Uh oh.....this is so not good....

[ecompt]

No, probably along the lines of, "This kid went to a bunch of high schools in one of the worst educational systems in the country. Can we please be a little more careful?"

[groove]

No, probably along the lines of, "This kid went to a bunch of high schools in one of the worst educational systems in the country. Can we please be a little more careful?"

and reportedly ripped off money and food and was rumored to be involved in a car stealing incident. hmmm, might want to check deeper into his background. The thug had no business being considered for MU and the idea of him sitting next to my daughter in a class makes me puke.

[ChicosBailBonds]

This is exactly my point.

I know he went to Rice, but still, "he's a JUCO", and MU should limit the amount of JUCO's in order to limit their risk, right?

Wrong.

MU needs to recruit good people who are great at basketball. No need to make it more complicated than that.

Private school, public school, prep school, JUCO, transfer, etc. etc. None of it really matters if they are good kids who are great at basketball and can handle the academics.

When people said they should limit their risk of Jucos, my assumption (at least how I think) is that you limit the number of non qualifiers, thus the Kinsella, Fulce, Butler type JUCO would be excluded.

[ChicosBailBonds]

OK, if Kinsella is not a good example, why are Butler and Fulce and DJO good examples?  Each of these players could have played D-1 ball out of high school.  (Fulce had to go to prep school for a year, but I do not see anyone complaining about too many prep school players.)

Uhm, they're not good examples as I stated yesterday and again today.  If they're full qualifiers out of high school and attend a JUCO, then I have no worries from an academic perspective.  If they aren't full qualifiers out of high school and go to a JUCO, we need to be more diligent.

But more importantly, when we have a kid that is basically a criminal (whether he went to a JUCO or not), it would be nice if our due diligence in the recruiting process would capture this.  It would have taken one phone call to the right person.  I would be absolutely FLOORED if Buzz didn't know about Clark's past...FLOORED.  He chose to ignore it which is his right.  If he felt the kid turned the corner, fine....but it's clear that he hadn't.  Yes, to say it was a mistake, is an understatement.

[ChicosBailBonds]

OK, if he had stolen a car or committed some other mid level felony, I would agree there were red flags with him based on the stories I am hearing(admittedly just now that all this has gone down)......however I haven't a single story that would make me believe Buzz could have predicted he was capable of rape.  And really that's what we are all reacting to, that he made the jump from juvenile issues to being a rapist.  Really he went from a 3 to a 9 on the criminal scale....who could predict that?

Plus it didn't happen at MU, perhaps with a better support system Clarke could have improved as a person and this doesn't happen.

Stealing a car only gets you a 3 on the criminal scale nowadays? 

[mu03eng]

The point is that based on his record there was no way to predict he would go off the rails this badly.  Wouldn't you agree going from potentially being involved in a car stealing incident to rape is at least a three fold escalation in severity??  If Buzz thought his early mistakes were youthful indiscretion and he had turned a corner...I don't have a problem with that because nothing I see here makes me think you could foresee what happened.

[MUfan12]

Stealing a car only gets you a 3 on the criminal scale nowadays? 

Depends on the car... 

[GGGG]

I agree with you, but one minor clarification -- not sure there is any allegation anywhere that the girl was unconscious.  She remembers and reported what happened, and none of the other witnesses say she was unconscious.  The only reference to "unconscious" in the arrest affidavit is where it refers the statute which refers to assaulting someone who is unconscious or physically unable to resist.

Incidentally, the charged offense - Sexual Assault (Texas Penal Code Section 22.011) is a second degree felony.  If convicted, the penalty is at least two years and no more than 20 years (Texas Penal Code Section 12.33).

So if he gets near the minimum, we'll have time to show him the "Jesuit Way" and he'll still have eligibility???

[Canned Goods n Ammo]

When people said they should limit their risk of Jucos, my assumption (at least how I think) is that you limit the number of non qualifiers, thus the Kinsella, Fulce, Butler type JUCO would be excluded.

What exactly makes a partial qualifier "riskier" than a full qualifier?

I realize that they may have some academic issues in the past, but clearly that is not what we are talking about with Clark.

Again, MU needs to recruit good people who are great at basketball and can pass their classes.

Let's not start applying more rules than that.

ooooo he's a JUCO, he's so scary... oooooo....

They are kids who went to Junior College. They aren't mutants.

C'mon Chicos.

[Goatherder]

Uhm, they're not good examples as I stated yesterday and again today.  If they're full qualifiers out of high school and attend a JUCO, then I have no worries from an academic perspective.  If they aren't full qualifiers out of high school and go to a JUCO, we need to be more diligent.

But more importantly, when we have a kid that is basically a criminal (whether he went to a JUCO or not), it would be nice if our due diligence in the recruiting process would capture this.  It would have taken one phone call to the right person.  I would be absolutely FLOORED if Buzz didn't know about Clark's past...FLOORED.  He chose to ignore it which is his right.  If he felt the kid turned the corner, fine....but it's clear that he hadn't.  Yes, to say it was a mistake, is an understatement.

But yesterday you were calling for a limit on the number of jucos, not a limit on the number of jucos who did not qualify out of high school, and you pointed out that the fact that we had four jucos on our roster with another committed for next year was terrible and made the program look bad.  But of those four, three qualified out of high school.  The fourth seemingly was a good enough student who was poorly advised in high school.  No one has had anything bad to say about him.  Quite the contrary.  He is emerging as a team leader. 

Clark was a recruiting mistake in my view, but I do not know what information Buzz had on him which might have affected his decision.  I find it unbelievable that he did not make the ONE phone call you refer to in order to check up on the guy.  He most probably made several. 

So by the standards you are applying today, as opposed to yesterday, we have had two juco recruits who were not eligible out of high school and who should have been closely scrutinized.  One seemingly was.  So we have one juco recruit who seems to be a mistake.  And your solution is to limit the number of jucos?

[ChicosBailBonds]

What exactly makes a partial qualifier "riskier" than a full qualifier?

I realize that they may have some academic issues in the past, but clearly that is not what we are talking about with Clark.

Again, MU needs to recruit good people who are great at basketball and can pass their classes.

Let's not start applying more rules than that.

ooooo he's a JUCO, he's so scary... oooooo....

They are kids who went to Junior College. They aren't mutants.

C'mon Chicos.

No one said that.  In my opinion based on my experiences, kids that are fully qualified out of high school usually take school more seriously, are usually more mature, more disciplined, make better life decisions.  Those are general terms, but I believe the are applicable.  As I've said in this thread at least 5 times, that doesn't mean you don't take JUCO players or you don't take partial qualifiers. But yes, I do think it means you have to be more diligent.

I'm sticking to it....they're not mutants, but I'd prefer 4 year players every day of the week....and if we do go the JUCO route, I'd prefer we go through our best efforts to make sure they will succeed at MU and don't have major red flags (Clark) on their resume which could bite MU in the ass.

[ChicosBailBonds]

But yesterday you were calling for a limit on the number of jucos, not a limit on the number of jucos who did not qualify out of high school, and you pointed out that the fact that we had four jucos on our roster with another committed for next year was terrible and made the program look bad. 

Go back and read what I said because I did not say what you just stated.  My standards haven't changed at all.  I said fewer JUCOs (I did not put a limited number) and I also said I'm not against JUCOs.  What I DID say is that going after so many JUCOS means kids coming in every 2 years rather than 4 years.  That means constant turnover in the classes.  I also said kids that aren't ready academically puts additional strain on the program because they are always battling to stay eligible (but clearly stated that Fulce and Butler and others that were full qualifiers are not whom I was referencing)...post at 7:57pm and 9:15pm  So I disagree with your characterization

But of those four, three qualified out of high school.  The fourth seemingly was a good enough student who was poorly advised in high school.  No one has had anything bad to say about him.  Quite the contrary.  He is emerging as a team leader.   (again, look at what I actually said in the posts referenced above...I'm not talking about the full qualifiers...never have been)

Clark was a recruiting mistake in my view, but I do not know what information Buzz had on him which might have affected his decision.  I find it unbelievable that he did not make the ONE phone call you refer to in order to check up on the guy.  He most probably made several.  (I would be floored if Buzz didn't know about Clark's problems in the past.  He obviously felt Clark had matured on and wasn't going to be a problem...unfortunately he was wrong...a recruiting mistake....second one in the last 2 weeks...recruiting is a tough business and difficult to predict...funny, I kept reading on here from so many people how easy it was and recruiting mistakes should not be happening or so the comments went the last 3 or 4 years)

So by the standards you are applying today, as opposed to yesterday, (wrong, same standards yesterday and today) we have had two juco recruits who were not eligible out of high school and who should have been closely scrutinized.  One seemingly was.  So we have one juco recruit who seems to be a mistake.  And your solution is to limit the number of jucos?  (my solution is to recruit 4 year kids as much as possible, the add consistency to the program, are ready academically and tend to be more mature generally speaking.  I'm not against JUCOs, as I stated again and again, especially full qualifiers. If we go the JUCO route, dig deeper in the evaluation process.  My additional solution is to not recruit kids that have a resume that includes theft, multiple high schools, etc, etc. unless you're absolutely sure they've got their crap together.  If you're not sure, then it isn't worth the risk)

[Lennys Tap]

What exactly makes a partial qualifier "riskier" than a full qualifier?

I realize that they may have some academic issues in the past, but clearly that is not what we are talking about with Clark.

Again, MU needs to recruit good people who are great at basketball and can pass their classes.

Let's not start applying more rules than that.

ooooo he's a JUCO, he's so scary... oooooo....

They are kids who went to Junior College. They aren't mutants.

C'mon Chicos.

Everyone knows that partial qualifiers commit rape at a significantly higher rate than full qualifiers. Maybe they should be required to wear sweaters with bright red R's on them

[ChicosBailBonds]

Everyone knows that partial qualifiers commit rape at a significantly higher rate than full qualifiers. Maybe they should be required to wear sweaters with bright red R's on them

[ChicosBailBonds]

Everyone knows that partial qualifiers commit rape at a significantly higher rate than full qualifiers. Maybe they should be required to wear sweaters with bright red R's on them

Everyone knows that if a kid says he's turned a corner, he's no longer going to steal, is finally going to take school seriously, will no longer hang out with the wrong crowd you can take it to the bank.  No need to dig further.

[Lennys Tap]

Everyone knows that if a kid says he's turned a corner, he's no longer going to steal, is finally going to take school seriously, will no longer hang out with the wrong crowd you can take it to the bank.  No need to dig further.

The quotes I read on this board were not from the kid but from his coach. But why let a simple thing like accuracy interfere with a really good opinion?

[bilsu]

I am making some assumptions here. I assume that Buzz knows Clark's JC coach and that the JC coach told him that Clark was not any trouble for him. There are no guarantees in life. Things sometimes go wrong. One bad Juco does not mean all juco's are bad. The difference between Huggins at Cincy and Buzz at MU is that Clark would probably still be on Cincy's team.