Anyone got a GPS thingy?
Edward M. Kennedy
--Tedward
mimus
> I think we've stumbled into the Plains Of Oblivion.
<looking down:>
This isn't sand . . . this . . . this is _spam_ . . . .
Where are the buzzards when you need them?
--
The Usenet voice of the Kentucky Wildcats!
(Please ignore.)
_Raw Recruits_ and _Undue Process_ for all,
Welcome to college basketball!
"Ask not for whom the horn honks:
"It honks for thee."
hughes
mimus <tinmi...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 Jul 2009 17:32:58 -0400, Edward M. Kennedy wrote:
>
> > I think we've stumbled into the Plains Of Oblivion.
>
> <looking down:>
>
> This isn't sand . . . this . . . this is _spam_ . . . .
>
> Where are the buzzards when you need them?
OK, so here's a morsel:
Apparently K's gonna coach the 2012 Olympic team. Good thing?
Edward M. Kennedy
>> > I think we've stumbled into the Plains Of Oblivion.
>>
>> <looking down:>
>>
>> This isn't sand . . . this . . . this is _spam_ . . . .
>>
>> Where are the buzzards when you need them?
>
> OK, so here's a morsel:
>
> Apparently K's gonna coach the 2012 Olympic team. Good thing?
How many coaches have back-to-backs?
--Tedward
hughes
Not sure.
You can't argue with success, but you could make an argument to "spread
the wealth". It's clearly quite an honor to be selected, so you might
want to allow someone else to bask in the (potential) glory.
The stakes are awful high, though, so I suspect the prevailing sentiment
is gonna be "stick with a winner".
A separate issue is whether there's any downside for Duke. Personally, I
think not. Win or lose, it's a very high-profile thing. (Can K's get any
higher? Barring a mass murder conviction or sex scandal, I mean.)
Does the "distraction" have a possible negative effect regarding his
regular coaching duties? Any evidence of that last time?
Edward M. Kennedy
>>>> > I think we've stumbled into the Plains Of Oblivion.
>>>>
>>>> <looking down:>
>>>>
>>>> This isn't sand . . . this . . . this is _spam_ . . . .
>>>>
>>>> Where are the buzzards when you need them?
>>>
>>> OK, so here's a morsel:
>>>
>>> Apparently K's gonna coach the 2012 Olympic team. Good thing?
>>
>> How many coaches have back-to-backs?
>
> How many coaches conveniently develop bad backs?
All those gold medals are damn heavy!
--Tedward
Edward M. Kennedy
>> >> > I think we've stumbled into the Plains Of Oblivion.
>> >>
>> >> <looking down:>
>> >>
>> >> This isn't sand . . . this . . . this is _spam_ . . . .
>> >>
>> >> Where are the buzzards when you need them?
>> >
>> > OK, so here's a morsel:
>> >
>> > Apparently K's gonna coach the 2012 Olympic team. Good thing?
>>
>> How many coaches have back-to-backs?
>>
>> --Tedward
>
> Not sure.
>
> You can't argue with success, but you could make an argument to "spread
> the wealth". It's clearly quite an honor to be selected, so you might
> want to allow someone else to bask in the (potential) glory.
>
> The stakes are awful high, though, so I suspect the prevailing sentiment
> is gonna be "stick with a winner".
>
> A separate issue is whether there's any downside for Duke. Personally, I
> think not. Win or lose, it's a very high-profile thing. (Can K's get any
> higher? Barring a mass murder conviction or sex scandal, I mean.)
>
> Does the "distraction" have a possible negative effect regarding his
> regular coaching duties? Any evidence of that last time?
Ask Dean Smith. He should know.
--Tedward
Donnie Barnes
I do think the NCAA should give the Olympic coach the ability to let one
of their "non recruiting" assistants do actual recruiting while he's
engaged in his Olympic duties (when that falls into recruiting periods,
obviously). Otherwise it could be a small liability...
--Donnie
Don Del Grande
>I do think the NCAA should give the Olympic coach the ability to let one
>of their "non recruiting" assistants do actual recruiting while he's
>engaged in his Olympic duties (when that falls into recruiting periods,
>obviously). Otherwise it could be a small liability...
You would think the NCAA would already allow something like this - but
instead, the NCAA seems to go the other way:
Bylaw 11.7.1.1.1.3 - Replacement for National or Olympic Team Coaches
"An institution may replace a coach temporarily or on a limited basis
when that coach takes a leave of absence to participate on or to coach
a national team or Olympic team, provided the replacement is limited
to a one-year period and the coach who is replaced performs no
recruiting or other duties on behalf of the institution."
-- Don
mimus
Your prefatory statement makes me think you may be mis-reading that; it
allows the _replacement_ coach to recruit (and doesn't ban conferences
between the two coaches) . . . .
Don Del Grande
> Don Del Grande wrote:
>
>> Donnie Barnes wrote:
>>
>>> I do think the NCAA should give the Olympic coach the ability to let
>>> one of their "non recruiting" assistants do actual recruiting while
>>> he's engaged in his Olympic duties (when that falls into recruiting
>>> periods, obviously). Otherwise it could be a small liability...
>>
>> You would think the NCAA would already allow something like this - but
>> instead, the NCAA seems to go the other way:
>>
>> Bylaw 11.7.1.1.1.3 - Replacement for National or Olympic Team Coaches
>> "An institution may replace a coach temporarily or on a limited basis
>> when that coach takes a leave of absence to participate on or to coach a
>> national team or Olympic team, provided the replacement is limited to a
>> one-year period and the coach who is replaced performs no recruiting or
>> other duties on behalf of the institution."
>
>Your prefatory statement makes me think you may be mis-reading that; it
>allows the _replacement_ coach to recruit (and doesn't ban conferences
>between the two coaches) . . . .
Hmmm...after a second reading, you appear to be correct - I thought it
said that the replacing coach was the one who couldn't recruit.
Since the replacement coach can recruit, I assume the NCAA feels that
increasing the number of coaches who can do off-campus recruiting from
three to four would be an unfair advantage.
-- Don
mimus
Especially when the main one's also the Olympic coach.
For once, you can see their point.
Banning free transportation to and from and meals and overnight stays at
the U during a recruiting visit are ridiculous, though-- anyone who can be
bought for that is probably so dim you're going to end up having to kick
them off yer team, anyway.
Point-shaving for burgers!
Donnie Barnes
So while the NCAA does appear to allow for what I was saying, the odd
thing here is whether the coach would take them up on it. It sounds like
the departed coach must take a "leave of absence" and definitely does
NOT let them recruit at all while gone. I don't think Coach K took a
true leave of absence last time, nor would he. I'm sure while he might
be too busy to fully recruit, he would like the ability to be able to
seal the deal by phone or whatever on a top priority.
Hmm, interesting situation.
--Donnie
mimus
Yep, on the one hand you don't want to _punish_ a coach or program for his
or her being selected to coach the US Olympic team (and there's going to
be some serious diversion of coaching attention from the regular program
under the best of circumstances), but on the other hand you don't want
the coach distracted by his or her regular program while running the
Olympic program, or to allow that coach or his or her regular program to
use that appointment as a recruiting tool (any more than it's going to be
by very virtue of that coach being so appointed) . . . .
Still, it's probably more a juggling than a tightrope act.
Unless it's Bobby Knight, when you have to weigh coaching excellence
against the possibilities of player, administrator, venue-employee, fan
and/or police-abuse and/or WWIII.
Edward M. Kennedy
Given the restrictions on contacting recruits (of which I don't
actually know all that much), I'd think this would mostly amount
to a scheduling problem.
--Tedward