So why should kids miss a year for following the coaches they commited too? They should be able to follow the coach who got them to choose the school in the first place
Smalls
- Thread starter ILhawk41
- Start date
Flowrestling has navigated and destroyed this forum.
Free account 6 years and 4 prior.
Chief you gotta get the forum back to us. Coach Spooner and I are old friends and I like what he's doing. Message board Spooner get these jackals out of here. Kakerts' site depends on it.
Save I tried
Free account 6 years and 4 prior.
Chief you gotta get the forum back to us. Coach Spooner and I are old friends and I like what he's doing. Message board Spooner get these jackals out of here. Kakerts' site depends on it.
Save I tried
I agree completely. Everyone can change allegiance except for the poor kids who are prayed upon by the universities that then hang them out to dry when it's convenient. There should be a rule that says that any kid who hasn't participated in a varsity match/game can transfer without loss of time if the receiving institution pays the losing institution the scholly money back.. Period. If you've wrestled with your university name on your singlet, you are at the mercy of the school. If your new school won't pay your scholly money back, then you're screwed too. Makes it more fair I think.
this is a wrestling forum and flo is the most popular wrestling website, so yeah flo is going to be mentioned in wrestling forums
if there was an agreement that they could transfer, that should be honored. if VT reneged on that shame on them. really - shame on them and if i was Tom and the recruits i'd be super bitter too. (and i'll say this in FRL).
otherwise - maybe it's just me - but i'd never let a recruiting class leave en masse b/c of a coaching change.
i know it doesn't sit well here b/c it's Iowa-VT, but for me it's not about that.
If Zeke left last summer - i wouldn't have given ASU's class releases either. I'm trying to win.
and they signed an LOI. that should be honored too, right?
otherwise - maybe it's just me - but i'd never let a recruiting class leave en masse b/c of a coaching change.
i know it doesn't sit well here b/c it's Iowa-VT, but for me it's not about that.
If Zeke left last summer - i wouldn't have given ASU's class releases either. I'm trying to win.
and they signed an LOI. that should be honored too, right?
Is that fair to the kids though? They signed the LOI based on a coach's promise to be there through their careers most likely. That is then a broken promise from a university employee. Yeah they signed an LOI, but it's a crappy way of doing business. If a coach can leave without repercussion, why not an athlete? It seems amoral.
When schools like asu haven't got big recruits in a while and they make a new hire and than all of a sudden all the top recruits are commiting there, than the kids are obviously commiting to the coaches and not so much the school. They believe in the coach and the direction he wants to put the program in so If he leaves and a recruit doesn't believe in the new coaches coming in then why should he have to lose a year for sticking with the coach he believed in and who he believed was going to be his coach throughout college.
Of course, this issue is bigger than wrestling - it affects all sports.
just positing this: is athletes signing LOI's like marriage? or would that be a bad simile?
just positing this: is athletes signing LOI's like marriage? or would that be a bad simile?
If the coach is getting kids to sign an LOI knowing that they are thinking about changing jobs, then yes, it is wrong for the institution to keep them in chains. The coach misrepresented the situation to the kids, whether intentional or not. That should be legal grounds to null the contract, but I know the LOI contract closes that loop hole in favor of the institution. One of these days, the parents of these kids are going to start demanding that LOI's be negotiated. Impossible? It only takes a few to make changes Willie. Why not advocate equality among the parties from your bully pulpit?
I'm not Tailgate Tom, but almost always in revenue sports (read: football and men's basketball) an athlete has to sit a year if transferring, and in non-revenue athletes do not. Revenue sports require scholarships to be full (football = 85, BB =12), non-revenue can be partialled (except women's BB, gymnastics, tennis & v-ball, which are also full or none).
i oversee flotrack. and an article was published on there a few weeks back that basically says: "why even sign an LOI?"
all it can do really is restrict the athletes' rights
all it can do really is restrict the athletes' rights
Here is what I remember from the situation. The VT AD, Weaver, told Tom and the star recruits (Metcalf, JayBo, Slaton, LeClere, etc.) and their families that if Tom left for another job, he would release them.
When Tom came back to Iowa, Weaver went back on his promise and refused to sign the releases. Weaver claimed to have never made such a promise, and he basically called Tom a liar. The fact that all of the wrestlers mentioned above, and T.H. Leet, followed Tom to Iowa despite losing a year, tells me all I need to know about the situation.
I'm sure there are some newspaper articles out there from that time detailing the whole saga. If I get some time I'll try to find some of them and post here. Also, as someone else mentioned, I believe some Borschels or Slatons posted on these boards at the time telling their side of the story.
When Tom came back to Iowa, Weaver went back on his promise and refused to sign the releases. Weaver claimed to have never made such a promise, and he basically called Tom a liar. The fact that all of the wrestlers mentioned above, and T.H. Leet, followed Tom to Iowa despite losing a year, tells me all I need to know about the situation.
I'm sure there are some newspaper articles out there from that time detailing the whole saga. If I get some time I'll try to find some of them and post here. Also, as someone else mentioned, I believe some Borschels or Slatons posted on these boards at the time telling their side of the story.
Obviously there was an agreement. Almost no one denies that. Look at it from the athletes side. Would you travel across the nation as a top recruit in the nation, if you were not given assurances, that if your Olympic Champion coach left, you could also? Remember this was not exactly a top 10 team at the time
The coach before Tom (I think) at was Kieth Mourlam, great coach imo (he was asst under Gable when I was there ) but not Tom Brands.
Tech hired Brands to put them on the map(he did). He had no idea when, or if, other jobs would open up. He took the vt job and was totally committed to making them national champions.
Of course the one objection, the kids (and their parents) had was ... What happens if Tom leaves? A truly valid question. They got assured (not denied under oath) if that happened the would be allowed to go too. I could get more detailed but I wont.
You said you wouldn't have released them either. I highly doubt you thought this out at all. Maybe you could say , I would never be put in that position. I understand that if the recruit and family ask to talk to you (as ad) and you say no way, Tom leaves? who cares you sign with vt you will wrestle for vt.
Had that happened, 2 things would not have. The recruits would not have committed, and Tom would not have taken the job in the first place.
So sure, you may have handled the whole situation differently (I kind of doubt it). But either way I highly doubt you would have done it the way they did.
But, wrestling can get a little boring sometimes, so without a little drama what else would we argue about? I know... how sick was retherford when he wrestled sorenson?
Athletes have scholarships which are year to year. It's a horrible simile, unless you feel marriages should only last 1-5 years, and can be partialled.
All I was saying was that smalls was using an apples to oranges comparison with his example. It seems like the commonly accepted practice in non-revenue athletics is to grant a full release since these sports are typically Olympic sports with a pretty specified talent and coaching pools and partial scholarships.
i guess the parallel i was shooting for was that in both cases you committed, and in both cases a lot of people seem to side with an individual's right to break that commitment.
but a coach makes a commitment to a university and can negotiate a release. Why can't athletes do the same? Seems unfair.
I think the statistic is that about 50% of marriages end up in divorce...........
so you tell us if that is a good or bad similie.
dub - wasn't my intention. whether it was a handshake or a writ , where i come from it's honored. wasn't trying to complicate things.
So what are the opinions on the v tech kids now who may want to leave. Let's say v tech doesn't get a big hire and someone like McFadden who has wrestled for v tech already wants to leave and follow dresser or go elsewhere, who would say he shouldn't get a full release? Or what about a true freshman this year who was red shirting like Moore? I obviously think anyone who wants a release after the coaching change should be able to, but what's everybody else's opinions on the situation? Obviously the situation is much different from when tom left v tech
http://pilotonline.com/sports/brand...cle_94fb7504-43e5-52dd-9c0b-4c948c45fb9a.html
Brands' departure leaves Va. Tech wrestling with a tough decision
- The Virginian-Pilot
- Apr 7, 2006
Last week Virginia Tech was optimistic about its wrestling program.
With former Olympic gold medalist Tom Brands at the helm, the Hokies were, according to athletic director Jim Weaver, "on the verge of doing some outstanding things."
Those hopes all but disintegrated Wednesday, as Brands was introduced as the new coach at Iowa, his alma mater, and the Hokies announced plans to evaluate whether the program is worth continuing.
...
NCAA rules allow student-athletes except football, basketball and hockey players to transfer one time from one four-year college to another without having to sit out a year, provided their original school grants them a release. Jaudon said he could not recall an instance in his seven-year tenure when Tech had denied such a request.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1635080/posts
Wrestling parents say Tech misled
Roanoke Times ^ | May 19, 2006 | Jim Reedy
Posted on 5/19/2006, 1:22:06 PM by Mr. Blonde
Parents of the five Virginia Tech wrestlers who plan to follow former coach Tom Brands to Iowa say Tech athletic director Jim Weaver's decision to deny their sons immediate transfer releases flies in the face of a promise he made during the recruiting process.
Brent Metcalf, Joe Slaton, Dan LeClere, Jay Borschel and T.H. Leet -- all of whom redshirted as freshmen last season -- plan to enroll at Iowa but will lose a year of NCAA eligibility unless Virginia Tech releases them from their scholarship obligations.
The fathers of Iowa natives Slaton, LeClere and Borschel said Weaver promised to do just that when they met with him in his office in fall 2004. Brands, a former Olympic champion, was the sole reason the five touted recruits were considering the Hokies and their families wondered what would happen if he left for another coaching job.
"It was clear what [Weaver] told us," Jim Borschel said. "He said 'We have a practice of releasing any athlete at any time for any reason.'"
Brands left Virginia Tech last month after two seasons and Weaver, who declined to comment for this story, announced the Hokies would not grant transfer releases until after next season.
A three-person university panel upheld that decision in an appeals hearing last week.
Lynn Metcalf, Brent's mother, said Brands promised a release in writing, but Jon Jaudon, the Virginia Tech associate AD who oversees the wrestling program, said that was "absolutely not" an official document.
"I would characterize it as a scribbled note, to be honest with you," Jaudon said. "That wasn't the assertion that the athletic department made. That was an assertion that they claim Coach Brands made to them. Coach Brands was acting outside the scope of his job description with that claim. ...
"We've completely lived up to our end of the bargain."
Tech offered to release the wrestlers if they agreed to transfer somewhere other than Iowa, the parents said.
"We feel like they have a problem with Tom and they're taking it out on our 19-year-old sons," said Matt Shaver, Slaton's father.
The parents said they will consider legal action against Tech if university president Charles Steger does not overrule Weaver and the panel.
"Had we not been promised this, we wouldn't be saying anything," Lynn Metcalf said. "We're not whiners."
Former Hokies wrestler John Laboranti, now taking summer classes at Penn State, said Virginia Tech released him from his scholarship in January after he left the team during the season.
Mark Logan, who redshirted as a freshman last season, left Virginia Tech for reasons unrelated to wrestling, said Kevin Dresser, the Hokies' new coach.
"I don't think he needed a release," Dresser said, noting that Logan only received scholarship aid to cover the cost of his books. "I think his situation was quite a bit different ... than these guys."
Dresser also said that Mike Faust, a senior All-American last season for Tech, decided to train full-time at the U.S. Olympic Training Center in Colorado Springs, Colo., instead of helping to coach the Hokies as a graduate student.
So...............does anyone have any questions?
So it wasn't about releasing them, (as VT said they would grant them a release to anywhere but Iowa) it had more to do with spite.
The difference between UCLA basketball and wrestling are that the kids in basketball are on full scholarships. That's the revenue vs non revenue thing. Scholarships are renewed every year (though some schools are giving 4 year schollies now). If coaches can leave, athletes should be able to leave too.
Well played, sir, well played!Guessing how many times you've mentioned a specific dead AD here over the past few months might mean something.
Guessing we may not be getting the message you have been trying to impart. Or maybe we don't care. Or see the relevance.
Or maybe you have some strange morbid fascination with death..........guess it's a Pirate thing.
And in this case, I was kind of stating that he won't be able to speak up for himself. Kind of different than in the past discussion, where I was trying to state that he was, permanently, no longer part of the Virginia Tech athletic department.
Unless of course everything was done verbally and with a handshake as many honorable people still do these days.
Yes, I know that won't stand up in a court of law or against a mad AD. (God rest his soul)..
LOL...Oh...that was a sports movie; not reality, right?
not talking about rules, talking about what's right.
What's right? Anything of any major importance to me has always been put into writing to avoid these types of conflicts. So, it's hard for me to believe that so many people were "trusting" and didn't care to protect themselves by obtaining a written document.
Well played Vall...Now, SHP can pull the dead guy shtick all the time but sounds like it was an institutional decision from the top down. A PSU fan on another board called Brands an idiot for not getting it on paper but TB would honor his word with a handshake so he probably figured his new boss would as well. Yea, it sucked for VT that they got ditched for the prom queen but at least TB had a history with her and it wasn't done for purely selfish motives like money or a chance at a better recruiting area. VT made a big deal about Dresser going home and how everybody could understand it yet Brands went for the only job (he wouldn't have went to State) that he wanted more than VT.
As for the transfer thing...wrestling parents (or the individual) are different than basketball or football. They usually have some skin in the game in terms of $$$. Maybe Metcalf was the only one there on full scholarship but maybe he might have had to pay books or something.
Bottom line...despite what many in the wrestling world want to portray, Tom Brands is a solid guy who says what he means and means what he says. Not a lot of that going around these days.
As for the transfer thing...wrestling parents (or the individual) are different than basketball or football. They usually have some skin in the game in terms of $$$. Maybe Metcalf was the only one there on full scholarship but maybe he might have had to pay books or something.
Bottom line...despite what many in the wrestling world want to portray, Tom Brands is a solid guy who says what he means and means what he says. Not a lot of that going around these days.
First off, can't belive you are referring to student athletes as "assets". Second, you are suppose to be an in the know wrestling publication so how can you be so uninformed as to what was agreed to when these wrestlers agreed to sign a letter of intent to VT. I don't make my living as you do, however, I have spoken to a number of the individuals, NOT ASSETS, involved and there is absolutely no doubt what was promised to them. You are absolutely wrong making assertions without bothering to determine the facts. That would, however, not allow you to put forth your biased and pre determined OPINIONS. I also believe there is a difference between revenue and non revenue sports and that student athletes should be choosing a school for what's best for them; that includes the coach, the academics, the location, and anything else they feel is important. The bottom line here is that in the vast majority of cases athletes in non revenue sports have always been given their release, with or without a prior agreement to do so. Again something you should be well aware of. It would seem this is more about making a splash or you biased opinion or both.
Well, in that case, the President of Virginia Tech at the time (Charles Steger) is no longer there either, although he is still walking this earth.
At any rate, I was pulling the "dead guy" shtick in your favor this time. He can't really testify if he's not here, right?
That said, for the comment above, I don't know that anything regarding a signed stipulation that the wrestlers would be released would be legally enforceable on the university, from the student-athlete's perspectives.
You are right and as history has shown it wasn't. Just an AD and a university not following through on their word as well as not doing what they had always done and granting the release, thereby causing young athletes to lose a year of eligibility because of spite. Should be easy to see why Tom will not do anything to further the VT wrestling program. So no one including flo can make a case that VT acted in good faith in Denying these athletes their release.
Last edited:
I feel strongly about the issue, and it goes beyond my school colors because it happens everywhere. Isn't it sad that an institution dedicated to molding teenagers into grown men failed at the test for reasons that every teenager acts upon. Spite and greed and vindictiveness. There was a high road to be taken, and it's a shame it wasn't. Contract or no contract, there is right and wrong at play here. There can be nothing more vile for an institution to do than to limit the growth pattern of a 19 year old without a damn good reason. That goes to the very core of their mission statement. That situation taught these young men that your word means nothing if it's not in writing. Shouldn't we be teaching young men to be honorable and try to work things out without paper?
I have run large global operations, and I can tell you that I made dozens of verbal agreements every day to get the job done. Sometimes those verbals bit my backside, but I kept my word because it is how you want to be regarded in future transactions.
I have run large global operations, and I can tell you that I made dozens of verbal agreements every day to get the job done. Sometimes those verbals bit my backside, but I kept my word because it is how you want to be regarded in future transactions.
