Re: Uthoff update
Do schools need to start reworking the one sided contracts they are getting into?
Do schools need to start reworking the one sided contracts they are getting into?
Jarrod Uthoff
- Thread starter JugadorHawk
- Start date
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
I don't mean to speak for Patrick..... For me, I think that for the "adults" (AD's and coaches) I get tired of them acting like hypocrites all the time. They tell kids that they should live up to their obligations when they commit to a school, and b!tch, moan, and cry when kids transfer (see what Pollard said when ISU was exit U, instead of Transfer U) At the same time, coaches leave in the middle of the night for the bigger and better deal leaving only a note to the kids, because the opportunity presented itself.
To me I ask myself why all the rules for the kids, and NO rules or repercussions for these coaches at all? They can leave Universities in shambles and move onto the next job within day or weeks, all the while cashing fat checks, while the school, and the kids get put on probation. The coaches that are cheating should be punished every bit as much as the school....only then will they think twice about cheating.
Don't get me wrong, I think the transfers are out of control, and kids need to sit a year if moving schools. Yet I'm tired of DB's like Ryan who act like they have never left a job, or changed their minds, and then they try to crush a kid for changing his mind....
I don't mean to speak for Patrick..... For me, I think that for the "adults" (AD's and coaches) I get tired of them acting like hypocrites all the time. They tell kids that they should live up to their obligations when they commit to a school, and b!tch, moan, and cry when kids transfer (see what Pollard said when ISU was exit U, instead of Transfer U) At the same time, coaches leave in the middle of the night for the bigger and better deal leaving only a note to the kids, because the opportunity presented itself.
To me I ask myself why all the rules for the kids, and NO rules or repercussions for these coaches at all? They can leave Universities in shambles and move onto the next job within day or weeks, all the while cashing fat checks, while the school, and the kids get put on probation. The coaches that are cheating should be punished every bit as much as the school....only then will they think twice about cheating.
Don't get me wrong, I think the transfers are out of control, and kids need to sit a year if moving schools. Yet I'm tired of DB's like Ryan who act like they have never left a job, or changed their minds, and then they try to crush a kid for changing his mind....
Last edited:
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
We gave Brust a "full release" meaning there were no restrictions in place at all. He petitioned the Big 10 to let him go to Wisky on scholarship and we actually put in a good word to help him get in there. We couldn't have been more accomodating.
Few thoughts:
I agree PatrickAdamovicz that if we are going to restrict players who want to leave then we also need to restrict coaches who bolt at the first job offer they get. The school has more invested in them than they do one player who wants to transfer, and every time a good coach leaves it potentially sets your program back a few years.
I think this is making Bo look bad, which I love. It was even on the front page of the Chicago Tribune's website late yesterday afternoon. The ACC and ISU restrictions really look bad.
If this was Marcus Paige It'd be one thing, but I don't see Uthoff as a program changer myself and just not really sure we'd want him anyway. Not saying Bo isn't still a jerk but as far as how it affects us not too worried about it as I think Fran has his eye on other players.
Can someone please clarify the Brust situation. I'm not sure Iowa actually "took the high road' as far as some are implying. I know they released him (Brust), with less restrictions than Bo, but I don't think it was until the Big 10 stepped in that he was released to go to another BIG school. Pretty sure Iowa's original restrictions were no BIG school. Just sayin.
Perhaps this whole situation will make some of our in state recruits think twice about leaving for greener pastures as they might not get the chance to come home again.
Is anyone else more excited about getting back to bball season next year than football?
We gave Brust a "full release" meaning there were no restrictions in place at all. He petitioned the Big 10 to let him go to Wisky on scholarship and we actually put in a good word to help him get in there. We couldn't have been more accomodating.
JonDMiller
Publisher/Founder
Re: Uthoff update
It sounds like this rule is now off the table...BUT it probably won't matter all that much as I just don't see conference schools releasing athletes to be able to TX to other conference schools..
It will come up soon where someone wants to return to their home state or something like that, and the coach who wants to be on the receiving end of that transfer will make a public sympathy play, etc.
It sounds like this rule is now off the table...BUT it probably won't matter all that much as I just don't see conference schools releasing athletes to be able to TX to other conference schools..
It will come up soon where someone wants to return to their home state or something like that, and the coach who wants to be on the receiving end of that transfer will make a public sympathy play, etc.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
The big difference there is that the coaches are involved in "commerce". Normally, you can't put "overbearing" restrictions in place that restrict commerce to take place. You can restrict from the standpoint of trade secrets or competition (i.e. non-compete clause), but you generally can't put things in place in a contract that restricts the movement of commerce.
The big difference there is that the coaches are involved in "commerce". Normally, you can't put "overbearing" restrictions in place that restrict commerce to take place. You can restrict from the standpoint of trade secrets or competition (i.e. non-compete clause), but you generally can't put things in place in a contract that restricts the movement of commerce.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
How is a "contract" with a coach any different than a "contract/scholarship" with a kid? Universities usually lets a coach out of a contract, because ultimately they don't want a coach who doesn't want to be there. The same doesn't go for these kids, sure they can leave, but coaches can have say on where they go, by placing restrictions on them. I get the conference thing, but in cases like this with Uthoff and Ryan, it is not fair to the kid to include others schools like this, and Ryan knows it, and is just being a vindictive d!ck.
How is a "contract" with a coach any different than a "contract/scholarship" with a kid? Universities usually lets a coach out of a contract, because ultimately they don't want a coach who doesn't want to be there. The same doesn't go for these kids, sure they can leave, but coaches can have say on where they go, by placing restrictions on them. I get the conference thing, but in cases like this with Uthoff and Ryan, it is not fair to the kid to include others schools like this, and Ryan knows it, and is just being a vindictive d!ck.
eyekwah
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
My thought is Mr Uthoff must choose between what will make him happy versus living with the restrictions placed on him by Mr Ryan. In the end this issue is one about money, whether he has to pay his own tuition at a University he desires to play for or he accepts the restrictions and has his education financed by a University Athletic Dept.
My advice to Mr Uthoff DO WHAT MAKES YOU HAPPY, the full-ride scholarship, while enticing, isn't worth the price of unhappiness.
My thought is Mr Uthoff must choose between what will make him happy versus living with the restrictions placed on him by Mr Ryan. In the end this issue is one about money, whether he has to pay his own tuition at a University he desires to play for or he accepts the restrictions and has his education financed by a University Athletic Dept.
My advice to Mr Uthoff DO WHAT MAKES YOU HAPPY, the full-ride scholarship, while enticing, isn't worth the price of unhappiness.
Re: Uthoff update
Maybe he's a 4.0 student and plays the trumpet and we can just find him a bunch of adcademic schollies to pay for a good chunk of tuition. Then we can have a 6'8-6'9 walk on
Maybe he's a 4.0 student and plays the trumpet and we can just find him a bunch of adcademic schollies to pay for a good chunk of tuition. Then we can have a 6'8-6'9 walk on
AdamHawk
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
When has Iowa EVER put restrictions on a player transferring out? New coach or not? Tyler Smith, Freeman, Kelley, Peterson, Fuller, Payne? Obviously, Iowa has had many opportunities to be bitter towards players (often the best players on the team) transferring out but has chosen to take the high road each time. Clearly Bo doesn't have the same demeanor.
When has Iowa EVER put restrictions on a player transferring out? New coach or not? Tyler Smith, Freeman, Kelley, Peterson, Fuller, Payne? Obviously, Iowa has had many opportunities to be bitter towards players (often the best players on the team) transferring out but has chosen to take the high road each time. Clearly Bo doesn't have the same demeanor.
eveningnewsteam
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
Could Wisconsin block a presidential scholarship from Iowa?
Maybe he's a 4.0 student and plays the trumpet and we can just find him a bunch of adcademic schollies to pay for a good chunk of tuition. Then we can have a 6'8-6'9 walk on
Could Wisconsin block a presidential scholarship from Iowa?
Section136
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
I think JD should donate 50 cents for every page view that this thread gets. He can then set up the first "Hawkeye Nation Scholarship" and award it to Uthoff.
I think JD should donate 50 cents for every page view that this thread gets. He can then set up the first "Hawkeye Nation Scholarship" and award it to Uthoff.
1hawkeye1
Well-Known Member
TheManTheMyth
Well-Known Member
DodgerHawki
Well-Known Member
This is right...
Iowa was under no obligation to give Brust the full release, although MOST schools end up doing so when there is a coaching change. An exception of course is Bruce Pearl at Tennessee, who refused to release Tyler Smith when Buzz Peterson got canned at UT. Smith ended up going to a prep school and then to Iowa, and then of course back to UT when his Dad became ill.
I'm of the opinion that schools should be required to appeal to pose restrictions on players when they transfer, not the other way around. The default should be the player can transfer to any school he wants. I'm no big fan of the "transfer culture" but where are the penalties for coaches when they "get a better opportunity?"
The reason Ryan is taking heat is he comes off as punitive. This is a player who has never played a minute for him, but he's putting a huge list of schools that are off-limits. It's within his prerogative to do so, but it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. It also means that other schools should let potential recruits know about it on the the recruiting trail. If you end up wanting to leave the Badgers, your options will be limited.
Iowa was under no obligation to give Brust the full release, although MOST schools end up doing so when there is a coaching change. An exception of course is Bruce Pearl at Tennessee, who refused to release Tyler Smith when Buzz Peterson got canned at UT. Smith ended up going to a prep school and then to Iowa, and then of course back to UT when his Dad became ill.
I'm of the opinion that schools should be required to appeal to pose restrictions on players when they transfer, not the other way around. The default should be the player can transfer to any school he wants. I'm no big fan of the "transfer culture" but where are the penalties for coaches when they "get a better opportunity?"
The reason Ryan is taking heat is he comes off as punitive. This is a player who has never played a minute for him, but he's putting a huge list of schools that are off-limits. It's within his prerogative to do so, but it doesn't mean it's the right thing to do. It also means that other schools should let potential recruits know about it on the the recruiting trail. If you end up wanting to leave the Badgers, your options will be limited.
SpiderRico
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
But your comment was why coaches can leave whenever they want with no restrictions, but restrictions are put on students when they want to leave.
And my reply to that revolved around legal principles. A coach is employed....i.e. he is providing his labor in exchange for a salary. Labor is commerce, or the selling of a commidity, and as such, restrictions can rarely be put on commerce with the exception of protecting trade secrets or protection from competition.....which is why non-compete clauses are legal.
A player is not being paid a salary as a scholarship is not a salary. Hence there is no commerce taking place. Therefore, restrictions can be placed within a contract that a player and his/her parents sign that designate that a school has the right to restrict where a player can transfer to if he/she should decide to leave. Until someone challenges this in court, the practice is legal and will continue.
Is it right or fair? No, it's not. Bo is apparently being a vindicative jagaloon because that's how he rolls. On the other hand, is it fair when a player commits to an institution knowing full well that he may not play right away or the schemes may not best suit his abilities, but he still makes the decision to go there? It's not like Wisky is all of a sudden running a new offense/defense, has a new coach or assistants, dropped his program of study, etc. In the end, sometimes life just ain't fair.
But your comment was why coaches can leave whenever they want with no restrictions, but restrictions are put on students when they want to leave.
And my reply to that revolved around legal principles. A coach is employed....i.e. he is providing his labor in exchange for a salary. Labor is commerce, or the selling of a commidity, and as such, restrictions can rarely be put on commerce with the exception of protecting trade secrets or protection from competition.....which is why non-compete clauses are legal.
A player is not being paid a salary as a scholarship is not a salary. Hence there is no commerce taking place. Therefore, restrictions can be placed within a contract that a player and his/her parents sign that designate that a school has the right to restrict where a player can transfer to if he/she should decide to leave. Until someone challenges this in court, the practice is legal and will continue.
Is it right or fair? No, it's not. Bo is apparently being a vindicative jagaloon because that's how he rolls. On the other hand, is it fair when a player commits to an institution knowing full well that he may not play right away or the schemes may not best suit his abilities, but he still makes the decision to go there? It's not like Wisky is all of a sudden running a new offense/defense, has a new coach or assistants, dropped his program of study, etc. In the end, sometimes life just ain't fair.
Re: Uthoff update
The money that the player receives in scholarship is considered income so it is the same as the coach getting income from a salary. The one difference is that the scholarshp income is exempted from taxes.
Additionally, schools handing out scholarhships to pay for a kids college in exchange for his "labor", i.e. playing a sport is commerce, and in addition, it is interstate commerece because schools are spending money for kids in other states to come to their insitutions so that the schools can make money.
The money that the player receives in scholarship is considered income so it is the same as the coach getting income from a salary. The one difference is that the scholarshp income is exempted from taxes.
Additionally, schools handing out scholarhships to pay for a kids college in exchange for his "labor", i.e. playing a sport is commerce, and in addition, it is interstate commerece because schools are spending money for kids in other states to come to their insitutions so that the schools can make money.
MisterLucky
Well-Known Member
Re: Uthoff update
We're talking about maybe the most important segment of a young man's life up to this point. Why should some bitter old millionaire be able to dictate where a kid can go to college and play basketball, especially when there are no similar restrictions on him and his decision to ply his trade? Ryan is being a hypocritical db!
We're talking about maybe the most important segment of a young man's life up to this point. Why should some bitter old millionaire be able to dictate where a kid can go to college and play basketball, especially when there are no similar restrictions on him and his decision to ply his trade? Ryan is being a hypocritical db!
