'12 GA LB Khalid Henderson

Status
Not open for further replies.
#876
#876
BruinVol said:
Cut isn't the only coach that will use this against. Hopefully the negative pub won't be a huge factor but going forward I really hope we are more careful with some of our early offers.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Next year we're going to have to be more selective. Hopefully that means less of the "camp" guys like Henderson, Blanc, Hill, etc.
 
#877
#877
UTCVol said:
Next year we're going to have to be more selective. Hopefully that means less of the "camp" guys like Henderson, Blanc, Hill, etc.
Click to expand...

That seems to be a very common theme for the respected posters here in the recruiting forum.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#878
#878
BruinVol said:
Cut isn't the only coach that will use this against us. Hopefully the negative pub won't be a huge factor but going forward I really hope we are more careful with taking some of our early commitments.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Cut isn't.... but coaches who coach at schools like Duke more than likely are.

Bama will do this... LSU, UGA, USCe, UF, AU... your top programs MUST do this now. You cannot afford to not get in on a kid that you think is going to be really good based on his first 2-3 years of HS. But you aren't going to be perfect either. Some of those guys just won't continue to grow or improve to their Sr year. With the recruiting restrictions, you simply do not have room for them.

The teams UT wants to compete with do the same thing... so they can't say a word. It is only the Dukes and UK's of the world that can try to use this. But guess what... a kid has to think of himself as being on the lower end of his team's recruiting class before he would EVER believe it could happen to him. How many of them are like that? It isn't going to happen or even be a concern for the top 3/4's of your class. If they pick off one of your lowest 6 or 7 guys... is that really going to hurt the program overall?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#879
#879
Dont hate the coaches hate the rule. 25 makes it difficult to take chances and keep up with the Joneses. Henderson is an example of someone Dooley wants but doesnt have time to develop.
 
#880
#880
Don't offer or don't accept a kid's commitment that you may have questions about. I don't think it's really that complicated.

It looks much worse when you pull a scholly from a prospect because you may have found another prospect that you think might be better. It kind of makes you look like you don't know what you are doing to tell you the truth.

Some will bring up the argument that it's just as bad because a prospect can walk away from a commitment to a particular school. Not really true. Some kids, like Khalid, will commit to a school and shut everything down recruiting wise. You now have to start the recruiting process all over again, and some of the schools that offered you before you committed might be full at your position. Whereas a school always has a board full of propects at every position in case they lose a commit at the last minute. They are always prepared to fill that spot.

There's legitimate reasons to pull a kid's scholly (academics, legal trouble, issues in school, etc.)
 
#883
#883
LynxVol said:
Henderson needs to accept that in the coaches professional judgment, he wasn't the best available player for UT. It's a business about winning...Dude needs to move on. It's only going to hurt him worse by lingering on being "let go" by UT.
Click to expand...

That's easy for us to say. For someone truly committed to UT, maybe not so easy. I'm not one to argue against the coaches' judgment in such matters, but this makes me feel bad.
 
#887
#887
UGA insider said:
Don't offer or don't accept a kid's commitment that you may have questions about. I don't think it's really that complicated.

It looks much worse when you pull a scholly from a prospect because you may have found another prospect that you think might be better. It kind of makes you look like you don't know what you are doing to tell you the truth.

Some will bring up the argument that it's just as bad because a prospect can walk away from a commitment to a particular school. Not really true. Some kids, like Khalid, will commit to a school and shut everything down recruiting wise. You now have to start the recruiting process all over again, and some of the schools that offered you before you committed might be full at your position. Whereas a school always has a board full of propects at every position in case they lose a commit at the last minute. They are always prepared to fill that spot.

There's legitimate reasons to pull a kid's scholly (academics, legal trouble, issues in school, etc.)
Click to expand...

Happens every year, get over it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#888
#888
UGA insider said:
Don't offer or don't accept a kid's commitment that you may have questions about. I don't think it's really that complicated.

It looks much worse when you pull a scholly from a prospect because you may have found another prospect that you think might be better. It kind of makes you look like you don't know what you are doing to tell you the truth.

Some will bring up the argument that it's just as bad because a prospect can walk away from a commitment to a particular school. Not really true. Some kids, like Khalid, will commit to a school and shut everything down recruiting wise. You now have to start the recruiting process all over again, and some of the schools that offered you before you committed might be full at your position. Whereas a school always has a board full of propects at every position in case they lose a commit at the last minute. They are always prepared to fill that spot.

There's legitimate reasons to pull a kid's scholly (academics, legal trouble, issues in school, etc.)
Click to expand...

high_horse.jpg
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#892
#892
This is bull. The only reason schools have a backup plan is because so many recruits play games now. They treat the recruiting process like thier own personal drama.

College football is not a game of "slap and tickle", many men stake thier reputations and livelihoods on the win/loss column of the team they coach. It is a big BUSINESS. Feelings get hurt every day in the business world for much smaller potatoes. The kid will be fine, if he can play, he'll get that chance. UT can't afford to miss on prospects.

UGA insider said:
Don't offer or don't accept a kid's commitment that you may have questions about. I don't think it's really that complicated.

It looks much worse when you pull a scholly from a prospect because you may have found another prospect that you think might be better. It kind of makes you look like you don't know what you are doing to tell you the truth.

Some will bring up the argument that it's just as bad because a prospect can walk away from a commitment to a particular school. Not really true. Some kids, like Khalid, will commit to a school and shut everything down recruiting wise. You now have to start the recruiting process all over again, and some of the schools that offered you before you committed might be full at your position. Whereas a school always has a board full of propects at every position in case they lose a commit at the last minute. They are always prepared to fill that spot.

There's legitimate reasons to pull a kid's scholly (academics, legal trouble, issues in school, etc.)
Click to expand...
 
#895
#895
BruinVol said:
Cut isn't the only coach that will use this against us. Hopefully the negative pub won't be a huge factor but going forward I really hope we are more careful with taking some of our early commitments.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Of course we are going to get negative publicity when we cut a kid loose -- what else would you expect?? We offered the kid, he accepted our offer and we accepted his commitment. We spent the whole time he was being recruited (and afterwards) telling this 17 year old kid how great he is, how much we want him to be a "Vol for Life" and how he is exactly what we want and need at his position.

Despite what some here profess to believe, it is human nature especially for an immature and naive 17 year old, to believe that all of those things that we were telling him was actually true -- after all in his local school he has always been the hero. Then all of a sudden he finds out we have been lying to him the whole time when we tell him that we have found some player(s) that we like better so we are going to cut him loose. And a lot of folks here want to defend this practice.

Recruiting over a committed recruit may just be "business" to a lot of folks here, but to the recruit who was just cut loose (and to almost all the general public), it is a betrayal. He has lost a lot of valuable time when he could have been finding another school that actually wanted him, not just took his commitment until they found someone better. He has to start the process all over again, but this time a lot of schools have already completed their class or are close to it, making it much more difficult.

I will say it again -- unless we told the kid up-front before we accepted his commitment, that we might recruit over him or that he might be gray shirted, it is morally wrong to do either of those things. It is also monumentally hypocritical, especially in light of the values we profess in the Vol for Life program. We may have forewarned all our marginal recruits beforehand, but frankly I doubt it.

A number of big time programs engage in this practice, but most do not, as Cutcliff noted. Also I know that a lot of folks here are ok with this practice but I am not. It does not matter one iota what others do, when I give my word on something that is the end of it. My word as a man is something you can take to the bank regardless of whether or not I find a "better deal" at a later date. There are things in this world that you do just because they are the morally right thing to do. There are also things that you do not do, just because they are morally wrong.

mlsoft
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#896
#896
mlsoft said:
Of course we are going to get negative publicity when we cut a kid loose -- what else would you expect?? We offered the kid, he accepted our offer and we accepted his commitment. We spent the whole time he was being recruited (and afterwards) telling this 17 year old kid how great he is, how much we want him to be a "Vol for Life" and how he is exactly what we want and need at his position.

Despite what some here profess to believe, it is human nature especially for an immature and naive 17 year old, to believe that all of those things that we were telling him was actually true -- after all in his local school he has always been the hero. Then all of a sudden he finds out we have been lying to him the whole time when we tell him that we have found some player(s) that we like better so we are going to cut him loose. And a lot of folks here want to defend this practice.

Recruiting over a committed recruit may just be "business" to a lot of folks here, but to the recruit who was just cut loose (and to almost all the general public), it is a betrayal. He has lost a lot of valuable time when he could have been finding another school that actually wanted him, not just took his commitment until they found someone better. He has to start the process all over again, but this time a lot of schools have already completed their class or are close to it, making it much more difficult.

I will say it again -- unless we told the kid up-front before we accepted his commitment, that we might recruit over him or that he might be gray shirted, it is morally wrong to do either of those things. It is also monumentally hypocritical, especially in light of the values we profess in the Vol for Life program. We may have forewarned all our marginal recruits beforehand, but frankly I doubt it.

A number of big time programs engage in this practice, but most do not, as Cutcliff noted. Also I know that a lot of folks here are ok with this practice but I am not. It does not matter one iota what others do, when I give my word on something that is the end of it. My word as a man is something you can take to the bank regardless of whether or not I find a "better deal" at a later date. There are things in this world that you do just because they are the morally right thing to do. There are also things that you do not do, just because they are morally wrong.

mlsoft
Click to expand...

Surprised you didn't work some CTJ bashing in there
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#897
#897
mlsoft said:
Of course we are going to get negative publicity when we cut a kid loose -- what else would you expect?? We offered the kid, he accepted our offer and we accepted his commitment. We spent the whole time he was being recruited (and afterwards) telling this 17 year old kid how great he is, how much we want him to be a "Vol for Life" and how he is exactly what we want and need at his position.

Despite what some here profess to believe, it is human nature especially for an immature and naive 17 year old, to believe that all of those things that we were telling him was actually true -- after all in his local school he has always been the hero. Then all of a sudden he finds out we have been lying to him the whole time when we tell him that we have found some player(s) that we like better so we are going to cut him loose. And a lot of folks here want to defend this practice.

Recruiting over a committed recruit may just be "business" to a lot of folks here, but to the recruit who was just cut loose (and to almost all the general public), it is a betrayal. He has lost a lot of valuable time when he could have been finding another school that actually wanted him, not just took his commitment until they found someone better. He has to start the process all over again, but this time a lot of schools have already completed their class or are close to it, making it much more difficult.

I will say it again -- unless we told the kid up-front before we accepted his commitment, that we might recruit over him or that he might be gray shirted, it is morally wrong to do either of those things. It is also monumentally hypocritical, especially in light of the values we profess in the Vol for Life program. We may have forewarned all our marginal recruits beforehand, but frankly I doubt it.

A number of big time programs engage in this practice, but most do not, as Cutcliff noted. Also I know that a lot of folks here are ok with this practice but I am not. It does not matter one iota what others do, when I give my word on something that is the end of it. My word as a man is something you can take to the bank regardless of whether or not I find a "better deal" at a later date. There are things in this world that you do just because they are the morally right thing to do. There are also things that you do not do, just because they are morally wrong.

mlsoft
Click to expand...

You and I share similar opinions on this matter. I will say this there is absolutely no chance that Henderson, Cross, or Redding was told they could be ask to look elsewhere BEFORE they committed IMO. As I stated earlier some on here refuse to believe that so they can continue to feel that the staff is beyond anything remotely "unfair".
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#898
#898
mlsoft:

We ALL know where you stand and you know how others feel, must you keep posting this everytime a commit is cut loose every year? It happens it will continue to happen and your constant diatribes aren't gonna change it.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#899
#899
mlsoft said:
Of course we are going to get negative publicity when we cut a kid loose -- what else would you expect?? We offered the kid, he accepted our offer and we accepted his commitment. We spent the whole time he was being recruited (and afterwards) telling this 17 year old kid how great he is, how much we want him to be a "Vol for Life" and how he is exactly what we want and need at his position.

Despite what some here profess to believe, it is human nature especially for an immature and naive 17 year old, to believe that all of those things that we were telling him was actually true -- after all in his local school he has always been the hero. Then all of a sudden he finds out we have been lying to him the whole time when we tell him that we have found some player(s) that we like better so we are going to cut him loose. And a lot of folks here want to defend this practice.

Recruiting over a committed recruit may just be "business" to a lot of folks here, but to the recruit who was just cut loose (and to almost all the general public), it is a betrayal. He has lost a lot of valuable time when he could have been finding another school that actually wanted him, not just took his commitment until they found someone better. He has to start the process all over again, but this time a lot of schools have already completed their class or are close to it, making it much more difficult.

I will say it again -- unless we told the kid up-front before we accepted his commitment, that we might recruit over him or that he might be gray shirted, it is morally wrong to do either of those things. It is also monumentally hypocritical, especially in light of the values we profess in the Vol for Life program. We may have forewarned all our marginal recruits beforehand, but frankly I doubt it.

A number of big time programs engage in this practice, but most do not, as Cutcliff noted. Also I know that a lot of folks here are ok with this practice but I am not. It does not matter one iota what others do, when I give my word on something that is the end of it. My word as a man is something you can take to the bank regardless of whether or not I find a "better deal" at a later date. There are things in this world that you do just because they are the morally right thing to do. There are also things that you do not do, just because they are morally wrong.

mlsoft
Click to expand...

Great post .. Hopefully we are more careful about taking marginal prospects in the future
 
#900
#900
God forbid this kid go to another SEC school to play football or get a free education from Duke. We really destroyed his future.
 
New posts
Status
Not open for further replies.

VN Store



Back
Top