Nick Baumgardner drops a nuke on Nick Saban
Saban -- who has, of course, won four national titles at Alabama -- is literally in the middle of a situation where recruiting violations within his program were found. An assistant coach has been forced to resign and the school currently is awaiting the result of that NCAA investigation.
And if that were the only thing going here, it'd probably be enough. But it's not.
Like in 2009 when a businessman paid for stars Mark Ingram and Julio Jones to go on a fishing trip. Or in 2013 when a former Alabama player was caught giving Tide offensive lineman D.J. Fluker impermissible benefits. Or later that same yearwhen Saban had to fire a staffer after he paid safety Ha Ha Clinton-Dix.
Anyone remember that whole deal about the disassociated Alabama booster who continued to sell signed Crimson Tide merchandise -- from players who still were on the team -- back in 2014?
Yeah.
But there was Saban -- who has an NCAA rule honorarily named after him -- on Tuesday, demanding answers on whether or not a few summer camps would be on the up and up. So there was Harbaugh, who correctly decided to give the old "are you seriously going to sit there and say this with a straight face?" reply.
http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/index.ssf/2016/06/column_jim_harbaugh_nick_saban.html
Sounds like there's a legit concern about the camps buried somewhere in Sabin's rant. I just don't know enough about the AAU and/or basketball recruiting to know what these concerns might be. It'd be an interesting, substantive topic for this thread to veer into.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
In that Harbaugh’s twitter destruction was about calling out Saban’s hypocracy as opposed to defending satellite camps (which I believe was unnecessary after the backlash that many coaches expressed last month after the NCAA initially banned them).
The reality of recruiting is that the top prospects are not being identified by these camps. Everybody knows of the Rashan Gary, Ha Ha type kids who were NFL bound by the 10th grade. That's the level of recruit that is approached for "impermissible benefits", not the generic 3*.
Even if it were, why/ how does a 2-5 hour summer camp increase the "impermissible benefits" that recruits would receive? At most, a kid who would have gone to an FCS or D2 school gets noticed by a Rutgers or MAC team and gets an offer or maybe Michigan/ OSU decide to offer a kid with FCS/ D2 offers. I'm sure these are not the kids the boosters are paying.
Then you get into the regulation itself. Aside from the NCAA being a shitshow with randomly assigned punishments, what is regulated (# of camps, camp hours, location of camps?).
Once that's figured out, wht happens to the kids that are poor (and can't now attend a camp that is far away) or the kids that are in smaller/ lesser known high schools or the kids with poor high school coaching (seriously, our HS football coach was the former elementary school gym teacher)?
After that's all agreed upon, who does the enforcing? Should the NCAA hire a bunch of old white men to go around policing the camps?
Saban is a hypocrite and hasn't fully thought this out. He's also won by cheating (as documented by the article in the OP).
Last year there were stories about Michigan compliance people traveling with the coaches to coaches so no violations occur. I assume that is still the case. If Michigan's taking the steps to run a clean camp, there should be no reason to restrict what Michigan is doing.
The attention should be focused on the violations which the NCAA has already indicated they can't handle.
I also agree the competitions that bring the top talent would be far more of an attraction to the bagmen and others trying to get access to the top recruits. I can't see them wasting time on these and the more there are, the more difficult it would be to hit enough camps to make it worthwhile.
I'm sure there will be problems, but there are problems in College Football overall. See the Alabama coach problem as an example. What will happen to Alabama? Probably next to nothing. That's what the problem is.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I disagree, but your comment gets down to practical levels, so I like it.
School-run camps are run by the school. The guy signing you in at the desk? He works for the athletic department. The guy pointing you toward the restrooms? He works for compliance. The coaches running the drills? They're on staff at the university. The guy handing out t-shirts at the end? He's the recruiting coordinator. Etc.
When Alabama or Michigan runs a camp at their school, they have control over who gets on the field, who sits in the stands, where people park, how fees get paid, etc.
When Sound Mind Sound Body (or its equivalent) takes place and there are 60 schools there with "coaches" or "administrators" milling around, there's no university control over who steps on the field. There's no control over how fees get paid or where that money goes. There's no supervision of who meets whom underneath the bleachers or behind the field house.
So all this concern is to ensure that camp fees are paid? Seriously?
Sure. In the same way that the entire Bill of Rights is about a well regulated militia.
The concerns I see are "Make sure camp fees are paid." My response: who cares. "Meeting people under the bleachers": who cares. All the issues I see you bringing up are making sure the NCAA's ridiculous "improper benefits" rules are followed.
Ummm...okay. Even if you think the rules are ridiculous, that doesn't change the fact that they're rules. If you want to change the rules about improper benefits, that's fine, but Saban's comments (and mine) weren't about changing those rules. They were about how to best enforce the rules already in place.
If Saban was really interested in "how to best enforce the rules already in place," he would do well to, you know, stop breaking them himself. He doesn't care about the rules being broken, he cares about recruiting. That's it. When a disingenuous gasbag pretends to care about one set of rules while blatantly breaking sevral others, I don't care what he has to say. And I'm glad he gets called out on it.
Even if it did go directly to a coach or individual, it is not against the rules but neither was the 'Bama bowl practices at the HS of Clinton-Dix -- which included upgrading the school's weight room FoC as well.
Do not for one second think this isn't a targeted strategy by Harbaugh.
-- Camps raise overall awareness of M = improved long term recruiting
-- Build relationships with local HS coaches though camp interaction = improved long term recruiting in the area
-- Raise specific Coach and School's profile by holding camp there (and maybe some extra cash by larger attendance?). = improved recruiting ins at that school now and long-term
-- Identify and hire up-and-coming HS coaches to M staff (win-win here) = improved recruiting knowledge and connections in those areas for the long term.
Jim probably does "just love coaching the kids" but this is all about recruiting and raising M's profile. What the mouth-breathers at RCMB fail to grasp is that the results are not about specific recruit(s) and the 2016 recruiting class.
...and when the kid doesn't go to a camp, and is sitting on his front porch, or working out unsupervised at the local high school - where is the supervision of who meets whom underneath the bleachers or behind the field house?
And it certainly doesn't outweigh the benefit to the local kid who otherwise might never see out of state schools. Or only see them on private visits with a train of bagmen in tow.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
The same "under the bleachers" (figurative) argument can be made about camps on campus. The university doesn't control who stands outside the big house, and a lot of camps are open to media and the public.
Plus, this same thing can happen at recruits high school games, practices, outside their school, online, or at any other event. There are tons of opportunities for shady third parties to introduce themselves to recruits. The risk is already there. Satellite camps may introduce one additional forum for it, but it is not adding any risk that isn't already there in abundance. It's a really weak argument.
On top of that, people who want to "regulate" camps somehow have to reach the conclusion that a coach doing 10 camps (or some other arbitrary number) will not have a negative impact on third parties being introduced, but doing 11 camps will.
Lets not forget that his (Saban's) first statement that started this whole mess was that Harbaugh was "pathetic" and "irrelevant." Then the mouth of the south chimed in...well, that's where we are.
It would have been a lot easier if Saban and stated, "hey, more power to Jim Harbaugh and Michigan, but I'm not going to run things that way, and this is why...." whatever...blah blah blah. But no, he didn't. He turned it into a crusade.
He's an ass. That's why we have the line of attack on Saban.
I've been convinced since the camp concept was jumped on by Harbaugh that there were two things that JH wanted to accomplish. In no particular order:
1. The South is a recruiting rich environment and Meyer and Franklin had advantages from prior coaching positions that Michigan did not. Holding camps in the South makes recruiting easier.
2. When Harbaugh arrived at Michigan, with the exception of 2011, there had been seven years of Michigan not being a national power and not getting the type of positive coverage that Michigan had been used to. To that end, the SEC/ACC did Harbaugh a huge favor by putting him in the spotlight ever since he showed up in Ann Arbor with their constant noise and then the camp ban this Spring. It has been non-stop coverage and Harbaugh gets brownie points for all of his camp participation.
Magnus, I don't see any easy means of the NCAA limiting camps without getting involved in a discussion of antitrust by eliminating opportunity.
IMHO, his point is pointless. Feel free to correct me if I am wrong as you know more about recruiting than I ever will, but with all these extra camps, it is not likely that Michigan will find the unknown 4/5 star, they already know who they are usually. This is mostly to get the Michigan name and acceptance out there more in the South AND as a side benefit, it gets a lot of unknown 2/3 stars some limelight and exposure to the second/third tier schools.
Will these 2/3 stars get involved with 3rd parties since their upside may not be that great, and the 4/5 stars may already have their 3rd parties associated with them so how does having more Michigan camps get more 3rd parties involved than they already are. Compare saban's logic to all the bag men that the ess eee see schools already employ and it does look silly.
You're right that these satellite camps at this point are more about getting the Michigan "brand" out there, but keep in mind that there are rising 9th, 10th, 11th, and 12th grade kids attending these camps. There are also those 2019 and 2020 kids who are having Harbaugh, Drevno, Brown, etc. interact with them early in their high school careers, and not all of those kids are already identified as surefire 4- and 5-stars.
I think third parties can have an effect on all levels of recruits. No, it's not the average 2-star recruit who gets loaner cars and offers to buy houses. But on a lesser level, other people can get involved in recruitments. And keep in mind that the recruiting services and the schools don't always see eye-to-eye. A kid who's a 3-star to Scout.com may be a "high 4-star" to an individual team. If you look at kids' offer lists, they don't always match up to what ESPN says. Teams aren't bidding for you based on your rankings. They're bidding for you on how much they want you and how hard other programs are pushing. A 3-star recruit with offers from USC, Florida, Texas, Alabama, Auburn, Clemson, etc. is obviously more of a target than a 3-star recruit with offers from Florida Atlantic, SMU, and Boise State.
Saban doesn't give a shit if there are violations coming from these camps. He simply doesn't want to give up ANY recruiting advantage. Therefore, he'll say any BS to establish that wall around the south.
I don't think its more complicated than that.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
You can enjoy whatever you want. Personally, I'm not a fan of our coach calling out other programs/coaches over Twitter. I also think the satellite camp issue is unresolved, and Saban brings up some worthwhile points that are being ignored in the kerfuffle.
Don't get me wrong. I think Saban is an ass. I've seen him speak at a clinic, and I felt dirty the whole time I listened to him. He's absolutely trying to protect his recruiting territory, and that's obvious. That doesn't mean he's 100% wrong on the issue, though.
Not a 100% wrong, no. But the essense of his argument is total bull. So when the by-product of your bs argument has a bit of merit, I dismiss any of the value in the argument due to his disingenuousness.
So where's your critique of Saban's specific actions here? At least Harbaugh is honest about his opinion, lack of tact aside. Instead, it seems like you're on Saban's side in this particular matter and want to fully investigate his hypothetical dark conspiracy lurking in satellite camps before they should be allowed to go forward.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I've been called worse. I don't really care.
I'm not on anyone's side. I don't have to pick sides. This isn't a two-party system. I'm on the side of wanting to make sure that the rules are followed and preventing opportunities for people to skirt the rules. Whatever side that is, I'm on it.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I'm not making a general attack on you. I'm wondering why you side with Nick Saban on this particular issue, namely that shadiness at satellite camps is a unique and serious threat.
You say you're on the side of rule following, which again makes me wonder why your stance is "This is a serious issue and Harbaugh is bad for attacking Saban" and not "There may be some concerns with satellite camps but Saban is the last guy that should be lecturing anyone about rule following".
Blergh. This isn't about me. This is a microcosm of the problem I have with the discussion. Rather than discussing the issue, we're talking about Saban's hypocrisy, Harbaugh's tweeting ethics, and whether I'm forceful enough in my criticism of Saban's slimeballiness.
The guy doesn't give two sh*ts about NCAA rules so for him to sit on an imaginary high horse and wonder aloud if a satellite camp is going to result in violations is laughable.
I agree that satellite camps probably need some reasonable cap on them (e.g. coaches are allowed to hold X off-site camps per season, allowed X hours of off-site teaching etc.) but to hear Nick Saban attempt to look down his nose and Harbaugh is a joke.
If I heard a coach I respected say it (like maybe a Pat Fitzgerald or a Brady or a Richrod) then sure, their concern is probably well founded. Saban is just concern trolling
I agree, and I'm not a huge fan of The Opening (or similar camps) for that reason.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Is that true? Or is that just a guess? Personally, I don't know if Saban has ever talked about the pros and cons of The Opening.
I'm genuinely not understanding the "third party" argument. How do satellite camps introduce third parties to the recruiting process in a way that is not already there? The coaches show up, interact directly primarily with recruits and other coaches only, and leave.
If anything, its a incremental increase in risk and not really worthy of an argument, unless I'm completely missing some line of reasoning.
Man, Magnus is really taking it on the chin. By my calculations, another 1,640 threads like this he'll be completely out of MGoPoints.
WD should have those 1,640 threads posted by next Tueday.
This isn't about satellite camps. Among other things, it's about Saban trying to manipulate the media to keep/put pressure on Harbaugh in some way, its about Harbaugh showing everyone he's not afraid to take on the biggest name in college coaching, its also about drawing attention to Alabama's and the SEC's historical recruiting tactics as part of why they have been so "amazingly" successful, and its about challenging the SEC and others to meet the academic standards and principles of Michigan.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
A few years ago when Southern California was placed on probation. Some people were surprised by the severity of the penalties (only USC fans, really). But in the report released by the NCAA, it was directly noted that the USC football program had previously been placed on probation five times since the early 1950s. I’m sure USC’s repeat violations had some impact on the severity of the penalties they received in 2010.
Listed below are the current FBS schools that have been placed on probation, in which the school’s football team was somehow involved. It’s important to keep in mind that violations in other sports often bring attention to a school’s entire athletic program. Sometimes the football violations paled in comparison to violations in other sports, but if the football program was involved I still listed them (i.e. Baylor’s probation from 2005-09).
College Football (FBS) Programs That Have Been Sanctioned the Most
Note: The count includes seasons not yet completed (i.e. USC 2012-2013).
Rk School Seasons Sanctioned
1 Southern Methodist (TX) 17 7
2 Southern California 15 6
3 Auburn (AL) 11 4
4t Alabama 10 3
4t Michigan St. 10 3
4t Oklahoma 10 5
7t Colorado 9 5
7t Illinois 9 5
7t Texas A&M 9 4
7t Wisconsin 9 4
11t Arizona St. 8 4
11t California 8 3
11t Cincinnati (OH) 8 4
11t Kansas 8 4
11t Kansas St. 8 4
11t Miami (FL) 8 3
11t Oklahoma St. 8 2
11t South Carolina 8 3
19t Florida Intl 7 2
19t Houston (TX) 7 3
19t Memphis (TN) 7 3
19t Mississippi 7 3
19t Mississippi St. 7 3
19t Ohio St. 7 3
19t Texas Tech 7 3
What's really impressive is that Saban coached for two different double-digit sanctioned schools.
I am so going to listen to what he has to say about "integrity of the game".