CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

DAMN and DAMN (Phillips/Schwenke now "Soft" Commits)

by Mars · 1/28/2010

Sponsored Advertisementad content
G
gmj81
Hmmm... The writing was on the wall the whole time.



Way to go Bronco! Way to stand up for the other recruits in this class and not mess around with this bull crap. I love it. Two years in a row, we've pulled offers to these entitled pre-madonnas. Not that they are bad kids but putting up with the crap they were feeding Bronco would have only contaminated the team concept he has already established.
G
gmj81
Well said Mars.
S
snoscythe
I agree with Bronco here, but not because of the Honor Code. Bronco is calling guys who they have offered and telling them there are not enough scholarships left in the bag, and telling them if they want to come to BYU, they'll have to walk on--basically cutting off the recruiting process for Bronco, who doesn't want to lead kids on if there aren't enough seats at the table.



Then you have dip$#!+$ like this who reneg on their word and might leave BYU with unused scholarships on the table on signing day, which the BYU coaching staff could have used to pursue other players. If Bronco did in fact yank Schwenke's offer when he took the ND trip, good on Bronco. The message is loud and clear to recruits in the future.
G
gmj81
*Edit* This was in response to a comment of Lingo's that has since disappeared.



You're right. There are no guarantees. Kids can change their commitment as many times as they want to before they actually sign their LOI. If you want to tell Apo to go back to Texas, be my guest. But BYU didn't actively recruit him once he committed to Texas (so please stop using it to support your claims). That is a fact. Additionally, the coaches had heard that Heaps was putting on a presser in SLC and probably hoped beyond hope that he would commit to BYU but they had no idea about Apo and Stout. The three of them worked that out all on their own. BYU had nothing to do with Apo. Now, not that there should be any difference between breaking your commitment, whenever that may be but when Apo broke his commitment to Texas was in July, a full eight months prior to LOI day. Scwhenke decided to brake his commitment to Bronco less than a week before LOI day. Which do you think puts the respective coaches in a greater bind. What's more, it's fairly common knowledge that Apo was given an offer during his Texas trip and told he had the weekend to accept it or it would be pulled. Given that situation, he indeed did accept only to find out they were still going after more receivers even when he was already the fifth in the class to sign. Kona was put in no such predicament. He had more than enough time to ponder his BYU offer and take all his visits prior to December if he wanted to.



And by all accounts, it doesn't appear that Kona was offered until he agreed to come to ND so don't put the wagon before the ox. At the very least, he had to entertain their interest long enough for them to invite him to come and visit so that they might offer him. These teams know how to play the recruiting game as we've seen with countless BYU recruits in the past. His profile still doesn't show an ND offer. And many times players and their families mistakenly think they have an offer when they don't. And alot of these other schools don't offer BYU commits until they agree to come for a visit or until they agree to decommit from BYU because they know that with their "prestigious offer", they are likely to get a bump in the rankings which only makes recruiting against BYU in the future that much harder. We've seen these coaches pull every trick in the book to keep their programs in the headlines because recruiting is the lifeblood of a program. Don't think they are above those kinds of tactics.
G
gmj81
I posted this on Rumorboard in response to someone else who thought Kona shouldn't be held accountable for his word and that this is just how the recruiting game works:



I don't know about you but when I was five if I lied to my parents, you better believe I got swats for it. And sure, I continued to do it until at least the age of twelve but every time I knew I could expect the same thing if I got caught. Lying was the biggest no-no in the book. That was instilled in me at a young age. But you wouldn't expect a five year old to keep his word? How else do you propose to start teaching them? And are you just going to wait until they get to college? I'm not suggesting Kona is a flat out liar but telling the truth is the very foundation of integrity.



Other people have mentioned how we entrust 16 year-olds with operating a cash register (or any job for that matter), operating a vehicle per the laws of the land, dating and respecting young women or going on missions just a year later. Is that year between 18 and 19 some magical transformation time when they become so much more mature and accountable? Sure they make mistakes on occasion but if you don't hold them accountable, when/how are they going to learn? I'm no parent yet and maybe I won't be a good one, but in my opinion, accountability to the Lord starts at the age of eight. But accountability to parents starts from day one. Otherwise they'll never be ready to be accountable to the Lord. It is in fact the parents job to teach and instill that accountability, isn't it?



I'll throw out one more example... So we can sign up and send off an 18 year-old to war and expect them to be able to make honorable and mature decisions when it comes to life and death but we shouldn't expect them to be able to stay true to their word when they give a commitment even if just prior to the age when one is considered an adult and entrusted with voting or taking part in a war?



The issue here isn't with the fact that Kona wasn't sure about his decision. I'm sure it is a tough decision. I'm sure he even has NFL aspirations and making the right college choice could drastically affect those plans. None of that is wrong. The issue is that he tried to hide all this and act as if nothing was going to change come LOI day. Yet his actions didn't back up his words. And not that there is anything inherently wrong with taking free trips when they are offered to you but unless you are being totally honest about your intentions, is that exhibiting integrity? But if he was never sure of his commitment to BYU, he never should have committed in the first place. Just because the scholarships were drying up doesn't give him the right to grab one now for safekeeping and then decide later if he actually wanted to keep it or not. The rapidly disappearing offers just accelerated his decision-making process, at least if he wanted to still consider BYU. And there's nothing unfair about that. The demand for one of those offers is high and hundreds of other kids would jump at the chance to accept one without even requiring a trip or being shown the love at all.



Bronco was faced with a decision. He's been burned before. And ultimately, it's his program to run as he sees fit until Holmoe decides his time is done. So does Bronco let this kid go when he's told every recruit in the class that he is bound to them as they are bound to him and knowing the kinds of promises other coaches will make and lengths they will go to to sway a talented albeit young and impressionable kid their way? Mind you, Bronco also knows that he wouldn't be able to talk with that young man once he got home because of the silent period (which I think we all probably agree that Bronco and few others actually honor). Whether you agree with it or not, Bronco told Kona if he tripped his offer would be pulled. There's nothing wrong with that. It might not result in us landing as talented an individual but there's nothing deceitful or dishonest about it.



So now Kona is faced with a decision. And by all accounts it appears he chose to go to Notre Dame, a school he claims he has no interest in, only desires to visit some friends and get off the islands. Even if that is 100% true (though is seems like there is a disconnect in there somewhere or something missing from the story), Bronco still gave him a choice. If you're not going to hold Kona to his word, then Bronco shouldn't be held to his either. By all appearances, it seems Kona has made his decision to go visit old friends in South Bend, even after he claims he prayed about it and knew BYU was the right choice for him and even after Bronco on multiple occasions gave him the warning that if he went, his offer would go to someone else. How can Bronco be at fault for any of this? And how are we supposed to not expect these young men, immature and impressionable as they may be, not to be held accountable to their word?
Sponsored Advertisementad content
J
jonnylingo
gmj81 wrote:
I posted this on Rumorboard in response to someone else who thought Kona shouldn't be held accountable for his word and that this is just how the recruiting game works:



I don't know about you but when I was five if I lied to my parents, you better believe I got swats for it. And sure, I continued to do it until at least the age of twelve but every time I knew I could expect the same thing if I got caught. Lying was the biggest no-no in the book. That was instilled in me at a young age. But you wouldn't expect a five year old to keep his word? How else do you propose to start teaching them? And are you just going to wait until they get to college? I'm not suggesting Kona is a flat out liar but telling the truth is the very foundation of integrity.



Other people have mentioned how we entrust 16 year-olds with operating a cash register (or any job for that matter), operating a vehicle per the laws of the land, dating and respecting young women or going on missions just a year later. Is that year between 18 and 19 some magical transformation time when they become so much more mature and accountable? Sure they make mistakes on occasion but if you don't hold them accountable, when/how are they going to learn? I'm no parent yet and maybe I won't be a good one, but in my opinion, accountability to the Lord starts at the age of eight. But accountability to parents starts from day one. Otherwise they'll never be ready to be accountable to the Lord. It is in fact the parents job to teach and instill that accountability, isn't it?



I'll throw out one more example... So we can sign up and send off an 18 year-old to war and expect them to be able to make honorable and mature decisions when it comes to life and death but we shouldn't expect them to be able to stay true to their word when they give a commitment even if just prior to the age when one is considered an adult and entrusted with voting or taking part in a war?



The issue here isn't with the fact that Kona wasn't sure about his decision. I'm sure it is a tough decision. I'm sure he even has NFL aspirations and making the right college choice could drastically affect those plans. None of that is wrong. The issue is that he tried to hide all this and act as if nothing was going to change come LOI day. Yet his actions didn't back up his words. And not that there is anything inherently wrong with taking free trips when they are offered to you but unless you are being totally honest about your intentions, is that exhibiting integrity? But if he was never sure of his commitment to BYU, he never should have committed in the first place. Just because the scholarships were drying up doesn't give him the right to grab one now for safekeeping and then decide later if he actually wanted to keep it or not. The rapidly disappearing offers just accelerated his decision-making process, at least if he wanted to still consider BYU. And there's nothing unfair about that. The demand for one of those offers is high and hundreds of other kids would jump at the chance to accept one without even requiring a trip or being shown the love at all.



Bronco was faced with a decision. He's been burned before. And ultimately, it's his program to run as he sees fit until Holmoe decides his time is done. So does Bronco let this kid go when he's told every recruit in the class that he is bound to them as they are bound to him and knowing the kinds of promises other coaches will make and lengths they will go to to sway a talented albeit young and impressionable kid their way? Mind you, Bronco also knows that he wouldn't be able to talk with that young man once he got home because of the silent period (which I think we all probably agree that Bronco and few others actually honor). Whether you agree with it or not, Bronco told Kona if he tripped his offer would be pulled. There's nothing wrong with that. It might not result in us landing as talented an individual but there's nothing deceitful or dishonest about it.



So now Kona is faced with a decision. And by all accounts it appears he chose to go to Notre Dame, a school he claims he has no interest in, only desires to visit some friends and get off the islands. Even if that is 100% true (though is seems like there is a disconnect in there somewhere or something missing from the story), Bronco still gave him a choice. If you're not going to hold Kona to his word, then Bronco shouldn't be held to his either. By all appearances, it seems Kona has made his decision to go visit old friends in South Bend, even after he claims he prayed about it and knew BYU was the right choice for him and even after Bronco on multiple occasions gave him the warning that if he went, his offer would go to someone else. How can Bronco be at fault for any of this? And how are we supposed to not expect these young men, immature and impressionable as they may be, not to be held accountable to their word?


I think we get your point. I just think your a little anal about it. It should be a case by case basis. Here bronco had his concerns and played it the way he thought he should which I support. When you are too anal about it though you can lose out on good kids who would be good players at byu but are simply confused and less certain than others on which decision to make right off the bat. It is a huge decision which is not easy for some to make. If you get all over someone simply for wavering you are going to scare some away unecessarily. that may not be the case here. there is probably more than meets the eye going on. I suspect bronco questioned heir supposedly 'pure' intentions. that coupled with other preexisting concerns was probably enough for bronco to take the stance he did. If he did it though simply because he was tripping there, then i think it was a stupid decision. I doubt that is the case however.
M
Mars
jonnylingo wrote:
When you are too anal about it though you can lose out on good kids who would be good players at byu but are simply confused and less certain than others on which decision to make right off the bat. It is a huge decision which is not easy for some to make.

He made his decision months ago. That's what makes the kid a liar. You can't spin that. He's just another Te'o or Jamora, kids that refuse to be responsible for their own poor choices.
G
gmj81
Then you don't get the point at all because it CAN'T POSSIBLY BE a case by case basis. Not with the way Bronco has established this team and with way he keeps building it. The very bedrock of his program is that no one individual is greater than the team. You're obviously a TBS member based on some of your posts so you should have seen the post over there by Kori Gaines' father stating that every commit has been told multiple times and had reinforced both during the January recruit trip and during their in-home visit with Bronco what that commitment means. Don't think this is unique to BYU either. Plenty of other coaches won't stand for this stuff either. Mr. Gaines said Paul Johnson did the very same thing to a highly rated prospect earlier this year who had committed to Georgia Tech but decided he wanted to keep taking his trips.



How do you possibly expect Bronco to look those kids in the eye and tell them, "Well, Kona was in a different situation see because he just wanted to go visit some friends." Or maybe according to some he should have just said, "Kona is a better player than you are so we will grant him greater leeway." That would totally undermine Bronco's foundation, trust, everything. He treats all these kids the same. They all have to earn it and want it. If they aren't willing to sacrifice a trip to reconnect with some old friends, how can he be convinced they'll sacrifice for the team?



It couldn't have been more perfect that Phillips and Schwenke were both about to trip at the same time. This proves Bronco is no respecter of persons. One of the kids backed down and understood wholeheartedly what Bronco has been preaching. The other threw a hissy-fit in the airport and dared Bronco to pull his offer.



I'm sorry if you think I'm being anal about this but like I said, this is one of my hotbutton issuses and I don't care for it when much when people make excuses for kids who have been given a full knowledge of their commitments and how they should treat them. This isn't like a kid who promised his mother that he would empty the dishwasher and didn't. This is much bigger and every part of the commitment was spelled out for these recruits so that they could understand fully what they were getting into. And these commitments affect the future of hundreds of people, from their future teammates to the coaches to the very own families. If the shoe were reversed and guys like Gaines, Phillips, Quezada had all enrolled early based on the fact that they believed the future to be bright coupling their talents with those of Heaps, Apo, Stout, Kaufusi and the bunch. Then all of a sudden Heaps and Apo have a sudden change of heart and decide to go elsewhere, do you not think the others would feel a little betrayed?



We're talking about Bronco here. Not Lane Kiffin or Pete Carroll or one of the countless other sleezeball coaches who will do whatever it takes to land a talented kid who can help him win, even if it means promising kids the world and then breaking that promise. Bronco has integrity and he expects the same thing out of his recruits. That's why you haven't seen Bronco pull offers to guys who got hurt their senior year like Owens, Afo, Kaufusi, Tushaus, etc. even when it appears their careers could be in jeopardy or might not ever be the same player they once were.
B
bigbluepuma
gmj81 wrote:





You're right. As the rules are now, he can do what ever he wants until he signs on the dotted line. But that's what's wrong and where changes need to be made. It's not honest and it wastes thousands of dollars and people's time when these kids change their mind at the last minute and it affects hundreds of people's future, not just their own. There needs to be an early signing period in football like there is in basketball. And if a kid hasn't yet decided, like I said, I'm fine with that. Take all the time you need. But once you make a decision, stick with it. Don't keep searching. But don't get pissy like Heimuli either when you wait around and the program decided to move on without you.



I don't think that changing your mind is all that bad (most of us aren't too mad at Apo). Just don't wait until the wedding and leave the groom standing at the alter in his rented tux.


jonnylingo wrote:
even if he was just tripping to nd for a free trip, nd doesn't care. they just want a shot at him to try and change his mind. Even if kona said that straight up is why he is coming, nd would still fly him out.


Lots of schools are willing to do that. No matter how sure a recruit thinks he is, there is a chance of changing his mind.



'You really think if Kona told them, "I'm not going to sign with you even if you trip me out" that they would still pay to fly him out and waste their time showing him around when he's not even going to go there and they could focus on other recruits? I know ND has googobs of money but they're not even stupid enough to waste it or their time like that. What's a ticket from Hawaii to South Bend even go for these days? Only $700 or $800 dollars.



YES!!!!



Finally, don't get all high and mighty with me. Everyone on this board and every other, you included, at some point or another has had their buttons pushed by other posters or recruits' actions or something where they may make judgments that may or may not be substantiated. This just happens to be one of my hot button issues. And from the information available, I don't think the claims I've drawn are probably that far from the truth. At the very least, the Schwenke's ought to understand what this looks like and should understand that until they clear things up, there might be a few unhappy people. They certainly don't owe me any explanations but they do owe the BYU coaches one. And it doesn't sound like they are any too pleased either. But I can draw whatever conclusion and state my opinion in whatever way I want until the final truth comes out Like I said, I overlooked the first few rumors of him courting and being courted by other schools. How long do you expect me to keep this up?


It would certainly appear to me that, although he was wearing the ring, he was still playing the field.
E
EM_Puma
And we all thought this was going to be a boring period leading up to national LOI day. :sulk:
Sponsored Advertisementad content
B
BoiseBYU
So long Kona

We hardly knowed ya

Enjoy Notre Dame

Maybe you'll play in a bowl game



[ Post made via Mobile Device ] http://cougarcorner.com/images/mobile.png" alt="" loading="lazy" style="max-width:100%">
B
BOID
Mars wrote:
I would say 60 40 for byu at this point with the information that I have.

So he's only 40% liar at this point? Seriously, you don't have a problem with this? It's like the Dad from Jerry Maguire who only needs to give you his handshake because his word is his bond. A commitment from someone with little integrity doesn't mean very much.


Well said, Mars.
Page 3 of 3
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.