[Rosiak's Blog] Buzz on signees, recruiting

[MerrittsMustache]

While he may be wrong on the Vander/Maymon topic, he is 100% spot on this time.  I like Buzz, but he basically admitted that he dropped Newbill for Jamil for talent reasons alone.

Why don't Buzzophiles just admit this is the case?  Why do they blame Newbill?  Or his coach?  Or Brad Forester?  Hmmmm....  Why are they so uncomfortable with the truth???

Because...

1) We don't actually know it's the truth and/or...
2) We think that all of the above named deserve some share of the blame and/or...
3) Some people don't think it's wrong to drop a player in order to get more talented one, especially considering it's within NCAA rules to do so.

[GGGG]

Because...

3) Some people don't think it's wrong to drop a player in order to get more talented one, especially considering it's within NCAA rules to do so.

I have a lot more respect for people who would just say this instead of contriving some story to completely absolve Buzz of any wrongdoing, however within the NCAA rules it might be.

[NavinRJohnson]

I have a lot more respect for people who would just say this instead of contriving some story to completely absolve Buzz of any wrongdoing, however within the NCAA rules it might be.

But, here is where the shades of gray really come into play. First, I do not acknowledge that this is necessarily what happened, despite what some of you are choosing to read into Buzz's comments. That aside, speaking on a more general basis, there may be variables that could make this a scenario I am ok with. What if the coach knows that a marginal BE player would in fact be better off playing elsewhere? What of the coach realizes the player isn't as good as he initially thought? What of the coach questions the players ability to make it in the program long-term? Questions of work ethic or commitment? Wouldn't he be acting in the best interest of the player as well in the program in a case like that? The fact is, recruiting mistakes happen. Lord knows they happened with regularity around here the past decade+ (For the record, I don't recall hearing as much about all of this commitment honoring back then when guys like Kevin Menard, Krunti Hester, Ron Howard, etc. chose to transfer.), and frankly, it is a coach's responsibility to correct them.

Buzz says he didn't not do the wrong thing relative to DJ Newbill (again, despite some of you choosing to modify his words so you can infer that he was saying he 'didn't break the rules'), and I believe him. Why? Form my perspective, in his time here, he has earned that benefit of the doubt.

[mueron]

Would you people shut the f up about this already.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I have a lot more respect for people who would just say this instead of contriving some story to completely absolve Buzz of any wrongdoing, however within the NCAA rules it might be.

Bingo

It's funny how one group demands that people "man up" and just admit it, yet at the very same time they are in full spin cycle like a dryer when the shoe is on the other foot.  Manning up is only one way apparently....because shades of gray are only to be used for their arguments, not anyone else.

[Marquette84]

Because...

1) We don't actually know it's the truth and/or...
2) We think that all of the above named deserve some share of the blame and/or...
3) Some people don't think it's wrong to drop a player in order to get more talented one, especially considering it's within NCAA rules to do so.

The problem is that people keep putting up alternate theories that are either outright violations of NCAA rules, make no sense given other known facts, or are otherwise not credible or demonstrate a lack of familiarity with the rules.

First, earlier in the thread someone tried to blame Brad Forster for speaking with Newbill, thus making Newbill ineligible.  Yet if that was the case, MU was obligated to report it as a violation to the NCAA.  MU didn't do that, hence the "Brad Forster is to blame" theory is simply not credible.

Second, People keep bringing up the application--yet we know that the truth is that the application was not yet due!! Why do people have such a hard time admitting this fact?  What part of the deadline do they not understand?  Newbill faces a late-August deadline for getting his application in--and in early July he's dumped for not getting it in?  He still had another month or two!  Even if you don't believe the story that Newbill was told to "take his time and get it right", why don't you believe the NCAA forms that explicitly state when the application is due?

Third, there is no credibility to the allegation that Newbill's coach can be blamed.  MU gave Newbill an LOI to sign and Newbill signed it.  The NLI is a national form that neither MU, Newbill, or Newbill's coach could alter.  No coach--not even the storied Bob Hurley--can do ANYTHING to affect the commitment between school and player after that NLI has been signed by a player. 

Fourth, people keep bringing up some supposed agreement that Buzz made with Newbill to go to prep school.  Yet we know that the NCAA has barred such arrangements.  As with the Forster theory, this one alleges an NCAA rules violation.   Yes, I know someone will bring up Villanova--but in that case it was the players option---VU only had 11 scholarship players at the time.  The player himself didn't want to burn up a year of eligibility, and if he wanted to attend there was a place on the roster for him. 

Fifth, people keep saying that the rules permit MU to drop a player. Wrong.  The NLI gives the athletic department zero leeway in withdrawing an NLI. There are a very limited number of ways a school gets out of an NLI--NONE of them are in the hands of the athletic department, and NONE of them applied in Newbill's case.  He was not denied admission.  He did not make himself ineligible under NCAA rules.  He did not fail to meet NCAA academic minimums.   In fact, the only way the athletic department can get out of the NLI is to have the PLAYER request a release from his NLI--which is exactly what Newbill did.

Fifth, people keep saying that "Buzz can't talk" about the situation.  BS.  A coach can't talk about a player BEFORE he signs an NLI.   Newbill signed an LOI.  Therefore, Buzz could have explained the entire situation. 

Sixth, the comment about NCAA rules permitting teams to drop one player for a better one ONLY applies to those who have been in the program for a year--the school's only option is to not renew a scholarship.  There is NO provision to pull a scholarship from a player that signed an NLI. 

Which brings us to the only credible explanation--which Buzz more or less admitted in the most recent interview: He had a chance to get a better player, so he dumped Newbill. 

Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship.   Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach. 

[Marquette84]

Buzz says he didn't not do the wrong thing relative to DJ Newbill (again, despite some of you choosing to modify his words so you can infer that he was saying he 'didn't break the rules'), and I believe him. Why? Form my perspective, in his time here, he has earned that benefit of the doubt.

If Buzz feels he did nothing wrong by DJ why did he feel compelled to change his recruiting policy?  Why is he choosing to hold an open scholarship if he feels there was nothing wrong in signing a player now and then replacing him next June or July if a better player comes along?

[ChicosBailBonds]

The problem is that people keep putting up alternate theories that are either outright violations of NCAA rules, make no sense given other known facts, or are otherwise not credible or demonstrate a lack of familiarity with the rules.

First, earlier in the thread someone tried to blame Brad Forster for speaking with Newbill, thus making Newbill ineligible.  Yet if that was the case, MU was obligated to report it as a violation to the NCAA.  MU didn't do that, hence the "Brad Forster is to blame" theory is simply not credible.

Second, People keep bringing up the application--yet we know that the truth is that the application was not yet due!! Why do people have such a hard time admitting this fact?  What part of the deadline do they not understand?  Newbill faces a late-August deadline for getting his application in--and in early July he's dumped for not getting it in?  He still had another month or two!  Even if you don't believe the story that Newbill was told to "take his time and get it right", why don't you believe the NCAA forms that explicitly state when the application is due?

Third, there is no credibility to the allegation that Newbill's coach can be blamed.  MU gave Newbill an LOI to sign and Newbill signed it.  The NLI is a national form that neither MU, Newbill, or Newbill's coach could alter.  No coach--not even the storied Bob Hurley--can do ANYTHING to affect the commitment between school and player after that NLI has been signed by a player. 

Fourth, people keep bringing up some supposed agreement that Buzz made with Newbill to go to prep school.  Yet we know that the NCAA has barred such arrangements.  As with the Forster theory, this one alleges an NCAA rules violation.   Yes, I know someone will bring up Villanova--but in that case it was the players option---VU only had 11 scholarship players at the time.  The player himself didn't want to burn up a year of eligibility, and if he wanted to attend there was a place on the roster for him. 

Fifth, people keep saying that the rules permit MU to drop a player. Wrong.  The NLI gives the athletic department zero leeway in withdrawing an NLI. There are a very limited number of ways a school gets out of an NLI--NONE of them are in the hands of the athletic department, and NONE of them applied in Newbill's case.  He was not denied admission.  He did not make himself ineligible under NCAA rules.  He did not fail to meet NCAA academic minimums.   In fact, the only way the athletic department can get out of the NLI is to have the PLAYER request a release from his NLI--which is exactly what Newbill did.

Fifth, people keep saying that "Buzz can't talk" about the situation.  BS.  A coach can't talk about a player BEFORE he signs an NLI.   Newbill signed an LOI.  Therefore, Buzz could have explained the entire situation. 

Sixth, the comment about NCAA rules permitting teams to drop one player for a better one ONLY applies to those who have been in the program for a year--the school's only option is to not renew a scholarship.  There is NO provision to pull a scholarship from a player that signed an NLI. 

Which brings us to the only credible explanation--which Buzz more or less admitted in the most recent interview: He had a chance to get a better player, so he dumped Newbill. 

Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship.   Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach. 

Well laid out.  Prediction, instead of someone having a discussion of your points, you will be attacked personally, ridiculed, etc.

[willie warrior]

How dare anybody impugn Buzz's integrity with such distorted information.

[MerrittsMustache]

Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship.   Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach. 

Your rundown was decent, though not completely accurate, but then you threw the hypotheticals and opinions in during this last paragraph and killed your credibility.

[MerrittsMustache]

I have a lot more respect for people who would just say this instead of contriving some story to completely absolve Buzz of any wrongdoing, however within the NCAA rules it might be.

I think that since Buzz did not break any rules, he was simply doing his job (put together a team that he believes has the best chance to win) by replacing one player with a more talented one.

[NavinRJohnson]

Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship.   Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach.  

Probably the single most hysterical comment written on this topic. SJS goes through and attempts to discredit any other theory, yet is able to comfortably subscribe to the one above. For the record, that is not an attack on SJS the person, it is an attack on a very ridiculous argument with no basis whatsoever. If you have something concrete to support your suggestion that Buzz is simply a bad guy, please share it with us. Again, something supported by facts would be appreciated, not pure conjecture or a rehash of the theory you put forth above. Just like Chico, you are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to DJ Newbill and his camp, as opposed to Buzz, because they have done so much to earn it the last 2-3 years. I wonder why.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I think that since Buzz did not break any rules, he was simply doing his job (put together a team that he believes has the best chance to win) by replacing one player with a more talented one.

And he should just "man up" and own to this...right?  Isn't that what you are clamoring for from others?  Why beat around the bush?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Probably the single most hysterical comment written on this topic. SJS goes through and attempts to discredit any other theory, yet is able to comfortably subscribe to the one above. For the record, that is not an attack on SJS the person, it is an attack on a very ridiculous argument with no basis whatsoever. If you have something concrete to support your suggestion that Buzz is simply a bad guy, please share it with us. Again, something supported by facts would be appreciated, not pure conjecture or a rehash of the theory you put forth above. Just like Chico, you are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to DJ Newbill and his camp, as opposed to Buzz, because they have done so much to earn it the last 2-3 years. I wonder why.

Just like I said...right on queue

By the way, using your logic you can never believe anyone or anything other than what comes out of the basketball department since they will NEVER be in the same position to have that 2 - 3 years (and growing) benefit of the doubt.  Do you know FINALLY understand why some of us think that is silly beyond belief? 

[NavinRJohnson]

Just like I said...right on queue

By the way, using your logic you can never believe anyone or anything other than what comes out of the basketball department since they will NEVER be in the same position to have that 2 - 3 years (and growing) benefit of the doubt.  Do you know FINALLY understand why some of us think that is silly beyond belief?  

Please point out to me where the personal attack is.

It seems I am the only one using any logic at all. What is it inBuzz Williams' track record that makes you doubt his version of things? You look at the circumstances and conclude that he flat out cut the kid lose. Period. End of story. He says you're wrong. So please, explain to me what DJ Nebill and friends have done to earn your trust, that Buzz Williams has not done?

Unlike some, I am willing to acknowledge I could be wrong on this, but until I see more reason or a pattern of behavior to support your version if things, I see no reason to do so. You talk about all of the questionable or 'stupid' things that Buzz has done over the past year or so, yet are unwilling or unable to provide any specifics. So why should any of us believe any of it given some of the obvious bias you have demonstrated since he's been here (five years has gione awfully fast)? SJS just came out and said he thinks Buzz is a bad guy. Why? Other than an accusation he flat out denies, what has he done to deserve that?

[Lennys Tap]

While he may be wrong on the Vander/Maymon topic, he is 100% spot on this time.  I like Buzz, but he basically admitted that he dropped Newbill for Jamil for talent reasons alone.

Why don't Buzzophiles just admit this is the case?  Why do they blame Newbill?  Or his coach?  Or Brad Forester?  Hmmmm....  Why are they so uncomfortable with the truth???

Your interpretation of what Buzz said has resulted in you forming an opinion. I have no problem with that. When you insist your interpretation and opinion equates to a truth (that we'll never know) I take issue.

[NersEllenson]

What is amazing to me is how 84, Chicos want to take what Buzz was asked..and replied to be his admission that he cut DJ Newbill for a better player.  It all depends how you want to look at Buzz..if you are looking for any chance to crucify him..you will interpret what he said to be that he cut DJ Newbill.  Couple of facts:

1) Buzz wasn't asked specifically about DJ Newbill..yet CHOSE to take the question asked and comment on the DJ situation.  The question asked was pertaining to THIS YEAR's recruiting class at present:  Do you like having that extra scholarship going into spring, considering how much player turnover there is at that time of the year?

Buzz said - Back to that..I know I lost some people on that...I didn't do anything wrong on DJ.  The timing made it look like I did something wrong, but I didn't do anything wrong.

The point being...it looked like he cut DJ and took Jamil...based on the timing of the events.

He then continues to answer the original question..as asked..pertaining to keeping a scholarship open for spring...because there are transfers...why sign a mid-major plus guy..when a high major guy may come available in spring?  We are now at that point at MU where we can afford to keep one open..because we have enough depth on roster as is...tht if we roll the dice and don't take a plyaer now..and still "miss" on a spring guy..not the end of the world.

My take..he specifically CHOSE to mentione the DJ case..because he knew if he answered the question presented to him..as he did without saying something about DJ...people would take what he said to be exactly an explanation as TO the whole Newbill fiasco.

Again..if you are looking to crucify Buzz and that is your agenda..you see it differently...if you feel Buzz has earned the benefit of the doubt..and exhibited good character in his time at MU..you take him at his word.

[Marquette84]

Probably the single most hysterical comment written on this topic. SJS goes through and attempts to discredit any other theory, yet is able to comfortably subscribe to the one above. For the record, that is not an attack on SJS the person, it is an attack on a very ridiculous argument with no basis whatsoever. If you have something concrete to support your suggestion that Buzz is simply a bad guy, please share it with us. Again, something supported by facts would be appreciated, not pure conjecture or a rehash of the theory you put forth above. Just like Chico, you are willing to give the benefit of the doubt to DJ Newbill and his camp, as opposed to Buzz, because they have done so much to earn it the last 2-3 years. I wonder why.

Please--if you think I'm incorrect on any of the points, please outline exactly why you think so.  Cite the incorrect interpretations of NCAA rules.  Create a scenario that is consistent with known facts.

Calling me hysterical, making accusations of "taking sides", or accusing me of not using facts doesn't endear me to giving your argument any consideration--especially when you offer no support in fact.

I'm more than willing to give you the benefit of the doubt if you could offer a plausible explanation that is not predicated on MU committing an NCAA rules violation, or inconsistent with known facts.

So far, the only scenario that I can see that is consistent with NCAA rules, every statement out of the MU camp, every statement out of Newbill's camp, and all known facts is that Buzz coerced Newbill to ask out of his NLI.

Let's go through the other alternatives, one by one:

1.  Forster's conversation made Newbill ineligible.  
I claim this is implausible because if it were true, then MU would have had to report it to the NCAA.  We didn't report it, therefore, I don't feel the theory is plausible.  

2.  Newbill's coach is somehow to blame.
I pointed out that this is implausible because MU issued the LOI, and Newbill signed it.  As we learned with Hurley and Taylor, no matter how much a coach whines, he has absolutely zero impact an NLI--its between the school and the player.  Period.

3.  Newbill didn't understand the separate agreement to make his NLI conditional.
The NLI states that no other conditions apply and voids any verbal agreements that may have been made prior to the NLI.  Plus, the NCAA issued a rule prohibiting any side deals to the NLI.  If MU made a conditional offer to Newbill (i.e., if we get a better player you're going to Prep School), it would be an NCAA violation.  Therefore, this is not a plausible explanation.

4.  Buzz can't speak to the issue.
The NCAA rules preclude a coach from speaking BEFORE the NLI is signed.  Newbill actually signed an NLI.  Buzz may not have want to speak, but to say that rules precluded him from speaking is not correct.

5.  Newbill didn't complete his application.
And he had another six to eight weeks to do so.  According to the NLI that he and MU both agreed to, he had until the first day of classes to get it in.  The university never denied him admission.

6.  Newbill didn't qualify for admission.
Not true.  He hadn't yet submitted his application--which wasn't yet due.  He met all NCAA minimums.  He wasn't arrested over the summer.   There was no reason to think that MU's admissions office would deny him.

7.  MU can drop a player to replace him with a better one.
MU cannot drop a player under an NLI.  There are a very specific set of circumstances under the NLI is voided, and none of them applied to Newbill's situation.  MU could choose not to renew a returning player's scholarship, but they had no leeway with incoming players.


Finally, I asked you a very specific question--if Buzz did nothing wrong, why do you suppose he changed his policy?  You dodged.  I'm asking again.

[NavinRJohnson]

I'm not the one making accusations, you are. Your laundry list above is great and all, but I'm not the one who has anything to justify. I am choosing to take Buzz at his word on this issue. That's it. Its not complicated. I believe he's earned it, but I understand the world may look a little different from inside Tom Crean's rectum. You suggested that he told Newbill he would waste a year of his eligibility, or threatened to ride him unmercifully during practice (even though by most accounts, that's a promise he makes to all recruits).

[NersEllenson]

Finally, I asked you a very specific question--if Buzz did nothing wrong, why do you suppose he changed his policy?  You dodged.  I'm asking again.

Why are you always so eager to paint Buzz in a bad way, or bad light?  What did he do to you to make you hell bent on trying to make him look like a "heartless SOB?"

Lastly, as to why Buzz changed his policy as you say..he explains that in his original response - because the Marquette roster is now deep enough, talented enough..to where you don't HAVE to take a sure thing signee that might be a mid-major plus guy...and run the risk/roll the dice that you won't be able to sign a better player in the spring.  MU can now afford to take that risk...due to the GREAT work done by the staff already with regard to roster make up/composition.

[GGGG]

I'm not the one making accusations, you are. Your laundry list above is great and all, but I'm not the one who has anything to justify. I am choosing to take Buzz at his word on this issue.

Buzz's "word" doesn't contradict anything MU84 said.  The only thing Buzz said is that he did "nothing wrong" in the NCAA sense.  Which is true.

[Marquette84]

Your rundown was decent, though not completely accurate, but then you threw the hypotheticals and opinions in during this last paragraph and killed your credibility.

Your point is well taken--I created a hypothetical to explain what might have happened.  I should have just left it at MU somehow got Newbill to request his release, and left the method by which they did so up to one's imagination.  I don't think my hypothetical was implausible by any stretch, but I don't know for a fact that those exact words were used.  

What inaccuracies do you think I made in the other points.  Having read all the relevant documents I thought I reported these accurately, but I'm open to corrections.

[Spaniel with a Short Tail]

Which brings us to the only credible explanation--which Buzz more or less admitted in the most recent interview: He had a chance to get a better player, so he dumped Newbill.

Of course, NCAA rules don't let the school unilaterally dump an incoming freshman, so Buzz had to coerce Newbill to request a release from his NLI--probably by threatening to ride him unmercilessly during practice, telling him that he'll play exactly one minute all season (thus burning his year of eligibility), and letting him know in advance that he won't renew his scholarship.   Yeah, that make Buzz seem like a heartless SOB of a coach.  

I appreciate your laundry list, but can't agree that this is the "only credible explanation."  Has anyone in DJ's camp corroborated or even hinted that this "corecion" occurred?  Maybe they have - I'm not following this as closely as others.  The general scenario that Buzz dumped Newbill for Wilson is a possible scenario, maybe even a likely scenario.  However, your conclusion that there was this distasteful coercion relies on too many unknowns.

[NavinRJohnson]

Buzz's "word" doesn't contradict anything MU84 said.  The only thing Buzz said is that he did "nothing wrong" in the NCAA sense.  Which is true.

No, that's not what he said. He said he did nothing wrong. Period. The only people who injected NCAA rules into Buzz's comments are those who are insisting Buzz is shady, didn't do the right thing, failed to honor a commitment, etc.

[GGGG]

OK fine.  But obviously the issue is that you can interpret Buzz's "word" multiple ways.  Again, what he said doesn't contradict anything MU84 laid out.