Originally posted by EvanstonCat:
I didn't mention the Cotton incident because I thought we did anything wrong. I mentioned him as an example that refutes your claim that when we offer a kid and accept his commitment, we do it with the notion that we will never go back on it. The Cotton situation was very strange. In any event, NU didn't "go back on its" offer. I am 100% confident in saying that. I acknowledge that, although at the time I thought and was upset that we reneged (which would be counter to the "values" that Corbi attributes to me). Once it was explained to me, and Cotton's family even came out on it, I fully acknowledged that I did not think we did anything wrong. Only reason, again, that I mentioned it in this thread was that there are exceptions to everything to refute Corbi's comment that our word is certain and bond.
And it's a crock that we don't offer a kid or let him visit unless he has been formally accepted by the school, though I would guess it may be the case with an "official visit." This is exactly the case. With very VERY few exceptions, prospects are not allowed to take official visits unless they have been admitted. I acknowledge and even make this point - what I refute is the idea that we won't make offers until a kid has been formally accepted. Those were the words that were used. And it's BS. First of all, do you want to bet that Flynn Nagel hasn't even applied to Northwestern much less been accepted? Do you honestly think that football recruits go through the typical application process? There's an entirely different procedure that results in an answer much sooner than the "normal" applicaion process. I'm not saying they go through a typical application process. And yes, I imagine an answer might come much sooner than normal, but the fact of the matter is, we offer kids who haven't even applied, much less been formally accepted. How else do we offer juniors in HS? As I understand it, our offer letter apply conditions including admission to the University, staying in good academic standing, and keeping out of trouble. In this regard, I don't believe any school is any different (even if in practice, many including the scumbag SEC and dOSU may look the other way on those stated conditions). He didn't even know he had a scholarship offer until Monday. How the hell do we offer juniors who haven't even decided who are their finalists. Are you suggesting that every 2016 kid that we have offered has already applied to NU and has been accepted? Early offers are a judgement call based on a prospect's academic performance to date. There are plenty of occasions where we will tell a recruit "we think you are a good enough player on the field to receive an offer, but we need to see more academic performance out of you." There's much more art than science to the process, but the recruiting staff has a pretty good sense for the type of performance that will eventually be satisfactory to get admitted to Northwestern. This I totally understand and believe, and I would guess most schools apply this process as well. Why waste time with a kid that isn't going to be able to be admitted? That's not what Corbi was saying. If he had, I wouldn't have called him on it. Why do you insist on making things up?
If we let go of Johns because of the Cotton situation, as you seem to be implying, then that's a shame. He was a hell of a recruiter and a hell of a coach. I don't think the program is better off because of it. And Kevin Johns wasn't responsible for Cotton not getting into school. Fitz would have had all the info and approved the offer and accepted the commitment, and to blame Johns for that incident is ridiculous and illogical if that's what you're suggesting. However, I doubt that's what happened. You can believe whatever you want. The Cotton situation was very strange and there was plenty of blame to go around. I don't know what to believe, because I don't know what happened. If it was simply the kid didn't get in, as I thought, then why blame Johns? Apparently, according to Glades and Corbi, something else happened, but it remains a mystery to me. Sounds like Wilson wanted to get a great coach and poached Johns straight up. And why not? He was a great coach.
What are the approaches that I advocate? I already said if Stanford was jerking around kids like people were accusing them of doing, that I found that disgusting. My beef was with the accusations themselves. I expressed skepticism that they were doing so. Stanford is/was absolutely doing so. There's absolutely no reason that their 'top" recruits could know their admission status as early as August before their senior year while their lower-tier prospects with substantially similar transcripts wouldn't know until a couple days before Signing Day. You were one of the people whose arguments and first hand testimony compelled me to consider the possibility that Stanford was doing something wrong. As I noted at the time, if they were indeed doing that, then obviously that is not something I or any other reasonable person would condone. As I undestood it though, based on what some Stanford guy who came onto our boards said, it wasn't just the lower tier players that didn't get admission results. There were examples of very highly rated recruits that ended up not getting in and having to switch their commitments in January. Although, with others who would know better (you're not one of them) have insisted that these occurred as described, I'm at least uncertain and even inclined to believe them now.
Don't tell me whom I should root for. Your patronization is sickening.
