Any Meaningful Difference ...

[I. Melvin]

... between Tubby leaving and getting Draymond to decommit from us and go to Minnesota and BCG leaving A&M and getting Jordan to follow?

One gave a commitment in writing.

One gave a commitment orally.

Personally, I don't see a lot of difference. Nor am I upset that the guy that committed to Tubby wants to follow him.

As much as I loved Pitino, I never felt good about the way he (and CM) handled the Michael Bradley situation ...

No wonder Patterson and Jai are waiting until the last minute. Wish Jordan had done the same ...

[Caveman Catfan]

An oral commitment is not binding. The written commitment is seen by the NCAA as being a binding agreement between the school and the teenager.

[Craig the Blueheart]

Caveman Catfan wrote: An oral commitment is not binding. The written commitment is seen by the NCAA as being a binding agreement between the school and the teenager.
How does the written commitment work? I have heard that the NCAA does not even handle these written commtiments. An ESPN analyst was debating this issue the other day, and he rendered the letters of intent a fraud because of who is administering the program. Is there any clarification on that?

[Los Gatos]

A letter of intent is administered by the Nation Letter of Intent Org not the NCAA. See their web site for details:

http://www.national-letter.org/

[BamaCat86]

The LOI is between the student athlete and the school.

[Craig the Blueheart]

Can anyone paraphrase how this thing works, rather than me sifting through hundreds of details on the website listed above?

Is the national LOI organization essentially a liason between the student and the school? If not, how can they hold a player to their LOI?

[Los Gatos]

Basically the school have agreed to not allow a student who has signed a LOI to go and play at another school who is part of the LOI organization. Since almost every school is a member, the student can not go somewhere else (after signing a LOI) as the schools have agreed not to take the student.

[poodoo]

No wonder Patterson and Jai are waiting until the last minute. QUOTE by I. Melvin

________

Ironically, you have just answered a question of your own on another thread, I. Melvin. :D

[kyfanaticus]

By signing a National Letter of Intent, a prospective student-athlete agrees to attend the designated college or university for one academic year. Pursuant to the terms of the National Letter of Intent program, participating institutions agree to provide athletics financial aid for one academic year to the student-athlete, provided he/she is admitted to the institution and is eligible for financial aid under NCAA rules. An important provision of the National Letter of Intent program is a recruiting prohibition applied after a prospective student-athlete signs a Letter of Intent. This prohibition requires participating institutions cease recruitment of a prospective student-athlete once a National Letter of Intent is signed with another institution.



That raises a question.... Can Coach tell the sophs to be that their year is up ??? and releaseplayers and ? Like wise players walkits a one year sit. Should we reals do they keep ?

[Coldstream]

kyfanaticus wrote: By signing a National Letter of Intent, a prospective student-athlete agrees to attend the designated college or university for one academic year. Pursuant to the terms of the National Letter of Intent program, participating institutions agree to provide athletics financial aid for one academic year to the student-athlete, provided he/she is admitted to the institution and is eligible for financial aid under NCAA rules. An important provision of the National Letter of Intent program is a recruiting prohibition applied after a prospective student-athlete signs a Letter of Intent. This prohibition requires participating institutions cease recruitment of a prospective student-athlete once a National Letter of Intent is signed with another institution.



That raises a question.... Can Coach tell the sophs to be that their year is up ??? and releaseplayers and like wise players walk?

Yes, schollies are actually renewed annually but rarely is a scholly rescinded unless there are major issues with the player.

[kyfanaticus]

will the player retain the year ?

[I. Melvin]

Ah, yes - the "why didn't JL and PP commit to OTS?" question. Good catch. :)

But I only stated that they should have verballed, thus, not binding them to the University and, incidentally, providing support to their chosen coach.

If DeAndre committed primarily to Gillispie (and not A&M), he would have been better served to have merely verballed.

Even if it hurts us in the future, I strongly believe that the signed (but not enrolled) kids should automatically be given a release if their intended Head Coach leaves before they arrive on campus.

poodoo wrote: No wonder Patterson and Jai are waiting until the last minute. QUOTE by I. Melvin

________

Ironically, you have just answered a question of your own on another thread, I. Melvin. :D

[Los Gatos]

kyfanaticus wrote: will the player retain the year ?
Not sure I understand what you are asking. If you asking if they still have four years of eligibility the answer is yes.

If they enroll in another school, that would start the NCAA's five year clock. Once they enter college they have five years to complete their four years of eligibility. Since they would have to sit out the first year, they would have to complete their four years of eligibility in four years. That's an NCAA rule, not a LOI agreement.

If they didn't enroll in another school for a year, they would still have the opportunicty to red-shirt as the five year clock would not start until they enter college a year later.

[matt colvin]

I. Melvin wrote:

Even if it hurts us in the future, I strongly believe that the signed (but not enrolled) kids should automatically be given a release if their intended Head Coach leaves before they arrive on campus.


:thumbupThat's how I feel too. It's not fair to the kids the way it is now. You commit to a "situation" that emcompasses more than just the university and program, it includes the current personnel too.

[POEKLM]

matt colvin wrote: I. Melvin wrote:

Even if it hurts us in the future, I strongly believe that the signed (but not enrolled) kids should automatically be given a release if their intended Head Coach leaves before they arrive on campus.


:thumbupThat's how I feel too. It's not fair to the kids the way it is now. You commit to a "situation" that emcompasses more than just the university and program, it includes the current personnel too.
I agree too.

[poodoo]

POEKLM wrote: matt colvin wrote: I. Melvin wrote:

Even if it hurts us in the future, I strongly believe that the signed (but not enrolled) kids should automatically be given a release if their intended Head Coach leaves before they arrive on campus.


:thumbupThat's how I feel too. It's not fair to the kids the way it is now. You commit to a "situation" that emcompasses more than just the university and program, it includes the current personnel too.
I agree too.
FWIW, I also agree, I. Melvin. :)Also, in regard to Patterson and Lucas, I have always felt that they have wanted their ultimate destination to FEEL that it was their first choice. Some have said that they waited because they were afraid their scholarships might be taken by others if they had verballed to UK and there was then a coaching change.While that could have been part of it (IF they were both wanting to come to UK), Itruly suspectsome of it was merely their wanting their eventual choice to feel the MOST LOVED. That's nothing but my feminine intuition talking, though. :lol: