No Reason To Fuss

[Marquette84]

Let's take the pro-MU or pro-Buzz emotions out of the picture.

How would we feel if Jim Calhoun did the same thing?

Or Rick Pitino?

Or Bob Huggins?

Or Mike Krzyswewski?

We all know the answer--those coaches would be slammed around here for doing so.  

Here's the potential long term negative.  If the LOI means nothing to the team--and that frankly is the effective result of Newbill's departure--what is to stop all programs from adopting the practice of taking one or two extra players every year?

Teams could easily mitigate their recruiting risk, reduce the impact of transfers, eliminate short rosters due to summer injury, not have to worry about non-qualifiers leaving a hole in the roster, etc.  They simply take a couple extra LOIs.  Then, if there are no transfers, injuries or non-qualifiers, they simply dump the two worst players.

And after MU the last two seasons, why wouldn't every team in America start to sign an extra player?  As Buzz has demonstrated, aside from some bad press and ill feelings from a player you don't want anyway, there is absolutely no penalty for cutting loose a player who signed an LOI.   Its even worse--the MU staff sits in good conscience knowing that Roseboro still got a free ride for a D1 team, and fully expect that someone will pick up Newbill.  

But what if EVERY team in D1 did the same thing as Buzz and none of them suffered a departure?  There would be 346 other kids today just like Newbill, all looking for a team.  

Its simple math--when the music stops playing, there will be 4858 (347 x 14) players vying for 4511 chairs (347 x 13).  347 players will be left out because each team signed 14 players but has only 13 scholarships to give.

It can't go on--and I fully expect the NCAA will see to it that it won't.

  

[Litehouse]

The problem bringing Roseboro into this mess is that we didn't replace him with someone else, his roster spot went empty last year.  Do you really think it would have been in Roseboro's best interest to sit at the end of the MU bench for a year, transfer someplace and sit out another year, and then finally resume playing competitive basketball 2 years later?

[Pakuni]

Here's the potential long term negative.  If the LOI means nothing to the team--and that frankly is the effective result of Newbill's departure--what is to stop all programs from adopting the practice of taking one or two extra players every year?

Teams could easily mitigate their recruiting risk, reduce the impact of transfers, eliminate short rosters due to summer injury, not have to worry about non-qualifiers leaving a hole in the roster, etc.  They simply take a couple extra LOIs.  Then, if there are no transfers, injuries or non-qualifiers, they simply dump the two worst players.

Huh?
This already happens all over the place, including at Marquette, including under the prior coaching regime.
Does the name Damian Saunders ring a bell? Do you think MU just caught a lucky break when it suddenly discovered his academics weren't so hot and it magically solved the problem of having more scholarship players than scholarships?


It can't go on???
It has gone on. For a long time.


  



[/quote]

[StillAWarrior]

Huh?
This already happens all over the place, including at Marquette, including under the prior coaching regime.
Does the name Damian Saunders ring a bell? Do you think MU just caught a lucky break when it suddenly discovered his academics weren't so hot and it magically solved the problem of having more scholarship players than scholarships?


It can't go on???
It has gone on. For a long time.

I'm going to plead ignorance here, but does it really happen all the time and all over the place?  I'm not saying that it doesn't...I don't personally know.  Everyone brings up Saunders.  Point taken.  But is that the only time it happened in Crean's nine years?  I don't remember others, but I didn't always follow these things as closely as I do now.  Did it happen under Deane?  O'Neill?  Dukiet?  I vaguely recall some players who didn't qualify while I was at Marquette (87-91), but I don't recall the specifics of when that came to light.

Does it happen at other schools a lot?  And by "it" I'm referring to offering a scholarship, getting an NLI, and then the kid doesn't ever show up for the first day of classes (either because the scholarship is pulled or the kid is told that it doesn't look like he's going to cut it).  I'm not saying it doesn't happen a lot, but I don't hear about it a lot.  But I don't follow these things nearly as closely as some on this board.

[NavinRJohnson]

Let's take the pro-MU or pro-Buzz emotions out of the picture.

How would we feel if Jim Calhoun did the same thing?

Or Rick Pitino?

Or Bob Huggins?

Or Mike Krzyswewski?

I suspect that, as is the case here, save for a bunch of internet nerds (us), most people wouldn't even know about it, and thus wouldn't care. Which is why this is such a non-issue. Beyond that, if nothing was offensive, immoral, unethical was done, there is really no reason for anyone to be slammed.

[StillAWarrior]

I suspect that, as is the case here, save for a bunch of internet nerds (us), most people wouldn't even know about it, and thus wouldn't care. Which is why this is such a non-issue. Beyond that, if nothing was offensive, immoral, unethical was done, there is really no reason for anyone to be slammed.

You are absolutely correct.  The vast majority of the sporting world neither knows nor cares about this little saga that is captivating all of us.  And given how I think this thing probably went down, Buzz doesn't need to be slammed.


But, I also do think that some people -- specifically 16 and 17 year old boys who can really play ball and their parents -- will know about this.  That's because when Bo Ryan, Jamie Dixon, Rick Pitino and others sit in their living room, they're going to say, "so, you're considering an offer from Marquette?  Boy, for your sake I hope that offer is still there when you get to campus."  You know they will.  They should.  Buzz would, and should, do the same.

[Pakuni]

I'm going to plead ignorance here, but does it really happen all the time and all over the place?  I'm not saying that it doesn't...I don't personally know.  Everyone brings up Saunders.  Point taken.  But is that the only time it happened in Crean's nine years?  I don't remember others, but I didn't always follow these things as closely as I do now.  Did it happen under Deane?  O'Neill?  Dukiet?  I vaguely recall some players who didn't qualify while I was at Marquette (87-91), but I don't recall the specifics of when that came to light.

Does it happen at other schools a lot?  And by "it" I'm referring to offering a scholarship, getting an NLI, and then the kid doesn't ever show up for the first day of classes (either because the scholarship is pulled or the kid is told that it doesn't look like he's going to cut it).  I'm not saying it doesn't happen a lot, but I don't hear about it a lot.  But I don't follow these things nearly as closely as some on this board.

The "it" I was referring to was the practice of taking more commitments than spots available at the moment with the expectation that a spot would be opening up (i.e. transfer, early draft entry, academic casualty, etc.). And  I probably was exaggerating - for which, no doubt, Marquette84 will come out swinging - with my "all the time" comment. Let's just say it's not uncommon.

[StillAWarrior]

The "it" I was referring to was the practice of taking more commitments than spots available at the moment with the expectation that a spot would be opening up (i.e. transfer, early draft entry, academic casualty, etc.). And  I probably was exaggerating - for which, no doubt, Marquette84 will come out swinging - with my "all the time" comment. Let's just say it's not uncommon.

Fair enough.  Thanks for the clarification.  Following up on my question, though:  is the situation described in my post (offer, NLI, no-go) uncommon?

I agree that the situation you clarified (more commitments than spots) is very common.  I do see that "all the time" and it usually ends up working out.

[Pakuni]

Fair enough.  Thanks for the clarification.  Following up on my question, though:  is the situation described in my post (offer, NLI, no-go) uncommon?

Honestly, I don't know the answer to that question.
When it does happen, I suspect it's far more often the result of an off-court issue with the player (academic or otherwise) or a player decision than the university's decision. I don't think schools are in the habit of taking LOIs from kids they might not want, nor should they be.
Again, it think it was stupid for MU to sign a kid without a 100 percent intetion of him playing at Marquette next year. That said, it doesn't necessarily make the situation immoral or nefarious. Just poor judgment/decision-making.

[Marquette84]

Huh?
This already happens all over the place, including at Marquette, including under the prior coaching regime.
Does the name Damian Saunders ring a bell? Do you think MU just caught a lucky break when it suddenly discovered his academics weren't so hot and it magically solved the problem of having more scholarship players than scholarships?

It can't go on???
It has gone on. For a long time.
 

Are you saying MU's admissions office is a party to fraud by improperly denying admission to Saunders for the sole purpose of getting out of a contract (his LOI?).  That's a pretty serious charge.  Hope you have evidence to back it up.

Seriously, if it were this easy, we would have used the same reason for Newbill, no?  

The admissions department could have "suddenly discovered" that Newbill's academics weren't so hot, hence "magically" solving the problem, without burning any bridges or opening up Buzz to national scorn.

So either Buzz was too stupid to ask the admissions office to gin up some excuse to deny Newbill admission.

Or the admissions office had legitimate reason to deny Saunders admission, and no such reason for Newbill.
 

[Litehouse]

Are you saying MU's admissions office is a party to fraud by improperly denying admission to Saunders for the sole purpose of getting out of a contract (his LOI?).  That's a pretty serious charge.  Hope you have evidence to back it up.

Seriously, if it were this easy, we would have used the same reason for Newbill, no?  

The admissions department could have "suddenly discovered" that Newbill's academics weren't so hot, hence "magically" solving the problem, without burning any bridges or opening up Buzz to national scorn.

So either Buzz was too stupid to ask the admissions office to gin up some excuse to deny Newbill admission.

Or the admissions office had legitimate reason to deny Saunders admission, and no such reason for Newbill.

The admissions office didn't have to gin up an excuse since Newbill never even sent in his application.

[Marquette84]

I agree that the situation you clarified (more commitments than spots) is very common.  I do see that "all the time" and it usually ends up working out.

Where Pakuni is off base is implying that schools break the LOI to accommodate their oversigning.  

Almost always, its a returning player who loses the scholarship--because the incoming player is guaranteed a scholarship under the terms of the LOI.

In Saunders case, it is most likely that had he qualified for admission, we would have seen an announcement that Trend Blackledge has left the team to focus on his academics.

[tower912]

It is a thin loophole/excuse/technicality, and the whole thing still makes me feel like I need a shower, but the kid never applied.  I wasn't accepted at schools I didn't apply to.    This whole thing has left me really conflicted.    I can argue it several different ways.    And that is the underlying problem.   So many fine-lines, loopholes and technicalities.  

[Marquette84]

The admissions office didn't have to gin up an excuse since Newbill never even sent in his application.

Per the terms of the NLI, Newbill had until September 1 to file an application.

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/NLI+Provisions/Letter+Becomes+Null+and+Void
"   Admissions Requirement.  This NLI shall be declared null and void if the institution named in this document notifies me in writing that I have been denied admission or, by the opening day of classes in fall 2010, has failed to provide me with written notice of admission, provided I have submitted a complete admission application.  It is my obligation to provide, by request, my academic records and an application for admission to the signing institution.  If I fail to submit the necessary academic credentials and/or application to determine an admission decision prior to September 1, the NLI shall be declared null and void.."

[Pakuni]

Are you saying MU's admissions office is a party to fraud by improperly denying admission to Saunders for the sole purpose of getting out of a contract (his LOI?).  That's a pretty serious charge.  Hope you have evidence to back it up.

Fraud? Fraud? How would it be fraud, exactly?
The university has a right to deny and accept admissions as it sees fit, so long as its not based on discrimination against a protected class. And the LOI is not a binding, legally enforceable document should the university deny admission.
This isn't rocket science. It's barely Contracts Law 101. Saunders was denied admission, therefore Saunders LOI was not binding.

The point is, Saunders' grades were bad when Tom Crean offered him a scholarship.
Saunders' grades were bad when he signed his NLI.
Saunders' grades were bad in April, May, June and July of 2007.
And yet it was only at the end of August, when everyone was enrolling and it became certain that MU had more players than scholarships, that the university decided it would not admit him.
Now, do you believe the university was under the impression that Saunders' high school grades would get markedly better between June and August of 2007?
If not, what other reason would they have for waiting so long to determine he lacked the grades to get into Marquette?
Could it be that they were waiting to see who showed up for classes at the start of the fall semester?
Hmmm.

Seriously, if it were this easy, we would have used the same reason for Newbill, no?  

Sure, they could have.
Problem is, it's hard to deny admission to someone who hasn't applied for admission.

[Litehouse]

Per the terms of the NLI, Newbill had until September 1 to file an application.

Well he should hurry up and get it in then.  This fiasco should give him plenty of material for the essay.

[Lennys Tap]

Fraud? Fraud? How would it be fraud, exactly?
The university has a right to deny and accept admissions as it sees fit, so long as its not based on discrimination against a protected class. And the LOI is not a binding, legally enforceable document should the university deny admission.
This isn't rocket science. It's barely Contracts Law 101. Saunders was denied admission, therefore Saunders LOI was not binding.

The point is, Saunders' grades were bad when Tom Crean offered him a scholarship.
Saunders' grades were bad when he signed his NLI.
Saunders' grades were bad in April, May, June and July of 2007.
And yet it was only at the end of August, when everyone was enrolling and it became certain that MU had more players than scholarships, that the university decided it would not admit him.
Now, do you believe the university was under the impression that Saunders' high school grades would get markedly better between June and August of 2007?
If not, what other reason would they have for waiting so long to determine he lacked the grades to get into Marquette?
Could it be that they were waiting to see who showed up for classes at the start of the fall semester?
Hmmm.

Sure, they could have.
Problem is, it's hard to deny admission to someone who hasn't applied for admission.

+1 The same admissions board that denied Saunders found it in their hearts to admit D Wade and we all know which one of the two was more "qualified".

[ChicosBailBonds]

Does the name Damian Saunders ring a bell?

Does arrested on drug charges ring a bell?   That certainly, in my book, falls into the camp of eggregious violation and a reason to break the commitment.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/29381254.html


Furthermore, he didn't qualify academically, something Newbill DID.

You're not comparing apples to apples

[Pakuni]

Does arrested on drug charges ring a bell?   That certainly, in my book, falls into the camp of eggregious violation and a reason to break the commitment.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/29381254.html


Furthermore, he didn't qualify academically, something Newbill DID.

You're not comparing apples to apples

What?
Damian Saunders absolutely qualified academically. How the heck do you think he played for Duquense just a few months after getting the boot from Marquette.
Marquette used the nebulous excuse that even though Saunders met NCAA requirements, he did not meet the school's requirements. Which is odd, given that Dwayne Wade did not meet NCAA requirements, yet somehow was admitted to Marquette. Maybe MU's standards are on a sliding scale, based on one's NBA potential.

The arrest thing has been addressed elsewhere. Crean said the arrest had nothing to do with it. If it did, why did the university wait two months after learning of the arrest to deny his admission?

[Lennys Tap]

Does arrested on drug charges ring a bell?   That certainly, in my book, falls into the camp of eggregious violation and a reason to break the commitment.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/29381254.html


Furthermore, he didn't qualify academically, something Newbill DID.

You're not comparing apples to apples

And Tom Crean is quoted as saying the marijuana arrest was not a big problem and had NOTHING to do with Saunders not being admitted. So unless you're calling your boy a liar you can drop the drug arrest straw man.

[Marquette84]

Fraud? Fraud? How would it be fraud, exactly?

I'll step back and give you the chance to explain EXACTLY what you meant with your use of the terms "suddenly discovered" and "magically solved" if you didn't mean to imply some sort of dishonest motives.

And while you're at it, why don't you list those other cases that you claim are similar to Newbill.

[Pakuni]

I'll step back and give you the chance to explain EXACTLY what you meant with your use of the terms "suddenly discovered" and "magically solved" if you didn't mean to imply some sort of dishonest motives.

And while you're at it, why don't you list those other cases that you claim are similar to Newbill.

1. I meant that Damian Saunders' academics, and whether they were on par with Marquette's standards, only became an issue when it was clear the basketball team had more scholarship players than scholarships. They weren't a problem when he commited. Nor were they a problem when he signed. Or in May, June or July. Then all of a sudden things changed. What possibly could have happened between June and late August to have changed his academic situation? And why was a player like Dwayne Wade - who didn't meet NCAA standards - admitted, while Saunders - who did meet NCAA standards - denied? Did MU's standards change? And is it just a convenient coincidence that they changed just about the time Marquette had too many players and needed to cut someone loose?


2. When did I ever claim there are "other cases similar to Newbill." In fact, I said something close to the opposite.

"Honestly, I don't know the answer to that question. When it does happen, I suspect it's far more often the result of an off-court issue with the player (academic or otherwise) or a player decision than the university's decision. I don't think schools are in the habit of taking LOIs from kids they might not want, nor should they be."


Now, answer my questions (the ones you conveniently ignored).
How did Damian Saunders' academic situation change between June 2007 and August 2007?
How exactly would MU's decision to deny Saunders admission constitute fraud?

[Dawson Rental]

Does arrested on drug charges ring a bell?   That certainly, in my book, falls into the camp of eggregious violation and a reason to break the commitment.

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/29381254.html


Furthermore, he didn't qualify academically, something Newbill DID.

You're not comparing apples to apples

Definitely not, Saunders was/is a big and Newbill is a guard.  I bet plenty of times, Crean wished he had that decision back and had more inside help for the three amigos.

[Dawson Rental]

Is it too late to change this thread's title to: "Don't get your panties all in a bunch."

[Knight Commission]

If you believe that someone at MU said that verbatim, on the record, I have some swampland to sell you.

If true, that spokesman should be fired immediately.

If its true Buzz should be fired immediately.