Rob Ash said some things today

[Spanky]

Decommits are part of the recruiting process and most schools are involved..some win, some lose. Ash came up loser, but when you really look at it, there aren't many good recruits that will sign with state college when they can play at a good school with a better football program.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

Wow look at egriz, discussing the morals of college football recruiting...hahaha this place is awesome....but lets not let this thread derail from what its really about, and that is Ash coming out publically acknowledging how butt hurt he is.

 

[aschmidtacular]

I'm sure Ash is a good guy, but he is completely off base here. I understand the need to vent but his comments are nothing more than an attempt to bring down guys like Daum a peg or two. Real childish. You are a grown ass man complaining TO THE MEDIA about an 18 year old who made a decision that was best for him. What is frustrating to players is that coaches have no commitment to their own team at all. Where was Ash's commitment to all those players that he recruited to Drake when he left in 2006? Perhaps he would like to reconcile his thoughts on players switching a verbal commitment away from the Cats to him signing players on the dotted line at Drake and then leaving the next year. So Ash is committed to the Cats for life? If Alabama wanted to hire him he would say "nope, sorry, remember that 'commitment' speech I gave in 2015, I am holding true to that." Get real, he would leave in a heartbeat. Quit feeling sorry for yourself, overcome, adapt, get better, but stop whining to the media when this is part of the business.

 

[horribilisfan8184]

Stitt hasn't commented publicly on any particular decommitment this year, even though we are probably all wondering about a few. Ash, say hello to to the grownup way.

 

[BadlandsGrizFan]

After watching it, I think it came off bad just because of when and under the circumstances he said it. But he should know better than that. His main bitch was about the NCAAs rules and how kids can just commit and how those need to be looked at. That's fine, the NCAA can make a rule that if you COMMIT to a school, then you must go to that school. All that will happens is kids just wont commit at all. Nothing will change.

If anything it will just make signing day a HUUUUUGE cluster fuck of kids getting schollies pulled minutes before they sign, and crazy scrambling by coaches on signing day. I would be careful what you ask for Mr. Ron Ash

 

[Griz2k]

citay or others, do you think it's okay for a recruit to verbal/commit to a school and then continue to remain in the recruiting process and look at other schools?

Not saying I like it, but seems to be the nature of the beast. I'm not sure why Brekke flipped a couple years ago, but if I understand Daum's situation correctly, he wanted to go to UM, but was only offered a partial scholarship. The cats offer a full ride so he verbally commits. Stitt comes along and ups the Griz offer and Daum takes it. Are the cats pissed? Probably, just as the Griz probably were when Brekke changed his mind, but how do you stop it? It's an ugly "game" for sure. Win some lose some. Happened to the Griz this year as you know. It just always makes it sting more when a kid flips and chooses your arch rival instead.

 

[PlayerRep]

citay or others, do you think it's okay for a recruit to verbal/commit to a school and then continue to remain in the recruiting process and look at other schools?

Since that is EXPECTED to happen by both sides of the game how can it not be "okay"/

It is NOT expected that a recruit will continue to actively look after committing. In fact, the opposite is expected.

 

[citygriz]

citay or others, do you think it's okay for a recruit to verbal/commit to a school and then continue to remain in the recruiting process and look at other schools?

Since that is EXPECTED to happen by both sides of the game how can it not be "okay"/

It is NOT expected that a recruit will continue to actively look after committing. In fact, the opposite is expected.

so, player rep, explain the keyon (sp?) clark situation. he committed early, and ten days before the signing date, had his scholie pulled. his school is now so upset they won't let us recruit there. you expect kids to remain faithful, but not the schools?

 

[Umista]

Rob is a good guy. If you look at his recent and now famous "November Meltdowns" and going from a top rated kick ass early season power to nothing the past few seasons. The cat fan base down on him, most of the state wondering about his coaching...It is a small wonder he can take all the pressure.

Ash did have a small melt down after his commits comments yesterday. One needs to wonder what it feels like to lose to the Griz in such a way and then lose the recruiting battle. I hope he is able to keep a cool head as I think he is a good coach for msu. I can't imagine what it feels like to be Rob Ash?

 

[PlayerRep]

citay or others, do you think it's okay for a recruit to verbal/commit to a school and then continue to remain in the recruiting process and look at other schools?

Does that break any established rule? If so then why worry about it? Or to you is it an issue of morality? In which case do you think it is immoral for a school to issue an offer then pull it? If not then CHANGE THE RULES but don't chastise those who are better at playing the game. I liken this to casinos who kick out "card counters". They defined the game and when someone who becomes good at playing by the rules then they ban them from playing. Everyone plays the game and I have no sympathy for anyone who chooses to do so.

Don't think it violates any rule. It's a matter of ethics more than morality (altho morality is an element of ethics). Yes, depending on the circumstances, I think it's unethical for coach to just pull an offer. Note the depending on the circumstances part. Don't think the rules can be changed, because then the recruit is completely committing prior to the allowed date. In the casino situation, I'm pretty sure that the written rules permit the casinos to ban card counters. Doesn't apply to the recruiting situation. I don't see this situation as a game.

Ethics is what fills in the gaps of rules, regulations, laws, etc. There can't and probably shouldn't be a rule for everything. Honesty is another thing that helps fill in the gaps. Here's a definition I saw on the internet:

"values relating to human conduct, with respect to the rightness and wrongness of certain actions and to the goodness and badness of the motives and ends of such actions".

I'll try to think of some examples. Do you think it's okay for a teacher to lie to a student? How about an employer lying to an employee? How about coach lying to a player? How about an employer telling an applicant that they plan to offer the applicant a job in several weeks after the board considers and approves the offer, and then the employer continues the job search and offers the job to someone else? There are probably many better examples.

 

[statler & waldorf]

Perhaps a change in the rules to 'no commitment announcement from player or school' would be in order. That would end the angst on both players and fans.

I am a bit surprised that the MSU administration put up with Ash's rant. Perhaps in the next few days the next shoe will fall. This could impact MSU recruiting next year, and beyond.

 

[grizpack]

I find it ironic that the same coaches who encourage kids to "verbally commit" to them as early as possible, even though both know it is not binding in any way, now complain when the kid changes his mind. Also, every team offers WAY more scholarships than they have room for, as they know that some of the kids will go elsewhere. Following Ash's reasoning, once the Cats or Griz "offered" their full compliment of scholarships, they should stop recruiting. Otherwise, they run the risk (even though it is small) of not having enough scholarships for everyone that they have offered.

On the other hand, following Ash's reasoning, I wonder how many kids he recruited after he knew they had verballed to another school? Based on his theory, shouldn't he walk away from that kid? We will never know how many, but I guarantee you he was still on kids that had verballed to another school. Just as Stitt was.

The entire recruiting process is messed up. I have gone through it as a parent. Most coaches are salesmen. They will tell you exactly what they think the parent or kid want to hear. Some kids/parents eat it up. I was pretty skeptical of all of them. Fortunately, my kid was able to see through most of it. When you do run into one that is very honest, it is refreshing. But they are a definite minority.

 

[Griz2k]

citay or others, do you think it's okay for a recruit to verbal/commit to a school and then continue to remain in the recruiting process and look at other schools?

Since that is EXPECTED to happen by both sides of the game how can it not be "okay"/

It is NOT expected that a recruit will continue to actively look after committing. In fact, the opposite is expected.

I agree with that, but it happens both ways. Coaches don't stop calling recruits that have verballed elsewhere so I'm not sure it's fair to expect the kid to stop listening. It's a vicious circle to be sure! I was literally just reading a recruiting article on Yahoo about how this school got that kid to flip and that school got this other kid to flip and so on.

 

[Tailbone]

explain the keyon (sp?) clark situation. he committed early, and ten days before the signing date, had his scholie pulled. his school is now so upset they won't let us recruit there. you expect kids to remain faithful, but not the schools?

According to the kid's coach (the one who ranted about Clark's being shafted), Clark decommitted when Delaney left - at which point there is no obligation by either party.

 

[PlayerRep]

citay or others, do you think it's okay for a recruit to verbal/commit to a school and then continue to remain in the recruiting process and look at other schools?

Since that is EXPECTED to happen by both sides of the game how can it not be "okay"/

It is NOT expected that a recruit will continue to actively look after committing. In fact, the opposite is expected.

so, player rep, explain the keyon (sp?) clark situation. he committed early, and ten days before the signing date, had his scholie pulled. his school is now so upset they won't let us recruit there. you expect kids to remain faithful, but not the schools?

First, I previously commented, at the time, that there is and should be some ethics involved in that particularly situation. Second, I don't know the facts, and the actual facts would influence my view. Third, I believe a change of head coaches changes the equation to some extent. Stitt didn't offer this recruit; Delaney did. Even in that situation, I believe some level of ethics should come into play.

 

[krammer]

I believe ash is a quality guy however perception is reality....it was as if his "soap box" speech was really making an excuse as to why the cats will lose more games in the future.......to talk like that can only mean he is under heavy pressure.......

 

[PlayerRep]

citay or others, do you think it's okay for a recruit to verbal/commit to a school and then continue to remain in the recruiting process and look at other schools?

If a school offered my room and board along with paying for my books and i took them up on it and another school, same division, later down the road offers me a full ride, Im probably gonna flip on my verbal.

or you commit to a school that offers you a full ride and later on down the road the school that you wanted to go to offers you a full ride, i would also flip my verbal..

Okay, I can agree with some of what you said, but you didn't answer my question.

 

[PlayerRep]

citay or others, do you think it's okay for a recruit to verbal/commit to a school and then continue to remain in the recruiting process and look at other schools?

I don't, but the system has evolved that way. These kids have to pretty much save their place in line with the option of moving up in line or they will end up locked out of the show completely. It is a farce of a system, but it what they have in place.

I can see some of your point, but a recruit who has been offered and committed verbally, is not locked out of the system. He has an offer from a school he is willing to attend and play for.

 

[grizpack]

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/02/05/bobby-petrino-still-not-a-man-of-his-word/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Here is an article of exactly what I was talking about on the previous post. About none other than Montana's own Bobby Petrino. Who would think he would go back on his word??????

 

[PlayerRep]

citay or others, do you think it's okay for a recruit to verbal/commit to a school and then continue to remain in the recruiting process and look at other schools?

Not saying I like it, but seems to be the nature of the beast. I'm not sure why Brekke flipped a couple years ago, but if I understand Daum's situation correctly, he wanted to go to UM, but was only offered a partial scholarship. The cats offer a full ride so he verbally commits. Stitt comes along and ups the Griz offer and Daum takes it. Are the cats pissed? Probably, just as the Griz probably were when Brekke changed his mind, but how do you stop it? It's an ugly "game" for sure. Win some lose some. Happened to the Griz this year as you know. It just always makes it sting more when a kid flips and chooses your arch rival instead.

I don't have an issue with the Daum situation, assuming that the Cats didn't have a specific discussion with him about what he would do if the Griz later offered a full ride and he responded that he would not take that Griz offer. I don't know the Brekke situation either. I do have a problem with other teams/coaches telling recruits things that were untrue about UM's ncaa investigation situation. Suggesting that a recruit take that into account is fine, but indicating that a playoff ban was coming would be unethical, in my view.