Recent Comments

I would wonder if the NFL will let Drew ride around on LT's shoulders as some sort of megaplayer.

Made this in Paint for another thread. Seems appropriate here too.

Interesting - OLB/SS (Rover). I see Foster (primary) and Gray (secondary) are his recruiters for Tech.

No offers from anyone at this point.

Decent film on Hudl - http://www.hudl.com/athlete/190234/highlights/18248378

The reason Minnesota's name isn't probably popping up is that they expect one of the 1st round QBs to end up here (Projected to most likely be Carr or Bortles). If they don't take a 1st rounder, then maybe it could happen, but I feel new HC + new OC = most likely 1st round QB of their choice.

Me: The topic is about Fans tweeting Recruits, not Boosters.
You: The NCAA prohibits boosters from contacting recruits.
Please read more carefully before you reply.

1) Athletes get punished for rule infractions anywhere yes. But as previous cases have shown incorporated entities cannot wholly dictate rules over an individual at all times and even non-incorporated entities. This has been argued successfully in court before. NCAA is an incorporated entity. You can find the landmark case being Tinker v. Des Moines Independent Community School District in which the finding made it clear that First Amendment rights are not given up once you become a student, or even a student athlete.
2) Recruits can be made ineligible for lots of things. Talking to casual fans has never been one of them and never will be. (Again not talking about Boosters, please read carefully)

If you don't want a lecture on how law journals work then don't say things that show you need one. The finding of that case clearly defines it's judgement as pertaining only to the coach and school and not "appeals to the public at large." Reading is important. This means that the ruling cannot be applied to anyone and everyone as a blanket coverage.

Yes people change jobs all the time. Just because a judge then is not a judge now doesn't mean that their findings are any less important. This is why lawyers cite previous findings in their legal arguments. That's how the law works.

But since you are so loathe to base your argument on fact and only your own conjecture. I will offer you another source that writes about First and Fourth amendment issues with NCAA policing social media:
http://www.texasbar.com/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Texas_Bar_Journal&Templa...

In it Browning writes:

While it's true that universities have considerable reputational and tangible investments at stake in their athletic programs, student-athletes are still students first and foremost, not merely living billboards for a school's sports programs. As such, they have rights.

and before you dismiss his credentials as flippantly as you did the Harvard journal, because you have no actual facts to use, he is regarded as one of the foremost experts on the law and social media. His accolades include:

being a 2009 and 2010 recipient of the prestigious Burton Award for Achievement in Legal Writing; rated AV, the highest commendation issued by Martindale-Hubbell for legal ability, ethics, and professionalism; selected as a Super Lawyer in the field of Civil Ligation Defense (20052010, Law & Politics); inducted as a Charter Fellow of the Litigation Counsel of America, a trial lawyer honorary society limited to 3,500 Fellows, representing less than one-half of one percent of American lawyers; and elected to the American Law Institute (one of only seven lawyers in Texas elected in 2009).

http://texasbarcollege.com/Reports/JohnGBrowning.pdf (bio page)

So again, what you say is false. wrong. factually inaccurate. This is a First Amendment issue. Simply saying it isn't doesn't make it so.

I forgot about ermon lane. I think dupre is going the lsu way, but who knows

Right... Weaver's default kickoff time was 1:30 and it was only the Western Carolinas of the world that showed up in that slot. If the game is on TV we have zero control over when the game starts. Every single game we have played at noon has been because television has told us to play at noon.

Went I went to get mine, they were out of my size so, I never even got the opportunity to purchase mine.
I'd definitely like to buy some.

If Lefty had been around when we were recruiting Thomas, Boyd, Manuel, etc, I think we would have had a much better chance with those other guys, which would have allowed LT to stay at tight end. Now, if Thomas and Lefty arrived at the same time (and we had already missed on those other guys), then yes I think he would have kept him at QB and we'd have a 2nd year starter getting ready for the OSU game.

The NCAA already bans contact between boosters and prospective recruits. You do realize this, right? This includes phone calls, letters, etc. If you meet the definition of a booster, you can't talk to a recruit at all until he gets on campus. Doing so would get the school in trouble if they didn't do everything in their power to shut it down. It doesn't apply to the entire populace, only those who are involved in college athletics. To my knowledge, no one has challenged this rule because it's an entirely valid rule. Why is tweeting recruits any different than calling recruits or showing up at their door?

As to your replies:

1) You're changing the question. You asked if athletes are always on the clock, which they are since athletes get punished for things done away from campus since it embarrasses the school. They aren't employees, and the NCAA doesn't want them to be employees because then they'd have much larger issues.

2) You asked if recruits who aren't signed yet able to be limited. They clearly are because if they do things which make them ineligible then they can become ineligible when they get to college. Just because you don't like the answer doesn't mean you can ignore it.

I'm familiar with how law journals work. Please don't lecture me on this. The actual legal finding was that the school association's restrictions were proper and did not strike at the 1st Amendment. That is the law. Anything else written by the author, while well researched, is her opinion. It is not the law. The holding in the case said nothing about other issues and therefore is dicta regarding other issues. Also, that involved a "state actor", so the 1st Amendment was implicated. The NCAA is not a state actor. The justice who wrote that particular opinion is no longer on the Supreme Court. Another justice who joined there isn't on the Court any more. The makeup of the rest of the justices could be completely different. Exrapolating what the Court will do in the future is always murky.

"if you want to form an argument then find something, anything, to support what you say. Right now you have nothing."

I have the NCAA and the compliance officers all saying don't do it. I have a long-standing ban on boosters talking to recruits that's never been challenged. You have a law journal speculating that a future challenge may be successful. I like where I'm standing here.

Could be true if FSU ends its WR haul in its current form. But Ermon Lane is probable to commit and there is at least a chance that Malachi Dupre could commit. With Rashad Greene, Rudolph, and Lane, Harrison is probably the #4 option. And lets not forget O'Leary at TE. I really do believe that Harrison is an elite talent but that is a lot of elite mouths to feed.

Now if Dupre commits to LSU and Worton or somebody decommits I would be a little more worried.

I like the model too, so long as it doesn't impact our ability to be better than what is status quo.

My problem is that it impacts the amount of coaching individual players get. We all know that 1's and 2's get the most looks and the most work. 3'2 and 4's not nearly as much. Those on scout get very little. Coaches are spread very thin as it is and so individually providing tutelage to so many kids is not possible. A larger staff means that player development personnel can be hired to coach up kids who are the 3's, 4's and Scout.

If you look at a program like Bama at first glance you would say they have the recruits. So many highly sought after incredible athletes. Yes they do, but they are all still just kids and they all need work. Some are ready now but most are not. yet every year they have very little drop off in talent. Why? Just because they had the recruits? No. Because they have so many development personnel that are building these kids up so that when they do get to be 1's and 2's there is no drop off. Saban and the coaches concentrate on game plans, recruiting and 1's and 2's only.

If having a larger staff means this can happen then I am all for it, and it can still be a family atmosphere.

The only templates I have access to are the 2012 and 13 ones. If enough people want copies of the older shirts that is something that could possibly be explored down the road.