Coaching Carousel Begins

Quote from: Choz4Life on March 22, 2012, 11:48:08 AM

Quote from: fordham96 on March 22, 2012, 11:43:25 AM

Some rumors that Carmody was going to get axed at Northwestern but they have decided to bring him back for another year:
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/11459848-419/bill-carmody-to-stay-at-northwestern.html

Hardest job in D1?

Army hands down.

Wouldn't be easy but they can win the Patriot League and no one would be shocked.  All Patriot League schools play wihtout schollies.  Relative to who they are competing against I would suggest Northwestern in basketball and Vandy in football are harder.

If Vandy ever won the SEC in football or Northwestern won the Big 10 in basketball you would fall out of your chair, pigs would fly and the Earth would stop rotating.   

Eh, the right coach could do it.  I mean Northwestern having a top notch FOOTBALL team is much more shcoking than basketball, and Northwestern did that in the 90s.  Just because they haven't done it doesn't mean itd be more surprising/harder than NW in football.  Football is always harder than basketball for top notch academic schools --- which is why you never see Duke anywhere near the top of the ACC.

Eh, the right coach could do it.  I mean Northwestern having a top notch FOOTBALL team is much more shcoking than basketball, and Northwestern did that in the 90s.  Just because they haven't done it doesn't mean itd be more surprising/harder than NW in football.  Football is always harder than basketball for top notch academic schools --- which is why you never see Duke anywhere near the top of the ACC.

Not sure but even if you're correct who is the right coach?  Think about it.  Why is Bill Carmody there?  Because he coached at Princeton which has similar academics and recruits similar kids.  Not saying Northwestern is Princeton because they do have athletic schollies but put Princeton in the Big 10 and see what you get.

Army hands down.

You'd think Air Force would be the toughest, since you can't cram a 7-footer into a tiny cockpit, and I assume almost everyone who heads to the USAFA has dreams of being a pilot -- yet they've had the most success recently. I think there might be a height restriction for Navy (Robinson grew like 6 inches in college), but not sure about Army.

Oh man. Just another example of the supreme hypocrisy of college basketball and BE bylaws.

A signed player can never go to another BE school.

A signed coach can.

Burn this rotten system all down.

Choz - you are awlays complaining about the system but it works two ways. The players are supposed to be student-athletes, not athlete-students.

The rules and the money certainly favor the schools but these kids are getting something of significant value in their scholarships. Using SJU as an example:

Tuition: $34k
Room & Board $11k
Meal Plan: $5k
total: $51k per year (x4) = $205k

Besides playing basketball for the school what else do the players give the University. Since a massive majority of kids that play Division I college basketball will NEVER EVER play professionally, you would hope they would be smart enough use the opportunity to get a free education to set themselves up for their own futures.

If you think they players should be compensated that is great but if they become professional basketball players after leaving the school, they should then be obligated to return the tuition money. If a kid gets hurt the school should be able to cut its losses and take the kids scholarship away at year end.

Also - how do you determine how much to pay these kids.

Lastly, we both know these kids want for NOTHING while they are in any major basketball program.

Quote from: Choz4Life on March 22, 2012, 11:48:08 AM

Quote from: fordham96 on March 22, 2012, 11:43:25 AM

Some rumors that Carmody was going to get axed at Northwestern but they have decided to bring him back for another year:
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/11459848-419/bill-carmody-to-stay-at-northwestern.html

Hardest job in D1?

Army hands down.

Agree, 100%.  Not even "the right coach" can help at West Point, considering that the eleven combined seasons Army was coached by the #1 and #2 all time winningest coaches in Div-1 history (Bobby Knight and Mike Krzyzewski), they only managed two 20 win seasons, and ZERO Ncaa tourney appearances. 

Choz - you are awlays complaining about the system but it works two ways. The players are supposed to be student-athletes, not athlete-students.

And the reality is what?

The rules and the money certainly favor the schools but these kids are getting something of significant value in their scholarships. Using SJU as an example:

Tuition: $34k
Room & Board $11k
Meal Plan: $5k
total: $51k per year (x4) = $205k

STJ hoops brought in $6.7 million in 10-11 from a labor force (players) that cost it $663,000. Not a bad return yo.

Besides playing basketball for the school what else do the players give the University.

See above. The answer starts wit this: $

Since a massive majority of kids that play Division I college basketball will NEVER EVER play professionally, you would hope they would be smart enough use the opportunity to get a free education to set themselves up for their own futures.

The emphasis has been and will always be: do enough to stay eligible so you can focus on yo real major: Ball.

If you think they players should be compensated that is great but if they become professional basketball players after leaving the school, they should then be obligated to return the tuition money. If a kid gets hurt the school should be able to cut its losses and take the kids scholarship away at year end.

School already got that right. Schollies are renewed yearly. Find me a coach on a one-year contract.  Kids are cut left and right.

Also - how do you determine how much to pay these kids.

Players form a union. Bargain collectively. And sign a contract that sets a wage scale.

Lastly, we both know these kids want for NOTHING while they are in any major basketball program.

You is wrong here.

Check.

If college players form a union and start getting paid, they can also be fired for poor performance I'd assume.  It sets a bad precedent in a lot of ways.  Only pay should be a small stipend for players for living expenses and it should be the same across the board. 

....they can also be fired for poor performance I'd assume.... 

Already happens.

All the time, actually. Check the transfer lists.

Least a union could bargain for employment protections. Right now, all players are freelance contractors. And have no voice in the process.

Quote from: Marillac on March 22, 2012, 12:46:31 PM

Quote from: Choz4Life on March 22, 2012, 11:48:08 AM

Quote from: fordham96 on March 22, 2012, 11:43:25 AM

Some rumors that Carmody was going to get axed at Northwestern but they have decided to bring him back for another year:
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/11459848-419/bill-carmody-to-stay-at-northwestern.html

Hardest job in D1?

Army hands down.

Agree, 100%.  Not even "the right coach" can help at West Point, considering that the eleven combined seasons Army was coached by the #1 and #2 all time winningest coaches in Div-1 history (Bobby Knight and Mike Krzyzewski), they only managed two 20 win seasons, and ZERO Ncaa tourney appearances.

Wait a minute nobody is suggesting that Army is easy but you need to keep it relative.  There are plenty of mid major schools that don't make the NCAA's because they cannot win their conferences that does not make them the "hardest job in America.".  When is the last time Canisius won the MAAC?  Colgate is in the Patriot League, when is the last time they won that League?

Those are hard jobs too.  But they are relative.  I am comparing Canisius with Iona and Manhattan and Niagara NOT with UCONN or Syracuse.  I am comparing Army with Lehigh and Bucknell and Colgate NOT with Kentucky and Ohio St and UCLA. 

Vandy and Northwestern have to compete against the big boys night in and night out with some severe handicaps.  You think Nick Saban would rather coach Vandy football with its academic standards or Alabama?  We know darn well he aint coaching Army but guess what? Army does not compete in the SEC anyway so who cares.   But Vandy does that is the difference.

Choz -  I am at my work computer and don't have the ability to quote your response so I can't go point by point like you did. Despite our consistent back and forth on various topics I respect your opinion very much but it cost the school a lot more then 663k to run the program in 2010 -11.

You think the schools use the players solely for financial gain and there is definitely some truth to that but if the players are not smart enough to use the schools for their own academic and future gain that is their own fault and not the fault of the system.

Ask UConn kids if their real major is ball next season.

Scholarships are renewed annually and some kids do get told to move on. But we both know its is NEVER EVER done publically, kids are not embarrassed and they are almost always given help to find a new school.

You make it seem the relationsdship between scholarship student athlete and school is an adversarial one.

You make it seem the relationsdship between scholarship student athlete and school is an adversarial one.

Not necessarily.

But it is an economic relationship - one in which one party is on the short end of the stick. So yeah, it can easily turn into an adversarial one.

Quote from: MCNPA on March 22, 2012, 02:51:20 PM

....they can also be fired for poor performance I'd assume.... 

Already happens.

All the time, actually. Check the transfer lists.

Least a union could bargain for employment protections. Right now, all players are freelance contractors. And have no voice in the process.

They have a voice.  They choose to play or not.  College ball is akin to sn internship.  Very few of these kids are pros.  Freelance contractors or entrepreneurs?  They're not employed.  I played college sports and never once thought nor cared how much money the college made from tickets to games.  The entitlement that some of this movement oozes is almost offensive.  You say SJU's employee costs are a few hundred grand, but that didn't include how much it costs for coaches salaries, renting the Garden etc. 

Colleges have to also fund other amateur sports.  It's a slippery slope.  These aren't indentured servants.  They can also try their hand overseas or NBDL or wherever they choose.  Everybody is free to go Lenny Cooke route.  Not many Kobe's out there.  Other than that, colleges provide almost everything a college athlete needs to help them succeed.  I'm not averse to a stipend to give the players some spending money.  I think anything more than that would destroy college sports all together.

I would probably be in favor of the "right" payment plan or supplemental income for players.

That being said, Choz, don't TONS of players win too?  What about the guys that come to school, hardly ever play, but get a fully paid free 4 year education at a great school with alumni contacts that allows them to get a job outside of basketball that they probably never would have been able to sniff in a million years without that schollie?  You are absolutely right that the schools make out REALLY well with this deal.  I don't deny that.  But the vast majority of players who will never even sniff the NBA have the chance to make it too.  Free tuition, admission to a school they may not have been able to get into academically otherwise, and alumni connections for future jobs.

The point is, players SHOULD be getting more back from the school for the vast profits made on them, in the form of some supplemental income, but I won't even begin to pretend I know a way that would work and be fair.  But the players ALSO SHOULD be taking better advantage of their education.  They can set themselves up for life even without ball if they work hard in school, make sure they are well liked by the school admin, and avail themselves to the alumni connections that will come with that.

ah the ways that additional benefits can equate to a smart college scholarship athelete. 

i'll never forget when I was in college and spent time crashing with friends at Georgetown.  The basketball team as all other scholarship atheletes used the student dorm cafeteria with all the rest of the students.  they could eat as much as they wanted so they were making numerous trips to the food lines.  then my friends introduced me to good old American ingenuity.  We could eat cheaper than cafeteria prices by scoring  a meal through the atheletes and they could score some walking about money   

Jim Baron of URI fired.

Goodman is reporting that Baron seems to be the leading contender to replace Tom Parrotta at Canisius.

They have a voice.  They choose to play or not. 

Tru. But a collective voice is more powerful. And the NCAA would never allow that to happen.

Freelance contractors or entrepreneurs?  They're not employed.   

They are, in effect, employed by the very nature of the system... if you look past the propaganda of "student athlete" and simply look at the dollars and cents.

I played college sports and never once thought nor cared how much money the college made from tickets to games. 

If you were playing in a revenue generating sport, then you were doing yourself a disservice.

The entitlement that some of this movement oozes is almost offensive. 

Not as offensive as a for-profit system masquerading as a non-profit with a societal mission.... all the while exploiting cheap labor.

You say SJU's employee costs are a few hundred grand, but that didn't include how much it costs for coaches salaries, renting the Garden etc. 

Labor costs tend to be the biggest expense of most businesses. The players are the labor. And they receive 10 percent of the revenue in the form of tuition (which, by the way, is being valued by pmg at the retail cost - not the wholesale cost.) 

Colleges have to also fund other amateur sports.  It's a slippery slope.

My proposal is for revenue-generating sports ie bball and fball.

 

These aren't indentured servants.  They can also try their hand overseas or NBDL or wherever they choose.

America's minor league bball system is the NCAA. They have a monopoly in this country. I wish there were  more high school kids doing what Brandon Jennings did.

Other than that, colleges provide almost everything a college athlete needs to help them succeed. 

Except when a kid is expendable and his scholarship isn't renewed.

Quote from: crgreen on March 22, 2012, 02:20:42 PM

Quote from: Marillac on March 22, 2012, 12:46:31 PM

Quote from: Choz4Life on March 22, 2012, 11:48:08 AM

Quote from: fordham96 on March 22, 2012, 11:43:25 AM

Some rumors that Carmody was going to get axed at Northwestern but they have decided to bring him back for another year:
http://www.suntimes.com/sports/11459848-419/bill-carmody-to-stay-at-northwestern.html

Hardest job in D1?

Army hands down.

Agree, 100%.  Not even "the right coach" can help at West Point, considering that the eleven combined seasons Army was coached by the #1 and #2 all time winningest coaches in Div-1 history (Bobby Knight and Mike Krzyzewski), they only managed two 20 win seasons, and ZERO Ncaa tourney appearances.

Wait a minute nobody is suggesting that Army is easy but you need to keep it relative.  There are plenty of mid major schools that don't make the NCAA's because they cannot win their conferences that does not make them the "hardest job in America.".  When is the last time Canisius won the MAAC?  Colgate is in the Patriot League, when is the last time they won that League?

Those are hard jobs too.  But they are relative.  I am comparing Canisius with Iona and Manhattan and Niagara NOT with UCONN or Syracuse.  I am comparing Army with Lehigh and Bucknell and Colgate NOT with Kentucky and Ohio St and UCLA. 

Vandy and Northwestern have to compete against the big boys night in and night out with some severe handicaps.  You think Nick Saban would rather coach Vandy football with its academic standards or Alabama?  We know darn well he aint coaching Army but guess what? Army does not compete in the SEC anyway so who cares.   But Vandy does that is the difference.

We're not talking about any mid-major, with 'decent' coaches.  We're talking about the 2 winningest coaches EVER.   It's speculaton for Lehigh, Bucknell and Colgate what might happen should they land such a calibre of coach.  Army's situation is already established.

Quote from: Moose on March 04, 2012, 02:02:27 PM

Jim Baron of URI fired.

Goodman is reporting that Baron seems to be the leading contender to replace Tom Parrotta at Canisius.

This would be a great hire. I heard this mentioned about 2 mins after he was fired, no brainer

Quote from: MCNPA on March 22, 2012, 04:25:28 PM

They have a voice.  They choose to play or not. 

Tru. But a collective voice is more powerful. And the NCAA would never allow that to happen.

Quote from: MCNPA on March 22, 2012, 04:25:28 PM

Freelance contractors or entrepreneurs?  They're not employed.   

They are, in effect, employed by the very nature of the system... if you look past the propaganda of "student athlete" and simply look at the dollars and cents.

Quote from: MCNPA on March 22, 2012, 04:25:28 PM

I played college sports and never once thought nor cared how much money the college made from tickets to games. 

If you were playing in a revenue generating sport, then you were doing yourself a disservice.

Quote from: MCNPA on March 22, 2012, 04:25:28 PM

The entitlement that some of this movement oozes is almost offensive. 

Not as offensive as a for-profit system masquerading as a non-profit with a societal mission.... all the while exploiting cheap labor.

Quote from: MCNPA on March 22, 2012, 04:25:28 PM

You say SJU's employee costs are a few hundred grand, but that didn't include how much it costs for coaches salaries, renting the Garden etc. 

Labor costs tend to be the biggest expense of most businesses. The players are the labor. And they receive 10 percent of the revenue in the form of tuition (which, by the way, is being valued by pmg at the retail cost - not the wholesale cost.) 

Quote from: MCNPA on March 22, 2012, 04:25:28 PM

Colleges have to also fund other amateur sports.  It's a slippery slope.

My proposal is for revenue-generating sports ie bball and fball.

 

Quote from: MCNPA on March 22, 2012, 04:25:28 PM

These aren't indentured servants.  They can also try their hand overseas or NBDL or wherever they choose.

America's minor league bball system is the NCAA. They have a monopoly in this country. I wish there were  more high school kids doing what Brandon Jennings did.

Quote from: MCNPA on March 22, 2012, 04:25:28 PM

Other than that, colleges provide almost everything a college athlete needs to help them succeed. 

Except when a kid is expendable and his scholarship isn't renewed.

You both have very good points which is why this debate goes on and on ad nauseum not just on boards but in the meetings of the NCAA and various institutions.  However I disagree with Choz's point of view because it only holds true in the top 25% of d1 programs (BCS schools plus a few) and the top 10% of players (total guesses on my part but you get my point).  If you change the system you would need to do it universally and put a lot of programs at risk of financial loss while passing benefits on to a number of players at still profitable schools that probably don't deserve it based upon the points being raised.   Examples are most non BCS D1 schools who don't turn a profit on their hoops programs.  Think America East schools would be in favor of paying their "student athletes" or would they simply say screw it and refuse to participate in the pay fo play system.   And if they do that maybe they should drop to D2 since there won't be any CJ McCollums or Steph Curry's since every player worth his salt will go to the big schools once the little ones decide not to play within the revised system.   This is why the football schools more seriously consider walking away.  Much more revenue and less schools affected but I don't give a rat's patootie about college football so I don't care how that affects my position in this debate.

That said I agree with Choz, if 17-19 year old kids think any education is useless and they're emotionally ready then, yeah, go to Europe like Brandon Jennings.  That opportunity is there so take it.  My question would be why don't more kids do that now if the system is so irreparably broken?

FWIW top academic schools are taking advantage of the accomplishments their elite students as well to develop a higher academic profile and in the end financially benefit through greater donations and the ability to charge higher tuition.  Those kids should be paid based on Choz's logic.