[SI.com] Texas (UT) upset with new recruiting rule

That's a weird rule, but can kinda see the point of it.

 

Waaah.

UT talking about recruiting disadvantage. Come on.

 

Just hire a new def coord

 

which is?

 

As much as the Whiney Orange fans get on my nerves at times, this rule is total horse manure and they have a right to be pissed (Maryland as well)

 

A "coach in waiting" can essentially have as much sway with recruits as the actual coach, I'd imagine.

 

No, but then I don't think the original rule makes sense.

UT should argue the rule is r****ded not that it is a recruiting disadvantage. 99% of the schools in the country can't compete against UT.

 

Seems to me UT is being punished for promoting from within, which is something the NCAA should be encouraging rather than lambasting. There are too many "hired gun" coaches who job-surf from school to school every season, and it's bad business. The debacle with Lane Kiffin is perfect evidence of this. UT is being the anti-Kiffin, and they're being hamstrung by the NCAA for it.

Wasn't the whole "coach-in-waiting" completely unofficial anyway? I mean, what's to prevent UT from issuing a statement tomorrow saying "in that case, Will Muschamp is NOT the next coach-in-waiting", all the while keeping a handshake deal under the table?

 

That's that I was thinking...Strip him of the title while keeping a handshake deal with him...

 

So what? Eventually, it's going to give Texas an advantage in recruiting. You're trying to argue that it's a dumb rule because Texas won't have that great of an advantage this year. What about in five years when Mack isn't so healthy? They'll certainly have that advantage then. Just because the benefit isn't there this year, doesn't mean they shouldn't implement a rule that will curb that future advantage..

I understand the point of the rule, and I think it sucks for Texas -- but I suppose they'll just drop his "head coach in waiting" tag if they fail to get it repealed.

 

They have an advantage because they can back up the claims that the program is stable? That the kids being recruited by a particular coordinator know that the guy isn't jumping ship right after signing day (see Florida)?

We shouldn't let recruits visit campuses either. After all, Texas has a clear advantage being located in Austin.

 

So can anybody explain why head coaches, by rule, are forced to have a more limited role in recruiting than their assistants in the first place? That would help me understand why they believe the same rules should apply to the coach in waiting.

As it stands, I have to side with UT on this.

 

What is stupid is that this rule makes something that is a questionable advantage (having a HCIW) to something that is a clear disadvantage (only allowing the current DC one visit.)

It is not like HCIW is a real position. It doesn't guarantee anything. It didn't stop Tennessee from going after Muschamp. What if this rule had been in effect this year, and Tennessee was successful in taking Muschamp?

Without the recruiting of Muschamp, Texas probably wouldn't have gotten Jeffcoat/Hicks, and would be without a DC for next year. Now, THAT is a distinct disadvantage.

 

Well you have a basis for why you think the rule is dumb, you can't just argue that you don't like it. But this is a recruiting disadvantage and it shouldn't matter what school you're talking about. If it does, then you're singling Texas out which is what Dodds is arguing. But as Dodds put it, Muschamp and Maryland's HCIW are also coordinators and this rule directly limits their job duties.

But if this rule stays put, I would like to see UT drop the HCIW tag and just have an understanding. It's a legit way to get around the rule and the NCAA has been pissing me off lately.

 

That seems like a pointless rule. I always thought the problem when it comes to future head coaches are the ones that jump ship out of nowhere to a new program, not a plan set way in advance.

You would think the NCAA would be happier with a system where the successor is in place ahead of time and kids aren't getting screwed by a coach leaving the program suddenly.

 

Instead of making up this stupid rule, why don't more schools just take the same "advantage" and have a coach in waiting designate so they can get the same "advantage"?

I'm with the poster that said that they should just take away the title "Coach in Waiting" and just have a non-public deal in place.

There are so many things that need to be changed in the NCAA that would actually help so I don't understand the point of this rule.