The Washington Post's Mark Giannotto wrote a must-read story on Virginia Tech, Virginia, the two programs recruiting against each other in Virginia Beach, and the influence of the 757 Sports Academy and Virginia Thoroughbreds.
After you digest the entire piece, what are your thoughts?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/national-signing-day-cavs-...
Forums:
DISCLAIMER: Forum topics may not have been written or edited by The Key Play staff.
Comments
Ew. It's quite sleazy, and that's really all I have to say about it.
Wow. I never knew the real details about what was going on. Here's where I have a problem with it: these sports academies are accepting money to train athletes. The leaders of these academies/7-on-7 groups are then in discussions with college coaches (in London's case, hundreds of phone calls). At that point, these guys become agents or brokers. That's where the NCAA must step in. They can try to shroud themselves in nonprofit status or whatever, but it doesn't matter. They are accepting money from a high schooler or his parents, and then negotiating with college coaches. The only people that should be allowed contact with the college coach are high school coaches, teachers, and administrators. These players are allowed to seek whatever offseason training and preparation they wish, but those in charge of such training are in a business, and that business has now become representation on their behalf.
Not only are they accepting money from the players' families, but it seems from that article that a lot of these families are struggling as is and living paycheck to paycheck. It's almost like a reverse Robin Hood. Profiting off the poor and needy. I hate the whole situation but this is one part of it that really gets me. That IRS non-profit status is a bunch of crap too. The organization itself might not make a profit, but that doesn't mean the coaches won't. London is supporting that with everything he has. I don't even call my parents 420 times.
He's calling them 8 times a week. Heck, I don't even call my parents once a week (I'm a bad son).
I think the undertone of this, and it isn't being said without hard evidence, is that the kids/families are paying a nominal fee, so the real revenue for the program is coming from somewhere else. And then, all the kids go to UVA. You connect the dots. It won't win a case on Law and Order, but it the circumstantial evidence than somehow those programs are being funded by someone associated with UVA is strong enough to convene a grand jury.
The problem with proving it, as with the case of Oregon and the Texas "handler", is that the venture is likely being bridge financed. That is, a 3rd party who doesn't have a paper affiliation with UVA is footing the bill.
Duhn-Duhn *law and order sound
Not saying I completely disagree with you, but playing devil's advocate:
I played tennis growing up, and paid a personal coach. When I was looking at colleges, he helped me reach out to coaches, told me which programs/coaches to stay away from, helped me put together highlight tapes, etc. I trusted his opinion far beyond that of my high school coach. I know he my best interests in mind, and he is still one of my good friends today.
Granted this is common practice in tennis, how is it any different from the 7-on-7 coaches?
I think this is the difference. The question is whether or not the 7v7 coaches have the players' interests in mind vs, their own.
"having the player's best interests in mind" is not something that is quantifiable or could be regulated by the NCAA.
While there could be something shady going on with these guys de-facto assuming that there is comes off as sour grapes on the part of tech fans. It's silly to dismiss all 7-on-7 programs as "dirty" or whatever while saying that HS coaches are legitimate non-parent sources of influence. It's not like a HS can't be dirty, or a parent for that matter.
I don't think that dismissing the notion of 7-on-7 programs and coaches out of hand is in the best long-term interests of Virginia Tech Football
You are correct, however I question whether someone who comes out and says that they will never tell a kid to go to a certain school or try to actively convince them not to go to a school is looking out for the player's best interest.
As for the 7v7 stuff, I don't know enough to comment on it.
Agreed. I know nothing about these 7-on-7 teams, but you can't really convince me that these 'coaches' are attempting to take advantage of these kids for money at $5/session.
It seems people are hinting that UVA (the school, the coaches, the boosters, etc.) are paying these 'coaches' in return for their influence. That's a large accusation. If that's the case then they really are the scum of football. But, again playing devil's advocate, if they had a bad experience with our coaches, then who can blame them for guiding kids away from us?
I don't disagree with having a personal coach or trainer. There's just a line that gets crossed here. When you have representatives of these camps coming out an trashing a school and praising another (and for any Hoos out there, I would be pissed if someone was trashing UVA and praising VT, just out of principle), they are not looking out for the individual player. They are trying to build their brand by directing high school athletes to schools, becoming de facto farm systems for those schools. They're boosters at that point and it's wrong.
I don't understand how this is different from building relationships with HS coaches who in turn influence their players to come to your school. You seem to be conflating certain coaches, who let's be real, may just be assholes, with the entire concept of 7-on-7 and private coaching.
Just because what these guys are doing *may* not be legit, does not mean that the entire concept lack legitimacy and should be dismissed out of hand.
I'm not trying to say that. Perhaps my wording isn't very precise here, but I'm only knocking the abuse of the existing system that has allowed for corrupt individuals to set up these pipelines. That action is wrong, as is public trashing/praising of certain programs - that's effectively advertising and mudslinging. Certainly, HS coaches are interviewed and asked about their relationships with schools, but everything there that I have seen (admittedly I don't pay a ton of attention) tends to be a lot of coachspeak without detail until after a kid has signed. Relationships matter, yes, but those are private. Public advertising of one program while trying to shame or defame another is different. Not all these 7-on-7 groups are doing it, but some are and those programs and their representatives are acting inappropriately.
For me personally, it's splitting hairs to say that it's fine to influence kids to go to a certain school and steer them away from others as long as you don't talk about it. As a pragmatist, all that matters to me is what happens in the end.
It seems to me like your real problem is with these certain people acting like jackasses. That's a seperate issue from 7-on-7 and private coaching/training, which is a seperate issue altogether from having relationships with coaches who influence kids to do to your school. It sounds like you're conflating all three.
Yes, I do have a problem with people being jackasses. I also have a problem with a system that allows for it to go on, unchecked. To that extent, yep, I'm conflating things, but given that we have evidence of possible abuse or conflict of interest, it's something that needs to be looked at.
Let me boil this down to my main problem: there exists an industry in which parents pay money to coaches, who in turn engage in (sometimes extensive) contact with college coaches to influence the process, either by trying to influence the coach or the recruit. Payment of any individual who then acts as an intermediary on your behalf is called hiring an agent and is the definition of an NCAA violation.
On the plus side...I learned what the word "conflating" means today.
ditto
But they are not paying the 7v7 coach to act as an intermediary, they are paying them as a fee to participate in the league. The fact that the coaches have relationships with NCAA coaches and influence their players to go to places whose coaches with which they have a strong relationship is literally no different than HS today. Also, this happens in literally every sport. This has been happening in basketball forever, and it happens in other sports without as strong of a College-HS infrastructure as football.
Coaches, both High School and private, help players with aspirations of playing at the college level in literally every sport all the time. You're never going to change that.
I agree with everything you've said thus far, but I think this is the point of contention that everyone seems to be hinting at (though unproven):
I would suggest you take a look at the AAU system and the seediness that goes on there. To compare a trained educator, well versed in the rules, with accountability to a school system to these alleged 'coaches' whether they be FB 7 on 7 or BB AAU is laughable.
The AAU System that has been around for decades now and is not only a, but the reality of the College Basketball recruting world? I'm familiar with it, and it's come to the point where it's much more important for a College coach to maintain strong relationship with AAU coaches than it is HS coaches. So, for all the people saying "Do nothing in this changing recruting environment and wait for the NCAA with their sterling record of doing anything about anything to put the proverbial hammer down" I say not so fast.
Which is my whole point, being dismissive of all 7v7 coaches as "seedy" and "corrupt" and whatever other sour-grapesie terms people want to throw around is a fallacy and damaging to the program in the long term. There are hundreds of legitimate AAU programs out there, just as many and likely more than there are "seedy" ones. There are "seedy" HS coaches out there in all sports. There are "seedy" parents.
The fallacy is dismissing all people who participate in any one aspect of the recruting process as inherently "good" or inhereantly "bad." Identify the people who are good, kids, parents, HS coaches, 7v7 coaches, and cultivate relationships with them. Leave the "bad" people to the "bad" programs, but don't cut off your nose to spite your face.
True, there likely are properly run, upstanding 7 on 7 programs as there are AAU. Problem is, the one we deal with looks for all evidence to be one of the shady ones. I think you run the risk of alienating the HS coaches (see bleow) and that a serious issue. Ask VT about alienating a HS coach who regularly has D-1 talent- referring to Mike Smith at Hampton after the James Wilson incident in the 80's:
From the Gainotto article:
"But former Bayside High Coach Darnell Moore, who coached Nicholson, Mizzell and Blanding before stepping down in December 2012, told The Washington Post that part of the reason he resigned after 12 seasons was that he had grown tired of dealing with the outside influences.They steer kids to certain schools, said Moore, a former head coach at Norfolk State"
Specifically, what "evidence" is there? I see a lot of insinuation, but no actual evidence. The fact that UVA sucks isn't evidence that these people are dirty
This has also kind of been my point all along: High School coaches steer kids toward and away from schools all the time and have forever. It's the principle foundation of Beamer's "develop good relationships with in state HS coaches" strategy. So, the notion that 7v7 coaches are "dirty" because they steer kids toward or away from certain schools doesn't hold any water when HS coaches do it as well.
"Specifically, what "evidence" is there? I see a lot of insinuation, but no actual evidence. The fact that UVA sucks isn't evidence that these people are dirty"
I'd just refer to the fact that UVA sucks and they have 2 5* and a 4* all from the same 7 on 7 plus French's comments...
And I don't have a big issue with a HS coach influencing a kid... he is their school coach, employed by the locality with all the checks and balances that go with that of which there are none with 7 on 7.
Guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. I am glad we don't get involved in it.
I agree and disagree. Yes, high school coaches do this. No, if any coach does this they are not being fair to the kids they're coaching and influencing. In the ideal world they should be impartial to who or where and partial to what will benefit the kid the most or help him achieve his goal the most.
But we know this is not an ideal world. Here's my problem with these 7v7 coaches. They are not high school coaches or any type of school employee whatsoever. Within the rules of the NCAA, even if a high school coach does lead players to a certain school that is allowable because they are otherwise governed by the rest of the rules of violation regarding recruiting. However, 7v7 coaches are not school employees and in this case are specifically guiding kids to LOLUVA. There really is little difference here than what used to happen in SMU days. Boosters getting kids to go to their school.
And before you say that these coaches are not giving kids cars or whatever, I would counter an say they are giving them free training, free coaching, free publicity and improved, and in this case, direct line to a specific university. Those are all impermissible benefits from a booster to a kid. The key here is the clear funneling of kids to a specific university though, because that's what defines them as a booster. So yes, dirty. filthy in fact.
I would also say that London's comment about not doing anything not allowed under
is always a telltale sign of someone that knows what they are doing is shitty but doesn't care because it helps their own situation. Dirty again.
Its definitely providing an unfair competitive advantage for LOLUVA. Ive read several stories on TSL where these HS coaches bash Virginia Tech publically to the local media. While these coaches are welcome to their own opinion, its certainly feeding a negative atmosphere for VT recruiting at these HS that also participate in the 7 on 7 activies.
The HS coaches get paid by the local school system and do not accept money from the kids for their services. Where at the 7 on 7's, the kids/parents are paying these coaches. The money going straight to the 7 on 7 coaches is where there is the "look" of impropriety...
What is the difference between 7on7 and summer camps? I know a lot of these kids go to private camps to work on their skills. Parents are paying for their kids to go there and they most certainly have an opinion on certain schools that these kids probably hear at one point.
Kids pay money for private coaching and training in every HS sport today, football, baseball, basketball...even tennis as mentioned upthread. This has been going on for a really long time, it's gotten to the point where if you have D1 aspirations in pretty much any sport, professional coaching and training outside of the school system that you pay for is part of your life.
I can't disagree. I think the difference now is that college coaches are recruiting more and more through these people that are paid as "professional" private coaches by the kids/parents now versus the traditional HS coach. That change from the traditional way of doing things just leaves a lot of questions.
To me, the devils advocate argument is "it has been standard practice to wine, dine, schmooz, BUY OFF a top recruit's high school coach for years." However, just like AAU basketball, these offseason program organizations are not at risk of answering to their school system about their job if impropriety is discovered. This has become a major problem in several areas (Memphis is notorious for it both with AAU and offseason football handers.)
It seems the 7 on 7 teams have an influence on where recruits end up and I've heard around here that we don't really focus on that very much. Maybe we should. I know it's an NCAA gray area right now, but if it's impacting us getting top recruits because we don't have a relationship with their 7 on 7 coaches, maybe they should start to build one. Granted, I'm not saying make 420 phone calls with one of the coaches but just spend a little more time there.
I personally think Tech needs to stay as far away from that mess as possible. Sooner or later the roof is going to fall in on those people and I don't want to Tech to get caught up in it.
7v7 seems fun and it gets skill players plenty of reps against formidable talent
I've heard many of the arguments from people in the know...AAU, we gonna put a stop to that, we're gonna leverage the HS coaches, etc., etc..... but we have choice in this country
they are deluding themselves... 7v7 ain't going nowhere cuz its fun and developmental at the same time
JMHO... as a recruiter you can stick your head in the sand and lose, or you can treat these guys like the legit coaches they are
They are "legit coaches" as much as pee-wee coaches are legit. From what I've read, it seems that's all they really are anyway- pee-wee coaches who decided to continue moving up and "coaching" the kids from a young age. If they are legit coaches, then they'll be working as coaches full time (at the high school or college level) rather than living out of their cars.
Note: I'm not trying to denigrate all pee-wee coaches. My coach won a national title at Clemson and played in the NFL, but he coached our team because his son played. It remains to be proven if these guys are valuable enough as coaches to continue this business or if they've simply followed a talented group of young players, including one of their sons, up the ranks.
Personally, I think that Beamer&Co. need to take a similar approach to how VT does our other business. I'm sure 7v7 coaches run the spectrum just like HS coaches, players, parents, and people. Some are great stand-up guys. Some are sleaze looking for a big payday. Just by seeing how the VB 7v7 coaches have conducted themselves online and in interviews, seems like they're not much of the type we would want in our program BUT if there is a strong, clean (relative term in 7v7/AAU I guess) program with talented players in it, I think our coaches need to grab a hardhat and build some bridges.
I guess. Just cause a guy lives in his car doesn't mean much to me about how the guy is valued as a coach and/or an advisor. If that guy was the best my kid could afford but he gave my kid free sprinting strength training lessons, etc, that guy might be viewed as incredibly valueable if he delivered for my kid. Someone walking in then saying this guy sucks or isn't a good coach, yada yada yada, ... well that wouldn't help them recruit my kid lets put it that way. In fact that guy with the big mouth will get grin f***ed and dropped last minute as a show of respect for the guy who was there for my kid.
Relationships are relationships and you can respect them and work around them or get torched by them. Sounds like we got torched and continue to do so. Ironically I have to imagine Cornell would do better on his own down there.
I can't tell you how many "legit coaches" I've seen make their name on the back of a "coach" that noone respected. Except the kids who will tell you the reason why they won nationals was this kids father. He might not have been a coach but he was a better more motivated and more motivating coach for the kids than the "professionals".
It hurts if you dedicate your life to the profession and a guys father is better than you. But you can accept it and move on or whine like a baby which it seems like we have.
We're probably saying similar things. I'm probably way more critical of the way Beamer and co are continuing to handle this.
THAT SOUNDS LIKE DANNY TRIPLETT!
Nailed it. I knew you had SWVA ties but I still didn't figure it would be guessed from my blurb.
Err, where is the evidence these guys are legit coaches? Most appear to me to be hacks looking to piggy back on the fame of 17 year olds. Witness the rant of one of their 'coaches':
"To all the Hokie fans talking sh*t...I hear you loud and clear and I will make sure that u guys get everything you deserve good luck because you'll need it and to the fans that are good people and don't understand why your friends keep doing this I am sorry because I promise you the damage is done and there is nothing that you can say to me or my group to make things right you barked up the wrong Tree on this 1. I normally wouldn't care where any kid going to college but now at this point I will never recommend a kid to go to Tech y'all can send all ur hall of fame guys or your current or former NFL guys to come out and try to talk to us and I will tell them the same thing I'm telling you I think your football program is great but but y'all ain't shit ( this is not for all of you only the ones that have been investigating us and putting our information over the Internet ) I will let all my kids know how you feel about the coaches and a current players they play with so keep it up. I am trying to figure out why you so mad at Turtle anyway UVA got best quarterback in a state according to the VHSCA and the coaches got what they wanted the Allstate utility player it's a good thing you got the dad is going to take you to the next level lmao whatever chump."
-Carson Cutler (father of Corwin Cutler)
Somebody needs to go packpride on their ass, dig up all the dirt, and get it out there for everyone to see. Just sayin'.
7-on-7 camps are growing by the year. Thankfully, our team, along with other schools, are run by the coaches of the schools. No outside influences. I can promise you regulations are coming for it and that many high school coaches are sick of outside pressures influencing the players.
When I was in school the only way a high school coach can coach a 7on7, AAU, Fall league baseball team, was if there were a couple kids on the team not from his high school. Is that still the case or has the rule fallen out?
Sooooo they've had this "pipeline" since 2009 and only won 2 games last year! Yawn!
I know that UVA gets all this talent. BUt one thing that can be seen is that he doesn't have the ability to coach it up at all. It is really sad, these kids are good, and they are about as good as they are going to be going to UVA. I can only see the ones with the intangibles that can't be taught going to the pros, but they would go no matter where they go. I feel bad for these kids, London has no excuse being 2 and done for last year. He is a bad coach.
Here's the other thing. I am in no way defending London. Goodness no. But I think those 7 on 7 types have a hard time looking out for anyone else but themselves and the team pays for it as a whole. I would love to have the talent but I'm not exactly heartbroken to have lost out on a lot of those guys over the past couple years.
A lot of them have been quoted as saying they just want to get to the NFL and you'll get there no matter where you play. Go to UVA, play early without having to redshirt, draft three years later. Guess education isn't as never ending as ole TJ thought.
on the contrary he is a pretty good coach for us during the games.
Let's just hope they don't replace him with someone who knows what he is doing. There is talent there.
I also don't believe for a second Stiney through Newsome under the bus. He's a standup guy. I could see it more the other way around but that'd be a long shot. It's just bad business.
How exactly would Stinespring be throwing Newsome under the bus when Newsome objectively wasn't having success with the Virginia Beach recruits? You can't throw someone under the bus for not getting recruits when, oh let's see... he wasn't getting recruits! Newsome was part of the staff until only one year ago, and not a single one of those guys ever considered VT. Little Turtle is just squawking the company line and throwing out a red herring as an excuse to why they don't like VT. There is plenty of evidence that it had nothing to do with Newsome though.
PS these guys must really have a thing for piss poor coaching if that's all they can come up with.
All this started before Stiney went back to the beach. These guys are in bed with London. To say they have their players best interests at heart is laughable considering London is on his last chance at UVa. As I recall, some of these 7 on 7 teams suddenly have practices or a game pop up on their schedule when we have big recruiting weekends like our junior day or during our summer camps.
You just show me the spot where he threw him under the bus
I'll be down there tomorrow to make sure it got him
"But London and Virginia assistant Chip West, both of whom grew up in the Tidewater area, exchanged at least 420 calls with Snead on their school-issued cellphones from August 2012 to August 2013, according to documents obtained through an open-records request." 420 calls over the course of one year baffles my mind.
One thought....This has a lot to do with why Mike London hasn't been canned yet, right?
I'm getting the same sort of bad vibe when I read about all of the phone calls John "Black Santa" Blake was making while coaching the OLs at UNC.
Correct
London recruits great players, they make it to the NFL, they become big donors. He doesn't have to win to make that system work.
TIME OUT! YOU!
This is what bothers me the most. The NCAA is completely worthless. It will take far too long for them to decide what to do. When they finally do decide to take action they'll make a big mess of it. In the end I fear the poorly managed, ill prepared NCAA will fail to shut down these types of pipelines and they'll become all the rage moving forward.
they got no plan 2 fix this
just a bunch of #2s nodding heads saying that sounds like a great plan, boss, boss you're a genius
emperor got no clothes, bro...its all most a joke
any u folk really thinking the NCAA gonna fix this? seriously?
The NCAA has never done anything about AAU teams, so don't expect them to come down on 7v7 teams
The real issue is that the VT coaches allowed themselves to get flanked by UVA on the Thoroughbred part. There is no excuse for having the crappy UVA program be the destination for elite Virginia talent.
Whether or not Beamer likes the idea of non-parents having an important voice in a young recruits decision process, it's a part of the game. The coaches on the staff who didn't reach out and make the Thoroughbred staff feel as though they had advocates in Blacksburg weren't doing their job good enough. Plain and simple. Of course young men are going to trust the opinion of their coaches, and of course those coaches are going to have favorable opinions of school which reach out to them. As long as those men weren't getting paid to steer their recruits towards a particular school, I see absolutely nothing wrong with what's going on.
I guarantee that there are plenty of high school coaches who steer their kids (intentionally or not) towards Frank Beamer's program because they have a good relationship with Frank's staff.
Here's the thing though this is a very centralized group of individuals. It's not diverse high school coaches to build relationships with. Frank is all about character and if this situation was something he was not comfortable with I cannot fault him for it.
That's the part that is most interesting to me. Is this connection between the Thoroughbreds and UVA going to level back off in the next couple years when Cutler's son is no longer affiliated with the players? If London is fired (I think it happens after this season), will the connection remain and will kids continue to buy in to a losing program? The fruits of this relationship are undoubtedly paying off stronger than ever this year (Eli Harold and Mizzell playing, Brown and Blanding in the program), but the future is far more unclear.
Fascinating to be sure. When London is fired after this year and that connection is burned what happens then? I sort of get the feeling that they may dislike tech so much that they would cater to whomever comes in and replaces him.
I agree that's true with the current Thoroughbreds leadership. However, with Little Turtle gone, will the elder Cutler continue to be someone players will want to pay to coach/train them, or will their own parents get the bright idea that they should be doing the coaching? I don't see much of anything to stop every class of parents/potential recruits from doing this for themselves and promoting their own interests.
If I'm the Hokies, I'm not all that fussed about these dudes liking me. I want to talk to your high school coach and your mama. Period.
I'm pretty sure non of the big 2015 recruits have Thoroughbred ties, whatever that is worth.
Disagree- college coaches should deal with the parents, HS coach and administrators and not some shady wanna-be trumped up coaches
What should Frank do? Drop down on one knee and beg forgiveness? Let them know that they are really in charge and he is at their mercy?
He might want to send coach Moorehead down there instead of Stiney. You kill two birds with one stone that way... the 7 on 7 guys are mostly receivers, and that is Moorehead's position. The 7v7 contact would be with the position coach they would work with. If a QB shows up worth recruiting, Coach Leoffler could come on down and have a few words with him.
Additionally, if the 7v7 coaches have some kind of racial problem with Stiney, you erase it by sending coach Moorehead.
How about trying to not alienate them?
I'm reading in between the lines. There's no way the Thoroughbred leaders woke up one day and randomly had a hard on for all things Mike London. They like London because he has a better relationship with them. Meanwhile Frank Beamer writes a book saying he doesn't like the role they are playing in modern recruiting. I'm SHOCKED that they don't appreciate the sentiment.
Does Beamer need to write them checks? Of course not. But if he's planning on going the rest of his career without friendly interaction with a 7 on 7 coach, this may be the best possible recruiting class Tech will see under his leadership.
I can't believe he compounded the problem in his new book. Talk about being unaccountable. Terrible example of leadership.
Taking a stand based upon principles is the definition of leadership. I would think that the opinion of a legendary head coach who has run a clean program and whose guiding principles are honesty and loyalty would actually matter to people.
You might think so, but how often do we see it? Winning National Championships is all that matters, even if you run a dirty program to do it.
If the cost of success at that level is cheating, count me out. I'd stand on principle there, too. Win within the rules. If we're coming up short because others are cheating, something needs to be done. Same goes for any other program playing within the rules. If they're being put at a disadvantage because of others' actions, the NCAA needs to do its job. This isn't the pros where the one with the most money wins. This is amateurism and it's what, to me, makes college football so much fun.
Believe me, I abhor the thought that we need to cheat to win.
But on the other hand, look at the punishments that have been handed down over the years to those who have been caught red handed? Ohio State went on probation for a couple years and lost one year of eligibility. Florida State got probation. USC had a few scholarships taken away (and would still likely be a power if not for Carroll leaving for Seattle). Miami got a complete slap on the wrists after Yahoo blew them apart. North Carolina got caught with the biggest academic scandal involving athletes we've ever seen, and the NCAA excused themselves from the investigation.
Cheating sucks, but when the precedence has been set to hand out absolutely tame penalties to those who are getting caught doing the worst stuff, what is the incentive to be clean anymore? Yeah, keeping a clean conscience is nice, but if the reward for bending the rules is vast and the penalty for getting caught is absolutely minimal, you're only hurting yourselves if you don't get a little dirty.
Miami got a slap on the wrist because the NCAA sucks at doing its job and can't even close on the biggest slam-dunk case ever. USC had to vacate their national championship. What's the point of winning one when you cheat and have it taken away?
But do you want our first National Championship to be vacated due to cheating? USC had to vacate a National Title. Miami and UNC lost nothing of major importance because they hadn't really done anything important during that time. Miami's did overlap with some of their success in the early 2000's but it was more rampant during their years of trying to be "back." Ohio State had their coach lose his job. Would you want that for Beamer? Or how about what happened with FSU and it tarnishing Bobby Bowden's reputation. Regardless of the punishment, it's a black mark on your school. One that we don't need and one that I would never want for Frank Beamer to have. He's been a consistent example of class throughout his career among many coaches who have lost respect for themselves and the game.
I get what you are saying and in the end I guess it is what you see of yourself when looking in the mirror. I know inside when I do something wrong, even if it is technically ok to do. Following the spirit of the law/rule is as, or more, important then following the letter of the law/rule.
I, personally, would have a hard time with VT bending the rules just because the penalty if we got caught would be minimal.
Totally false strawman. No evidence UVA is cheating here. No evidence that VT needs to cheat to compete. We just have to hire someone who is respectful to coaches that recruits have chosen to play for in 7v7. The fact that this is so hard for all of you to understand shows what Frank B homers you are. Don't insult your customer!!!! How hard is it for you to understand that????
Beyond that, there is no bright line between what is allowable and not allowable by the NCAA.
There is no evidence that the thoroughbreds are somehow doing anything other that what a VT-oriented HS coach would do. Question is why. Because we indicated to them that they are not legitimate coaches.
Ahem. VT with coaches that 60% of its fanbase did not consider legitimate, indicated that these guys were not legitimate coaches. Laughable.
Keep writing blank checks to unaccountable leaders such as Beamer and Weaver.
At this pace, Beamer will do irreparable damage to the program by the time he is done.
Writing the book where he justifies the stupidity of telling the Corwin crew that their dad and coaches etc were no good, just shows how out of touch he is.
Guy would be fired in a heart beat for not understanding how to sell / market in almost any business I've ever worked in.
Started with Percy Harvin saying he'd never play for VT because the offense sucked. Frank considered him a crank. Shoulda fixed the issue then. Years later we've got an OC who is underpaid, still doing OTJ, not clear that Frank doesn't still reign him in, etc., etc.
Now we're at 10% of the Virginia top 10. Sure Corwin may not be a 7v7 coach, but 7v7 isn't going anywhere. Keep calling these next generation of 7v7 coaches idiots and we're not going to recover recruiting in Virginia.
Our out of state performance was awesome this year and hopefully it continues. But there is a reason why Virginia recruiting was out bedrock all those years. Making OOS recruiting your bedrock was a hallmark of the Groh era at UVA. We continue down this path and we will end up with teams like Groh had.
Beamer needs to change or should be forced out. Stupid people go around insulting customers, business partners etc. Beamer has become that stupid person. Not only condoning his coaches stupid behavior but writing books about it.
I'm not accusing UVA of cheating. I think the whole industry is questionable, but that's separate. vtphoenix is saying that many feel winning a NC is all that matters, even if you have to cheat. I was responding to the thought that anyone who has to cheat doesn't deserve it.
It's clear you don't stand behind Beamer, but IMHO the hyperbole and extrapolations you are making are getting ridiculous. Do you have inside knowledge of every decision he's made on this or any other topic? If you do, please share. I'll go back to his book and check myself, but as I recall, Beamer is fairly diplomatic on this topic and expresses concern for the well-being of players who are pressured or exposed to undue influence by paid coaches. Concern is not condemnation. We don't know what's going on behind closed doors.
EDIT: clarified what I was trying to say and not sound like I was bashing vtphoenix.
I get that the conversation has been hijacked into a MNC cheating focused thing. IMHO that is where the hyperbole lies. Noone is saying anything about MNC and cheating...none of that is relevant to dealing with the real question of the 7v7 industry. You guys are making this about cheating and MNC because you're saying Beamer is right to stay out of this because we would have to cheat and nothing not even an MNC is worth that. And that might be right, but the fact of the matter is its not relevant to having to deal with the 7v7 industry. You don't have to cheat and you don't have to give up on an MNC. Just stick to whats best for the kids and it will work out.
Parents hire the coaches for their kids and for that reason alone these coaches deserve respect. HS coaches where I'm from don't get selected by parents. I'll take a person selected by a parent everyday over someone hired by a county administrator.
My kids coaches >> HS coaches. That might not be the situation here, but again, because a parent hires a coach there is no reason to think there is something illegal or morally wrong going on.
>>Meanwhile Frank Beamer writes a book saying he doesn't like the role they are playing in modern recruiting. I'm SHOCKED that they don't appreciate the sentiment.
I'll read the book maybe this weekend to see if this interpretation is reasonable.
You don't disrespect people for no reason. The coaches I've hired for my kids are incredibly high integrity, high performing people and whether my kids become D-1 players or not, any coach who comes in and says something about their integrity or role in the industry is STUPID. Plain flat out STUPID. If my kids are faced with a choice between the STUPID coach and the coach that just deals with these coaches (even if he doesn't like them), its a no brainer. It will be that way as long as VT continues to try and taint the 7v7 industry.
Beamer is insulated, taking poor decisions, and evidently writing books that just create more trouble. Won't be around for a while but if Beamers book is on Kindle I'll read it this weekend and report back.
Not a Beamer hater but with this offense fiasco and now this 7v7 stuff, sometimes life moves on and you refuse to move with it. Get a real offense, market to kids who are potentially high integrity high performing kids regardless of what you think of their parents, schooling, coaches, 7v7 coaches, workout coaches, etc. Do anything else and you're just thinking too hard.
From what I remember of my talks with folks, there were two ways the 7v7 stuff would get under control. 1) HS coaches co-opt on an opt in basis the tournaments and form super elite regional teams etc. These would have to be administered somehow by some organization either NCAA or equipment guys... sounded like equipment guys would do it and try to get the participants to abide by NCAA guidelines for 7v7. 2) same deal but now the HS coaches aren't involved as much because they didn't sign up for 7v7. There are lots of problems with both approaches. Haven't talked to friends around this stuff in a few months. Folks were working to see if they could find an approach the HS, NCAA, coaches and players would adopt and stick to. All the legal NCAA is gonna come to town stuff is BS. Never happened in basketball never gonna happen here. IMHO, these might work but it will require alot of folks to work together. My guess is AAU is much simpler and for that reason alone these co-opt the 7v7 ideas are high risk, low probability. I'm not saying zero probability, but I'd say 20-40% chance they happen and they'll probably not be done soon if they get done. If you're gearing up for 2014, you shoulda had your ducks in a row already. So, best case likely 2015. Herding cats, good luck with that.
False. If something that a school is doing is deemed against the rules, consequences can include vacating wins, and in the extreme, NC trophies. Now, given that the NCAA doesn't necessarily have a rule against what is going on (or do they?), then retroactive punishment would probably not be appropriate. But if the argument is that you need to bring in top talent to win a NC, and recruiting is how you do it, you need to follow rules.
Given what I have quoted below, I think it's really ridiculous that some of these guys have come out on message boards, Twitter, etc. with profanity-laced tirades against VT. Beamer's public statements are expressions of concern for the well-being of kids. Maybe more goes on behind the scenes, but that's just something we don't know. I'd say some of these 7-on-7 guys (again, to state clearly: not all of them, probably a tiny minority) are making themselves look like complete jerks.
I have no problem with parents hiring personal coaches for their kids. You can spend your money however you like in pursuit of whatever interests you or your kids have. But to me, if you call yourself a coach for a high schooler, you MUST be regulated by the same rules that apply to coaches employed by the schools.
Your understanding of the situation is what is shocking.
It was never hijacked. The article which this entire thread is about concerns the suspect nature of LOLUVA's connection with these 7v7 coaches.
Respect is earned not given. And any coach (high school, 7v7 or otherwise) that goes out of their way to publicly shame any program, VT or otherwise, with shithead tweets like "Fuck Tech" and all the dumbass interviews he gives does not deserve respect. No matter his wittle feewings got hurt because a coach did something that made him mad. He should be of better character and know that his foremost job is to get the kid to reach his goals, and not try to direct kids away from one program because he feels he was insulted. That's the definition of someone who is thinking only about himself. What if a kid fits perfectly for VT's scheme, could start immediately and had a chance to play for a championship ring yet he sends him to LOLUVA which runs a scheme they don't fit into well, is a constant loser and doesn't play for championships. Is he doing that kid any favor? That's the dumbest argument I've heard.
Not illegal. A violation of NCAA rules. You can avoid it and say just because it happens in basketball and NCAA is stupid that nothing will happen. I don't disagree with your AAU basketball or NCAA stupid points, but that doesn't mean what is happening isn't a violation. High school coaches are part of a governed body of people that fall withing NCAA rules. 7v7 coaches are not, but in a case such as this (read specifically this one and do not overgeneralize to all 7v7 coaches) there is a strong possibility that these coaches can be considered a booster to LOLUVA. Again there are hundreds of cases in the history of NCAA where a kid has been "directed" to a program by someone who can be considered a booster and have gotten in trouble for it. That is not BS as you say. That is fact.
Oh no, someone got their feeling hurt because a coach said he prefers to deal with parents directly. Oh for shame. Give me a break. Seriously, how immature can you be? Frank and any coach have the right to decide what's best for their program. Hell, VT football would still be in the Big Least without him and VT would definitely not have it's name national recognized. If you think that Frank wasn't the instrument of change at VT for football, athletics and the school in general then you are delusional. This is a man that deserves your respect. I have my gripes about him as well, and think he had serious decision making issues during the O'Cainspring era but at the same time I respect the hell out of the man for what he has done. A university coach that took a team from nothing to the national championship with never getting any major violations is something to be revered, not disrespected. A 7v7 coach that has been coaching for just a few years and publicly has an agenda against any program with such wonderful role model worthy tweets as "Fuck Tech" is someone to discredit and look down upon. To say anything else isn't just ignorant, it's stupid.
Insulated? I don't think you know what that word means. Beamer is in the public eye more so than any 7v7 coach. If he sent tweets like these coaches or gave interviews like them there would be serious repercussions. He didn't write anything in his book that is slanderous or insulting, only his opinion which like everyone in the USA he is entitled to. As you say you haven't read it. Perhaps you should read something before commenting on it.
This is the stupidest comment you've made. See you wrote stupid all over the place.
If you honestly believe that you don't want to send your kids to VT because Beamer and his staff insulted a 7v7 coach then don't, send them to LOLUVA. If you think that this 7v7 coach is the one that is going to get your kids to reach their goal and not the coach that has the best active win record, then don't send them to LOLUVA. If you think that someone who tweets "Fuck Tech" and gives interviews like a loser because his feelings are hurt is going to make the right decision for your kid and not the coach that had the integrity to keep his promise to sit Michael Vick for a year then don't have them be a Hokie, and send them to LOLUVA. Seriously, who the hell cares. if you don't want your kids to be coached by Beamer then don't. I, as a fan, want kids that want to be a Hokie, so I can do without yours.
You seem to think that you, your kids and 7v7 coaches are entitled to college coaches bending over backwards for you. Kissing your ass and saying "YOU!" to you 420 times a month. You really believe this is the best lesson your kids can learn from this issue? Maybe they should go to LOLUVA because you seem to want them coddled their whole life. College football is a business and college football coaches can choose to play to your ego or try to tell you their principles. Has Beamer not made mistakes? Of course not. He's made loads. Would I personally choose Beamer over London to educate, coach and help shape my son into a man. Yes, I would without hesitation. That's not being a biased homer. That's because I respect someone who says honestly what his opinions are and not the man who says shit like "technically what we are doing is allowed under current NCAA regulations" as London did in the article. That's not someone I trust with my son's future. And I as a parent would never trust a coach who lets their personal feeling guide the decision making process they use to shape my son's future. That's idiotic.
You as a parent are the one that should ultimately help your child decide what is best. Not a high school coach, nor a 7v7 coach or anyone else. They are there to be an adviser only. When parents that have such difficult obligations need to rely on these coaches like a lot of kid's parents in the 757 do, then I would hope that the coach advising them has the modesty to accept that they should look out for the kid first and not their own ego.
Before you keep commenting on this topic you read Beamer's book and learn more about the situation. Stop assuming you know everything and talking as if you personally know Beamer disrespected anyone and how he did it. You don't.
Hmm, I'm sure goodwill is on every company balance sheet as an asset and Coach Beamer has racked that up in spades.
What did Beamer actually say in this book?
I'm going to post a small snippet from the book, on par with what I saw in David Teel's article about the book. I understand there may be issues with the fact that this is copyrighted material, so Joe, if I'm crossing any line here, say the word and it comes down. The last thing I want to do is cause a headache for you.
In the chapter on recruiting, Beamer devotes a lot of space to talking about relationships with players, helping them grow and succeed, using story of Macho Harris as an indicator of taking care of a player and helping him to stay safe and do well (heck, Beamer took the kid to the hospital - there was a fire at the house during an in-home visit).
Regarding changes he would like to see in terms of recruiting rules, he says:
I get a downvote for stating something that's obvious, not an opinion, and nothing offensive. I'm not saying we should cheat to do it. I fucking hate the idea that seems to be what it takes. I was just saying, how many NCs have been vacated, or may be forced to be vacated in the near future due to bad practices by coaching staffs and such?
Upvote to even you out. Some people don't know how those arrows are supposed to work. It's a perfectly valid observation, which is very sad to admit.
I didn't down vote you but I read it that you thought winning a national championship was all that mattered even if we needed to cheat. Plus one on the original post to balance you out after the explanation.
Edit: for spelling error.
Sorry, I forgot to use my /sarcastica font.
Personally, I'd prefer that CFB continues to stand on his principles and not kiss the collective butts of a group of people who apparently want to hurt the Tech football program as much as possible.
If this group was really performing a mentor role and looking out for the best interests of the kids in their "program", they would ensure that EVERY FBS/FCS coach willing to offer a scholarship was given EQUAL access to their kids. The steering they're doing to UVA based on their personal and ongoing relationships with Mike London and Chip West is total bull. That "steering" and bad-mouthing of the Tech program was going on long before CFB wrote his latest book - so who really fired the first shot in this war?
When London goes, and that will probably happen at the end of next season, what are the chances that UVA will hire another coach who caters to the 757 to the detriment of the rest of Virginia? When that happens, who will the Breds turn to then?
One more point - Tech has already extended 73 offers to recruits for 2015 and has two verbals so far. Do you think they're letting the Breds intimidate them? LOL - not on your life.
Actually, you could make a fairly strong case that by aligning themselves with a particular school, they are improving the odds of their borderline FBS talent receiving an offer from that school.
The elite talent in the Thoroughbred program are going to play regardless. Having London know that he is more likely to get the top notch players by accepting the less talented ones, the Thoroughbred coaches are actually looking out for their players.
So you're OK with quid pro quo within college football? "Here, I'll keep maintaining the pipeline as long as you offer this kid a scholarship." I can see how one can argue that this is helping that individual kid who otherwise might not have gotten the offer, but what in the world are we doing to the system if we allow such things to happen? That's essentially negotiating over players by using other players as bargaining chips.
IF that is what is happening, and that's a big IF, it doesn't help the elite talent.
Everything has a cost.
It's figuring out what cost is and who pays it that is interesting.
OK let's say they are aligned.
They are a non-profit entity and charge only a nominal fee to parents. They in turn pay for coaching, equipment, food, travel, lodging all with the aligned university athletics department knowing full well that these players are being sent to them by someone not under NCAA limitations as school coaches are. The children, yes children, are constantly pushed to play only for the team that their 7v7 handler wants them to go to because hey, they just provided you with everything stated above.
hmm... what does this sound like? There's a word for it... ah yes, booster.
All these things provided to kids have monetary value and are designed to give a kid both a leg up and commit them to a specific school. Is this really any different than SMU in the 80's. Someone outside the program pays kids to play at a single University.
This is a terrible idea.
Here's what doesn't make sense to me:
It's not just that Beamer's staff got outflanked or let UVA beat them to the punch. If that were the case, then no problem, we just play catch up and build relationships with these guys also - I'm sure they'd be open to having relationships with multiple coaches. There's more to it than that, otherwise Beamer & Co wouldn't stand by and watch all these recruits go elsewhere.
My guess here, and it's purely just a guess with no inside information...is something about the situation made Beamer very uncomfortable to the point that he wouldn't get involved with these guys. In fact, his staff probably did more than that, otherwise these coaches wouldn't hate VT so much.
So what is it that would have made Beamer so uncomfortable? Is it that UVA was paying these 7on7 coaches? I don't know...but I'm also not imaginative enough to think of anything else that would have made Beamer so staunchly opposed to building relationships with these coaches.
I don't think Beamer was standing by while elite talent went to UVA, I think he was just trying to go the traditional route. Let's realize, Beamer has been coaching a LONG time. It's not outside of the realm of possibility to think that he didn't want to interact with those coaches because he hasn't had to do that in the past. It wouldn't be the first time an established coach is slow to react to a new sporting reality.
Let's assume that the Thouroughbred program isn't dirty (considering there is ZERO EVIDENCE to suggest that it is... literally zero). Put yourself in their shoes... They've been coaching/mentoring these young men for a long time and are finally starting to see their dreams get realized. You're trying to help them out by getting them recognition on a national level at 7x7 tournaments, making highlight videos of them, practicing and training with them all the time. Think about how invested you would be in those players.
Think about how frustrating it would be if the biggest program in the state wouldn't even talk to you because you weren't an "official" HS coach or family. Hell, these coaches are probably bigger influences in a lot of these kids lives than some family members. If the second biggest program accepted you with open arms and treated you like the positive influence in the kids life that you are while the biggest treated you like a shady hustler, of course you would have hurt feelings. Those negative feelings would be even further inflamed if the biggest program insinuated in a book that the type of program you run is dirty.
I don't think it is that much of a stretch to explain this whole situation as a case of the "butt-hurts". These coaches invested a ton of time in recruits, were disrespected (intentionally or not) by one program and welcomed by the other. From there, things snowballed. Having Tech fans call the Thoroughbred program dirty with no evidence AT ALL isn't helping the cause.
Of course, I wouldn't be shocked if down the road it was shown that UVA was paying for recruits. I'm just saying that I can imagine a world in which it's not necessary.
Fair points, I must admit.
I could definitely picture a world where Beamer hates change and didn't want to have to deal with these new coaches. In the past few years it seems he's been more open to change...but I wonder if by then the blood was already bad and it was too late to do anything about it.
I don't know - it certainly seemed to me the Post was painting a pretty negative picture of UVA's recruiting practices, although I agree it is hard to pinpoint what exactly is unethical / wrong about it.
I agree that 420 phone calls combined from Coach London and Coach West to Lee Snead over the course of 365 days isn't out of the ordinary one bit.
This is my main problem. The NCAA limits contact with HS coaches, but apparently there's no problem with unlimited contact with individuals personally paid by a recruit and his family.
So blame the NCAA for a stupid rule, don't call the advocates of young men dirty without evidence.
Are we forgetting that these are real men? With families? Careers? Is it really acceptable to go online and slander them and accuse them of immoral business practices?
I guess I just have qualms dragging people's names through the mud and potentially damaging their future abilities to provide for their families simply because they don't like my favorite football coach.
I don't think it's a stupid rule. I think the limit on contact with recruits and coaches is one of the more sensible ones. The ability of ANY coach (and as I've said in other posts, I would hate it if VT were doing this) to find a way to sidestep the limits, which are known to everyone involved here, is wrong because it flies in the face of the purpose of amateur athletics.
I'm not slandering anyone. I'm not alleging anything immoral is going on (this isn't about morals, it's about rules for fair play). I am only saying that if there is any potential for merit to what was reported above, by a journalist whose integrity depends on (at least in part) the veracity of this story, there needs to be an investigation. If everything comes back clean, then these guys are in a position of greater strength. And if it's not clean, they get busted and reforms come.
I didn't mean you personally should stop slandering the Thoroughbred program leaders, but rather the more rabid critics.
Gotcha. I'm with you there. We shouldn't ever jump to conclusions, but this is something worth looking into, if for no other reason but the serious potential for abuse. If it's not happening now, it will at some point.
"...advocates of young men"??
If they were truly advocates/mentors of these kids they would be making sure that every FBS/FCS coach willing to extend an offer is given an EQUAL opportunity to deal with these kids without the steering that's obviously going on.
I think in the "best case scenario" this is a situation where Mr. Cutler worked to surround his kid with the best talent in VB so that his son would have more success in HS, get noticed more, and hyped more. Then the group of "coaches" felt snubbed by VT so they steered all these kids away from Blacksburg. UVA was pushed since that's where Cutler was going, and again Mr. Cutler wanted to surround his kid with some talent. The kids who didn't like UVA were still steered away from VT.
Newsome & Beamer don't pander to 3rd party handlers, Strike 1.
London & West called Snead more than once per day. Strike 2.
UVA recruited his Turtle Cutler, VT didn't. Strike 3.
I'd love to see how 7 on 7 tourneys display these guys talents... reminder- this is glorified touch football. And the bigger issue to many is that many of these alleged 'coaches' are NOT positive influences. Case and point:
"To all the Hokie fans talking sh*t...I hear you loud and clear and I will make sure that u guys get everything you deserve good luck because you'll need it and to the fans that are good people and don't understand why your friends keep doing this I am sorry because I promise you the damage is done and there is nothing that you can say to me or my group to make things right you barked up the wrong Tree on this 1. I normally wouldn't care where any kid going to college but now at this point I will never recommend a kid to go to Tech y'all can send all ur hall of fame guys or your current or former NFL guys to come out and try to talk to us and I will tell them the same thing I'm telling you I think your football program is great but but y'all ain't shit ( this is not for all of you only the ones that have been investigating us and putting our information over the Internet ) I will let all my kids know how you feel about the coaches and a current players they play with so keep it up. I am trying to figure out why you so mad at Turtle anyway UVA got best quarterback in a state according to the VHSCA and the coaches got what they wanted the Allstate utility player it's a good thing you got the dad is going to take you to the next level lmao whatever chump."
-Carson Cutler (father of Corwin Cutler)
Terrible judgment to post a quote like that. We can't hope to have all the context. Unfair to Carson, unfair to VT fans who you make look bad by posting this stuff with no context.
For context: http://www.thekeyplay.com/comment/26067#comment-26067
Huh? You've not been paying attention over the past few months. Cutler, not me put it in the public realm via 247 message board. Give me a break.
I agree. I don't know the situation, don't know for a fact whether it is dirty, gray, or above board but it is a situation that cannot be ignored. Perception becomes reality if allowed too, and we cannot afford to let the perception of VT as not being the school to go to become self-fulfilling.
The problem is getting into that pipeline without upsetting our traditional support, the High School coaches. It's kind of like starting to date a new girl while trying to remain friends with your old girlfriend, does not work all that well.
And then how clean is this program? I, for the most part, have a hard time trusting human nature. What starts out as a way to help your kid get better, starts getting bigger and bigger and pretty soon you need to get some money to help you run your camp, pay travel expenses, etc. Where will that come from? Without some kind of oversight, I can see where this could really get shady.
One of the things I love about VT is how clean CB has run this program and I don't want that to change. Regardless, there is no way we can ignore this situation if it is costing us that recruiting area.
I hate the 7-on-7 teams, it's turning high school football into high school basketball. These kids have more of a sense of entitlement than ever before.
After Kamara's comments about why he chose UVA, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of these players don't care about winning. For those you don't know, Kamara tweeted that "Go wherever you gone start, winning games doesn't get you to the league" (http://virginiatech.247sports.com/Board/59428/Jamil-Kamara-25233341/1).
This is how some recruits think, it's absolute garbage and I don't want that level of entitlement or that level of apathy towards winning anywhere near Blacksburg.
Side note to Kamara: NFL teams are in the business of winning games. Because of this, they are going to draft players and sign free agents who care about winning games. When you're sitting down with an NFL team and you tell them "I chose UVA because winning games doesn't matter", how do you think they're going to respond?
If you don't win games, your chances of sitting down with an NFL team go down drastically as well.
same thing will happen if O'Bannon case is found for the players. Kids will only go to schools that can "pay" them the most money.
With 7-on-7 you have a for profit influence on these kids who are going into a not-for-profit industry. What that means is someone is getting paid. I don't care how much the Shitbird's coaches say it is about respect, they are in this for the money. They want influence with a university to turn that into a profit. That's why they demand that university coaches go through them. London and LOLUVA are basically their bitch now because they want that pipeline.
So i agree with Frank and VT. Fuck that.
All this does bring up an interesting questions that goes back to previous threads about the NCAA. Cutler and these coaches are actively directing kids to a singular school at most, and away from a singular school at least. Cutler's douchebag kid and many of their players committed to LOLUVA. Cutler and the other Shitbird coaches are not high school employees. Therefore are they boosters?
By the very broad and loose definitions of what constitute a booster I think the NCAA could argue yes. And this has been going on for YEARS. If the NCAA had balls and well, let's face it, intelligence to do so they could come down so hard on this and make and example. They don't need to prove that LOLUVA gave the coaches anything, just qualify that Cutler and the other coaches constitute a booster. Done.
420 calls to land Brown Kamara and Blanding?
I'll take that each and every day of the week.
Sounds like Frank doesn't want to do the hard work of selling and converting someone who doesn't like him because of the bad attitude of one of his coaches. Worse yet it appears to be more important to save face than make a legitimate attempt at getting these kids. Hard to believe two or three years later we're still seeing this approach from VT coaches.
I thought we had left all that in the past. If you don't have a s-load of humility you shouldn't be in this game. Now you also need a s-load of pride, and a s-load of arrogance at the same time. But if you can't be humble and sell to someone you don't totally respect, without telling them that, its just plain flat out time to leave the game.
Good luck with that NCAA scenario. Declaring every 7v7 coach a booster, every athletic performance coach a booster. BOOM! DONE! Seriously? Scary that anyone says this stuff .... even if you work for the guy and have to agree with him at work... this is a message board where you can be honest and just say... NEVER GONNA HAPPEN!!!
Have seen tapes of this guy working with young QBs. Might not respect the motherf-er, but you know what. He probably beat the guy we had before Scot L. BOOM! All you have to do is read some LT3 articles to see that is not far from the truth. But keep alienating the next generation of beach QB. Its not the smart thing to do, but you Beamer boys gotta have your pride.
Don't know how you can question Beamer & Co's work ethic. They want this program to get better more than anyone and they're working their tails off. They may not land some top prospects but it's not going to be due to lack of effort.
I didn't say this. I was talking specifically about these coaches that are working in congruence with London and LOLUVA. When 7-on-7 coaches specifically channel kids to one school and they are not a high school coach then that indeed can be considered an act of a booster. There have been many cases of a kid or school getting into trouble for exactly this. That's not a scenario that's a reality.
This is both erroneous and stupid. Erroneous part: Beamer and the staff may have slipped up the last several years but that doesn't mean they haven't been trying to sell these or any kid. Like most schools they need to invest time in the recruits that they know they can get, the ones they know they have a chance with and finding the diamonds in the rough for most of their available time. Chasing after kids that are already committed to LOLUVA and have no interest in VT, and who have been funneled their by their coach/handler who says things like "Fuck Tech" on twitter is the stupid part.
You want a better class of recruits. I agree. We should be landing 5 star kids. I agree. Dealing with this trash is not the answer and a waste of time and money.
Although there there's really no hard evidence of wrongdoing here, I'm with Coach Beamer on this one...smells very AAU, and don't even get me started on what goes on with the AAU.
I agree that Beamer thinks this is outside the lines a bit....no evidence except some of his vague quotes and that he hasn't catered to this crowd.
There is some danger in getting 'outflanked' but uva will also be in a tight situation: so they get a few kids from this pipeline; that in no way guarantees success. But if/when they let London go will their next coach have to get the stamp of approval from these 7-7 'coaches?'
This whole connection may have been one of the feathers in London's cap that helped him get the job or not, but it seems like a desperation move on his part.
It may be why FB adjusted his staff to change the recruiting footprint as well. If VT is not in contention for some of these kids without getting a little dirty, then maybe he's decided to get his kids from other places.
It definitely feels like Frank doesn't want to play that way. He's still keeping comunications open with highschool coaches, but it just feels like he's said "Fuck a bunch of this 7 on 7, I'll go somewhere else."
Honestly, I think it's a good thing he's doing that. We've shown this recruiting cycle that we can do well without dabbling in the sleeze, and that's just what we'll do.
Also, I know a lot of people have been saying that we should do it because it's not illegal. I think it's Frank's viewpoint that it should be so he doesn't want anything to do with it.
My thoughts:
1. Further proves my point that London is a terrible recruiter. Just lucky to have 1 connection with extremely powerful influence over a talented group of athletes.
2. This Thoroughbred connection with UVA won't last forever... They still have some good players on their roster, including some likely 4-star players for the class of 2015. But, how long will Mike London be coaching? How long will it take for players to see the writing on the wall? (Eli Harold already has been quoted with some strong anti-UVA quotes)
3. Poor kids. I feel like they were completely misguided and blinded by selfish men with vendetta-like agendas.
I wish there would've been more comment from Coach Moore. Citing 'outside influences' as a reason for resigning sounds to me like there's a clique that develops among the 'elite' players that go from 7 on 7 to high school ball. Seems to me like you'd foster a culture of entitlement or at the least a 'me-first' attitude. I imagine a scenario where player gets a lap or up-downs on the high school practice field and the then complains to 7 on 7 coach about it. 7 on 7 coach gets in the ear of high school coach and says something like 'my guy doesn't need your team, he can star on mine and I'll get him into a I-A program without you.' If high school coach caves, he's opened the door for future, worse interference. If he doesn't, he's got a bad apple that is at best counter to building a strong team ethic.
Personally I think the on the field results prove that this doesn't matter one bit. If a five star or top rates recruit wants to go to UVA and waste his talent then let him. They have 6 wins over the last couple years and haven't beat us. Ill take kids that want to work hard and win over a kid that wants to get paid to play. That's why we are blue collar and they wear ascots.
This also doesn't matter one bit because UVA was getting 5* recruits long before Mike London. They had a few back then, and they sucked. They have more now than before, and they suck even more.
My point is...UVA was able to get top-notch recruits under Al Groh also. They always have and always will be able to get some of the top players in the state because they're THREE HOURS closer to home for the 757 players than we are, and some of them want to be closer to home. With or without 7on7, UVA will get some elite recruits, and then do nothing with the talent.
If they're not part of the high school program and they get more than 1 phone call a day from the university and deliver kids reliably to the university, why is that not boosterism?
One more thing to consider - this all started because the dad kept his group together from little-league on up. That whole group is graduating now. Is he going to have any kind of influence on future kids, or is he tapped out? It seems like it might be more like a bucket full of talent than a well.
Awesome article. I've seen this referenced on TKP a bunch but this really explained it well. I think the biggest take away is that right now it's legal to work through these "third-party coaches", but it really shouldn't be. Stinespring said it pretty well (yeah i just said that):
NCAA really needs to look further into this. I hope other schools bring this to their attention so a formal investigation into the process as a whole takes place.
And how on earth do you sell these kids into going to a 6 win in 2 seasons school??
By teaching them that winning doesn't matter in college, from a very early age. The only thing that matters is showcasing their own skill.
Honestly, I feel bad for the kids. That's not a good recipe for future success, but it's what their "mentor figures" are telling them.
Guys, I hate to break it to you but this 7-on-7 stuff isn't going anywhere.
The "AAU" comparisons are valid, but not why you think - AAU Ball is now the reality of MBB recruting. So, keep hoping that the NCAA, the people who wouldn't/couldn't do anything about UNC and their rampant, blatant, and obvious cheating, are going to do anything about 7-on-7. It's here to stay, just like AAU is for MBB.
Someone want to ask James Johnson about how important it is to not burn relationships with every in-state AAU coach? Because, that's likely what's going to be the death-knell for is job.
Adapt or Perish.
Yep... its not going anywhere and its ONLY going to get worse over time. If you don't play the game right now, you're going to be forging an uphill battle over the long haul.
The landscape is changing. You either adapt or die.
See: Gary Williams.
Coaches, no matter whether they're high school coaches, or from one of those programs, shouldn't be influencing kids one way or the other. They should be there to train, and prepare, and when the time comes, to be as informative as possible for ANY school that is looking at the kid. No saying this school is bad, go to this school instead. It should be "Here are the facts. Make your own decision. Go to whichever school you feel is best for you."
The moment it becomes, "You should go to UVA because..." or "You should go to Virginia Tech because..." you have become a booster, whether you accept money or not.
That's what I think, anyway. It may be high and mighty, and completely unrealistic, but BECAUSE of the influence coaches have over kids, they shouldn't be allowed to use that influence.
No, you're dead on. Coaches should not be influencing kids in any way. But the sad reality is that, very much like what is happening in AAU basketball, this very much is going on in 7on7 football, and the NCAA, the organization in place to govern and regulate these endeavors is far too spineless to do anything about it.
So while we stay inside our home looking out the window watching all our siblings get dirty in the recruiting mud during the rainstorm while our parents went out to the store telling everyone not to leave the house, we're completely missing out on all the fun because we're more content with telling ourselves that we're doing the right thing instead of going out and getting dirty, having fun, with the full understanding that even if we get caught, there is very little our parents could do to punish, cause everyone is doing it.
NCAA isn't spineless. It just doesn't have any legal authority here. Ask your most informed pal with all the connections who believes NCAA will fix this. Drill down on the argument. It all falls apart.
A parent hires a coach for his kid who wants to play in 7v7 tournaments. Why should the NCAA be able to regulate this act?
Only hope if for a market based solution, but regulators like the NCAA aren't good at these usually because it upsets the status quo.
Only hope I buy is that you're going to see a concerted effort of the equipment companies and NCAA member institutions to host more 7v7 tournaments and as a condition of playing in them, the participants agree to abide by NCAA bylaws guidelines, etc. But... from what I understand this would be a very big change in mindset and would potentially upset some precedents, etc.... so it has to get worked out ... there is no guarantee that it can be worked out the NCAA might not be able to get its head around a set of guidelines that embrace the 7v7 game in a way that doesn't upset their guidelines for high schools etc.
My concern with all this is the opportunity for "street agent" behaviour where the "coaches" are getting $$ from persons affiliated with certain schools. I'm not even sure it would be a NCAA violation (admittedly a high/Low bar). I'm guessing there may be some of this but short of video tape it would be hard to prove.
As potentially shady as this can all be, its not currently against the rules. And if AAU ball is any indication, it will not be against the rules anytime soon.
I like the point that was made a bit earlier though. in that a lot of these Thoroughbred players all grew up together. Its almost an odd coincidence that so many of them have the talent to nab D1 scholarships. It will be interesting to see moving forward if they continue to turn out players at this rate. If they are able to, then like it or not seems to me that VT will have to repair some bridges with these guys. I personally would prefer not to have to go there, but as they say "It is what it is", and right now "It is" necessary if you want to tap into some of this talent.
I think this whole deal is slimy. Having said that, I'd be comfortable staying away from the booster/agent/trainer/coach scenario and stick to dealing with high school coaches. I think families will eventually see through the hype if a bunch of top notch recruits don't get to the NFL and don't get the degree from UVA they're working towards. Correct me if I'm wrong, but haven't a few of their previous top-flight recruits been removed from the team and school? If the guys that are there now don't make it through, and the new recruits don't make it through, then the emperor's clothes will be revealed.
420 is London's code for "YOU!" An ex-cop knows these things...
I think if the 757 Academy was pro-Hokie, this would be a non-issue for fans here. There are positives from getting a scholarship to UVA as far as education too; it just sucks that they have shut the door on VT and are trying to lock them out of a shot at recruits. I think that when you start to peel back the layers on this you are going to see a money trail or some sort of kickbacks. I don't think grown men get invovled with funnelling kids to schools in any sport without seeing financial gains. I don't think this is a black issue or a white issue either; its a green issue. Where there is money to be made off the physical gifts of others, 3rd parties will be there to 'help' those kids.
While we would enjoy the recruits, I think the wise fan would have an issue with it and you touched on why that would be.
We don't want to be caught up in this mess when it all comes falling down. I hope that this article acted as an exposé for what's going on down there, but who knows what will happen. Where there's smoke, there's usually a fire. And if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck...well you know...
Here's what I don't understand: why you assume it's "going to all come falling down."
Who's going to bring it down? The NCAA? Like the brought down UNC, Miami, or the entire AAU sytem?
AAU *is* college basketball recruiting now.
If there's a money trail, it will come falling down. Granted, that's an IF statement, but why possibly subject yourself to the wrath of the NCAA? The losses outweigh the gains in this situation IMO.
It's there a reason you're completely ignoring the AAU in the room? You keep avoiding discussing the very obvious analogy here. AAU hasn't "come falling down" and there's absolutely no evidence at all of a "money trail" beyond the implications of bitter Hokie fans.
Whats to say that it WILL come falling down?
AAU basketball is far more shady than this, and it has been allowed to grow and cultivate for decades. We've already seen that the NCAA is completely spineless to enforce their own rules on widespread issues like recruiting, so they go after schools for the nitpicks. Miami got a slap on the wrist for their problems. North Carolina didn't even get punished for giving out grades for classes that didn't exist to keep athletes eligible.
If you're sitting around waiting for some NCAA mythical hammer to drop and clean up the mess that is collegiate recruiting, you're going to be waiting a VERY long time. This is a Pandora's box that cannot be closed at this point.
I honestly do not want the majority of the kids that come out of this program. I get that they are uber talented but they are also almost always a type of player that I do not want in the Virginia Tech program. The great thing about coming through a High School program is that you have to earn your spot on the squad through coaching respect and hard work. I believe that these kids think they are a gift to your football program and you should do whatever they want. I'm not even sure that its a case of UVA underdeveloping some of them as much as it is that they don't buy into the team philosophy. (If London has a philosophy that is)
I think this is a good point. I like to believe (whether it is true or not) that we recruit a certain type of player that really wants to buy into the system and be a part of a team, not just a player that is biding their time to make it to the league. I want the type of player that is always going to be proud of being a Hokie, like Kam Chancellor or Eddie Royal, rather than the player that thinks the school did nothing for them, like Ryan Williams. If you look at the comments McCarron and Saban were making about the younger players at Alabama, it seems like they became too entitled and weren't buying into the program, which caused them to lose games. I want to ensure that the talent we recruit wants to be here because it is Virginia Tech, not because it can get them to the league.
Exactly. I'm not saying that every player we offer is the prototypical VT player. There will always be players that don't buy in. But UVA is clearly not profiting from the situation and that can't ALL be attributed to London being inept.
I grew up in Newport News, VA and saw 1st hand how young athletes thought college football/basketball was just another stepping stone to getting a job in the Pros. These kids come from 1 parent homes sometimes not even raised by a biological parent and being raised by a relative ( Grandmother , Aunt, etc. ). Getting an athletic scholarship is a stepping stone to the pros not a degree and a better life. These recruits are full of pride, piss, and vinegar. The 7 on 7's feed into their ego and lottery dream. VT tries to sell normalcy and reality. 7 on 7's is selling a dream and steering them away from reality to whomever makes the biggest donation to their organization. Which is apparently UVA.
The issue is brokering. NCAA limits the contacts college coaches can have with recruits. Apparently no limit on college coaches talking to "others" and recruits talking to those same "others". 7o7 and similar organizations are trying to exploit loopholes by using "others" to make unlimited contacts with recruits. As long as the colleges aren't paying the others (like Oregon did) there does not seem to be a technical violation. Uva may be using some other form of compensation to these organizations or maybe not. It is a gray area. I'm not sure I like these pay for play organizations. Both pros and cons (take that any way you want). They are not just in football. Ever heard of soccer travelling teams? For those that can afford it, it is a way to expose your kids to high level of competition. I think CFB comes from a background where he believes in underdogs and people that do things on their own.
>> 7o7 and similar organizations are trying to exploit loopholes by using "others" to make unlimited contacts with recruits
ummm... they trying to give kids something to do that will provide fun, valuable experiences for them
no different that a track guy that you get to help your kid get faster
your kid can still play football... was talking to a guy at a track guys place this week... offers to Rutgers, Md, hoping for Oregon.... you can't ban this guy from getting lessons on how to run better from a top guy in the area
now they have a track team... sponsorship of a track team is a gray area... but you still can't ban fundraisers, track team sponsorship opportunities, etc.... we do these all the time... we raise funds and the funds are available to buy down kids fees who are less advantaged.... if they are not used they they go into an overall fund that buys down everyone's fees pro rata
>> Uva may be using some other form of compensation to these organizations or maybe not. It is a gray area.
there may be sponsorship opportunities that football teams use in pee wee football... are they gray area violations as well? Soandso Insurance sponsors a kids football team, maybe his kids football team, maybe he is a UVA grad. fundraisers, etc.,etc. .... where do you draw the line?
the NCAA is not God... trying to act like you're going to give the NCAA powers of everything... you people realize this is not Russia? Get the message and give it to old man Beamer, better yet maybe his son understands and maybe he can convince the old man.
I agree with this sentiment expressed by Stinespring.
There are no concerns whatsoever about any organization thats geared towards helping young people gain opportunities and work on their skill set, Stinespring wrote in an e-mail. The concern here is in recruiting. When people have the opportunity to influence and theres no accountability to what they say or do, thats a tremendous concern.
If the leadership of such organizations are steering kids away from your school and won't deal with you honestly there is a problem. Are they looking out for the kids best interests? Are they interfering with fair recruiting?
Another thing: While the 757 has produced a lot of "stars" lately have they actually done anything on the field? Are the stars a result of exposure through the breds or are they any good at all?
Just saw that Tyrod is promoting a 7-on-7 league in the 757 area...
I tend to be on the side that thinks our coaches should stay out of the sort of grey area of 7-on-7 recruiting but I'm all for Tyrod (or any other former player for that matter) acting as an advocate in these leagues.
Maybe it's sheer coincidence but the timing of this tweet is funny as there has been so much recent talk about these leagues.
The timing is probably a coincidence, but I perked up when I saw this.
Wonder what his connection is to that league? I find it surprising that a NFL QB would be promoting a 7-on-7. But that would be massively beneficial to VT's recruiting if he got more involved in the 757.
cam newton promotes them all the time down around charlotte. couldnt hurt though with t-mobile being involved with them. maybe we'll have our own little pipeline in a few years.
It seems as though the NCAA looks the other way for some schools. Very fishy.
French's comments up above are my thoughts exactly...
Where does the income for this organization come from? They are traveling all over the eastern seaboard, wearing fancy uniforms, etc. Do they have a Nike deal or something? Unless that paper trail can be defined, I wouldn't want VT messing with it.
Also, for the record, it appears Tyrod Taylor is supporting a 757 7-on-7 league. In that case, Tyrod, being a millionaire, has probably fronted money in order to get the organization up and running and competing.
So, who pays for AAU Basketball?
http://247sports.com/Article/The-almighty-dollar-dominates-summer-AAU-ho...
Sadly, it gets worse. Colleges, while no one wishes to admit it, fund certain programs. They buy players and invest in programs. The stakes could be anywhere from $50,000 up front to get a program off the ground and upwards of $5,000 per month to maintain that level
How many thoroughbred players have we signed in the past few years? I heard that Stroman was a thoroughbred? Just guaging how strong the anti VT influence is
I would also be curious how those numbers compare to UVA over the past few years if anyone happens to have those numbers
I think more interesting would be UVA vs. any other school. Also isn't Stroman from nova? I doubt he'd be on a va beach team.
Stroman? I thought the Thoroughbreds were in the VA Beach area. Stroman came from Stonewall, Manassas, NOVA. Not sure if there was a summer league you're talking about, but he went to school many hours from there.
Yeah I saw it on a tsl post, thought it was strange for the same reason...but if anyone has a complete list of who's participated in this thoroughbreds thing I'd be very interested to see.
Stinespring speaking on the issue on signing day.
Well put Stiney!!!
Turkey leg for embedded audio.
That's pretty cool.