lwjr wrote:PonyDoh wrote:NickSMU17 wrote:I agree, and yes I think there are defn. racial undertones to SMU recruiting...it defn hurts us
I think a Butler is a great example of what we can become...
Also, you would think Adidas would want a bigger presence in a major city like Dallas...you would think they would want SMU to suceed...
All this shoe/AAU talk kind of makes me sick, it is incredible that they wield so much power
Here's the thing, they drive the global growth of the sport and basketball is a lifestyle brand. The NFL is far more popular then the NBA, but NBA players make far more in endorsement dollars. Having icons to push the brand moves product, and consumers buy way more hoop product then football. They sponsor college programs, in many cases, paying the coach more then the university. They are the games largest advertiser, which drives up TV deals and puts more money in the NCAAs pockets. They offset program costs from travel through apparel etc. They are basketball at this point, so either make friends or perish.
PonyDoh,
WOW, this is incredible information. So, one of your points is, even though a university is paying the BBall coach, like a coach K, he might be making six figures from a shoe company as well? Next point, if you want to recruit the best kids to your school you need to really get to know the HS coaches, the club coaches and the shoe people. Am I understanding that correctly?
LOL, I can't tell if you're being serious or yanking my chain, but here goes anyway. No doubt that coaches can make as much in endorsement deals, and all that entails, as they do coaching for the school. Heck,in many cases, coaches end up paying their profile assistants extra, through the apparel deals, so they aren't sniped by other programs. These companies pay for them to attend clinics, speaking engagements, have their own camps etc.
To your second question, high school coaches are the least influential. Club & shoe folks tend to rule the roost, particularly at the highest level. It's not just about knowing these people, it's about having a real tangible working relationship, which some time walks a very blurry line. Kids spend way more time on the travel circuit then they do playing high school basketball. It's April-July, every single weekend, and requires extensive travel. In most cases, apparel companies sponsor the tourneys and/or teams. Also, look at the major recruiting services and check when they update their player rankings. They place little to no emphasis on high school ball. They update in April, after high school ball, and end of summer, after AAU. The reality is that you can average 35pts per in the Texas high school playoffs, but if you stink come Great American Shoot-out, you'll see very little bump. OTOH, you can average 10pts per in high school, but have a great Real Deal in the Rock, and get high major offers, see a kid like Jordan Green.
People make the mistake of thinking hoops is easier to turn around then football, mostly b/c you only need a few players. The reality is that getting those players is so much more difficult in hoops b/c it's highly political, and it's not just about showing the kid love. So many more influences in the decision process...