New NCAA Rule Could Make "Coach In Waiting" A Thing Of The Past In College Football?
by ccmachine on Feb 11, 2010 10:06 AM CST
in Football
Email
Print
The Texas Longhorns and Maryland Terrapins have found themselves in a precarious spot due to a new NCAA rule change. Both schools have named coaches in waiting and now both schools have lost crucial recruiting time. The new rule states assistants "publicly designated" to be the next head coach are now bound by the same recruiting rules as the current head coach. What this means for Maryland and Texas is that James Franklin and Will Muschamp can only make one off campus visit to a prospect and it can't be between April 15 - May 31.
"We are exploring our options for legislative relief within the NCAA process, since we believe this places our program at a direct disadvantage. Will is our head coach-in-waiting but he is also our defensive coordinator, and this legislation restricts his ability to perform his current job duties," Texas athletic director DeLoss Dodds said.
No, Mr. Dodds, what it does is put you on an even playing surface with everyone else when it comes to recruiting. Sure the Longhorns are going to appeal this to the best of their ability but unless that is met with success Texas is faced with the choice of either not having their best recruiter out on the road or removing the head coach designate label.
21 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Actually it doesn't make it even
It puts us at a disadvantage since it gives our DC a restriction that doesn’t apply to anyone else. If you want to say that the HCIW designation is an advantage then fine, but this new rule makes it a disadavantage. It does not “level the playing field.” I believe we already have contract language that gives Muschamp the HCIW so it may not be so simple to just remove.
It is interesting that the NCAA is doing this now, after all many other programs have had HCIW positions. Additionally, the NCAA recruiting cabinet was against this.. Also, if this is such a huge advantage why aren’t other programs doing it? Look at the programs that are doing this. Maryland, Purdue(I think), FSU, and Texas are the ones I can think of. Only Texas is a top program and they were a top program before they did this.
Honestly, the two best classes in the nation according to ESPN were pulled in by Kiffin and Meyer. Not exactly paragons of program stability right now but it didn’t slow them down.
The problem is that there's no middle ground
NCAA says its an advantage to have the HCIW on the recruiting trail (something that I agree with) and Texas says that its a disadvantage to have the DC bound to the campus. The thing is that he does get one in home visit so its not like he can’t go out at all. Another possible solution for Texas would be to promote someone to a co-DC position and let him be the spokesperson for Muschamp. Not the same (I know) but it is somewhere in the middle.
Off subject...
Since you and I have had this discussion before I thought this may be of interest. I did not think it was appropriate for me to post it as a fanshot or fanpost since I know I hate it when others post this on BON to gloat.
ATX
Embarrasing...and led to a loss against TTU..
No more Burlington Coat Factory and Dillard’s for our guys.
by HoustonSooner on Feb 11, 2010 1:55 PM CST up reply actions
Just curious
But what do you see as the advantage of having a HCIW being on the recruiting trail? Maybe I’m missing something, but it seems like HCIW is just a label, and if I were Muschamp, I would just go to Brown and Dodds and tell them to “demote” me, basically removing his title.
I'm not here to make UT-Austin's argument
But Florida State got away with this for many years. (Although, Jimbo Fisher was never, as I can recall, the great coaching commodity that Will Muschamp is.) I like the rule because it hurts the chief rival and always enjoy when UT-Austin whines, but what if Stoops and Castiglione get a Muschamp-like coaching star and want to make him the HCIW someday to put the chastity belt on him to keep him from fleeing to potential suitors?
by HoustonSooner on Feb 11, 2010 2:03 PM CST up reply actions
just do away with the whole head coach in waiting title, it’s not like it’s helping us keep him at Texas. we’re still sitting here wringing our hands when Kiffin runs from Tenn, and will do the same when Georgia’s HC gets fired next year. he’s not contractually obligated to stay at Texas.
i think the rule is retarded, the advantages it gives Texas aren’t nearly as great as the disadvantages of not having our top recruiter/national guy/defensive coordinator able to leave campus. he’s not the head coach, he’s waiting to become the head coach. just like countless other coordinators around the country. he should not be treated the same, perhaps limit his recruiting powers (3, 4, 5 offcampus visits, whatever), but don’t hamstring him with some bullsh** rule because Texas is seeing little benefit, and actually alot of detriment to their recruiting by doing this.
by Displaced Longhorn on Feb 11, 2010 12:56 PM CST reply actions
Not feeling sorry for you guys
This is an example of a school having their cake and eating it too. Muschamp was a hot commodity and an even hotter commodity now, and UT-Austin wanted to put him in the “Conan O’ Brien” position to promise a job while trying to push (or gently nudge) Mackie out the door. Which is a pretty apt and funny comparison once you think about it. (Okay…Mackie doesn’t have Leno’s chin, but both men have that same superficially nice and charming quality until you get to know them and have great abilities dealing with the media..but it’s clear that Brown is doing really well right now against his chief rival just as Leno was when he was pushed out the door…Maybe UT could make Mackie AD once Dodds inevitably retires. That would make OU Letterman, and I don’t know if I like that comparison.)
Also, what UT-Austin fans don’t want to admit is that like Leno, Mackie is not going anywhere. The scuttlebutt I have heard is that he had a heart to heart meeting with DKR who warned him not to retire too early. DKR still to this day regrets retiring when he did.
All signs point to an NBC-like debacle here, and I will enjoy every minute of it. All I know is, if I were Muschamp, I wouldn’t stick around much longer. OU hangs half a hundred on Muschamp’s D and his stock plummets. Bold prediction: Will Muschamp will never be the HC at UT-Austin.
And Displaced, if UT-Austin weren’t seeing any benefit from this, why did they make Muschamp the HCIW?
by HoustonSooner on Feb 11, 2010 1:54 PM CST up reply actions
Not contractually obligated?
Not trying to be snarky here, because I really don’t know, but does Muschamp have a buyout of his deal if he leaves prematurely before he is named HC? The university attorneys would be stupid if they simply have an illusory promise from Muschamp to stay and be the HC without a subtantial buyout in the contract.
by HoustonSooner on Feb 11, 2010 2:06 PM CST up reply actions
afaik no coach on the football staff has a buyout, if they want to leave, they can go. i dont’ have a link or anything to offer, maybe some other Texas fan can back me up/refute me
by Displaced Longhorn on Feb 11, 2010 7:07 PM CST up reply actions
Who's really behind this
I’m not entirely convinced this isn’t part of some insidious Big Ten plot to force someone out of the Big 12.
by Bill Self's Hair Piece on Feb 11, 2010 10:27 PM CST reply actions
Those Bastards!
our recruiting competition with those schools is just getting out of hand!
"You have been banned from the Purple Row, for Inappropriate conduct, profanity, (&) telling site authors their articles are crap."
In the words of a co-worker with multiple medical degrees from Texass : If you dont want other schools courting him & you designate that title, this rule is the sacrifice you have to make. Take your pick which way you want it.
To which I replied “….. but, but, but WE’RE TEXAS!” lmao…
your coworker sounds like they don’t follow football very well… he’s still being courted by other schools (ie. Tennessee). the HCIW title doesn’t do anything to ensure he stays at Texas.
by Displaced Longhorn on Feb 12, 2010 6:23 PM CST up reply actions
well since he is a season ticket holder, has been for years & his wife’s family has a suite at DKR, I would say he follows Texass football. If it doenst stop him from talking to other schools etc then why bother with the title??? Seriously, if he isnt contracturally obligated then Texass should stop crying foul & drop the title, what is the big deal in that case… I mean since Texass claims it doesnt benefit them or him…..
as we all grow older
we can find and see many many places where the Texassians cry about everything. they almost have the ’they’re pickin on me’ syndrome.
This rule is a fair one, but...
I have no problem with this new rule, as OU JJ said,
If you dont want other schools courting him & you designate that title, this rule is the sacrifice you have to make
In the future, this makes sense, but the rule didn’t exist when UT appointed Muschamp as HCIW. UT and Maryland have every right to complain if the rule is enforced, as they should be grandfathered in. To argue otherwise is foolish, as why should UT be punished for something they did before the rule was even proposed? This would be like creating a law that all houses in Oklahoma have to be at most 2 stories tall, and then going around and fining anyone with a mansion…
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
