PonyFans.com

Pony_Fan wrote:Makes no sense.

Why deny his release.

If NLIs are not binding, then why have the kids sign them at all? Just hope they show up at enrollment in the fall. And don't tell me that b/c a coach left, the kid has the right to not honor his commitment. There will always be an excuse.

ThadFilms wrote:

mathman wrote:

J.T.supporta wrote:

couch 'em wrote:I suspect there is a lot to the story that we don't yet know.

i second that. so lets not get ahead of ourselves and say its bad for P/R when we dont know the full story.

I agree. Time will tell.

Probably.... but did we ever get the full story behind burgers and tide?

Do we ever get a full story when any NCAA violation or transfer happens? Its all kind of swept under the mat.

[quote="CalallenStang"].
3. Were we even in on McCoy when Dubois committed? I don't remember. The timeline all runs together in my head.[/quote]

No, when Dubois committed to SMU, McCoy was signing with Pepperdine. He was released from his LOI when the coach at Pepperdine left.

Can anyone else taste the irony in this one?

Matt has a stubborn streak. I would guess he insisted they sit down with him and they refused.

Does anyone think this may deter future on-the-fence recruits from committing/signing?

SMUtrojanFAN wrote:Does anyone think this may deter future on-the-fence recruits from committing/signing?

No

Yes it is ironic but...

When a head coach leaves a player may elect to leave for another school. This is not the case if an assistant leaves.

That said I do believe that if a player doesn't want to be part of the program he should be allowed to leave.

mathman wrote:

SMUtrojanFAN wrote:Does anyone think this may deter future on-the-fence recruits from committing/signing?

No

It won't hurt on the fence recruits, but it will hurt recruiting So-Cal in general, and possibly have some AAU ramifications

Let the boy go...he will still be several years behind in becoming a man. We are now in a no win situation.

I can see the kid's frustration with the guy who recruited him not being here anymore, and SMU bringing in more PGs than he thought. But guess what? There are no guarantees in life, even when you sign a contract (in this case, his NLI).

We can all sit here and say that we should let him go, but at the same time, what other school in D1 would release a kid in this kind of situation? Probably not many, if any at all. I could be wrong, but if we just roll over on this one then the perception is that SMU can be bullied by its recruits, and maybe that is not an impression that Coach Doh wants to give anyone. I will assume, until knowing anything different, that Coach Doh is doing what he thinks is right for the program.

Who knows, maybe this is just all posturing, and they ultimately release him?

i agree with the 2nd and 3rd paragraghs of Big Hoss' reply

I'm with Big Hoss also.

"As of this date, scheduling has not allowed for an in-person meeting between the coaching staff and Jarred DuBois. We hope to schedule a meeting with Jarred as soon as the team returns from its trip to Africa in order to allay any concerns he has. We still believe SMU is the best place for Jarred academically and athletically and look forward to him being a Mustang," SMU Associate Athletic Director for Compliance and Student Services Jeff Konya said in an e-mail.



DuBois concluded the e-mail by stating that a meeting would not be held upon the return of the men's basketball team.

I think this is probably the reason Doh hasn't given the release. Daddy and son need to man up and ask for the release face to face.

PonyDoh wrote:

mathman wrote:

SMUtrojanFAN wrote:Does anyone think this may deter future on-the-fence recruits from committing/signing?

No

It won't hurt on the fence recruits, but it will hurt recruiting So-Cal in general, and possibly have some AAU ramifications

I'm sorry, PonyDoh. I'm not with you on this. Why do you think the NLI denied his letter? If the best we can get on the record from anyone from the Dubois family is "personal reasons", then that leads to more questions than anything else. And more suspicions.

Unless you can't move because of a death in the family where you have to be a $$ provider or the coach you signed with left, those would be the major reasons to grant the release. Nothing suggests the former has occurred. Obviously, the latter hasn't happened.

And whatever the personal reasons the NLI got must have been so flimsy, it agreed with SMU.

You have freshmen who think their stuff doesn't stink and want immediately playing time. Thus, they are babied and then immediately threatened if others like McCoy and the other kid are brought into the mix.

Even if we told Dubois that we weren't recruiting another PG, that kid should have been smart enough to figure out that Doherty's first job is to put the best team on the floor. Show me a coach who has never lied to a kid, and I'll show you a kid who has never lied to a coach.

Was another school "recruiting" Dubois? Always a chance of that.

Now, look what it's cost him? A lot. Hope he's happy with what's happened.

I'm not suggesting that we're totally blameless in this. However, I am suggesting that when matters like this, a good number of folks automatically like to get into "blame SMU" mode. I'm insulted by that attitude.

I don't think the tentacles of alleged damage in that part of the country and AAU stretch as far as you believe. Every recruiting case with every kid is different with each school he is talking with. It's up to him to decide where he wants to go -- Not his AAU coach or his father. However, those two elements can be more destructive in this process than instructive.

Jared Dubois signed a letter and needed to live up the obligations of it. But given what has happened, he just learned a lesson about life -- THE HARD WAY!!

Now, he has to live with it.

George S. Patton wrote:

PonyDoh wrote:

mathman wrote:

SMUtrojanFAN wrote:Does anyone think this may deter future on-the-fence recruits from committing/signing?

No

It won't hurt on the fence recruits, but it will hurt recruiting So-Cal in general, and possibly have some AAU ramifications

I'm sorry, PonyDoh. I'm not with you on this. Why do you think the NLI denied his letter? If the best we can get on the record from anyone from the Dubois family is "personal reasons", then that leads to more questions than anything else. And more suspicions.

Unless you can't move because of a death in the family where you have to be a $$ provider or the coach you signed with left, those would be the major reasons to grant the release. Nothing suggests the former has occurred. Obviously, the latter hasn't happened.

And whatever the personal reasons the NLI got must have been so flimsy, it agreed with SMU.

You have freshmen who think their stuff doesn't stink and want immediately playing time. Thus, they are babied and then immediately threatened if others like McCoy and the other kid are brought into the mix.

Even if we told Dubois that we weren't recruiting another PG, that kid should have been smart enough to figure out that Doherty's first job is to put the best team on the floor. Show me a coach who has never lied to a kid, and I'll show you a kid who has never lied to a coach.

Was another school "recruiting" Dubois? Always a chance of that.

Now, look what it's cost him? A lot. Hope he's happy with what's happened.

I'm not suggesting that we're totally blameless in this. However, I am suggesting that when matters like this, a good number of folks automatically like to get into "blame SMU" mode. I'm insulted by that attitude.

I don't think the tentacles of alleged damage in that part of the country and AAU stretch as far as you believe. Every recruiting case with every kid is different with each school he is talking with. It's up to him to decide where he wants to go -- Not his AAU coach or his father. However, those two elements can be more destructive in this process than instructive.

Jared Dubois signed a letter and needed to live up the obligations of it. But given what has happened, he just learned a lesson about life -- THE HARD WAY!!

Now, he has to live with it.

There is nothing to gain by keeping the kid locked in. His reasons for wanting out aren't important, just that he wants out. The NCAA and NLI board are rigid, anti-athlete, institutions. Their judgements are predictable and expected.

When a kids lead recruiter leaves, the procuring cause of the verbal, you let the kid go. When you recruit over the kid and he's not happy, you let him go. Again, no reason to lock him in.

Currently, this is about hurting the kid, unless there was tampering from a league school. Maybe that's the case, but this is petty. A NLI isn't a commitment to the military, or about honor. It's just a business arrangement and when the business goes bad, you part ways amicably.