MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: rulzgal on July 07, 2010, 01:26:07 PM

Title: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rulzgal on July 07, 2010, 01:26:07 PM
Fans, please remember that you are considered a booster by NCAA standards if you are an alum, season ticket holder, donor, among other things.  If any of our boosters contact our recruits, that recruit will be ineligible to come to Marquette.  Please do not ever contact any of our recruits or their parents.  This means do not contact them in person, by e-mail, Facebook, Twitter, conduct interviews, etc.  You need to leave the recruiting to the coaches we have hired.  You can certainly feel free to contact our staff if you have information about a recruit that you think we should have.  We appreciate your support and your enthusiasm, but we need to make sure that you aren't doing something that violates NCAA rules.  For more information on NCAA rules, please refer to our website at http://www.gomarquette.com/compliance/ncaa-rules-guide.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/compliance/ncaa-rules-guide.html) or contact me at danielle.josetti@marquette.edu.

Thanks and Go Marquette!
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ATL MU Warrior on July 07, 2010, 01:31:18 PM
Fans, please remember that you are considered a booster by NCAA standards if you are an alum, season ticket holder, donor, among other things.  If any of our boosters contact our recruits, that recruit will be ineligible to come to Marquette.  Please do not ever contact any of our recruits or their parents.  This means do not contact them in person, by e-mail, Facebook, Twitter, conduct interviews, etc.  You need to leave the recruiting to the coaches we have hired.  You can certainly feel free to contact our staff if you have information about a recruit that you think we should have.  We appreciate your support and your enthusiasm, but we need to make sure that you aren't doing something that violates NCAA rules.  For more information on NCAA rules, please refer to our website at http://www.gomarquette.com/compliance/ncaa-rules-guide.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/compliance/ncaa-rules-guide.html) or contact me at danielle.josetti@marquette.edu.

Thanks and Go Marquette!

Way to go Brad Forester.  You ruined DJ's chances to come to MU.  Or is this some sinister plot by Buzz to deflect the blame away from himself and onto an innocent patsy? 

You make the call.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: DJO's Pump Fake on July 07, 2010, 01:32:04 PM
Thanks Danielle,

and Go Oregon, Ball State, Oregon State and MUHS!
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: GGGG on July 07, 2010, 01:32:27 PM
Out of curiosity, how are we considered boosters?  Under the promoted MU athletics definition?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: reinko on July 07, 2010, 01:32:54 PM
Fans, please remember that you are considered a booster by NCAA standards if you are an alum, season ticket holder, donor, among other things.  If any of our boosters contact our recruits, that recruit will be ineligible to come to Marquette.  Please do not ever contact any of our recruits or their parents.  This means do not contact them in person, by e-mail, Facebook, Twitter, conduct interviews, etc.  You need to leave the recruiting to the coaches we have hired.  You can certainly feel free to contact our staff if you have information about a recruit that you think we should have.  We appreciate your support and your enthusiasm, but we need to make sure that you aren't doing something that violates NCAA rules.  For more information on NCAA rules, please refer to our website at http://www.gomarquette.com/compliance/ncaa-rules-guide.html (http://www.gomarquette.com/compliance/ncaa-rules-guide.html) or contact me at danielle.josetti@marquette.edu.

Thanks and Go Marquette!


Buzz Killled
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Litehouse on July 07, 2010, 01:33:17 PM
This is an interesting twist to this unending saga.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Litehouse on July 07, 2010, 01:35:14 PM
Out of curiosity, how are we considered boosters?  Under the promoted MU athletics definition?

alum or season ticket holder counts, that probably covers most of us
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Skatastrophy on July 07, 2010, 01:38:37 PM
How long is a kid considered a recruit instead of a player?   Until this incoming class starts summer school at MU?  When the fall semester starts?  Until practice starts?  Until they play in their first game? 

Edit: Nevermind... I just read the linked article:

Quote
A prospective student-athlete is a person who has started classes for the ninth grade, regardless of his/her athletic ability. A prospect is also any student who is enrolled at a two-year college or at a four-year institution other than Marquette University. A prospective studentathlete remains a prospect even after he/she has signed a National Letter of Intent or accepts an offer of financial aid to attend Marquette University, until he/she reports for the first day of classes for a regular term (fall or spring) or begins official practice immediately prior to the start of classes. Marquette University requests that you treat ALL students as prospects.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: nyg on July 07, 2010, 01:41:54 PM
How long is a kid considered a recruit instead of a player?   Until this incoming class starts summer school at MU?  When the fall semester starts?  Until practice starts?  Until they play in their first game? 
[/

I had the same question.  After they sign an NLI or are actually admitted?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Strokin 3s on July 07, 2010, 02:41:15 PM
Mods please send to every person who requested a copy of the video.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Cooby Snacks on July 07, 2010, 02:45:28 PM
Catch of the day for Mr. Forster:

(http://i44.tinypic.com/4jw11g.gif)
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: mu_hilltopper on July 07, 2010, 02:49:01 PM
New infomercial:

Did you make a recruiting error?  On a sweet tea sugar high and you accidentally signed a tall white stiff?  Find a better player, now need to bump someone?

Stop worrying! Your problems are over!

Just call 1-800-MUSCOOP and for $49.95 (plus order handling) we'll get you in contact with an alum, season ticket holder, or donor who can violate the contact rules for you, taking care of those pesky problem recruits!

Our crack staff will document the violation and for an additional $19.95, call the NCAA for you!

(Patent pending technology - 2010.  Illegal in 48 states, except Texas and Mississippi.  All rights reserved, Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipisicing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.)
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: mu_hilltopper on July 07, 2010, 02:50:21 PM
Ignore that guy.  Take this seriously, you guys.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Skatastrophy on July 07, 2010, 02:52:41 PM
Ignore that guy.  Take this seriously, you guys.

You should be banned for personal attacks against... yourself.  Metaban.

-Directed by M. Night Shyamalan
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Litehouse on July 07, 2010, 02:57:37 PM
Does this qualify as a "culmination of several things"?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: mu_hilltopper on July 07, 2010, 03:00:17 PM
Dang.  Someone reported me to the moderator as an idiot.  Ahh, I'm just an anti-teal zealot living in a teal-loving world.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Josey Wales on July 07, 2010, 03:04:43 PM
Mods please send to every person who requested a copy of the video.

I must have missed the part about watching videos being a violation, i'll have to re-read it.

BTW a mod posted the link to the video.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rocky_warrior on July 07, 2010, 03:06:28 PM
Dang.  Someone reported me to the moderator as an idiot.  Ahh, I'm just an anti-teal zealot living in a teal-loving world.

Yeah, I'm thinking about banning you.  Then again, he did call MUScoop an asylum, so maybe I should ban him.  I'll ponder this for a bit and then probably ban everyone.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: reinko on July 07, 2010, 03:09:23 PM
Yeah, I'm thinking about banning you.  Then again, he did call MUScoop an asylum, so maybe I should ban him.  I'll ponder this for a bit and then probably ban everyone.

But if you ban hilltopper, that makes MORE work for you.  I say you recruit more mods, and lessen the load a bit.

/powergrab
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Strokin 3s on July 07, 2010, 03:11:04 PM
I must have missed the part about watching videos being a violation, i'll have to re-read it.

BTW a mod posted the link to the video.

Good, great I wasn't trying to tie the two was only pointing out that all of you clamoring for this video only encourage this sort of behavior, including mods.  No one on here is a coach for Marquette, get over it, let the coaches recruit and then enjoy the team Marquette fields.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rocky_warrior on July 07, 2010, 03:16:32 PM
I must have missed the part about watching videos being a violation, i'll have to re-read it.

You're correct, watching a video is not a violation.

For the record, I don't know if this involves DJ or Brad, there are exclusions for media i.e. - you are allowed to conduct an interview with recruits if you are part of the media.  For example, the Marquette Scout site can do recruit interviews because they are considered a "media" outlet.  MUScoop does not have that designation (partly because we haven't asked for it).  Brad likely falls into the "media" category, at least from his YouTube page:

Quote
I am a broadcasting major from Marquette University, specializing in sports anchoring, reporting and play by play. I also enjoy doing impersonations and voice over work. I write, produce and edit my own content.

But I'll let him and MU work anything out there if they think there's a problem.  It's outside of the MUScoop universe.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rocky_warrior on July 07, 2010, 03:18:51 PM
But if you ban hilltopper, that makes MORE work for you.

Hah.  Yeah, probably wise to keep that sarcastic jerk around.  I was not near a computer for the weekend and have only caught up to reading through July 2.  Well, except for this thread.  It's kinda fun living a couple days in the past.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: mu_hilltopper on July 07, 2010, 03:43:38 PM
I was not near a computer for the weekend and have only caught up to reading through July 2.

Yeah, thanks for leaving me alone.  Picked a great week.  Felt like Dances with Wolves.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: GOMU1104 on July 07, 2010, 03:47:28 PM
Brad likely falls into the "media" category, at least from his YouTube page:

But I'll let him and MU work anything out there if they think there's a problem.  It's outside of the MUScoop universe.


What outlet does Brad work for?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Jay Bee on July 07, 2010, 03:51:42 PM
MUScoop does not have that designation (partly because we haven't asked for it). 

  I've been curious about this... unrelated to MUScoop, but just message boards and websites in general...

  What is the other part(s) as to why MUScoop does not have that designation?  Is there a formal process to be deemed a member of the media by the NCAA or are there some set standards?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: reinko on July 07, 2010, 03:54:48 PM
What, are Spiral and SoCal the teachers of the group?

Summers off?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: bilsu on July 07, 2010, 03:58:55 PM
I always thought it was odd that Newbill's coach was posting on this site. I wonder if this played into Buzz's decision to cut Newbill loose. Maybe Buzz was worried he was a meddler like Tim Maymon.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: MUUWUWM on July 07, 2010, 04:04:45 PM
Brad Forester is not credentialed.  I know for a fact that he is not an idiot ;) so I know that he will not conduct any interviews with any more potential MU recruits.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 07, 2010, 04:19:31 PM
Good, great I wasn't trying to tie the two was only pointing out that all of you clamoring for this video only encourage this sort of behavior, including mods.  No one on here is a coach for Marquette, get over it, let the coaches recruit and then enjoy the team Marquette fields.

I wouldn't worry about, Buzz and the staff had a conditional understanding with Brad that the video would not be posted unless the player was released.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Blackhat on July 07, 2010, 04:20:29 PM
Look at what you losers have done now.


Sorry DJ.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: MUfan12 on July 07, 2010, 04:33:02 PM
I can't remember seeing a warning like this from Athletics before.

I wonder if the videos had anything to do with the Newbill situation.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rocky_warrior on July 07, 2010, 04:45:10 PM
I know for a fact that he is not an idiot ;)

Clever, very clever.

Look at what you losers have done now.

Huh?  Who exactly are you blaming this on?

What outlet does Brad work for?

As I said, I'll let him and MU work anything out there if they think there's a problem.  It's outside of the MUScoop universe.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: HouWarrior on July 07, 2010, 05:10:33 PM
This point is well taken.
My daughter was attending Cy Springs HS when K Bradley was being recruited by MU;
When news reports broke of his committing to MU, I was excited, and called the MU, school athl. dept. to see if I could now finally contact/talk to him and/or parents about Milwaukee, weather, jobs, real chili etc (I already handled the MU table for the college night at the HS)--but, in no uncertatin terms-- I was warned away from all contact-- I was scared straight--I didnt even make eye contact w/any of them at CYHS school functions-lol.

Wouldnt we better help the school by not posting overheard conversations, quotes, or even allowing the Philly coach types to openly query US on whether there will be an elite camp etc. --questions he should've directed to someone in charge.
I would hate if I ever gave even a hint of anything the NCAA would track here to check us out, or claim a problem. My need to know does not require any NCAA contact violations--as ultimately, its the team on the court I root for---not the stories behind the scenes.

Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: 77ncaachamps on July 07, 2010, 05:30:59 PM
The initial post should be stickied as people may forget and get over zealous when they discover a recruit is in their area.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: MUUWUWM on July 07, 2010, 05:36:36 PM
Clever, very clever.

Huh?  Who exactly are you blaming this on?

As I said, I'll let him and MU work anything out there if they think there's a problem.  It's outside of the MUScoop universe.



To Brad,...my apologies for some of my comments. Heat of the moment.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on July 07, 2010, 09:14:30 PM
So...let's backtrack:

April 14:  DJ signs LOI with MU
April 25:  First You Tube video of DJ and posse is posted by a MU alum
May 3:  Gardner signed, MU source mentions Prep School route for a recruit...message board rumors of DJ being the one follow.
May 13:  Brad Foster denies DJ is the Prep school candidate
May 22:  PhillyCoach registers and starts posting about DJ
May 26:  Brad Forster posts:  "The full length feature on DJ will be posted on Cracked Sidewalks early next week."
June:  DJ graduates, never applies, hardly talks to MU, doesn't know of Pro Am.  MU looks at various transfers who were granted releases.
June 29:  Wilson cleared.  Monarch lowers the boom. 
July 7:  MU issues recruiting warning to boosters and alums

Coincidence or the reason Buzz cooled and was steering him to Prep School...and since that wasn't going to wash after all this evidence, he sent in his assistant to tell his HS coach the news--and to stay 5 miles clear of the situation?  A very quick time line to a Buzzcut  or a NCAA nuclear fallout evacuation with a whole line of digital evidence?  Or was this whole situation a Buzz attempt to pull a Jay Wright and place a couple of LOI's into Prep School as he has done the last couple of years?

Not to blame Brad or Stan here as I think they are naive to all this...but if Buzz cools on a recruit or athlete--he is direct, honest, but has no patience for all this--he acts quick, sometimes impulsively (Acker, Cubes, Wilson the first time)--perhaps leading to miscommunication and a bitter end of the rope.  He wants players here who are serious about their studies and opportunities.  Take on Wilson or a lean-in recruit with a self-inflicted shadow?  Cruel pill but IU almost got the death penalty for texting too much.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Blackhat on July 07, 2010, 09:28:21 PM
Maybe Forster can get an exclusive with Deon Mitchell and really get our 2012 class off to a hot start.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: spiral97 on July 07, 2010, 11:21:41 PM
What, are Spiral and SoCal the teachers of the group?

Summers off?

I wish.. LOL  quite the opposite actually.. wife just gave birth to my son 2 weeks ago.. haven't even had time to make insults about that freak weirdo with the ahoya plates..   ;D
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: MU B2002 on July 07, 2010, 11:23:03 PM
I wish.. LOL  quite the opposite actually.. wife just gave birth to my son 2 weeks ago.. haven't even had time to make insults about that freak weirdo with the ahoya plates..   ;D

congrats
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Lennys Tap on July 08, 2010, 10:45:14 AM
Everything Brad posted here (MU grad, big fan, never miss a game, etc) screams booster to the NCAA. That he unwittingly committed violations on Marquette's behalf (on multiple occasions) seems clear. I'm sure it was unintentional but I'd be interested in Bred's take on the situation.

I'd also like to know what jeopardy MU is facing now and how much worse it could have potentially been had DJ ended up at Marquette.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: T-Bone on July 08, 2010, 12:06:19 PM
The initial post should be stickied as people may forget and get over zealous when they discover a recruit is in their area.

Definitely.

And added to "Welcome! / Rules / Tips".
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2010, 01:05:53 PM
Everything Brad posted here (MU grad, big fan, never miss a game, etc) screams booster to the NCAA. That he unwittingly committed violations on Marquette's behalf (on multiple occasions) seems clear. I'm sure it was unintentional but I'd be interested in Bred's take on the situation.

I'd also like to know what jeopardy MU is facing now and how much worse it could have potentially been had DJ ended up at Marquette.

All Brad has to do is say he is a blogger.   Look at what bloggers on other sites are doing interviewing signed players, coaches, family members as examples.

Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: GOMU1104 on July 08, 2010, 01:29:36 PM
All Brad has to do is say he is a blogger.   Look at what bloggers on other sites are doing interviewing signed players, coaches, family members as examples.



Examples...
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: babytownfrolics on July 08, 2010, 01:30:54 PM
All Brad has to do is say he is a blogger.   Look at what bloggers on other sites are doing interviewing signed players, coaches, family members as examples.



Funny how you are so willing to give this guy the benefit of the doubt, but not Buzz...
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2010, 01:33:18 PM
Funny how you are so willing to give this guy the benefit of the doubt, but not Buzz...

Give who the benefit of the doubt?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: babytownfrolics on July 08, 2010, 01:35:32 PM
Give who the benefit of the doubt?

who do you think?  Brad Forster.  It's like you're his lawyer.  

In any event, it's not like Forster is going to get in trouble, it's the possibility that he violated NCAA rules on behalf of Marquette that's the problem.  He should be ashamed for acting so recklessly.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2010, 01:44:08 PM
who do you think?  Brad Forster.  It's like you're his lawyer.  

In any event, it's not like Forster is going to get in trouble, it's the fact that he violated NCAA rules on behalf of Marquette that's the problem.  He should be ashamed for acting so recklessly.

Baby, I thought you were Buzz's lawyer.   ;D  Or wife.


You'll have to forgive me, were you saying that I should give Buzz the benefit of the doubt despite what the kid said, his coaches said, his family said....as if their opinions don't matter as an affected party?

Versus a MU fan in Philadelphia who interviewed the kid's coaches?  

Are you really comparing the two?   You'll note that other sites have interviewed those coaches as well, say the Scout site as an example.  Should they be in trouble for doing so?  Is the difference that one is considered "journalists" vs boosters?   I don't know, I'm asking.  

Where does that line get drawn?  Are MU fans \ boosters that run a MU dedicated website considered boosters or "journalists"?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Atlanta Warrior on July 08, 2010, 01:48:41 PM
While it might be convenient, in the age of message board and internet bloggers, to designated everyone who blogs or records a video as a member of the media it simply will not fly with the NCAA.  Chico of all people knows this well. In order to be legit, in the eyes of the NCAA, the media needs to be credentialed.  That is to say that they must be recognized by legitimate entities (such as MU or other local universities or pro teams) as members of the media for purposes of receiving a credential that enables them to cover events for these universities and teams without paying admission (in other words they're at the press table/row and have access to clubhouses/locker rooms and players for coverage purpose.

It is clear that Brad, perhaps unkowingly, fits the definition of a booster in that he is an alum.  I think it's ironic that being an alum defines one as a booster as I have seen several alums post things on this board that are harmful to our alma mater.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: mu_hilltopper on July 08, 2010, 01:49:11 PM
In any event, it's not like Forster is going to get in trouble, it's the fact that he violated NCAA rules on behalf of Marquette that's the problem.  He should be ashamed for acting so recklessly.

It's the "fact" that he violated NCAA rules "on behalf of Marquette"?    

Firstly, not a fact.  A possibility.  Secondly, I'd like to see your source on the "fact" that he did it "on behalf of Marquette."

Thanks.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: babytownfrolics on July 08, 2010, 01:50:05 PM
----, I thought you were Buzz's lawyer.   ;D  Or wife.

I won't pretend to know how or why you know my name, or that you think it would be a good idea to include my first name in one of your posts, but either way, it should be deleted.  Thanks.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: babytownfrolics on July 08, 2010, 01:53:29 PM
It's the "fact" that he violated NCAA rules "on behalf of Marquette"?    

Firstly, not a fact.  A possibility.  Secondly, I'd like to see your source on the "fact" that he did it "on behalf of Marquette."

Thanks.

This is taken from the link provided by Danielle at the top of this post.

ONCE YOU ARE A BOOSTER, YOU ARE ONE FOREVER! AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF MARQUETTE'S ATHLETICS INTERESTS, YOU ARE BOUND BY NCAA, BIG EAST AND MARQUETTE UNIVERSITY RULES. AND, THEREFORE, MARQUETTE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR ACTIONS!

It's obvious he's been contacting him for some time as he's been conducting interviews with him and developed a "rapport" with him.  If he's considered a booster...
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2010, 01:56:59 PM
While it might be convenient, in the age of message board and internet bloggers, to designated everyone who blogs or records a video as a member of the media it simply will not fly with the NCAA.  Chico of all people knows this well. In order to be legit, in the eyes of the NCAA, the media needs to be credentialed.  That is to say that they must be recognized by legitimate entities (such as MU or other local universities or pro teams) as members of the media for purposes of receiving a credential that enables them to cover events for these universities and teams without paying admission (in other words they're at the press table/row and have access to clubhouses/locker rooms and players for coverage purpose.

It is clear that Brad, perhaps unkowingly, fits the definition of a booster in that he is an alum.  I think it's ironic that being an alum defines one as a booster as I have seen several alums post things on this board that are harmful to our alma mater.

That is correct, you need to be credentialed to be at certain events, etc.  Which, ironically, the NCAA started to credential some bloggers two years ago for some events.  Your point is well taken.

That's also where it gets interesting with Brad, etc.  Because MU, to protect their own self interests and pass information on which THEY want to pass on and can CONTROL, will credential specific entities.  A bit of latin...quid pro quo as it were.  Nothing wrong with that, it's smart business.

But let's also get real, too.  What is to stop a Wisconsin Badger fan from interviewing a top Marquette recruit, put it all over the internet in the hopes of getting Marquette in trouble?  Or a Louisville fan doing that to Kentucky?  Etc, etc.   
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2010, 01:59:48 PM
I won't pretend to know how or why you know my name, or that you think it would be a good idea to include my first name in one of your posts, but either way, it should be deleted.  Thanks.

Oh, I'm sorry....I saw you use Brad's name so figured it was ok....

In your profile, your PUBLIC PROFILE, you should elect not to have information in public that you don't want public.   Gee, didn't you know this....how could you not know this....you rail on someone for not knowing something about a NCAA rule in a rule book that is over 500 pages long and yet you missed that little item.  Tsk tsk.

See where this is going? 
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: babytownfrolics on July 08, 2010, 02:03:57 PM
Oh, I'm sorry....I saw you use Brad's name so figured it was ok....

In your profile, your PUBLIC PROFILE, you should elect not to have information in public that you don't want public.   Gee, didn't you know this....how could you not know this....you rail on someone for not knowing something about a NCAA rule in a rule book that is over 500 pages long and yet you missed that little item.  Tsk tsk.

See where this is going? 

No I don't see where it's going, because now you're comparing my mistake in not knowing how to hide my personal information, to someone who interviewed a recruit without bothering to read the NCAA regulations on the matter.  One has nothing to do with the other.

If he wanted to play internet journalist, he should have been more careful, that's all.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: babytownfrolics on July 08, 2010, 02:09:22 PM
Oh, I'm sorry....I saw you use Brad's name so figured it was ok....

In your profile, your PUBLIC PROFILE, you should elect not to have information in public that you don't want public.   Gee, didn't you know this....how could you not know this....you rail on someone for not knowing something about a NCAA rule in a rule book that is over 500 pages long and yet you missed that little item.  Tsk tsk.


First of all, Brad Forster is posting under the name Brad Forster and holds himself out as such.

Second, I guess I should be asking why you would bother to click the link to my public profile, then include my name in one of your posts.  I have plenty of theories but I'll keep them to myself.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2010, 02:10:46 PM
No I don't see where it's going, because now you're comparing my mistake in not knowing how to hide my personal information, to someone who interviewed a recruit without bothering to read the NCAA regulations on the matter.  One has nothing to do with the other.

If he wanted to play internet journalist, he should have been more careful, that's all.

Let me connect the dots for you.

He more than likely made a mistake, not knowing the rules and you blast him for it.

You made a mistake, so I was happy to show you that we can all be blasters if we choose to go down that path.


You now take a conciliatory tone with him, but you certainly weren't earlier.  Your words seemed to indicate a lot more than "he should have been more careful, that's all".
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: mu_hilltopper on July 08, 2010, 02:20:25 PM
It's obvious he's been contacting him for some time as he's been conducting interviews with him and developed a "rapport" with him.  If he's considered a booster...

Yes, I read the post at the top.  If it were a "fact" wouldn't we be reading about an NCAA violation right about now?  Indeed, Forster has a DJ video from April that's been viewed 2000+ times.   Maybe the NCAA is working slow on that one?   My point is, that they are possible violations until they become actual "facts" as you suggest.

Also, are you still working on sourcing your "fact" that Forster created the videos/performed violations "on Marquette's behalf"?    Eagerly awaiting!
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: babytownfrolics on July 08, 2010, 02:26:36 PM
Yes, I read the post at the top.  If it were a "fact" wouldn't we be reading about an NCAA violation right about now?  Indeed, Forster has a DJ video from April that's been viewed 2000+ times.   Maybe the NCAA is working slow on that one?   My point is, that they are possible violations until they become actual "facts" as you suggest.

Also, are you still working on sourcing your "fact" that Forster created the videos/performed violations "on Marquette's behalf"?    Eagerly awaiting!


Fact was a little too strong, as it appears the phrase "booster" has some wiggle room, but if he's considered a booster, he essentially was acting on behalf of Marquette because Marquette is responsible for the actions of its boosters.  That was what I meant.  I have no sources, it merely follows from the inherent logic of what he did (assuming he's a booster).

My main point is that IF a violation occurred, Marquette would suffer the consequences vis-a-vis the NCAA, not Forster.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2010, 02:28:59 PM
Fact was a little too strong, as it appears the phrase "booster" has some wiggle room, but if he's considered a booster, he essentially was acting on behalf of Marquette because Marquette is responsible for the actions of its boosters.  That was what I meant.  I have no sources, it merely follows from the inherent logic of what he did (assuming he's a booster).

I don't understand, why aren't you giving him the benefit of the doubt like you did Buzz?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: babytownfrolics on July 08, 2010, 02:32:13 PM
I don't understand, why aren't you giving him the benefit of the doubt like you did Buzz?

Yeah, that's kind of my point.  I happen to trust the guy that Marquette chose to be the steward of the bball program instead of some guy with a computer, a video camera, and some kind of agenda.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Benny B on July 08, 2010, 02:43:40 PM
Yes, I read the post at the top.  If it were a "fact" wouldn't we be reading about an NCAA violation right about now?  Indeed, Forster has a DJ video from April that's been viewed 2000+ times.   Maybe the NCAA is working slow on that one?   My point is, that they are possible violations until they become actual "facts" as you suggest.

Also, are you still working on sourcing your "fact" that Forster created the videos/performed violations "on Marquette's behalf"?    Eagerly awaiting!


So after 3 pages of this, am I the only one asking the question:

Hypothetically -- let's say that the level of contact between Brad and DJ - albeit with the best of intentions - is considered a violation of NCAA rules which would result in sanctions for Marquette.  Since MU had nothing to do with Brad's actions, wouldn't distancing itself from DJ in an attempt to avoid sanctions make MU's decision to part ways appropriate?  Or should MU honor the NLI even though it meant losing a scholarship or two over the next few years?
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Litehouse on July 08, 2010, 02:51:09 PM
Yes, I read the post at the top.  If it were a "fact" wouldn't we be reading about an NCAA violation right about now?  Indeed, Forster has a DJ video from April that's been viewed 2000+ times.   Maybe the NCAA is working slow on that one?   My point is, that they are possible violations until they become actual "facts" as you suggest.

Also, are you still working on sourcing your "fact" that Forster created the videos/performed violations "on Marquette's behalf"?    Eagerly awaiting!


The rule makes the player ineligible to go to that particular school.  So theoretically it wouldn't be a violation unless Newbill comes to MU.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: mu_hilltopper on July 08, 2010, 02:58:27 PM
Can anyone find a story on the NCAA actually doing this?  I mean, between football, basketball, and 26 other sports, there are thousands of recruits.  And millions of boosters.    And I'll bet TONS of contact that indeed, violate the rules at the top of this post.

With that kind of volume, prior to knowing the real number, one would think there'd be dozens, perhaps hundreds of cases prosecuted by the NCAA.

I'm further guessing the reality is more like one or two.   But I'd love to know the actual numbers.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rocky_warrior on July 08, 2010, 02:59:16 PM
Whoa whoa whoa.  If, IF this is a "violation", There are many cases where fan/booster contact is deemed a minor (secondary) violation, which would NOT result in a penalty, or the inability of Newbill to attend Marquette.  I believe if  brad's contact was a violation, it would be deemed a secondary....

Quote
Violations
The NCAA defines violations in two ways:

    * Secondary Violation
          o A secondary violation is a violation that is isolated or inadvertent in nature, provides or is intended to provide only a minimal recruiting, competitive or other advantage and does not include any significant recruiting inducement or extra benefit. Multiple secondary violations by a member institution may collectively be considered as a major violation.
    * Major Violation
          o All violations other than secondary violations are major violations, specifically those that provide an extensive recruiting or competitive advantage.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rocky_warrior on July 08, 2010, 03:06:05 PM
With that kind of volume, prior to knowing the real number, one would think there'd be dozens, perhaps hundreds of cases prosecuted by the NCAA.

I'm further guessing the reality is more like one or two.   But I'd love to know the actual numbers.

Don't know the numbers, but to go along with my last post, there are even two levels of secondary violations, and it sounds like there might be hundreds/thousands of level II secondary violations that simply get filed away

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/legislation+and+governance/compliance/secondary+infractions/secondary_infractions_self_reporting.html
Quote
Level II secondary violations  are processed by the institutions and/or their conferences.  Each institution or conference must submit a Level II violations report to the enforcement staff on at least a quarterly basis (four times per year).  Although the staff will review the Level II reports, no formal processing of these reports will occur.  In addition, Level II violations will not require institutions to seek reinstatement of eligibility through the formal NCAA student-athlete reinstatement process for any involved student-athletes.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Benny B on July 08, 2010, 03:07:26 PM
Don't know the numbers, but to go along with my last post, there are even two levels of secondary violations, and it sounds like there might be hundreds/thousands of level II secondary violations that simply get filed away

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/ncaa/legislation+and+governance/compliance/secondary+infractions/secondary_infractions_self_reporting.html

Never mind... I withdraw my hypothetical.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: HouWarrior on July 08, 2010, 03:15:14 PM
When Forster posted here his intent to interview DJ in an upcoming video--Didn't I,  mess up big time, and all of us here fail our school in warning off such conduct?

 If I were Brad, at such time--I would have taken no insult, and wouldve thanked anyone here for the ounce of prevention NCAA warning.

I regret this--as my K bradley experience (above) had me thinking of this point, but I was too lazy, timid, or dumb to post something.

We are better to be careful, and overzealous with compliance, than to risk/promote/or acquiesce in silence, any possibility--even remote of a screw up.
I am sorry.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: RawdogDX on July 08, 2010, 03:20:09 PM
I didn't read this whole thread but I read the start.  Does anyone have a single example where a blogger interviewed a recruit and the NCAA said he couldn't go there?   Or a recruit got banned because some 24 year old who gives 50$ a year sent him a facebook Friend request?  
You know how many people must break this every year?  

That kid from the blind side should not have been allowed to fill out an application.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rocky_warrior on July 08, 2010, 03:24:21 PM
I didn't read this whole thread but I read the start.

Seriously.  I wonder why I bother posting.  Look 4 & 5 posts up.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: muvanwilder on July 08, 2010, 03:53:50 PM
Yikes, looks like Brad Forster is getting the Steve Bartman treatment.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: avid1010 on July 08, 2010, 04:02:02 PM
Fans, please remember that you are considered a booster by NCAA standards if you are an alum, season ticket holder, donor, among other things.  If any of our boosters contact our recruits, that recruit will be ineligible to come to Marquette.  Please do not ever contact any of our recruits or their parents.  This means do not contact them in person, by e-mail, Facebook, Twitter, conduct interviews, etc.

Thanks and Go Marquette!


I just donated $1 to the University of Indiana's men's basketball team, and am currently contacting all of their potential recruits via Facebook, Twitter and e-mail.  Interviews to be requested at a later date  :D  I'm also calling for any Duke recruit Jay Bilas or Jay Williams spoke to during their coverage of high school hoops be removed from Duke, ASAP.

I get what you're saying...but...
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Litehouse on July 08, 2010, 04:23:31 PM
I remember hearing about this rule with the various "Come to ______" facebook pages.  This story is about John Wall and NC State.
http://www.wral.com/news/local/story/4945435/

I also remember this story with Iman Shumpert's visit to UNC.
http://www.crackedsidewalks.com/2007/09/unc-investigates-possible-recruiting.html
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: bilsu on July 08, 2010, 04:56:35 PM
I just donated $1 to the University of Indiana's men's basketball team, and am currently contacting all of their potential recruits via Facebook, Twitter and e-mail.  Interviews to be requested at a later date  :D  I'm also calling for any Duke recruit Jay Bilas or Jay Williams spoke to during their coverage of high school hoops be removed from Duke, ASAP.

I get what you're saying...but...
Indiana's irrelavent. Donate you dollar to Kentucky. ;D
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Pakuni on July 08, 2010, 05:27:31 PM
I have no idea whether Brad Forster violated some obscure NCAA rule, and I doubt very much that Marquette gets in any sort of trouble over this.

That said, the NCAA has an extremely broad definition of booster that could theoretically include just about anyone who's ever expressed an interest in or spent a dime on a college athletics program. A booster can be anyone who is known to "have been involved otherwise in promoting the institution’s athletics program."

So, by creating videos where he educates fellow fans on (and hypes) a particular recruit, is Brad "involved in promoting the institution's athletics programs?"
I'd say the answer probably is yes.
I don't think the NCAA would do anything about it, but maybe the moral of the story is be careful out there.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: mu_hilltopper on July 08, 2010, 06:20:59 PM
I don't think the NCAA would do anything about it, but maybe the moral of the story is be careful out there.

This is why I always cross the street exactly between the crosswalk lines.  To be 'safe.'
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 08, 2010, 11:20:51 PM
Examples...

Sure...this is what I was saying before...define journalist vs non-journalist....these all look to be NCAA violations...or are they not because they have a cute website associated with them?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXW0NSJTJ9w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y31w_don3es

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq2p22Cdy8A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IezznUXAe2I  I realize Poneman does this all the time and some would consider him a journalist...that's fine, plenty of other examples

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHS_Ng3RbCY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT4yUuEqSxg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dA6gLoSV4M

Other Brad videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dr7EP5o8Fw




And on and on

All Brad has to do is create a company name like some of these outfits have done.  Some are legit, but some are mom and pop deals run out of a den.

Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: HouWarrior on July 09, 2010, 12:06:59 AM
Sure...this is what I was saying before...define journalist vs non-journalist....these all look to be NCAA violations...or are they not because they have a cute website associated with them?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXW0NSJTJ9w

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y31w_don3es

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bq2p22Cdy8A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IezznUXAe2I  I realize Poneman does this all the time and some would consider him a journalist...that's fine, plenty of other examples

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uHS_Ng3RbCY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sT4yUuEqSxg

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8dA6gLoSV4M

Other Brad videos

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3dr7EP5o8Fw




And on and on

All Brad has to do is create a company name like some of these outfits have done.  Some are legit, but some are mom and pop deals run out of a den.


Maybe I misunderstand your point.
I watched every link. No utube piece here is identified as from an alum, or anyone who'd be a "booster" by Ncaa definition. No mom or pop from a den is an NCAA defined booster.
Forster is not so ID'd in his DJ video either, but in posts here from him, he appeared to ID  himself as a booster.(an alum) If so, Brad creating any company name would not have then/will not now eliminate him from being a booster. It is what it is, a  ship --already sailed.

Are you saying any MU booster should simply create a company name and then freely do you tubes of MU recruits ---confident that such circumvents booster contact rules?

I prefer some other school test such boundries--and that all of us discourage any ruse, or even inadvertant contact issue---esp. as many MU secondary (inadvertant) violations., can equal an NCAA major--and we have never had one.

Chicos,
I must be missing your point--as I perceive you are strong on compliance--too(given your post noting UW's comparative NCAA black eye to MU's clean record).
Please clear up my confusion, on your point--I refuse to believe you are inconsistent on this-lol.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: bma725 on July 09, 2010, 06:48:26 AM
Quote
Are you saying any MU booster should simply create a company name and then freely do you tubes of MU recruits ---confident that such circumvents booster contact rules?

It's not a matter of creating a company name, it's a matter of getting the media credential.  Look at the other site.  Dodds is an MU alum, season ticketholder and works for MU as a statistician.  But he also has the media credential as a result of his website, which means even though he is all of those other things, he's not a booster.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: HouWarrior on July 09, 2010, 07:48:46 AM
It's not a matter of creating a company name, it's a matter of getting the media credential.  Look at the other site.  Dodds is an MU alum, season ticketholder and works for MU as a statistician.  But he also has the media credential as a result of his website, which means even though he is all of those other things, he's not a booster.
Not applicable. Tom Snyder of NBC, who attended Marquette, may well have been a booster---but also exempted due to his media credentials. Likewise, John Dodds, a credentialed media representative of many years, is not an analogy or example as those here questioned in Chicos post....

I questioned  Chicos on...those posted of each a you tuber ---including you tubers who create a company name---neither status of which makes one a credentialed media repr...a booster by any name, is booster until credentialed, and thereby excepted.

An overview of the issue is at:
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=194029985327&topic=9251&post=32950

UK has had to report secondary violations and disassociations due to message board contact violations:
http://www.ukathletics.com/doc_lib/compliance_corner.pdf
http://www.baylorfans.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-49312.html

..."That initial report also cited Poe for improper use of a booster Web site because he interviewed two prospects, Woodson and former Boyle County receiver Jacob Tamme, who also signed in UK's class of 2003, and posted their quotes and pictures on bigbluenation.com. When Woodson and Tamme were interviewed in May and June of 2002, bigbluenation.com was not publishing a magazine, and under NCAA rules was therefore not considered part of the media. As such, it was not allowed to post interviews and pictures of recruits, according to NCAA guidelines. ..."
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Benny B on July 09, 2010, 08:40:03 AM
Wow... you couldn't pay me enough to be Sandy Bell right now.

Nevertheless, there it is - in blue and white:

"Recently, we had a situation where some football recruits were interviewed by the administrator of such a Web site which resulted in a violation for UK. As a result of this violation we had to declare both those recruits (who eventually signed with UK) ineligible at our institution and appeal to the NCAA to have that eligibility reinstated."

This whole DJ Newbill thing is finally starting to make some sense.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: bilsu on July 09, 2010, 08:46:35 AM
There is very little MU can actually do to control any individual fan. I do believe they are wise to advise us against contacting recruits. That is part of institutional control. This message should also tell us they are monitoring the MU boards.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Benny B on July 09, 2010, 09:04:51 AM
I don't for a minute believe that the NCAA would hold an institution responsible for someone who goes rogue, be it a booster of the program or a fan of a rival program.  The NCAA will conduct an investigation, and if it turns out that someone is conducting interviews with malicious intent, then no - the NCAA is not going to hold the institution responsible.

However, in this case, I don't think anyone is disputing the fact that Mr. Forster is a bona fide MU booster, at least in the eyes of the NCAA, and he certainly has nothing to gain from MU being cited by the NCAA.  So his actions, although "secondary" by NCAA definition, could result in a violation for MU.  Is it a sanctionable offense by itself - probably not.  If it were one of several secondary violations, could it be sanctionable - apparently, yes.

If - and I'm saying if here - MU declared DJN ineligible to avoid an NCAA violation, then I have absolutely no problem with that.  As far as cutting him loose completely, that would be over the line.  But for all we know, MU offered to keep DJN in their long-term plans, pending an appeal to the NCAA, and the Newbill camp balked.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rocky_warrior on July 09, 2010, 09:08:38 AM
This message should also tell us they are monitoring the MU boards.

That is true, there are several members of the MU Athletics department with MUScoop accounts.  I only remember 2 ever posting (including rulzgal), but there are a couple more. 

It's unfortunate that we've tried to start more communication with them (like Q&A for fans), but they have yet to take us up on the offer.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 09, 2010, 12:46:08 PM
Not applicable. Tom Snyder of NBC, who attended Marquette, may well have been a booster---but also exempted due to his media credentials. Likewise, John Dodds, a credentialed media representative of many years, is not an analogy or example as those here questioned in Chicos post....

I questioned  Chicos on...those posted of each a you tuber ---including you tubers who create a company name---neither status of which makes one a credentialed media repr...a booster by any name, is booster until credentialed, and thereby excepted.

An overview of the issue is at:
http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=194029985327&topic=9251&post=32950

UK has had to report secondary violations and disassociations due to message board contact violations:
http://www.ukathletics.com/doc_lib/compliance_corner.pdf
http://www.baylorfans.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-49312.html

..."That initial report also cited Poe for improper use of a booster Web site because he interviewed two prospects, Woodson and former Boyle County receiver Jacob Tamme, who also signed in UK's class of 2003, and posted their quotes and pictures on bigbluenation.com. When Woodson and Tamme were interviewed in May and June of 2002, bigbluenation.com was not publishing a magazine, and under NCAA rules was therefore not considered part of the media. As such, it was not allowed to post interviews and pictures of recruits, according to NCAA guidelines. ..."



Just saw your note Houston, let me try and explain.  Some of those Youtube clips I posted were from fan sites where the fans explicitly said "I just did an interview with" so and so recruit.  See it on YouTube. 

Other videos seem to have a clever name associated with it implying they are recruiting services.  Some actually are, others seem nebulous at best.

To be clear, by no means am I condoning that Brad or anyone else do this.  My point was that it wouldn't be hard to do it.  I get the credential argument, but my question is whether these recruiting services (at least some of them) are credentialed.  Or are they just supplying information to rabid college fans that want to know where these high school prospects are going?

If it's the latter, and they are acting independently, I don't think there is much the NCAA can do about it.  In Brad's case, he's a MU alum that interviewed a recruit.  he also interviewed Duke recruits, etc.  It seems to me, it would be pretty easy for him to just become one of these recruiting informational entities, call in PhillyRecruits or whatever name you want, and if he's providing information on a number of different prospects, it doesn't seem different than many of the examples I provided.

Again, not condoning, I'm only pointing out what I'm seeing on other sites by other fans and recruiting services.

Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: HouWarrior on July 09, 2010, 01:33:48 PM
There is no such thing as a you tube poster getting press credentials from MU, or most NCAA sanctioned institutions---media credentials are not a universal license, as you know, rather each event/institution grants separate/league/or network passes. I think we agree a booster interviewing on you tube is NCAA quicksand. NO WAY should that person post here his work, links, or contact our schools prospects.

Your other point seems two pronged and salient. A booster forming a generic site HoustonHoopStars. com could video interview, and post on you tube---BUT had better not hint at where he graduated from, or reference/imply his school. Likewise-- no matter how generic the work or name--if the author is a booster, and posts, or links on the site/message board of his boosted alums--the generic nature of the work has then blended with boosterism--an error--poss. killing the recruit for  the school.

 Some other fans have masked their recruiting/contacts for the school by forming sites like WolfpackHoops.com, getting credentials from camps and the school, and noting the recruits "get" who we are for (by our name) -- when "interviewing/videoing prospects... As to interviewing prospects, esp. during blackout periods it seems  UNCState giving them a press pass cannot be a school supported ruse to help it make improper contacts---so even "media" credentials may not be a TOTAL safe harbor----nor will it fully cleanse them from still being boosters making illegal contacts for the school.....see article on same, and similar examples to the vexing problem for the schools ...

(that we'll, for MU,  clear away from-lol):

 http://www.facebook.com/topic.php?uid=194029985327&topic=9251&post=32950
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: rulzgal on July 09, 2010, 05:02:41 PM
Hey guys, thank you for your interest in this topic.  Please understand that this was a way to educate a portion of our fan base as we are entering the next round of heavy recruiting.  I notice there are some questions so I thought I would try to clear up any confusion. 

The incoming guys are still considered recruits until the first day of classes.  While it may seem like a silly rule because we are paying for them to go to school, it is what it is.  Please avoid contacting them if you see them at the Milwaukee Pro-Am or anywhere else.  You can say a simple hello, but no conversation should take place beyond that.

Several fans have contacted our recruits through Facebook and Twitter as well.  While it is permissible to “friend them” or follow them, there are rules about contacting them through the social media outlets.  Please do not reply to their tweets, post on their walls, send them direct messages, wink at them, poke at them or whatever. 

If you are not sure if you meet the definition of a bona fide member of the media, please contact Scott Kuykendall, Associate Athletics Director for Media Relations and he can let you know.

By the number of views to this post, you all are as enthusiastic about compliance as I am.  :) Thank you again for your cooperation and please, if you every have any questions about compliance, feel free to contact me. 

Danielle
danielle.josetti@marquette.edu
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: ChicosBailBonds on July 09, 2010, 05:07:00 PM
Hey guys, thank you for your interest in this topic.  Please understand that this was a way to educate a portion of our fan base as we are entering the next round of heavy recruiting.  I notice there are some questions so I thought I would try to clear up any confusion. 

The incoming guys are still considered recruits until the first day of classes.  While it may seem like a silly rule because we are paying for them to go to school, it is what it is.  Please avoid contacting them if you see them at the Milwaukee Pro-Am or anywhere else.  You can say a simple hello, but no conversation should take place beyond that.

Several fans have contacted our recruits through Facebook and Twitter as well.  While it is permissible to “friend them” or follow them, there are rules about contacting them through the social media outlets.  Please do not reply to their tweets, post on their walls, send them direct messages, wink at them, poke at them or whatever. 

If you are not sure if you meet the definition of a bona fide member of the media, please contact Scott Kuykendall, Associate Athletics Director for Media Relations and he can let you know.

By the number of views to this post, you all are as enthusiastic about compliance as I am.  :) Thank you again for your cooperation and please, if you every have any questions about compliance, feel free to contact me. 

Danielle
danielle.josetti@marquette.edu

Appreciate the response, especially regarding the Facebook portion.  I have asked questions in the past about Facebook as it seemed athletes (not just at Marquette but a number of schools) were befriended by alums, boosters, etc.  It's good to have clarity on that.
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: Shack on July 10, 2010, 10:03:15 AM
Appreciate the response, especially regarding the Facebook portion.  I have asked questions in the past about Facebook as it seemed athletes (not just at Marquette but a number of schools) were befriended by alums, boosters, etc.  It's good to have clarity on that.

NCAA compliance violations aside....any dude in his 30's that posts to teenage boys on Facebook is in strict violation of a Man Code
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: MUSF on July 10, 2010, 10:59:00 AM
NCAA compliance violations aside....any dude in his 30's that posts to teenage boys on Facebook is in strict violation of a Man Code

+100
Title: Re: Interviews with Recruits = NCAA Violations
Post by: AZWarrior on July 10, 2010, 11:55:22 AM
Dang.  Someone reported me to the moderator as an idiot.  Ahh, I'm just an anti-teal zealot living in a teal-loving world.

I just concluded you had multiple personalities.   ;D