OTish: NCAA strikes again with Marcus Lattimore and South Carolina
So NCAA struck again with a ruling against Lattimore:
"The NCAA has stated that Lattimore cannot join Will Muschamp’s staff at USC due to Lattimore’s status as a former player and his presence through football camps and foundation. The NCAA considers it an unfair recruiting advantage."
Lattimore is able to help out but not get paid for it:
"So the NCAA isn't barring Lattimore from associating with the program and its players. It's just preventing him from getting paid by the school."
I'm guessing in some back room they decided that since they didn't profit enough from his playing days.
Here's the link to the article: https://www.yahoo.com/sports/blogs/ncaaf-dr-saturday/report--marcus-lat…
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 10:00 PM ^
NCAA = cum on the mirror
Am I doing this right?
April 15th, 2016 at 10:40 PM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 11:11 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 11:50 PM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 10:03 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 10:05 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 10:05 PM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 10:12 PM ^
It's a poorly written article. If he was being hired as a coach it'd be a non-issue apparently. The NCAA is rejecting him as a "non-coaching ambassador" for the team. Either way, they had to have just made that rule up.
If I was Lattimore I'd sign on as a student assistant and finish my degree.
April 15th, 2016 at 10:15 PM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 10:28 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 10:59 PM ^
Don't ruin the fun by considering the facts and thinking critically. Didn't you get the memo that you're supposed to just read the headline, assume the NCAA did something inspired by hades itself, and then write the most knee-jerk hyperbole you can think of?
April 15th, 2016 at 11:13 PM ^
you're so woke
April 15th, 2016 at 11:21 PM ^
April 16th, 2016 at 12:52 PM ^
U.Texas pays Vince Young $100k/year to do the same thing. So what's the difference?
April 15th, 2016 at 10:08 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 10:10 PM ^
The SBNation article does point out something about this that I do find interesting - LINK
But he's also someone who runs football camps and outreach programs for young athletes in the Palmetto State, and having him on staff at South Carolina while also being active in the community would station Lattimore with one foot in college football and another in prep football. And while the Marcus Lattimore Foundation is mostly interested in preventing and helping athletes cope with injuries, it does seem to provide financial support to potential recruits, so it's not hard to see how that alone could credibly create the "unfair recruiting advantage" the NCAA is against even if Lattimore were not putting on camps.
I think the idea is that he would have to give up the foundation and the prep football ties to work at South Carolina. That might be where the hang-up in actually hiring Lattimore might be.
April 15th, 2016 at 10:30 PM ^
But isn't that same thing - minus the money - as what Blackwell is doing with MSU? He founded and ran SMSB, which is where Dontania found him. And he just explained earlier this week that he is still involved in running the camp. Put the money thing aside, and Lattimore = Blackwell, so far as I can tell. So maybe the money is the difference maker, which I could respect.
April 16th, 2016 at 10:05 AM ^
From what I can tell there are a few differences. Lattimore wasn't going to be hired as a coach, it was more of an ambassador role for the school/athletic department. The other thing that stands out is that while Blackwell ran SMSB for a profit, he didn't provide financial assistance to potential student-athletes. I think the financial aspect is clearly the difference maker here and it appears the NCAA got this one right.
April 15th, 2016 at 10:11 PM ^
Someone will drop him some cash sooner or later.
April 15th, 2016 at 10:22 PM ^
It has to suck for him. Injured playing football to such a degree he wound up not really being able to hold up in the NFL. So he wants to come back and coach at his alma mater, but is barred because he tried to work with kids through a foundation. I know that there are foundations and outreach programs with shady characters involved and dubious intents, but this seems like a guy who just wanted to be involved with football.
April 15th, 2016 at 10:26 PM ^
He wasn't coming back to coach.
April 15th, 2016 at 10:23 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 11:47 PM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 10:36 PM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 10:43 PM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 10:43 PM ^
This actually seems like a pretty reasonable decision.
April 15th, 2016 at 10:55 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 11:12 PM ^
April 15th, 2016 at 11:17 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 11:19 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 15th, 2016 at 11:38 PM ^
Its not because he's an alum. Its because of his ties to his foundation and the help they give student-athletes.
April 16th, 2016 at 12:07 AM ^
The NCAA is so dirty if it weren't for the fact that I love Michigan so much I'd probably have abandoned college football. As it is, I sometimes feel pretty aweful for helping perpetuate a group that just screws young people.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
It's obvious that colleges have a recruiting advantage when their camps are held geographically close to the best high school teams. In order to offset this advantage, the NCAA MUST PERMIT OUT-OF-STATE CAMPS! Otherwise, it's a combination in restraint of trade in violation of the Shernan Act.
and the imediate reaction of many is blind outrage at the NCAA?
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 16th, 2016 at 10:16 AM ^
"The NCAA has stated that Lattimore cannot join Will Muschamp’s staff at USC due to Lattimore’s status as a former player and his presence through football camps and foundation. The NCAA considers it an unfair recruiting advantage." - the key point is buried. Lattimore runs a foundation that helps kids (i.e. football players in high school and younger) and so if he were a member of the U South Carolina staff as well it would be a conflict of interest. They can pay whatever they want but if he works for the school, he represents the school and is subject to the same recruiting rules - so this type of relationship and activity is not allowed.
That would be like a basketball program hiring as an advisor a guy who just happens to run major junior and senior high school camps and tournaments.
Some mentioned a medical example - there is actually such a type of law, the Stark law after congressman Pete Stark. Basically it prevents physicians having a financial stake in something that they might have a conflict of interest in - ex:pharmacies or imaging centers. Physicians then won't be tempted to refer their patients to those places.
The NCAA actually got it right here but totally bungled the press release.
April 16th, 2016 at 12:31 PM ^
Well explained here on all fronts.
Thank you.
April 16th, 2016 at 12:51 PM ^
Somehow, I doubt they would say Lattimore can't be on staff because he's a former player.
A USC site gave their summary or interpretation of the NCAA ruling. Every other site is quoting them and it looks as if they are directly quoting the NCAA.
April 16th, 2016 at 12:44 PM ^
SB Nation has a nice write up on this. http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2016/4/15/11441884/marcus-latt…
Soapbox moment: I feel we too often are ready to blindly bash the NCAA for their every move without fully understanding the rules or situation ourselves. The satallite camp thing is a good example. The NCAA didn't ban them. The conferences voted on an executive order proposed by the SEC. The conferences banned them, the NCAA doesn't have a say until later this month.
April 16th, 2016 at 11:32 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
April 16th, 2016 at 12:58 PM ^
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad