never denied him admission.
6. Newbill didn't qualify for admission.
Not true. He hadn't yet submitted his application--which wasn't yet due. He met all NCAA minimums. He wasn't arrested over the summer. There was no reason to think that MU's admissions office would deny him.
7. MU can drop a player to replace him with a better one.
MU cannot drop a player under an NLI. There are a very specific set of circumstances under the NLI is voided, and none of them applied to Newbill's situation. MU could choose not to renew a returning player's scholarship, but they had no leeway with incoming players.
Finally, I asked you a very specific question--if Buzz did nothing wrong, why do you suppose he changed his policy? You dodged. I'm asking again.
-
I'm not the one making accusations, you are. Your laundry list above is great and all, but I'm not the one who has anything to justify. I am choosing to take Buzz at his word on this issue. That's it. Its not complicated. I believe he's earned it, but I understand the world may look a little different from inside Tom Crean's rectum. You suggested that he told Newbill he would waste a year of his eligibility, or threatened to ride him unmercifully during practice (even though by most accounts, that's a promise he makes to all recruits).
-
Finally, I asked you a very specific question--if Buzz did nothing wrong, why do you suppose he changed his policy? You dodged. I'm asking again.
Why are you always so eager to paint Buzz in a bad way, or bad light? What did he do to you to make you hell bent on trying to make him look like a "heartless SOB?"
Lastly, as to why Buzz changed his policy as you say..he explains that in his original response - because the Marquette roster is now deep enough, talented enough..to where you don't HAVE to take a sure thing signee that might be a mid-major plus guy...and run the risk/roll the dice that you won't be able to sign a better player in the spring. MU can now afford to take that risk...due to the GREAT work done by the staff already with regard to roster make up/composition.
-
I'm not the one making accusations, you are. Your laundry list above is great and all, but I'm not the one who has anything to justify. I am choosing to take Buzz at his word on this issue.
Buzz's "word" doesn't contradict anything MU84 said. The only thing Buzz said is that he did "nothing wrong" in the NCAA sense. Which is true.
-
Your rundown was decent, though not completely accurate, but then you threw the hypotheticals and opinions in during this last paragraph and killed your credibility.
Your point is well taken--I created a hypothetical to explain what might have happened. I should have just left it at MU somehow got Newbill to request his release, and left the method by which they did so up to one's imagination. I don't think my hypothetical was implausible by any stretch, but I don't know for a fact that those exact words were used.
What inaccuracies do you think I made in the other points. Having read all the relevant documents I thought I reported these accurately, but I'm open to corrections.
-
Which brings us to the only credible explanation--which Buzz more or less admitted in the most recent interview: He had a chance to get a better player, so he dumped Newbill.
Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship. Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach.
I appreciate your laundry list, but can't agree that this is the "only credible explanation." Has anyone in DJ's camp corroborated or even hinted that this "corecion" occurred? Maybe they have - I'm not following this as closely as others. The general scenario that Buzz dumped Newbill for Wilson is a possible scenario, maybe even a likely scenario. However, your conclusion that there was this distasteful coercion relies on too many unknowns.
-
Buzz's "word" doesn't contradict anything MU84 said. The only thing Buzz said is that he did "nothing wrong" in the NCAA sense. Which is true.
No, that's not what he said. He said he did nothing wrong. Period. The only people who injected NCAA rules into Buzz's comments are those who are insisting Buzz is shady, didn't do the right thing, failed to honor a commitment, etc.
-
OK fine. But obviously the issue is that you can interpret Buzz's "word" multiple ways. Again, what he said doesn't contradict anything MU84 laid out.
-
OK fine. But obviously the issue is that you can interpret Buzz's "word" multiple ways. Again, what he said doesn't contradict anything MU84 laid out.
Then what's his point? Of course it does. With absolutely nothing to support it, SJS suggested that Buzz told Newbill that if he didn't request out of his NLI that he would screw him over. He even said that makes him a heartless SOB. I would suggest that would qualify as doing something wrong. At least in my book it would be. I don't see anything to suggest that actually happened. But of course, I am not looking for reasons to discredit Buzz, as others obviously are.
-
Then what's his point? Of course it does. With absolutely nothing to support it, SJS suggested that Buzz told Newbill that if he didn't request out of his NLI that he would screw him over. He even said that makes him a heartless SOB. I would suggest that would qualify as doing something wrong. At least in my book it would be. I don't see anything to suggest that actually happened. But of course, I am not looking for reasons to discredit Buzz, as others obviously are.
How do you claim there is no support for my argument?
So far there have been eight possible reasons listed on this board that explain why Newbill didn't attend MU this year, ranging from the "he's ineligible because of Forster" to "there was a secret deal" to Newbill's coach somehow intervened. And I think even you would have to admit that one of the possiblities is that Buzz leaned on DJ to get him to go away.
By process of elimination, there was only one plausible explanation--Buzz leaned on JD.
Look, I understand that you don't LIKE that one remaining explanation, but lets be honest--you haven't actually come up with another plausible argument on your own. And you can't fault my logic or facts.
So its put up or shut up time. If you think I'm wrong, come up with some other reasonable explanation.
-
So its put up or shut up time. If you think I'm wrong, come up with some other reasonable explanation.
- Buzz was honest and DJ began to question whether or not he was good enough to play consistently at MU.
- Either party had doubts about his academic abilities.
- DJ didn't think he could hack it at MU and had second thoughts.
- His family didn't want him to go to Milwaukee.
- MU players expressed concerns about him.
- MU came to realize he was a douche.
- Eligibility concerns.
- He heard the ghost of Jeffrey Dahmer still roams the Marquette campus and got scared.
Fact is, I have as much basis for the suggestion of any of the above as you do for yours that Buzz threatened to screw him when he got to MU.
-
Whether you think Buzz is the devil incarnate or pure as the driven snow, the mechanism of what happened here (though why remains open to debate) is obvious:
Newbill never applied for admission.
As a result, he never was admitted.
Having not applied or gained admission, Newbill had no valid letter of intent.
With no valid letter of intent, MU had no obligation to give Newbill a scholarship.
Having no obligation to give Newbill a scholarship, MU informed Newbill he would not be receiving a scholarship.
Having been informed he would not be receiving a scholarship, Newbill asked for a release from his NLI to that he could accept a scholarship elsewhere.
All this stuff was gone over and over and over again five months ago. The language of the NLI is plain as day and while the wannabe lawyers here may wish to argue otherwise, any real lawyer will tell you the plain language wins 99 percent of the time. A school has no obligation, for what most would see as obvious reasons, to provide a scholarship to player not granted admission. Newbill was not granted admission. Newbill had no scholarship.
On the other hand, a NLI commits a kid to a school whether he gains admission or not, thus Newbill needed a release before he could get a scholie elsewhere. Again, this is in the plain language of the NLI. Nobody had to coerce him to seek a release. A release was the only way for him to go elsewhere.
Now, if you think Buzz hoodwinked the kid by using his lack of admission as a pretense to dump him in favor of a better player, you may be right. Or maybe something else was going on here. I don't know. Neither, I would venture to guess, does anyone else here, no matter how Insider-y they want to pretend to be.
I'll now leave this thread for good.
-
Whether you think Buzz is the devil incarnate or pure as the driven snow, the mechanism of what happened here (though why remains open to debate) is obvious:
Newbill never applied for admission.
As a result, he never was admitted.
Because he was *supposedly* encouraged by the coaching staff to take his time filling it out.
-
Because he was *supposedly* encouraged by the coaching staff to take his time filling it out.
I know I said I'd leave, but since you raise the point ... it's worth noting that when Newbill was told (according to him) to "take his time AND GET IT RIGHT" it was already mid June, long after you would think any other student serious about attending a university would have applied to said university.
Maybe you and DJ are exceptions, but I filled out my applications months before I graduated high school, not weeks after. So to pin Newbill's inability to get an application done on an innocuous remark from a coach weeks after it should have been submitted seems far-fetched, at best.
-
I know I said I'd leave, but since you raise the point ... it's worth noting that when Newbill was told (according to him) to "take his time AND GET IT RIGHT" it was already mid June, long after you would think any other student serious about attending a university would have applied to said university.
Maybe you and DJ are exceptions, but I filled out my applications months before I graduated high school, not weeks after. So to pin Newbill's inability to get an application done on an innocuous remark from a coach weeks after it should have been submitted seems far-fetched, at best.
I have no idea how most basketball players do it, but my guess is that they don't apply like most of us would. Furthermore, and I said this previously, but he was encouraged to take his time by the coaching staff. (At least according to DJ's sources.)
-
Newbill never applied for admission.
Correct.
As a result, he never was admitted.
Correct.
Newbill was also never denied admission. I do hope you'll agree with me on this.
Having not applied or gained admission, Newbill had no valid letter of intent.
Incorrect.
The plain language of the NLI states that the NLI is declared Null and Void at the point at which a player is denied admission--it does not state that the letter is void until admission:
The NCAA's own reference guide states (emphasis added):
"The NLI is a binding agreement between a prospective student‐athlete and an NLI member institution.
--Prospective student‐athlete agrees to attend the institution full‐time for one academic year (two semesters or three quarters).
--Institution agrees to provide athletics financial aid for one academic year (two semesters or three quarters)."
http://bit.ly/cpcEX3 (http://bit.ly/cpcEX3)
And the reference guide they send that provides details states (empahsis added):
"If a prospective student-athlete is denied admission to the signing institution, the NLI shall be declared null and void. There must be documentation substantiating the denial of admission before an NLI is considered null and void. The institution must notify its conference office regarding the denial and the prospective student-athlete should be informed by the signing institution of the status of his or her admission"
and:
"It should be noted that a prospective student-athlete has an obligation to provide, by request, a transcript of his or her academic record and an application for admission to the institution. If the prospective student-athlete fails 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."
For some odd reason, you continue to reverse the NLI language to mean what you want it to--not what it says. You continue interpret "If a prospective student-athlete is denied admission to the signing institution, the NLI shall be declared null and void" to actually mean "The NLI is not valid until such time the player is admitted."
With no valid letter of intent, MU had no obligation to give Newbill a scholarship.
There you go again. The NLI does not become effective when the player is admitted--it is declared null and void when his admission is denied (as well as several other reasons).
So in July, Newbill has a valid NLI at this point, which obligates MU to give him an athletics scholarship unless he is denied admission. Since this has not occurred yet, the letter is not yet null and void.
Having no obligation to give Newbill a scholarship, MU informed Newbill he would not be receiving a scholarship.
Incorrect.
The NCAA own documents state that the school has an obligation to provide a scholarship unless a player is denied admission. Nebill had not yet been denied, therefore his NLI was not Null and Void.
Furthermore, had he applied and gained admittance, MU would have been obligated to provide him an athletics scholarship.
Having been informed he would not be receiving a scholarship, Newbill asked for a release from his NLI to that he could accept a scholarship elsewhere.
On what basis did MU state that Newbill would not be receiving a scholarship? I know you'll probably claim that's its because he had not been admitted. But I think even you would admit that it was still possible for that to occur, right? With nearly eight weeks to submit the application before the NCAA specified deadline, there was a pretty good chance that Newbill could have been accepted.
Unless you are saying that MU already knew that they would deny Newbill's appliction, in advance, sight unseen, regardless of how compelling it is? Boy, there's a great example of Cura Personalis for you.
I know from our discussion five months ago that you feel that the Athletic Office dictates to the admissions staff what the decision will be and Newbill's denial would have been a fait accompli in your mind.
My believe the admissions office is fiercely independent-- I don't think they would deny an otherwise deserving kid solely to enable the basketball coach to strip a scholarship and give it to a better player, nor would they admit an otherwise unqualified person simply because he's a good basketball player.
But even If I'm wrong and you're right, on what basis can MU can claim a not-yet-existing application for admission has been denied? The would at least have to wait until the application was submitted before they can deny it.
All this stuff was gone over and over and over again five months ago. The language of the NLI is plain as day and while the wannabe lawyers here may wish to argue otherwise, any real lawyer will tell you the plain language wins 99 percent of the time.
Then why do you have to change the plain language to make your argument?
I read this:
"If a prospective student-athlete is denied admission to the signing institution, the NLI shall be declared null and void."
And you keep saying this:
"Having not applied or gained admission, Newbill had no valid letter of intent."
The plain language does not specify "applied or gained admission" for the letter to become binding. it says binding unless admission is denied.
A school has no obligation, for what most would see as obvious reasons, to provide a scholarship to player not granted admission. Newbill was not granted admission. Newbill had no scholarship.
However, a school does have an obligation to provide a scholarship to a player granted admission.
Newbill was still eligible to apply, and if his appliation was accepted he would have had a scholarship.
On the other hand, a NLI commits a kid to a school whether he gains admission or not, thus Newbill needed a release before he could get a scholie elsewhere. Again, this is in the plain language of the NLI. Nobody had to coerce him to seek a release. A release was the only way for him to go elsewhere.
A denial of admission renders the NLI null and void, at which point he could seek admission elsewhere, release or no release.
Again, this is in the plain language of the NLI.
Had Newbill applied to MU and been granted admission, the athletic department would have been obligated to give him a scholarship.
Therefore the athletic office--wanting to use his scholarship elsewhere--HAD to get Newbill to request a release from the NLI BEFORE he applied and was potentially admitted.
-
I know I said I'd leave, but since you raise the point ... it's worth noting that when Newbill was told (according to him) to "take his time AND GET IT RIGHT" it was already mid June, long after you would think any other student serious about attending a university would have applied to said university.
Maybe you and DJ are exceptions, but I filled out my applications months before I graduated high school, not weeks after. So to pin Newbill's inability to get an application done on an innocuous remark from a coach weeks after it should have been submitted seems far-fetched, at best.
I think you well know that the process for D1 basketball players is different than non-athletes.
In fact, if basketball players had to follow the normal process and deadlines, MU would NEVER bring in a spring signee, because the spring signing period occurs well after the normal December 1 application deadline. Jimmy Butler, DJO, Mbao, Liam McMorrow--they didn't even CONSIDER MU--no less having completed an application--prior to December 1.
I seriously doubt that Jamil Wilson had his application done by then--and we still admitted him.
Given that we know that MU routinely signs players in the spring, your suggestion that Newbill's process was anything outside of normal expectations for spring signees is disingenuous and/or misleading.
-
The plain language of the NLI states that the NLI is declared Null and Void at the point at which a player is denied admission--it does not state that the letter is void until admission:
The NCAA's own reference guide states (emphasis added):
"The NLI is a binding agreement between a prospective student‐athlete and an NLI member institution.
--Prospective student‐athlete agrees to attend the institution full‐time for one academic year (two semesters or three quarters).
--Institution agrees to provide athletics financial aid for one academic year (two semesters or three quarters)."
http://bit.ly/cpcEX3 (http://bit.ly/cpcEX3)
And the reference guide they send that provides details states (empahsis added):
"If a prospective student-athlete is denied admission to the signing institution, the NLI shall be declared null and void. There must be documentation substantiating the denial of admission before an NLI is considered null and void. The institution must notify its conference office regarding the denial and the prospective student-athlete should be informed by the signing institution of the status of his or her admission"
It's funny you accuse me of misleading/misstating the facts when, in your quoting of the language, you omit a pretty important phrase.
You're correct, the NLI says the letter is void if admission is denied.
But what you conveniently left out was the second part of that sentence, which states:
"or, by the opening day of classes in fall 2011, has failed to provide me with written notice of admission, provided I have submitted a complete admission application."
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/NLI+Provisions/Letter+Becomes+Null+and+Void
As you can see, denial is not the only way it becomes null and void. As I said - and you've contradicted, wrongly - failure to admit also makes the letter invalid. Now, giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'll assume your omission was a mistake. But now having seen the full statement can you now admit that you're wrong?
For some odd reason, you continue to reverse the NLI language to mean what you want it to--not what it says. You continue interpret "If a prospective student-athlete is denied admission to the signing institution, the NLI shall be declared null and void" to actually mean "The NLI is not valid until such time the player is admitted."
For some odd reason, you're basing your argument on a carefully edited version of the NLI language. It's simply wrong, as the language I quote above states. Denial is one way the NLI is declared invalid. Failure to admit is another. It's there in writing for all to see.
Furthermore, had he applied and gained admittance, MU would have been obligated to provide him an athletics scholarship.
On what basis did MU state that Newbill would not be receiving a scholarship? I know you'll probably claim that's its because he had not been admitted. But I think even you would admit that it was still possible for that to occur, right? With nearly eight weeks to submit the application before the NCAA specified deadline, there was a pretty good chance that Newbill could have been accepted.
Yes, as I already wrote, had Newbill been admitted, he would have been owed a scholarship. Which is why he wasn't going to be admitted. Do you think the admissions department would let in a kid under these circumstances? Do you think they would have set up a situation where some other kid promised a scholie would then have to be bounced? Or do you think it's more likely they would have done as the coaching staff asked and denied admission had the kid persisted in applying?
Unless you are saying that MU already knew that they would deny Newbill's appliction, in advance, sight unseen, regardless of how compelling it is? Boy, there's a great example of Cura Personalis for you.
Oh, please. Should MU just admit anybody with a compelling story because Cura Personalis?
And you're making quite a leap of faith to suggest DJ's case for admission - in July, when most classes are long past set - would have been so compelling that the admissions department just couldn't say no. DJ may be the exception - and for his it would be great if he were - but I'd guess that the average public school kid from the inner city of Philadelphia wouldn't meet MU's standard admission requirements.
My believe the admissions office is fiercely independent-- I don't think they would deny an otherwise deserving kid solely to enable the basketball coach to strip a scholarship and give it to a better player, nor would they admit an otherwise unqualified person simply because he's a good basketball player.
Really? Seriously?
You mean Dwayne Wade's GPA and winning personality got him into Marquette, not simply his ability basketball player? James Matthews? Trevor Mbakwe? Jeronne Maymon? These kids all had the grades to get into MU, basketball skills notwithstanding.
What kind of fantasy world does one live in to believe that admissions departments don't overlook serious academic and even character questions because a kid can ball? Every major D-I program lets in kids who wouldn't otherwise get in because they can play sports well.
But even If I'm wrong and you're right, on what basis can MU can claim a not-yet-existing application for admission has been denied? The would at least have to wait until the application was submitted before they can deny it.
And again, you're basing this one a partial - whether intentional or not - quote of the language. The language states failure to admit is the same as denial.
Then why do you have to change the plain language to make your argument?
I didn't. You omitted the portion of the plain language that didn't suit your needs.
The plain language does not specify "applied or gained admission" for the letter to become binding. it says binding unless admission is denied.
Yes, it does.
"has failed to provide me with written notice of admission"
However, a school does have an obligation to provide a scholarship to a player granted admission.
Newbill was still eligible to apply, and if his appliation was accepted he would have had a scholarship.
Nobody disputes that. But he never applied and never would have been granted admission.
How do we know this?
Because that's what DJ's coach said. That Monarch called and told him MU would not be giving DJ a scholarship. That means, even by your logic, they were telling him he wasn't getting admitted.
Therefore the athletic office--wanting to use his scholarship elsewhere--HAD to get Newbill to request a release from the NLI BEFORE he applied and was potentially admitted.
No, they didn't. They could have waited and denied him admission. But, in the meantime, DJ couldn't have fielded offers from other schools. It was much more to his benefit than MU's for him to seek a release.
And, again, you're resting your argument on some fantasy notion that the admissions department would have granted Newbill admission irregardless and independently of the athletic department's wishes. I think that's about as unlikely as Buzz offering me a scholarship tomorrow (I may still be eligible). But even if they are as "fiercely independent" as you'd like to believe, do you think Newbill would take the chance that he was going to be admitted under the same guidelines as any other kid trying to get into MU? Especially in July, long after admission applications for regular students are due? And he'd take that risk for a one-year scholarship, after which he might be shown the door, requiring him to transfer and sit out a year?
Wasn't going to happen, nor would any smart kid risk it.
-
I just hope to God Buzz won't do it again. His remarks this past week reveal what he did, why he did it and he believes he is right (by the letter of the law)...of course that doesn't take into account how the other party feels, what was done to him (can't play in Big East ever again), etc.
Now that's he holding the scholarship this time around, one would hope this isn't how we should be treating people and he won't do it again.
-
I love reading this board - there are a lot of smart guys posting here; probably more than most boards. But...
How LONG are you guys gonna OBSESS over this. You're like a bunch of 11-year old girls who have to be right and get in the last word. And all you are doing is speculating. You do NOT know all of the details. I don't have a problem with anybody offering their opinions on this subject - I just don't want to read the same thing month after month!
And the sad thing is that some of you doing this are among the best & brightest on the board
-
It's funny you accuse me of misleading/misstating the facts when, in your quoting of the language, you omit a pretty important phrase.
You're correct, the NLI says the letter is void if admission is denied.
But what you conveniently left out was the second part of that sentence, which states:
"or, by the opening day of classes in fall 2011, has failed to provide me with written notice of admission, provided I have submitted a complete admission application."
http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/NLI+Provisions/Letter+Becomes+Null+and+Void
As you can see, denial is not the only way it becomes null and void. As I said - and you've contradicted, wrongly - failure to admit also makes the letter invalid. Now, giving you the benefit of the doubt, I'll assume your omission was a mistake. But now having seen the full statement can you now admit that you're wrong?
I appreciate the benefit of the doubt. I actually did read this clause, and spcifically didn't t include this clause because its not relevant to the discussion of the events surrounding Newbill.
First, this clause is predicated on the player completing an application ("provided I have submitted a complete admission application"). We know that Newbill had not yet submitted an application. Until Newbill submits a complete admission application, this clause will never apply.
Second, the clause doesn't apply until the first day of classes, or 8/30/2010. The the earliest the NLI would become null and void under this particular clause is 8/30/2010. Since we were discussing events that took place around the 1st of July, I felt that a clause that would not be operative until 8/30 had no relevance to the discussion.
IF Newbill submitted an application, AND 8/30/2010 came and went AND written notice from MU was not provided by that date, THEN (and only then) the letter would become Null and Void under this clause. ALL THREE of those conditions would have to occur.
In this case none of the three conditions were met. Ergo, this clause has no relevance to the discussion.
THAT is why I didn't include this clause in my post.
Yes, as I already wrote, had Newbill been admitted, he would have been owed a scholarship. Which is why he wasn't going to be admitted. Do you think the admissions department would let in a kid under these circumstances? Do you think they would have set up a situation where some other kid promised a scholie would then have to be bounced? Or do you think it's more likely they would have done as the coaching staff asked and denied admission had the kid persisted in applying?
Maybe you're right. I'll accept your view that the entire admissions process for Newbill was dictated by the coaching staff.
It eliminates the need to coerce Newbill by promising that they'll ride him in practice, never play him, and not renew his scholarship. Instead, he was coerced into requesting the release by telling him in advance that regardless of what he writes in his application, they're going to deny him admission anyway.
I'm sure you would prefer a sanitized word like "convinced" or "requested" instead of "coerced." But given the circumstances, coerced is factually correct and contextually appropriate.
DJ didn't want out of his NLI--he wanted to play for Marquette.
-
I just hope to God Buzz won't do it again. His remarks this past week reveal what he did, why he did it and he believes he is right (by the letter of the law)
No, they didn't. YOU interpreted his remarks to reveal those things. There's a big difference.
-
No, they didn't. YOU interpreted his remarks to reveal those things. There's a big difference.
You're 100% correct, of course. He snaps his fingers and his opinions/interpretations magically morph into facts. The Amazing Chicos. LOL.
-
No, they didn't. YOU interpreted his remarks to reveal those things. There's a big difference.
Me and many many others. If only someone would man up and tell us what he meant.
-
Me and many many others. If only someone would man up and tell us what he meant.
Well as long as "many many others" interpret the comments in the same way then I guess it's fine.
Just for clarification, many many others disagree with a lot of the things that you post on here. Does that mean that those posters are right and can present their opinions as facts?
-
I didn't realize I presented mine as facts, sure look like they were opinions to me....no different than yours or Lenny's or Ners.
-
I didn't realize I presented mine as facts, sure look like they were opinions to me....no different than yours or Lenny's or Ners.
Chicos: "His remarks this past week reveal what he did, why he did it and he believes he is right"
That's your interpretation/opinion of what Buzz said. That's not a fact but, to me, it appears to be presented as such.
-
Chicos: "His remarks this past week reveal what he did, why he did it and he believes he is right"
That's your interpretation/opinion of what Buzz said. That's not a fact but, to me, it appears to be presented as such.
It's my viewpoint of what he said, shared by by some and not shared by others. I don't know how you can read my sentence and infer anything other than opinion. Almost everything on this board is opinion based. We're not talking about Newton's laws of gravity. How good player X will be, the decision Buzz or TC or MD or KO made was good, bad, ugly, indifferent.....most of what we talk about on here is opinion....in my opinion. 8-)
-
None of us will ever know 100% what happen. If you hate MU, You are going to see it as proof Buzz is evil. Take your agenda elsewhere.
-
Please stop quoting Chicos....it negates all that hard work I put into pressing the "Ignore" button.
-
None of us will ever know 100% what happen. If you hate MU, You are going to see it as proof Buzz is evil. Take your agenda elsewhere.
Or, Iif you love MU, you may see it as proof that MU could have done it better and in a way that that didn't portray MU so negatively (that's why we love MU, so we don't see MU in that light). In Buzz's own words he says that he knows he lost some people with that decision....does that mean all those people hate Buzz? All those people hate MU?
Buzz is not evil. MU is not bad. We can do better in how we handle these situations. (in my opinion)