NCAA Division I Proposal - 2016-116 (includes additional coach)

Submitted by umbig11 on

For anybody that wants to read the NCAA proposal on Athletics Personnel & Recruiting -- Football Recruiting Model, you can do so here:

https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/search/proposalView?id=100331

Also, the proposal to ban spring practice away from campus:

https://web3.ncaa.org/lsdbi/search/proposalView?id=100316

All of these are expected to pass in April and the additional coach will be effective immediately.

MGoBoard
Football

CarrIsMyHomeboy

January 9th, 2017 at 3:43 PM ^

(1) So the "Harbaugh spring break" rule will be enforced across *all* sports(!)? That's drastic and surprising. Is there any language I missed that would continue to permit Bball Euro trips? (2) What kind of backing is there for this? (3) Given the timing (April), it appears Harbaugh can do whatever he wants for the 2017 spring break, though.

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 7324

YoOoBoMoLloRoHo

January 9th, 2017 at 4:01 PM ^

create two potential issues: 1) how is on-campus practice during "vacation" periods giving athletes their protected time, 2) a school could schedule a spring FB trip while classes are in session which seems more detrimental. They are clearly trying to block JH's idea, but I suspect the messiness with so many sports will give him enough latitude to find a creative way to keep his spring trips.

Joined: 11/01/2012

MGoPoints: 18049

LSAClassOf2000

January 9th, 2017 at 4:04 PM ^

Additionally, this proposal will serve to reduce costs that are associated with travel to off-campus locations for the sole purpose of practice outside the championship season. This concept is consistent with other proposed parameters aimed at emphasizing student-athlete time balance.

Most kind of them to frame the "Harbaugh Rule" as "cost conscious" as well so that it might market better, if you will, not that many coaches needed a lot of urging on this one sadly. 

Joined: 01/07/2011

MGoPoints: 130627

Lampuki22

January 9th, 2017 at 4:08 PM ^

that the coaches have a feeling about this new rule. And if it is going to be good for Michigan, then it will be. But first let me tell you about Golden Limousine. 

Joined: 09/16/2009

MGoPoints: 7298

Mr. Elbel

January 9th, 2017 at 4:18 PM ^

are they not proposing anything to ban satellite camps again? I feel like re-writing that rule and re-proposing it is something. expected to happen. so is it not happening? also, can't we just frame the whole thing as a trip and call it good... bball still practices and plays in Europe.

Joined: 03/02/2014

MGoPoints: 21395

CarrIsMyHomeboy

January 9th, 2017 at 4:44 PM ^

There are a lot of potential fulcrums in this amendment. This one in particular*** appears to beg Michigan's AD to buy property in Florida for a new facility. ***("other than practice at an institution’s regularly used off-campus practice facilities")

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 7324

ScruffyTheJanitor

January 9th, 2017 at 4:48 PM ^

This would be the ultimate player move. Just layout a three-year schedule where the outdoor sports begin to regulalry practice at these spots and see them try to stop it. Surely we have rich alumns in each of those states that could donate 10 acres, some bleachers, and a cinder-block building. It wouldn't take much in the grand scheme of things. 

I actually think there is chance this goes to the courts; I'd love to hear some MGoLawyer opinions on how that would go.

Joined: 02/03/2011

MGoPoints: 12197

JWG Wolverine

January 9th, 2017 at 6:05 PM ^

Like Harbaugh's point arguing High Freeze's comments a while back, This is dumb because one aspect of the banning is literally just because other coaches aren't willing to work harder and make those camps happen for their schools. Harbaugh is setting the new standard for hard work as a recruiter, and he's not letting anyone outwork him. But if coaches won't even TRY to meet this new standard, then why are they still coaching?

Joined: 01/07/2017

MGoPoints: 28434

YoungFan

January 10th, 2017 at 12:43 AM ^

Is no one going to comment on the very first amendment? I feel like it's addressing us specifically. It says: In football, during a two-year period before a prospective student-athlete's anticipated enrollment and a two-year period after the prospective student-athlete's actual enrollment, an institution shall not employ (or enter into a contract for future employment with) an individual associated with the prospective student-athlete in any athletics department noncoaching staff position or in a strength and conditioning staff position.

 

Jim Harbaugh has hired multiple people associated with recruits in the past few years. In fact, it almost seems like an intentional pattern, to be frank. I would actually be in favor of banning the hiring of family members of recruits, but I think it's ridiculous that this would also hinder college teams from hiring the most successful HS FB coaches because it would hurt their chances with any of the HS FB players that played under them.

Joined: 04/09/2015

MGoPoints: 68