New NCAA rule will limit Muschamp's and other HCs in waiting in recruiting

[GoVols876]

New NCAA rule will limit Muschamp's and other HCs in waiting in recruiting

Chip Brown
Orangebloods.com Columnist

Will Muschamp, one of the best recruiters on the Texas staff, could certainly feel singled out by a new NCAA rule that will limit the amount of direct contact a "publicly designated" coach-in-waiting can have with a recruit. The rule hadn't even been proposed when Muschamp was named coach-in-waiting at Texas on Nov. 18, 2008. Now, it's an NCAA rule that affects Texas and only one other school.

A new rule will cut back Will Muschamp's direct contact with recruits.

Fearing schools that designate a coach-in-waiting would gain unfair contact with a recruit, the NCAA has approved a rule that will limit the direct contact with recruits an assistant coach can have if he is a CIW.

Assistant coaches can have more contact with recruits than head coaches. But an assistant who is publicly designated a CIW will be limited to the same contact as a head coach.

Texas wasn't aware of the rule until a few weeks ago.

I was not able to talk directly to athletic director DeLoss Dodds or anyone in the football office Tuesday, but I walked the halls over at Belmont today and needless to say there is all kinds of frustration with this rule for obvious reasons.

Will Muschamp is an aggressive recruiter who enjoys that part of his job and, most importantly, helps identify the prospects who Texas will recruit, a key priority of the defensive coordinator. His ability to visit with recruits directly, especially during the spring evaluation period, will now be cut back. (More on this in a moment.)

When Texas designated Muschamp as the coach-in-waiting on Nov. 18, 2008, this rule wasn't even in discussion. It was proposed by the Big East in June of 2009, debated in September of 2009 and ratified shortly thereafter for implementation beginning in 2010, according to this year's NCAA Manual.

The NCAA rules manual includes the "rationale" for new legislation when it is proposed. Here is the rationale that was presented by the Big East in recommending the new rule:

In recent years, some football programs have begun to publicly designate an individual on its current staff to become the institution's next head football coach when the current head football coach retires.

In addition to being an assistant coach, this individual has also been given the title of "head coach in waiting." As the Division I membership has supported legislative initiatives to restrict the off-campus recruiting activities of the head football coach, this designation has provided a distinct recruiting advantage.

This proposal would eliminate that advantage by mandating that the "head coach in waiting" adhere to all legislation applicable to the head football coach.

The rule was supported by the Football Issues Committee. Here's what the committee concluded in this year's NCAA Manual:

The committee supports the proposal. The committee noted that such coaches, once publicly designated, are allowed to recruit in a manner representative of a head coach and speak on behalf of the football program as a head coach -- not just an assistant coach.

The legislation was opposed by the Recruiting and Athletics Personnel Issues Cabinet. Here's what the Cabinet maintained (also published in the 2010 NCAA Manual:

The cabinet opposes the proposal. The cabinet noted that the designation of an assistant coach as the next head coach may occur several years prior to the departure of the current head coach, which may prohibit assistant coaches from participating in off-campus recruiting activities during the spring evaluation period for an extended period of time and may result in other unintended consequences.

The rule is on the books and will impact how Muschamp is able to recruit the 2011 signing class.

Texas doesn't see where a school gains an unfair advantage by having a coach-in-waiting out recruiting, especially during the spring evaluation period.

Mack Brown went out of his way during his press conference last Wednesday to make the point that he alone makes a scholarship offer and decides how many offers will go out to the various position groups.

Talked to Bob Burda of the Big 12 Tuesday about the rule, and he noted how several of these situations were playing out at places like Oregon, Purdue, Kentucky and Florida State over the past couple years.

Oddly enough, those schools have all transitioned their coach-in-waiting to head coach. Now, the only two schools in Division I-A with coaches in waiting appear to be Texas and Maryland (where Ralph Friedgen will hand things off to James Franklin).

Here is the legislation as laid out in the 2010 NCAA Manual:

13.1.2.6 Head Coach Restrictions -- Bowl Subdivision Football.

13.1.2.6.1 Assistant Coach Publicly Designated as Institution's Next Head Coach.

An institution's assistant coach who has been publicly designated by the institution to become its next head coach shall be subject to the recruiting restrictions applicable to the institution's head coach.

[13.1.2.6.1 through 13.1.2.6.2 renumbered as 13.1.2.6.2 through 13.1.2.6.3, unchanged.]

B. Bylaws: Amend 13.1.8.4, as follows:
[Federated provision, FBS only]

13.1.8.4 Limitations on Number of Evaluations -- Football.
In football, institutional staff members shall be limited to three evaluations during the academic year during which the prospective student-athlete competes or practices on any team. Not more than one evaluation may be used during the fall evaluation period and not more than two evaluations may be used during the April 15 through May 31 evaluation period.

An authorized off-campus recruiter may use one evaluation to assess the
prospective student-athlete's athletics ability and one evaluation to assess the prospective studentathlete's academic qualifications during the April 15 through May 31 evaluation period.

If an institution's coaching staff member conducts both an athletics and an academic evaluation of a prospective student-athlete on the same day during the April 15 through May 31 evaluation period, the institution shall be charged with the use of an academic evaluation only and shall be permitted to conduct a second athletics evaluation of the prospective student-athlete on a separate day during the evaluation period.

13.1.8.4.1 Head Coach Restriction -- Spring Evaluation Period. In bowl subdivision football, during the April 15 through May 31 evaluation period, the head coach [and any assistant coach who has been publicly designated by the institution to become the next head coach (see
Bylaw 13.1.2.6.1)] shall not engage in off-campus recruiting activities, participate in an offcampus coaching clinic, visit a prospective student-athlete's educational institution for any reason or meet with a prospective student-athlete's coach at an off-campus location.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I got this off another message board. I think the NCAA did a good job with this one.

[KingNick865]

They'll just name head coaches in waiting under the table.

[governmentmule]

Originally Posted by nickknx865

They'll just name head coaches in waiting under the table.

yep,and send the other coaches out saying he will be with you as soon as he can

[ljeller]

Originally Posted by nickknx865

They'll just name head coaches in waiting under the table.

Still puts a hurt on Texas recruiting though. It doesn't kill them but Muschamp is their best recruiter. Him being limited in springtime recruiting will have an effect on them. How negative that effect(if at all) is yet to be seen. I like the rule because a recruit can/will be influenced when they know there is going to be stability within the program. A kid knows if Mack isn't there, then Muschamp will be. He should be restricted just as a HC during springtime. That being said, I think the HCIW designation is stupid anyway. I don't really see the point. I have a feeling you won't see it anymore in the future either with the new rules...teams will just keep it quiet and deny it if it gets out in the media.

[tnfalcon]

Yay! Yet another NCAA rule!....Seriously though, it's gonna take alot more than that to hurt recruiting for "the other UT"

[Rock33]

Why not call it what it is... The FSU Rule or the Bowden Rule ? It's obvious it's not about Texas, FSU began rolling in Highly ranked recruits the second Bobby put down the ink !

[DD4ME]

Originally Posted by Rock33

Why not call it what it is... The FSU Rule or the Bowden Rule ? It's obvious it's not about Texas, FSU began rolling in Highly ranked recruits the second Bobby put down the ink !

+1
Posted via VolNation Mobile

[Vercingetorix]

It's not going to hurt Texas recruiting at all. It's the easiest place in the country to recruit. Supposedly Texas offered 30 scholarships this year, hosted 25 kids for official visits, and signed all 25 of them.

[jrwvol]

Originally Posted by Vercingetorix

It's not going to hurt Texas recruiting at all. It's the easiest place in the country to recruit. Supposedly Texas offered 30 scholarships this year, hosted 25 kids for official visits, and signed all 25 of them.

+1

Of the 25 they signed, 22 were from Texas. The other three were a 5* from Ohio, 4* Demarco Cobbs (Vol de-commit) from OK and a 3* kicker from LA.

[CHeightsvol]

THEY WILL JUST STEER AROUND IT. PLUS THE PENALTY WOULD PROBABLY JUST RESULT IN A SLAP ON THE WRIST!!!!

AS WE SAW IN THE RECENT PAST, YOU CAN HAVE MANY SMALL VIOLATIONS WITHOUT ANY SIGNIFICANT CONSEQUENCES.

[VaVol4life]

This will only serve to keep the media frenzy of a HCIW out of the public eye. Like was said before, It will be an under the table "wink wink" deal now.

Isnt there anyinthing more pressing the NCAA should be looking at? Such as, coaches going to a program and promising kids the world to get them to come there and then bailing on them without any repercussions. I also could care less about X and his cronies leaving, but there were alot of recruits that commited to playing for a program that arent playing for what they signed on for.

It just doesnt seem fair that coaches seem to come and go as they please but a recruit is penalized for changing their mind.

[JohnWardForever]

Originally Posted by CHeightsvol

THEY WILL JUST STEER AROUND IT. PLUS THE PENALTY WOULD PROBABLY JUST RESULT IN A SLAP ON THE WRIST!!!!

AS WE SAW IN THE RECENT PAST, YOU CAN HAVE MANY SMALL VIOLATIONS WITHOUT ANY SIGNIFICANT CONSEQUENCES.

Just STEER around it? Nice unconscious play on words.
In all caps to boot!

[Domestic Silence]

Originally Posted by VaVol4life

This will only serve to keep the media frenzy of a HCIW out of the public eye. Like was said before, It will be an under the table "wink wink" deal now.

Isnt there anyinthing more pressing the NCAA should be looking at? Such as, coaches going to a program and promising kids the world to get them to come there and then bailing on them without any repercussions. I also could care less about X and his cronies leaving, but there were alot of recruits that commited to playing for a program that arent playing for what they signed on for.

It just doesnt seem fair that coaches seem to come and go as they please but a recruit is penalized for changing their mind.

I agree with you on so many fronts, but in this case, it's not ALWAYS the coaches faults. They have to do what's best for them and puts their families in the most secured positions. Schools fire coaches all the time. As they say, don't hate the player, hate the game.

[davethevol]

I think this is a dumb rule. The NCAA needs to just focus on whether or not student athletes are getting paid to play somewhere and if schools are doing anything illegal to recruit them.

[IN Jed]

what happens in a situation like the one at UF, when the HC is in limbo and an assist. coach is labeled interim HC? Are both the old HC and the interim governed by the rules of HC?