Video Summary Of Marquette's Newbill Recruitment

[Pakuni]

It's bizarre, and clearly disingenuous, how some continue to defend the Creaning of Damian Saunders with such nonsense as "they were waiting to see if he qualified."

Damian Saunders was fully qualified to participate at Marquette or any other school. If they were waiting to see if he qualified, then the answer would have kept him at MU.

"They were waiting for his final SAT scores"

Wrong again. The final SAT test that year was June 2. According to collegeboard.com, score are available on average in about 19 days. In other words. Marquette could have had the scores in hand as much as two months before deciding Saudners didn't meet their standards.

"But wait ... Marquette has super special, tougher standards."
Bull----. Marquette under the pprevious coach allowed in a non-qualifier, not to mentionkids who had significant clearinghouse issues. And yet a fully qualified kid was just too risky for Marquette's standards? Give me a break.

Why can't some simply admit the obvious? Damian Saunders was cut loose at the last minute, despite having fully qualified and signing a NLI, because Marquette signed too many players. Apparently this is acceptable. Just dont cut a kid loose two months later to sign another player.

As Saunders' coach at Duquense said:

"He got caught in a numbers game. They (Marquette) signed one too many players. He was the odd-man out."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07323/835119-135.stm

And as Chico's and Brad Forester can attest, Pennsylvania baksteball coaches are never wrong when it comes to these things.

[TJ]

It's bizarre, and clearly disingenuous, how some continue to defend the Creaning of Damian Saunders with such nonsense as "they were waiting to see if he qualified."

Damian Saunders was fully qualified to participate at Marquette or any other school. If they were waiting to see if he qualified, then the answer would have kept him at MU.

"They were waiting for his final SAT scores"

Wrong again. The final SAT test that year was June 2. According to collegeboard.com, score are available on average in about 19 days. In other words. Marquette could have had the scores in hand as much as two months before deciding Saudners didn't meet their standards.

"But wait ... Marquette has super special, tougher standards."
Bull----. Marquette under the pprevious coach allowed in a non-qualifier, not to mentionkids who had significant clearinghouse issues. And yet a fully qualified kid was just too risky for Marquette's standards? Give me a break.

Why can't some simply admit the obvious? Damian Saunders was cut loose at the last minute, despite having fully qualified and signing a NLI, because Marquette signed too many players. Apparently this is acceptable. Just dont cut a kid loose two months later to sign another player.

As Saunders' coach at Duquense said:

"He got caught in a numbers game. They (Marquette) signed one too many players. He was the odd-man out."

http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/07323/835119-135.stm

And as Chico's and Brad Forester can attest, Pennsylvania baksteball coaches are never wrong when it comes to these things.

I don't defend the move.  Saunders' NLI should have been honored.

I feel  there is a slight difference in the situations worth pointing out though.  With Saunders, I believe the oversigning was done with an expectation that a spot would open up with James' departure.  I agree that doing so was a mistake and poor judgment, and shouldn't have been handled that way.

With DJ, it seems that Buzz never stopped recruiting for the spot and let DJ go when a better player came along.  That's not a mistake, that's a decision.  I don't appreciate that decision, and I think most here agree to some extent.  Don't extend and sign a NLI that you don't fully intend to honor.  It's simple as that.

[VegasWarrior77]

interesting news on the Victor Rudd situation.  makes sense we need a forward more than we need a 5th 2 guard.  I remember we recruited Rudd out of HS...pretty big time recruit if i recall...got kicked off his HS team tho and that seems to be a warning sign to me.

Victor Rudd got kicked off the Findlay Prep team here in Henderson, NV for fighting in the locker room with a teammate.  He failed to comply with the conditions to return to the team.  He is trouble with a capital T!

http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2009/mar/04/rudd-leaves-findlay-prep/

[Pakuni]

With DJ, it seems that Buzz never stopped recruiting for the spot and let DJ go when a better player came along.  That's not a mistake, that's a decision.  I don't appreciate that decision, and I think most here agree to some extent.  Don't extend and sign a NLI that you don't fully intend to honor.  It's simple as that.

I don't disagree. Regardless of whether DJ Newbill's place at Marquette was somehow conditional or not - and I won't pretend to know the answer - that's a bad way of handling business, and I've stated my opinion on that many times over the last week.

I raise the Saunders matter mostly to point of the hypocrisy of those who defended Crean's actions then, and continue to do so today, while portraying Williams as some kind of con man and charlatan.

For the record, IMO, oversigning is a bad idea and signing players to NLIs without a 100 percent intent to bring that player to MU also is a bad idea.

[Marquette84]

It's bizarre, and clearly disingenuous, how some continue to defend the Creaning of Damian Saunders with such nonsense as "they were waiting to see if he qualified."

Damian Saunders was fully qualified to participate at Marquette or any other school. If they were waiting to see if he qualified, then the answer would have kept him at MU.

"They were waiting for his final SAT scores"

Wrong again. The final SAT test that year was June 2. According to collegeboard.com, score are available on average in about 19 days. In other words. Marquette could have had the scores in hand as much as two months before deciding Saudners didn't meet their standards.

And the final ACT test date was June 14th, and the the writing test could take 5 to 8 weeks to report. 8 weeks from June 14th would be August 9th.  

Add some time to evaluate--plus the fact that we only know when Crean made the announcement--not when the admissions office made the decision--and we find that there is a plausible timeline.

Do I know for sure that's what happened?  No.  

Do you know for sure it didn't?  No.

You simply don't have enough evidence to say I'm wrong--in fact, if you were honest with yourself, you have to admit that yes, this is a reasonable possibility.

Your personal opinion of its likelihood is irrelevant--you confuse your opinion with actual fact.

"But wait ... Marquette has super special, tougher standards."
Bull----. Marquette under the pprevious coach allowed in a non-qualifier, not to mentionkids who had significant clearinghouse issues. And yet a fully qualified kid was just too risky for Marquette's standards? Give me a break.

You're the one that seems to be picky about having proof and evidence before throwing out accusations.

Do you know for a fact whether or not Marquette has standards above the NCAA minimums?  Do you know for a fact whether or not they weight recent performance more heavily than HS freshman year?   Of course you don't.  Once again, we have you projecting your opinion as proven fact.

It IS possible for MU to have more stringent guidelines than the NCAA, and it IS possible for MU to give more credece to a HS junior's or senior's performance than his freshman year.  Again, whether or not you think its likely is completely irrelevant.

I've given you a reasonable explanation on Wade consistent with the facts--he struggled early in HS, but by his senior year he was an honor role student.  Therefore, its easy to make the case that he was less risky than a marginal student that may have had a consistent (but low) GPA.  

Meanwhile Saunders didn't qualify as a HS senior--had to go to prep school for a year.  

So accepting Wade and rejecting Saunders is consistent with the known facts about both kids--if we accept that MU has different standards and weights latter performance more heavily.

So now I get to ask your opinion:  Which would be a better risk--a guy with a low GPA his freshman year but improved 3.0 (and honor role) his senior year? Or a guy who got through 5 years of HS (4 and year of prep) without showing such improvement but just barely getting a qualifying score?  

Under NCAA rules the former would be a partial qualifier, but the latter is fully qualified.  That is the fact.  You don't need to repeat them again.

But which do YOU think would represent a less risky choice?  And do you think its possible that the MU admissions office might reach the conclusion that a guy who made huge progress in HS is a better risk than a guy that didn't?    Bet you won't address these questions--because you KNOW the answers.  

Why can't some simply admit the obvious? Damian Saunders was cut loose at the last minute, despite having fully qualified and signing a NLI, because Marquette signed too many players. Apparently this is acceptable. Just dont cut a kid loose two months later to sign another player.

Because its not obvious at all.  In fact, its obvious that Saunders would NOT have been the first choice to reach the scholarship limit. What is obvious to me is that Saunders would have been a tremendous addition to the team--on an undersized team, gaining a 6'7" 4 star recruit with 22 point/11 rebound HS stats from a state championship team (followed by double-digit rebounding on the national prep championship team) was clearly needed, and would have been a significant upgrade over Trend Blackldege or Pat Hazel to name two.

The obvious decision to me would have been to have Trend Blackledge leave the team to focus on his academics (much the same way that Buzz tried to do with Acker).  Blackledge had his shot and wound up missing half of the previous season due to academics, so this decision would be clearly justified and represent the best interests of both the player and the team.  Furthermore, both MU and Blackledge had fulfilled their mutual obligations under the NLI.

If an incoming player was going to be let go, it was obvious to me that it would have been Pat Hazel--clearly the least talented of the 4 incoming recruits that year (sort of like Roseboro last year or Newbill this year).  Second after Hazel would be Scott Christopherson--given our depth at guard.  Third would be Saunders, with only Mbakwe ahead of him among the incoming recruits.

Furthermore, if it was obvious that Saunders was the one that was going to go in order to reach the scholarship limit, his arrest would have been an easy justification--On June 30th we knew that James wasn't going to declare for the NBA draft, and that no other player was going to transfer--thus the arrest reported that day would have been a perfect opportunity IF it was obvious that Saunders was going to go to meet the scholarship limit.

What you want us to believe is that Saunders was otherwise a good academic fit with MU, that we really saw more talent and potential in Pat Hazel and Trend Blackledge, and that the admissions office was willing to lie about not having the grades, even though they were willing to overlook the drug arrest?

Time for YOU to give ME a break.

As Saunders' coach at Duquense said:

Do you think that Marquette's admissions office shared their reasoning with the Duquesne coach?  

Let's look at motivations--the Duquesne coach could admit that his school's academics were lower than Marquette's and that's how Saunders became available.  Or he could protect his own school's reputation by pretending that it was a simply numbers game.

He chose the latter.  No big surprise there.

[Litehouse]

The obvious decision to me would have been to have Trend Blackledge leave the team to focus on his academics (much the same way that Buzz tried to do with Acker).

I thought you were actually making some sense until I hit that part.

For two relatively similar situations in which you acknowledge that none of us know the facts, you sure are spending a lot of time thinking up every possible hypothetical that makes MU look good for Saunders and bad for Newbill.

To quote one of our esteemed moderators...

The extent to which people are bending, twisting, and outright maligning, to fulfill their own prejudices is really stunning.

[Marquette84]

I thought you were actually making some sense until I hit that part.

Perhaps you could explain what didn't make sense.

Chances are good that I can explain it.

For two relatively similar situations

I don't think the situations are similar--there is one significant difference: One kid failed to gain admission after applying (Saunders), and another was asked to go away before he even had the chance (Newbill).

Perhaps I'm the only person here who has some belief in the fundamental independence of the admissions office, but if you believe MU's admissions office is independent from the coaching staff, then every other statement I made is consistent with other known facts.

in which you acknowledge that none of us know the facts, you sure are spending a lot of time thinking up every possible hypothetical that makes MU look good for Saunders and bad for Newbill.

To quote one of our esteemed moderators...

I'm not the one who maligned the MU admission office by implying that they lied when they said Saunders didn't qualify due to his academics. 

I'm not the one who incorrectly suggested that there was no possibility for new data on Saunder's academics to come to light following the spring signing period.

I'm not the one who then misrepresented the last possible date for receiving scores by using the earlier SAT date (not the later ACT) and then excluding the timeframe for reporting the results of the writing test, which may have been requested.

I'm not the one who keeps suggesting that that Saunders was the only obvious option available to Crean in order to meet the scholarship limit as "proof" that the only reason we let Saunders go was to meet the scholarship limit.

I'm not the one who glosses over the substantial and documented differences between Wade's and Saunders' academic situations coming out of HS in order to "prove" that the MU admissions office doesn't really consider academic potential.

I'm not the one who claims we were "lucky" or "fortunate" to lose a quality big on a team that was short on such players.

you sure are spending a lot of time thinking up every possible hypothetical that makes MU look good for Saunders and bad for Newbill.

And I'm responding to those who spend a lot of time trying to gloss over the differences in order to claim they're comparable. The fact of the matter is that one kid failed to gain admission after applying, and another was asked to go away before he even had the chance.

Now, Pakuni has every right to believe that MU lied about the reason we denied Saunders admission.  But he's not merely stating his case as a disagreement of opinion--he's stating that his opinion is fact. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Pakuni

MU should not over sign players, PERIOD.  Over signing sucks.  It's a practice that MU started under Crean and is still in very much full effect under Buzz.  Some schools are still winning at very high levels without playing this game with recruits. It's unfortunate that MU is doing this, a bad practice that is allowed by the Big East conference.  Not all conferences allow it.  Even some conferences that do, elite teams are finding ways to win year in and year out without going down this practice.

It's very possible at the time of the Saunders incident I didn't say a thing, it's possible I defended the move, I don't recall. I'm sure it's in the search function and Ners can pull it up.  After doing this now for several years, my opinion is we should not be doing this any longer.  It's not worth the stigma.

The ONLY reason to do it is when you sign marginally academic players who you think might not qualify academically so you're hedging a bet, OR, it's because you plan on buzz cutting \ Creaning someone off the team.

It's not something we have to do to be competitive.  It's not something "EVERYONE DOES" as I read here from time to time and no one can provide any meaningful examples to support the practice.

The question is....will Marquette continue this practice?  Why or why not? 

[Litehouse]

Perhaps you could explain what didn't make sense.

Chances are good that I can explain it.

Are you implying that Blackledge had the same off-the-court interests as Acker and could have been asked to "focus on his studies" because of that?  If you are, then I guess you have a point.  Or are you implying that Buzz was trying to get rid of Acker last year to make room for someone else?

The fact of the matter is that one kid failed to gain admission after applying, and another was asked to go away before he even had the chance.

Now, Pakuni has every right to believe that MU lied about the reason we denied Saunders admission.  But he's not merely stating his case as a disagreement of opinion--he's stating that his opinion is fact. 

Saying Newbill didn't even have the chance to get his application in sure sounds like stating your opinion as fact to me.  Newbill's oral commitment was reported on Jan. 30th, so he had 5 months to get the application in if he wanted to.

You've gone to great lengths to explain why the Saunders situation was acceptable while acknowledging that none of us really know the facts.  That's great and I applaud you for standing up for the honor of the MU admissions department.  But why do you think the Newbill situation doesn't have an equally acceptable explanation since none of us really know the facts there either?

[MarquetteDano]

Pakuni

MU should not over sign players, PERIOD.  Over signing sucks.  It's a practice that MU started under Crean and is still in very much full effect under Buzz.  Some schools are still winning at very high levels without playing this game with recruits. It's unfortunate that MU is doing this, a bad practice that is allowed by the Big East conference.  Not all conferences allow it.  Even some conferences that do, elite teams are finding ways to win year in and year out without going down this practice.

I agree.  Stop the oversinging.  You end up with situations like Newbill and Saunders.

[77ncaachamps]

I agree.  Stop the oversinging.  You end up with situations like Newbill and Saunders.

As a future non-football league (as many assume the Big East may be), oversigning may be here to stay.

[rocky_warrior]

As a future non-football league (as many assume the Big East may be), oversigning may be here to stay.

I think the Big East schools should turn the hoops world upside down, and declare that they are no longer going to recruit players.  Instead, they will invite the top hoops players in the US to the newly formed Big East Basketball Draft, and each school will take turns picking their players to fill 13 roster spots.   

[Marquette84]

Are you implying that Blackledge had the same off-the-court interests as Acker and could have been asked to "focus on his studies" because of that?  If you are, then I guess you have a point.  Or are you implying that Buzz was trying to get rid of Acker last year to make room for someone else?

No, that was not my intent, and I apologize for not making it more clear.

My intent was to show that both Acker and Blackledge were returning players no longer covered by an NLI.  I can go back through the years--I know there were other players who left the team but continued their studies--If I recall a number of Bob Dukiet's recruits fell into this category.

Saying Newbill didn't even have the chance to get his application in sure sounds like stating your opinion as fact to me. 

This is a known fact.

Both sides made comments in the media that said the app was not submitted yet.  Couple this with the NLI which states that the application isn't yet due, and I don't think one can deny that Newbill never had the chance to have his application considered by the admissions office.

Newbill's oral commitment was reported on Jan. 30th, so he had 5 months to get the application in if he wanted to.

Yes, he did have five months he could have done it. 
We also know that his application wasn't due yet.

You've gone to great lengths to explain why the Saunders situation was acceptable while acknowledging that none of us really know the facts. 

There are some facts we know and some facts we don't. 

One fact we know about Saunders is that the admissions office reviewed his application
One fact we know about Newbill is that the admissions office did not review his application.

That makes these situations different.

That's great and I applaud you for standing up for the honor of the MU admissions department.  But why do you think the Newbill situation doesn't have an equally acceptable explanation since none of us really know the facts there either?

Lots of people have offered explanations that are inconsistent with known fact.  One frequently cited one is that "Newbill knew he had a side arrangement to go to Prep School for a year".  Yet this statement is inconsistent with the known fact that the NLI explicitly prohibits such side deals. 

Do those people think the "no side deal" rule doesn't really apply to Marquette?  Do they think that MU could get away with it because we're different than all the other schools?  Do they think it's commonly ignored by all schools?  Do they just not realize that clause is part of the document?  I don't know.

[ChicosBailBonds]

As a future non-football league (as many assume the Big East may be), oversigning may be here to stay.

The irony is that oversigning started as a football technique, not a basketball technique.

MU can remain very very good without having to resort to it.

[NCMUFan]

Chico thank you for your opinion on the subject for the 1000th time.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Chico thank you for your opinion on the subject for the 1000th time.

[NCMUFan]

Any stats on the winner of most frequently ignored?  I know who I would place my money on.

[NersEllenson]

Any stats on the winner of most frequently ignored?  I know who I would place my money on.

I'd have to put my money on Marquette 84 simply due to the always lengthy replies.  I've never seen someone execute the multi quote rebuttal as well as 84.  My A.D.D usually kicks in after about the 3rd quoted statement of another poster...and most of his posts tend to dissect another poster's statement with 4-7 different quotes and subsequent lengthy rebuttals.

[cheebs09]

The irony is that oversigning started as a football technique, not a basketball technique.

MU can remain very very good without having to resort to it.

I haven't read this thread since like 3 pages ago so I don't know if this has been argued, but the thing with oversigning is sometimes it isn't oversigning. It could just look like oversigning to those of us who aren't in the program. Maybe they know of someone transferring already, but it just hasn't been announced, so they sign someone to take that person's spot but at the moment to the public, that spot isn't open yet.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Any stats on the winner of most frequently ignored?  I know who I would place my money on.

Oh Valiant, you're so cute sometimes.

The winner was Canadian Dimes by a country mile, of course when he changes his username 5 times, there's no telling what the cumulative number is.

[NersEllenson]

Oh Valiant, you're so cute sometimes.

The winner was Canadian Dimes by a country mile, of course when he changes his username 5 times, there's no telling what the cumulative number is.

Hayward was going strong as undisputed top ignored..with you and me coming in a somewhat distant 2nd and 3rd respectively...I think my high point was 7 Scoopers Ignoring me...actually wish we could still view that data about someone...thought it was relevant and fun.

[NCMUFan]

Chicos do you have the time to save clip art and photos for every occassion?