Henry Coleman III - 2020 Offer
- Thread starter SFspidur
- Start date
I never said we had to land them, but as a hometown team you would think they would at least put us in one of their final considerations. The fact they don't do it for us but do for VCU says a lot about how these two schools are perceived in Richmond by local recruits.
St. Louis has a history of landing top 100 recruits and Davidson has Grady who was top 100 on some basketball recruiting sites. GW got a top 100 recruit from Illinois a couple years ago. Not to mention the success Rhode Island, Dayton, and VCU have had in recruiting. Heck, even La Salle - which arguably has the worst facilities in the league, a terrible basketball record the past few years, and was even considering dropping D1 sports - just landed a 4 star recruit as a transfer. And before you say "well there is a reason why they're transferring" in reference to the fact they haven't lived up to their 4 star status, I would rather take a chance on those players than a transfer who was a walk-on, had no D1 scholarships to any other school, and had average stats on a subpar Ivy league team. Or a player who was on the bench at Chicago State.
Fan, thanks for the update. AWIII was just before my time. I was mostly aware of his transfer interests.
The notion that we can't consistently land kids with some BCS offers is one of the lasting legacies that once Mooney leaves our new coach will quickly dispel. Mooney cannot consistently land kids with BCS offers but plenty of other A-10 coaches can. LaSalle just got a couple BCS transfers, Grant and prior to him Archie at Dayton, Ford at SLU, Wade & Shaka when they were at VCU all were able to consistently land big time recruits.
I'm so tired of hearing what we can't do from the apologists. It is what Mooney can't do. Our facilities, league affiliation, investment in basketball should be able to attract much better recruits than we do. Perhaps the guy selling our program is not doing the best job?
I'm so tired of hearing what we can't do from the apologists. It is what Mooney can't do. Our facilities, league affiliation, investment in basketball should be able to attract much better recruits than we do. Perhaps the guy selling our program is not doing the best job?
Yes, it just shows over time if you have a coach with a dream you can make it happen. It's hard, but that is why you pay the big bucks.
VT, think about this for more than a minute. If the NCAA is investigating a program and finds that some student athletes or school has committed a crime, should they investigate the crime, prosecute the student/school, and punish the student/school? I would say no, they do not have the expertise or authority to investigate or prosecute crimes. They should report the crime the the proper authority (the police), let properly trained people determine if a crime was committed, and let the proper people determine what the punishment should be.
The NCAA does not have the authority or expertise to determine the academic value of any course, and I doubt many schools would want them to. That is literally the job of accreditation boards. The NCAA found what they thought might be academic fraud at UNC and referred it to the accreditation board so it could be properly investigated and UNC could be properly punished. The NCAA is not there to police academics. The investigation into improper benefits found that the athletes were receiving no more benefits than regular student's and that was all they had the authority to investigate.
This may not seem fair or just at first glance, but the alternative is much worse.
Smart is a great example. Kid looked down and out, he pulled team in and burned the page of February on the Calendar, then kept winning and kept recruiting.
I will say I had fallen into the negative trap, but when we landed Buck I was very impressed. that was a guy who's recruiting list had Michigan, UVA, and more. Not sure who actually offered but he was out there.
I will say I had fallen into the negative trap, but when we landed Buck I was very impressed. that was a guy who's recruiting list had Michigan, UVA, and more. Not sure who actually offered but he was out there.
Just because a guy might get one or two BCS offers means nothing. I would rather have kids with no BCS offers that are good fits and will end up helping us than kids with a few BCS offers who would not be good fits and would only end up riding the bench both here and at the BCS school that offered them.
LaSalle just got a guy that averaged 1 point a game for Clemson last year. Big deal. Would you rather have him because he "played" at Clemson or Francis, who we got? If another program would have landed Francis, you know you and others would have jumped all over Mooney for "missing out on another transfer". But, after we get him, some of you do not focus on that, and instead just wait for the next transfer or recruit to pop up that someone else offers or gets and use that as a another reason to attack our coach. At least you guys are consistent. I will give you that.
Could you elaborate on what you mean by good fit?
Because the way I see it, we haven’t made the tournament the padt 7 years, bring in kids who take at least 1 year to learn Mooney’s offensive system, had 5 scholarship eligibility players leave the program this year, had several more transfers to lesser schools the past several years, and have hardly any depth for playing time on our roster.
Were Smithen, Diekvos, Dominaus, Singleton, Ford, Abakah, Jordan Madrid Andrews, Solly, Friendshuh, and Pistokache good fits? Because they are the players we’re bringing in for the most part.
But we have the Big 3 and will be much improved next year, or the next year, or was it the year after that. Geez.
2011 ... "The NCAA does not have the authority or expertise to determine the academic value of any course"???
am I misremembering? these were flat out fake courses! you didn't even have to show up!
the sole excuse for not punishing the program was that there were a few non-athletes also taking the fake classes. and that's such BS.
someone explain to me a rational reason that these classes were created. tell me they weren't created for athletes to get a grade boost. the fact that a few other students cheated themselves to get an extra A doesn't mean the basketball program shouldn't be punished. but I guess punishing UNC would hurt the brand, so just let it go.
am I misremembering? these were flat out fake courses! you didn't even have to show up!
the sole excuse for not punishing the program was that there were a few non-athletes also taking the fake classes. and that's such BS.
someone explain to me a rational reason that these classes were created. tell me they weren't created for athletes to get a grade boost. the fact that a few other students cheated themselves to get an extra A doesn't mean the basketball program shouldn't be punished. but I guess punishing UNC would hurt the brand, so just let it go.
The courses were fake, UNC was punished by the accreditation board. NCAA doesn't punish schools for academic fraud, it has no authority to do so in its bylaws. UNC didn't actual break any NCAA bylaws, the NCAA cannot determine if classes are up to academic standards due to "profoundly held principles of scholarly independence".
----------
“The public is definitely going to hammer the N.C.A.A. if they don’t do something,” said Joshua R. Smith, the assistant athletic director for compliance at Eastern Illinois University. “You’re looking at bogus classes. The N.C.A.A. wants to take back their reputation that they really are academically focused first, putting the student ahead of the athlete, and this is an issue where they can do that.”
However, Smith added, “If you look deeper, it’s difficult to say what bylaw exactly comes up that they should be punished for.”
North Carolina has said that the fraud was confined to its academic side, over which the N.C.A.A. has no claim. Though convenient, this stance is consistent with profoundly held principles of scholarly independence. North Carolina even has cited N.C.A.A. President Mark Emmert, who in 2015 said, “It’s ultimately up to universities to determine whether or not the courses for which they’re giving credit, the degrees for which they’re passing out diplomas, live up to the academic standards of higher education.”
----------
The N.C.A.A. did not dispute that the University of North Carolina was guilty of running one of the worst academic fraud schemes in college sports history, involving fake classes that enabled dozens of athletes to gain and maintain their eligibility.
But there will be no penalties, the organization said, because no rules were broken.
In a ruling that caused head-scratching everywhere except Chapel Hill, the N.C.A.A. announced on Friday that it could not punish the university or its athletics program because the “paper” classes were not available exclusively to athletes. Other students at North Carolina had access to the fraudulent classes, too.
Noting that distinction, the panel that investigated the case “could not conclude that the University of North Carolina violated N.C.A.A. academic rules,” the N.C.A.A. said in a statement.
The N.C.A.A.’s determination was a major victory for North Carolina after years of wrangling and uncertainty. The athletic department — one of the most high-profile and lucrative ones in the country, and a source of deep pride in the state — could have faced severe penalties, including the loss of championships in men’s basketball, its signature sport.
The N.C.A.A.’s committee on infractions concluded it lacked the power to punish the university under the rules of the N.C.A.A., an association that expects members to govern themselves and establishes a wide berth when it comes to determining what qualifies as academic progress.
“N.C.A.A. policy is clear,” said Greg Sankey, the commissioner of the Southeastern Conference, who led the panel. “The N.C.A.A. defers to its member schools to determine whether academic fraud occurred and, ultimately, the panel is bound to making decisions within the rules set by the membership.”
Last edited:
I think most get that the NCAA didn’t punish because TECHNICALLY it wasn’t an undue benefit or a specific scheme for athletes to benefit only, and therefore fell to others to punish.
However, where most disagree is that the NCAA shouldn’t have punted on the subject, because the scheme was specifically created to benefit athletes’ gpa’s, and therefore though it was open to all students, it should have qualified as an athletic scheme.
The fact that UNC found a loophole (while brilliant on their part), makes the NCAA’s power look obsolete or worthless.
I understand how people feel, it doesn't seem right, it doesn't seem fair or just. However, the alternative to what happened is allowing the NCAA to apply punishments for arbitrary and undefined infractions outside of the rules established in its bylaws, which seems like a horrible idea, or changing the bylaws to include explicit and clear rules for academic standards, which seems like an impossible task.
The NCAA was stuck between a rock and a hard place, and I think they did the right thing with referring UNC's academic fraud to the proper authorities. If they had tried to apply a punishment to a school that did not break any rules it would have gone to court and the NCAA would have lost.
It sure would be helpful to have someone connected to the coaching staff on here.
So far if anybody on here is even falsely accused of being connected to the coaching staff they get ridiculous and insulted. Not much incentive for anybody who actually is connected to come forward.
This is why I was sort of ticked when Notre Dame was forced to vacate their football wins.
Yeah, I hear you. I just disagree that it wasn’t within their power. I think they chose to interpret their bylaws/the facts strictly, instead of looking at the entire picture and the spirit of what UNC was doing (which was trying to keep athletes eligible with a fake class), which is within their power to punish.
And what bothers me the most is that I can’t shake the belief that if it was North Alabama Tech Institute instead of UNC, the NCAA would’ve punished the school, regardless.
If I'm falsely accused of something, I may get insulted, but I don't need any incentive to get ridiculous!
[
QUOTE="plydogg, post: 243844, member: 3630"]So far if anybody on here is even falsely accused of being connected to the coaching staff they get ridiculous and insulted. Not much incentive for anybody who actually is connected to come forward.[/QUOTE]
I would lose a lot of respect for any team that would have someone close to a coaching staff post or even read a message board.
QUOTE="plydogg, post: 243844, member: 3630"]So far if anybody on here is even falsely accused of being connected to the coaching staff they get ridiculous and insulted. Not much incentive for anybody who actually is connected to come forward.[/QUOTE]
I would lose a lot of respect for any team that would have someone close to a coaching staff post or even read a message board.
I would lose a lot of respect for any team that would have someone close to a coaching staff post or even read a message board.[/QUOTE]
Nah, you wouldn't. Your allegiance is to Mooney (which is fine, maybe he employs you, maybe you played for him, hell maybe he smiles at you and you have some access to him, I don't frankly care). My allegiance is to is my alma matter and the long term health of our basketball program and our players.
All of which I see greatly suffering under Mooney. How many kids has Mooney brought into UR who end up not graduating here now. Isn't one of the great things we pride our athletic programs on is that we bring in kids and graduate them, but we are now just as much of a revolving door as some of the larger BCS schools.
I think this is a bit of a red herring. I've heard many folks, 97 included, who are ok when we ship out guys who aren't able to compete at an A10 level for UR. So it's a bit hypocritical to have pride in bringing kids in an graduating them when we are also willing to show them the door if they don't make it athletically.
It's certainly fair to question if CM has become blase about recruiting those kids knowing they're borderline fits. It doesn't look like we're far outside the norm on this front, although we can all debate if we should be given whatever moral compass UR may employ.
I still don't get it, 2011. you're saying creating fake classes so students ... mostly athletes ... get a grade boost isn't breaking any rules? athletes are required by the NCAA to maintain a certain GPA to play. so we'll just give them A's and everything is ok?
what are you saying to every other school out there? don't even bother sending athletes to class? we won't punish you. there's no rule against falsifying GPAs. or maybe we'll say we ALMOST took away UNC's accreditation (which no, we'd never do). wow ... huge punishment there. how will they recover?
I understand the argument. Fwiw, you have to recognize that 2011 isn't agreeing with it as I believe he stated.
If an institution of higher education decides to offer baloney classes that any student can take, it constitutes academic fraud and is subject to discipline by an academic body. You can make a cogent argument that UNC did this specifically to enable the athletic program to keep a group of players academically eligible, so of course it can be construed as an athletic department violation, but then you start opening up that subjectivity to all kinds of programs out there that grade on the curve, or don't use grades at all (Brown), and at what point do you want the NCAA wading into that end of things.
Justice wasn't served. This shouldn't happen but the end result was they've got a microscope on them for the foreseeable future and are unlikely to orchestrate such a blatant disregard anytime soon.
TBone, I will admit that as a fan of our basketball team, I have no problem moving players out who can play at the level we need them to play. However, that standard should be different from what I want as a fan to what the University is PAYING its head coach to do. And certainly, it negatively impacts the kid who has to transfer.
To me, a head coach is paid to A. win and B. to make sure his players graduate. Graduating players is particularly important at a school with high academic standards like Richmond. Right now, Mooney is not doing either very well.
Not even close to accurate. Every school has guys leave, so we are not paying our coach to make sure no one leaves and everyone that signs with us gets a degree from here. That is just not realistic.
What is realistic and expected as a coach is to graduate the guys who stay here through their senior year, and I think our coach has done a great job of that.
This reminds me -- did the NCAA do away with the graduation requirements? Weren't schools losing funding based on transfers and students who didn't graduate not so long ago, or is that something that I am making up in my head? I feel like we would be punished for this.
K, never involved transfers. UR basketball to the best of my knowledge has a 100% graduation rate.
