Clarification on contacting recruits

Submitted by Blue in Yarmouth on July 14th, 2011 at 9:14 AM

Last week there was a thread regarding contacting recruits. In essence it stated that anyone who contacted a recruit became a booster. It also suggested that anyone who spoke to a recruit and suggested that recruit should attend a specific school would be in violation of NCAA bylaws.

After reading the actual bylaw I disagreed with this interpretation of the OP and tried to describe why, but many disagreed with my interpretation (which is fine, that is what debates are all about). Since I still had questions as to how someone like myself could be considered a "booster" (a person who isn't an alumni, isn't a season ticket holder, has never been on campus, never donated money, and don't belong to any "booster associations) I contacted UM compliance in regard to my question.

I can't copy and paste the emails on my phone so I will give you the highlights of what she (Elizabeth Heinrich, Assistant Athletic Director of Compliance at UM) said: First I will be clear that my question was how could a person who has no affiliation with a university other than being a fan be considered a "person of athletic interest" which is what they call boosters. Her response was someone fitting that description would not be committing a violation by simply talking to a recruit and passing the idea that said recruit should attend a specific university. She continued by stating that a person fitting my description above would only be found to be committing a violation if they offered something in exchange for their commitment (money etc), but simply saying they should attend a university is not a violation.

To be clear, this only covers a person fitting my description above. If you are a season ticket holder, student, alumni, etc you may fit the definition of "booster" as set out in the NCAA bylaws. I also want to be clear that I think anyone (short of people who actually know a recruit or work in the industry like TVH) who contacts these recruits is taking far too much interest in recruiting and is likely doing far more harm than good.

I posted this so that people who may have been left with uncertainties after reading the previous thread (like myself) could have a more definitive answer as to whether a person with no affiliation to a university would be committing a violation by contacting a recruit and offering them nothing more than advise as to where to attend university. A societal violation, NCAA violation, no. Hope that clears it up. 

It also clarifies that people who are simply fans of a University who may attend the odd game here and there but are not alumni or make donations to the University are not considered boosters by the NCAA.



July 14th, 2011 at 9:58 AM ^

Yeah, when they did the Droid App I thought everyone was pretty much covered, but I didn't think of that. If it makes you feel any better, I think the disappearing paragraphs thing is pretty standard for a mobile browser on here. The App doesn't let you mark what board the post is on, so it doesn't appear on the board page unless you then log into the browser and drag down.
<br>But you can do paragraphs, with big spaces.

Blue in Yarmouth

July 14th, 2011 at 10:05 AM ^

That is a big space. It seems in comments the spacing works ok, but not in the OP for some reason.

Don't ask me the reason though. I am not the most technologically advanced person around. Not necessarily technoloically impaired, but not advanced either.

ND Sux

July 14th, 2011 at 9:22 AM ^

this is the best part:

"anyone (short of people who actually know a recruit or work in the industry like TVH) who contacts these recruits is taking far too much interest in recruiting and is likely doing far more harm than good."

Well put...our staff doesn't appear to need much help. 


July 14th, 2011 at 9:22 AM ^


If Hoke wanted your help he'd ask.  Secondly it's creepy and wrong.  Finally the NCAA rules are byzantine and odds are you'll fuck something up.  At which point the rest of us show up and celebrate the sanctions by razing your house.


July 14th, 2011 at 9:40 AM ^

Anyone who has gone to field level during pregame can attest to the fact that there are always fans calling for high-profile recruits to "Go Blue!"  Are those instances violations?  Of course not.  That is part of the recruit's experience, and something they should remember forever.  There is no way in the world that can be stopped, nor should it be.  But according to the memo referenced by the OP, those would technically be violations.

That said, anything more than that (i.e. facebook/twitter contact, phone calls, e-mails, personal conversations) is just not a good idea.  It's not only creepy, but also borderline harassment.  You said it best, CRex, creepy and wrong.

EDIT: For clarification, it is not my style to yell at recruits during pregame, I was simply using that as an example of what I have seen and know goes on at nearly every D1 football game.


July 14th, 2011 at 9:29 AM ^

Thanks for the info.
<br>(I know that MGoEtiquette dictates that I make some sort of snide comment to you at this point or be a dick to you in some way, but you really don't deserve that just for passing along information.)

Blue in Yarmouth

July 14th, 2011 at 11:09 AM ^

I know you said that in jest, but I'll give you the NCAA's take anyway. If I was a lobster fisherman (or store owner or employer of any kind) and was considered a booster of UM, I could still give a guy a job if he was paid fair market price for the job he did.

Now, if I took him lobster fishing for fun and the NCAA thought that would be considered a benefit... I would take an NCAA rep out for a day of lobster fishing and see how big a "benefit" they thought it was at the end of the day.

- lobster fished with my Dad for two years after high school and that was all the incentive I needed to buckle down and get

Oh, and what shrine in Cole Harbour? I haven't been in that area much so I haven't heardd of it.


July 14th, 2011 at 10:15 AM ^

who profess to love the manly toughness of MANBALL and POINTING, but when it comes to reading one single long paragraph without a line break by a long-time MGoBlogger, they fall to their knees weeping in ocular exhaustion, as though they've never had to read a book from the Grad Library that isn't primarily pictures with 24-pt type. Jesus.


July 14th, 2011 at 6:50 PM ^

I don't get it. What's the fascination with wanting to contact 17 or 18 year old kids? Wanting to follow them on twitter and give them advice? Is your name Ted Sarniak? 

Agree with above post: if Coach Hoke or staff wanted your help they would ask for it. They seem to be alright for themselves.

Blue in Yarmouth

July 14th, 2011 at 8:05 PM ^

was your post directed at me? I'm genuinely asking because I made it clear at least twice in the post that Ithink contacting recruits is an extreme invasion of privacy and a bad idea.

Perhaps it was because my OP was all one paragraph so you didn't read the whole thing which is understandable, but if you read my whole post and came away with idea i contact recruits...Ihave to seriously question your comprehension skills.

This post was meant to provide some clarity to the topic because it was discussed last week and many suggested the bylaw meant that anyone who spoke to a recruit automatically became a booster and was therefore committing a violation in the NCAA's eyes The response I received from UM compliance showed that was not at all the case so I thought I would clear it up.