How is Archie Collins not a booster and therefore under the NCAA scanner for W.Gholston

Submitted by DesHow21 on

Archie is a former MSU player and I assume alumni..so is by definition, a booster. He also happens to conveniently have W.Gholston living with him. Therefore Gholston has no pretty much no choice but to go to MSU when he has the Alabama's and USC's of the world chasing him. If distance is an issue Michigan should fit the bill just as well as anybody else. Yet Gholston has pretty much not even made a pretense of considering anybody else.

How the hell is NCAA not investigating this? How is this any different from Michael Oher living with the white family who were Ole Miss boosters and deciding to go Ole Miss to play his college ball?

chitownblue2

January 6th, 2010 at 4:20 PM ^

Did the NCAA stop Oher from going to Ole Miss? I don't understand your comparison.

If an alumni of a school encourages you to attend the school, that's not tampering.

DesHow21

January 6th, 2010 at 4:35 PM ^

Coach -> has limited leverage, cannot put the kid on the street.

Guardian -> Very murky. Lots of room for shenanigans...that why an investigation should always happen, I think, if the commitment is suspicious. If the guardian wants the kid to go to UF and UF wants him and gets him and FIU loses out, that sounds reasonable, vice versa, not so much.

Erik_in_Dayton

January 6th, 2010 at 4:33 PM ^

The word "booster" takes on its pejorative association when fans of a school give benefits to a player to get that player to go to their favorite school or because the player already goes to the school. There's no showing of that here.

bcsblue

January 6th, 2010 at 4:36 PM ^

The school has to give Archie something. Or be part of an organization that gives the something/ puts on events ie Victors Club or something. Ed Martin got free Michigan tickets once. So he was a "booster"

Clarence Beeks

January 6th, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^

Since we are in tin foil hat land, I'll briefly partake. Hankins going to OSU is rather interesting given Archie's ties to MSU and the fact that MSU didn't have interest in Hankins and vice versa. It almost makes me wonder if Archie pushed Hankins, a player of middling ability according to the services, to OSU so that if he ever were pressed based on his dealings with other players that he can say "look, see, I don't just funnel players to Michigan State". It just seems fishy to me that given Archie's ties to MSU that MSU wasn't in on Hankins.

bouje

January 6th, 2010 at 4:35 PM ^

How DARE HE steer his son to the University of Michigan where he is a coach!

Glass houses and all that stuff.

GCS

January 6th, 2010 at 4:45 PM ^

He's trying to point out how common things like the Gholston/Collins living situation are.

It's like the defense for Michigan's practice limits allegations: if this is a violation, then there are a whole hell of a lot of other schools committing violations too.

bouje

January 6th, 2010 at 4:51 PM ^

A booster has a player who is being recruited to play football living with him.

How is that different? Oh right it's not.

Archie Collins: MSU alum
Gholston: Lives with Collins gets steered to MSU because of living arrangement
Coach Jackson: Michigan Coach
Jeremy Jackson: Lives with Coach Jackson and has been bred to love Michigan (assuming here) and is probably steered to Michigan by his dad who is a coach.

I'd love to know how those are different situations because the only difference is the biological aspects of the parties involved. Why not go after Step fathers then who steer their kids to schools?

This whole Archie Collins thing is wrong and I think that he's a douche but all coaches are going to have a natural bias to one program or another.

Blue in Yarmouth

January 7th, 2010 at 2:08 PM ^

I think there is a definite difference in the situations you are comparing.

Most (and I stress most) parents first priority is the wellbeing of their children. Parents would certainly try to steer their children in certain directions in life, but there may be times when the child doesn't take the advice and may even do the complete opposite. Despite that, the parent still loves their child, regardless of the fact that they went against what the parent wanted.

In the case of a gaurdian (legal or otherwise) I wouldn't think that is the case. In fact, I would wager more often than not it isn't the case.

When I played in the CHL I lived with a family that I had never met before. It was a very strained relationship as they were very religous people and I.......well, I was a little bit of a wild teenager. They had rules in their house that I had to follow or pay the consequences.

I yielded to these rules for a while (went to church on Sunday and came in by 9pm etc etc etc) because I knew if I didn't I was out. After a few months though it was just too much and I broke their rules and was kicked out.

My point is, people who aren't a child's parent can hold things over a kid without the same feelings a parent would have. Let's say Archie says "Either you go to MSU or you don't have a place to live" would that be a violation? I'm not sure and am genuinely asking.

Really my main point was simply that there is a difference between gaurdians and parents, simply put.

Clarence Beeks

January 7th, 2010 at 3:49 PM ^

This is exactly the point I was trying to make by asking whether Archie is actually is legal guardian or whether Gholston just lives with him. The billet family example is exactly what I had in mind when I asked, but I didn't explain it because I have a feeling that 95%+ of the people who read and post here have no idea what a billet family is. You explained that way better than I could have. Nicely done!

03 Blue 07

January 6th, 2010 at 5:49 PM ^

...re Crawford, I recall that it was that he got popped for driving a car that belonged to a longtime family friend who may or may not have been his legal guardian and this was an NCAA violation of some sort. (Methinks probably not his legal guardian) If your statement re: AAU coach is correct, it could definitely jive with the idea that AAU coach + Car + Crawford + Crawford being NCAA athlete = fishiness/suspension.

/end conjecture based on sketchy memory of something that happened 10 years ago next month.

I do know he got suspended the day OF the MSU game, after I'd already made a $100 vs. shave my head bet on the pre-suspension spread with an MSU grad when I was a freshman at M. I looked bad with a shaved head.

jmblue

January 6th, 2010 at 6:17 PM ^

Crawford didn't live with an AAU coach. He lived, at least part of the time, with a local businessman (whose motives were never entirely clear) who gave him gifts. Because the businessman was not his legal guardian, the gifts were ruled an "extra benefit" and his amateur status would be compromised if he did not pay back the $15K or so they were worth. He went pro instead.

OSUMC Wolverine

January 6th, 2010 at 4:47 PM ^

If you're a booster and give a check to a prospect and the check bounces, is that still a violation? Would the piece of paper, proven worthless, still be considered a benefit? Is it the intent of the booster or the result of the relationship that matters? For that matter, is it enough that the recruit thought the paper had value to create a violation? Of course none of it matters as long as you don't get caught. Sorry...had to do it. :)

Other Chris

January 6th, 2010 at 4:57 PM ^

I'm not a booster as far as Virginia is concerned because I have not given any money to any athletic teams or programs other than purchasing tickets. My alumni association membership and my donations to an academic scholarship fund there do not make me a booster for the purposes of these sorts of issues.

However, I *have* given money to a (non-revenue) program at Michigan and get annual warnings about what I may and may not do as a booster. I never got those as an alum before I made the donation.

chitownblue2

January 6th, 2010 at 5:19 PM ^

-Cash or loans of any amount,
-Co-signing or arranging a loan,
-Gifts of free services (e.g. airline tickets, restaurant meals, use of an automobile, etc.),
-Rent-free or reduced cost housing,
-Employment of a student-athlete at a rate higher than the wages paid for similar work, or
-Payment to a student-athlete for work not performed.