CougarCorner
Sign in
Archived Topic

Can we please refrain from villainizing the schwenkes

by jonnylingo · 1/29/2010

Sponsored Advertisementad content
I
imuakahuku
kitic77 wrote:
I just wanted to offer a little insight. Living in Laie and growing up there is almost a world apart from living anywhere on the mainland save maybe Alaska. I have lived in numerous states and the lifestyle is completely different. That said I would like to take into consideration that there are very very few well to do families that have kids at Kahuku. A monumental trip is usually when a kid goes to an outer island for scouts or something along that line. They may get the chance to go to the mainland once before graduating from high school because of football, wrestling, or band. Or they may get a chance to visit family in Utah or California once. That pales in comparison to the trips that many families-including many of the poorer ones that jump in the car and for gas money drive a state or two over to spend time with family several times before the kids are out of the house. And I remember only one group of kids even remotely close to my age that went further east than Utah while still in high school and that was for a band trip to play in the citrus or orange bowl parade. That is from 10 years older than me to 10 years younger than me. It almost never happens. So I can see how this could be viewed by Kona and his family as simply an opportunity to go east for a visit. I remember the one trip I took to the mainland and I always will. After being on the same island for so many years and only seeing on TV or hearing about what it was like on the mainland, it was an eye opening experience for me at the time. It is different when you are a small child and a teen. Around when I turned 18 is when I really came down with “island fever”. It was especially tough because when I was real young and we lived in the east, we took numerous trips to Mich, Fla, and MD. So please don’t jump too heavily on Kona about wanting to get of the rock because that in and of itself is a life experience that doesn’t come along too often to kids from Kahuku.

The dumb thing about this whole process is that these kids don't have to sign anything and especially not on that one day. They can sit back and wait if they want to, maybe all the scholies are gone but if you are good enough one will be available, and make the commitment later. I can't fault Kona for wanting to go but I would think because there is no law that states that all recruits must sign on "national LOI day" there could be some patience exercised. BYU will not lose on any recruit if Kona doesn’t sign because they need the extra one for Kaveinga anyways, and it will also prove whether Kona is truly committed to BYU. BYU doesn’t lose either way.


I don't care if they never get off the island. If you want to leave and "just go visit friends" then pay for it yourself. I know it's expensive to travel to and from the Islands. I don't care. Pay for it yourself. Recruiting visits are not paid vacations. They're business trips. To use them as otherwise is dishonest and fraudulent.


That's an easy attitude to have but not a great argument against it.

To some if not most of the athletes they are paid vacations and the schools know it but still bring them in even if it is very unlikely they will sign. BYU even treats the trip as a vacation else how do you explain the snow mobile trip, the bball game, and all the other visits to attractions in the Provo area. Just about all the other schools do the same as well. So if a school knows you are already committed, but agrees to fly you out with next to no chance of you signing, you are dishonest or a fraud if you take them up on it? Do you think the school cares about the expense? If they did don't you think they would go after kids they had a much better chance at landing? They write it off as "doing business" and let it go.
I
imuakahuku
hawkwing wrote:
He had ample opportunity to take recruiting trips before he committed to BYU, it probably would be even less of a big deal if he had done it several months ago. The fact is it was incredibly poorly timed and thought out.


This is a great argument. I agree his timing was very poor, especially in light of Jamoura dropping the Y.
J
jonnylingo
Lawboy wrote:
Not to mention, what happens if Kona went to Notre Dame, liked it, but still liked BYU more, and realized his commitment to BYU just became stronger? What if?


i agree with this. I don't doubt kona and his family LOVE byu. does that mean he wasn't shopping a little bit, no it does't, but we still would have had a shot at him. if byu however thought they could use his schollie to poach someone else before lio day, than that justifies their actions even more.
M
Mars
Lawboy wrote:
Not to mention, what happens if Kona went to Notre Dame, liked it, but still liked BYU more, and realized his commitment to BYU just became stronger?

Well then he would be just like Handsome Tanielu, a kid who really likes BYU but doesn't have a scholarship offer. Maybe they could both walk on together?
B
bigbluepuma
Lawboy wrote:
Not to mention, what happens if Kona went to Notre Dame, liked it, but still liked BYU more, and realized his commitment to BYU just became stronger? What if?




What if.......Kona went to ND and liked it , and jumped ship? What if?
Sponsored Advertisementad content
L
Lawboy
bigbluepuma wrote:
Not to mention, what happens if Kona went to Notre Dame, liked it, but still liked BYU more, and realized his commitment to BYU just became stronger? What if?




What if.......Kona went to ND and liked it , and jumped ship? What if?


Good point. But makes no difference since he has no offer now. Only makes a difference if BYU is still his #1 choice on LOI day, since we closed that door. I'd rather the kid shoot us in the back, than we shoot ourselves in the foot.
J
jonnylingo
Lawboy wrote:
Lawboy wrote:
Not to mention, what happens if Kona went to Notre Dame, liked it, but still liked BYU more, and realized his commitment to BYU just became stronger? What if?




What if.......Kona went to ND and liked it , and jumped ship? What if?


Good point. But makes no difference since he has no offer now. Only makes a difference if BYU is still his #1 choice on LOI day, since we closed that door. I'd rather the kid shoot us in the back, than we shoot ourselves in the foot.


Good point. Unless there is more to the story than simply the coaches wanting him to not go tripping, then i think they made a mistake. I kind of think there is more the story though. seems to me bronco was 'testing' his commitment. In Bronco's eyes Phillips passed the test and kona didn't. I think its stupid though. I tend to believe the schwenke's in that byu was his first pick and it was pretty solid. I don't doubt thought that kona egged on the new offers. That doesn't mean he was going to take them though. Doesn't matter now though. We lost him. It just seems like it could have been avoided.



who cares if he goes tripping. so it is in bad taste....blah blah blah. if signed with byu on wednesday it wouldn't have mattered. but many, including our coaches seem to think him taking the trip has some implication on his ability to keep the honor code? I sure hope there is more to the story that we are hearing. We haven't heard the coaches side at all at this point.
G
gmj81
Ddawg wrote:
jonnylingo wrote:
Thats all.

Boo-frickin'-hoo. Good riddance to bad rubbish.


It's not so black & white. It's mostly shades gray. It's not a god thing to offend

to the point that current & future recruits are given "pause" because of the way fans may react.



I would suggest - our initial reaction (though very disappointed) should have been guarded, tempered with caution & hope - till signing day. If & when Kona did sign his LOI with another school - there is plenty of time for anger & recrimination.



Look - Kona was committed to BYU - did either Notre Dame or UW fans burn any bridges by attacking him? Nope - doors remain open & bridges intact. You just never know. You never know - now & in the future!! IMHO.


Might be good in theory Ddawg but bad in example. Jake Heaps only recently signed his graint-in-aid with BYU but immediately after he had his press conference, he was absolutely vilified in Washington. But there was still time for UW to convince him otherwise, right? Never mind that, now all of a sudden they "never wanted him" and he was "a lesser talent compared to Montana" and "who wants a Mormon anyway?"



The Heaps could understand all that at first as just sour grapes. But it has only gotten progressively worse for Jake and his family, even so much that the family business have been blacklisted in the community. Now tell me again UW and the it's fans doesn't burn bridges... or at least with a straight face.



The only thing "bad" really being said about the Schwenke's has been that their character has been called into question. But given the circumstances and ample evidence, I don't see how there's many who could honestly disagree that they have tarnished their own character a little bit through the whole situation.
M
Mars
jonnylingo wrote:
Doesn't matter now though. We lost him. It just seems like it could have been avoided.

We didn't lose him- Bronco pulled his scholarship offer. He lost us.
L
Lawboy
This whole situation? Let's put it in it's proper perspective first. That is what is lacking in all of this. Many here are quick to rip the Schwenke's for lack on integrity, and to me, that is flat out wrong. Tell you what, go ask an Alabama fan, or Florida fan, or USC fan about this scenario with this player. Tell me if they react the same. I think we all know that they will not, and the reason is because it is not personal to them. It is just another day on the recruiting trail. And therein lies the problem. Too many make it personal when it should not be. Ever. It is freaking college football recruiting. And if the kid changes his mind, guess what--he is entitled to. Changing your mind is not sin, is not immoral, is not unethical. looking and exploring options at a time when you are in demand is also not sinful, illegal or immoral. For those of us employed, if someone came by with a job offer, and you entertained it, what does that make you??? I;d say it makes you smart. You have the chance to accept it or turn it down. No harm in looking. Unless you are married. and BYU and Kona are engaged, not married. You can look while engaged.



when I was dating my wife, I was ready to go exclusive. She said yes. Less tha na week later, she backed out and said she was not ready. I told her I di not like it, but I respected her choice, and thought I still offered her the best options. She went on a few other dates, then told me she was ready. We got married 8 weeks later. Imagine if I had just cut her off when she wanted to explore other choices. I;d have missed out on 6 years of happiness, and not had the 2 boys that brighten my world every day. So that is where I am coming from. You have to be open to possibilities, and not act jilted just because they go look. They just might come back, more committed than ever. you have to allow for that.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
S
snoscythe
imuakahuku wrote:
BYU even treats the trip as a vacation else how do you explain the snow mobile trip, the bball game, and all the other visits to attractions in the Provo area. Just about all the other schools do the same as well. So if a school knows you are already committed, but agrees to fly you out with next to no chance of you signing, you are dishonest or a fraud if you take them up on it? Do you think the school cares about the expense? If they did don't you think they would go after kids they had a much better chance at landing? They write it off as "doing business" and let it go.


Beginning this year, BYU's recruiting weekend is only for recruits who have committed...to BYU. Even going back a couple of years, can you name one recruit BYU has flown into Provo for an official visit after they verballed to another school? I can't.
J
jonnylingo
There is a reason kids can switch up until signing day. its because its a huge decision and things change. coaches change, offers change, etc. but there has to be a end line which is loi day.



they should have the right to explore all their options up until that day. that is why the rules are the way they are. that is why there is no rule that says once you verbally commit you are bound. Its beacuse sa things change they should have a right to weigh their options before making that decsion.



in this case he got a new offer from a great program. he has the right to explore it. i still think byu overreacted (again unless here is more to the story than i am aware of) by pulling his schollie.



byu is reading too much into the trip to nd. tripping there doesn' t mean he is not committed to byu. it means he wants to make sure toe weigh all his options before he makes that decision. i believe the schwenkes that byu was their first choice. i understand their desire to explore their options as well as far as nd goes. they pretty much denied all the other offers that came there way becuase they were committed to byu. nd came along and they had to make sure it was not better for him.



he should have been allowed to go check it out and then make a decision. compare his verbal committment to his ability to commit to the honor code is reckless and manipulative in my opinion. i dont know the whole story but this rubs me the wrong way.



i still think that had we just said, we don't like it but we trust you and its your decision, don't let us down, that on wednesday he would be a cougar. and i think if that happened he would be eve more committed than he was before the nd trip. at that point he would have known he made the right decision. byu was tryign to force him to stick with his decision. they avhe a right to do that, i just think its stupid.



all this comes with a caveat. i haven't heard the coaches side of the story.
M
Mars
jonnylingo wrote:
There is a reason kids can switch up until signing day... they should have the right to explore all their options up until that day. that is why the rules are the way they are. that is why there is no rule that says once you verbally commit you are bound. Its beacuse sa things change they should have a right to weigh their options before making that decsion. in this case he got a new offer from a great program. he has the right to explore it. i still think byu overreacted (again unless here is more to the story than i am aware of) by pulling his schollie.
You make it sound like the NCAA is in charge of running BYU and not Bronco Mendenhall.



If BYU says "Don't trip after you commit here or you'll lose your offer" and the NCAA says "your commit isn't legally binding until you sign", and a kid commits to BYU and then trips elsewhere, which policy do you think should matter more to BYU in how they react- The NCAA's, or their own?



Should the recruit then act surprised that BYU is upholding their own policy? Should the recruit's family get mad at BYU for doing exactly what they said they would do?



Seems like a poor argument.
S
snoscythe
If coaches are telling recruits they have previously offered that they will now have to walk-on to BYU because all of the scholarships are spoken for (see Heimuli, Butorac), I have no problem with Bronco refusing to hold a scholarship any long from someone who has verballed but continues to take official visits to other schools.



Why should we hold a scholarship for Scwhanka who insists on visiting other programs simply because he said he was committed to BYU and then tell other guys who have been more honest with their indecision to either walk-on or pound dirt????



Treat the recruits like men and quit babying them. Then can get babied at Notre Dame and UW and be done playing football in time for finals every year. Yeah, the rule says they can change their mind at any time before signing day, but NCAA rules also allow drinking, porn, and extra-marital sex. We expect more here. I'm just glad this is all getting out of the way this recruiting year so it won't be a surprise to anyone in the future.
G
gmj81
And they have that right. But with Bronco and some other coaches, the rules are "once you commit" you don't trip or you lose your scholie. The NCAA has their rules... some of the coaches obey those, some don't, but many coaches also have their own rules. And Kona broke rule #1. Plain and simple.



And let's not call ND a great program please. They have tradition but they are nowhere close to being a great program currently. Same thing with UW. You could make the argument that they are still on the way back up but BYU is already on top.



What's more BKelly didn't bother recruiting Kona while he was at CIncy so he has no familiarity with the man at all. So why does Kona all of a sudden think that he could be a man he could play for? Other than Johny-come-way-lately-ND, all the rest of the offers he has had have stable programs and coaches. So there hasn't been a whole lot that has changed since prior to the season when Kona committed to the Cougars.



The bottom line is he never should have committed if he thought there might be other schools he'd be interested in. And considering how highly ranked and regarded he was by all the scouting services and programs, he had to know that more offers would be forthcoming.



But he obviously didn't want to forfeit his BYU offer before he had the chance to secure others that he might like better. He wanted his cake and wanted to eat it too. He wanted to still date around while he was engaged to be married. He used BYU and Bronco and abandoned their trust.
Sponsored Advertisementad content
J
jonnylingo
Mars wrote:
There is a reason kids can switch up until signing day... they should have the right to explore all their options up until that day. that is why the rules are the way they are. that is why there is no rule that says once you verbally commit you are bound. Its beacuse sa things change they should have a right to weigh their options before making that decsion. in this case he got a new offer from a great program. he has the right to explore it. i still think byu overreacted (again unless here is more to the story than i am aware of) by pulling his schollie.
You make it sound like the NCAA is in charge of running BYU and not Bronco Mendenhall.





Uh, no I'm not, I am questioning bronco's philosophy. Its not that hard to understand that. I am saying that its a stupid policy. i understand that i am in the minority on this. I think it cost us kona's services. I don't argue that kona' saying he is commited and then still going after the coaches asked him not to is lame. I don't argue that kona screwed byu by committing and then doing that. I am just arguing that in this case they should not have pulled his scholarship and let him go. If he chose to commit to byu after tripping to notre dame, well then you KNOW for sure if he was commited to byu or not. we don't have to 'question' it because he is tripping and make a decsiion right then. we could have waited until wednesday. it was stupid to force him not to take the trip. it was also stupid for kona to take it after byu asked him not to. the whole situation just sucks.
S
snoscythe
jonnylingo wrote:
jonnylingo wrote:
There is a reason kids can switch up until signing day... they should have the right to explore all their options up until that day. that is why the rules are the way they are. that is why there is no rule that says once you verbally commit you are bound. Its beacuse sa things change they should have a right to weigh their options before making that decsion. in this case he got a new offer from a great program. he has the right to explore it. i still think byu overreacted (again unless here is more to the story than i am aware of) by pulling his schollie.
You make it sound like the NCAA is in charge of running BYU and not Bronco Mendenhall.





Uh, no I'm not, I am questioning bronco's philosophy. Its not that hard to understand that. I am saying that its a stupid policy. i understand that i am in the minority on this. I think it cost us kona's services. I don't argue that kona' saying he is commited and then still going after the coaches asked him not to is lame. I don't argue that kona screwed byu by committing and then doing that. I am just arguing that in this case they should not have pulled his scholarship and let him go. If he chose to commit to byu after tripping to notre dame, well then you KNOW for sure if he was commited to byu or not. we don't have to 'question' it because he is tripping and make a decsiion right then. we could have waited until wednesday. it was stupid to force him not to take the trip. it was also stupid for kona to take it after byu asked him not to. the whole situation just sucks.


You keep forgetting that Kona has already said he prayed and received the answer that BYU was the place for him. Combine that with the fact he knew BYU was going to pull his offer if he got on that plane, and you have a kid who doesn't deserve to step on the field with guys like Phillips. A kid who (a) either can't follow personal revelation or makes up stories about personal revelation, and (b) can't follow a simple if-then statement doesn't need to be here.
M
Mars
snoscythe wrote:
Treat the recruits like men and quit babying them. Then can get babied at Notre Dame and UW and be done playing football in time for finals every year. Yeah, the rule says they can change their mind at any time before signing day, but NCAA rules also allow drinking, porn, and extra-marital sex. We expect more here. I'm just glad this is all getting out of the way this recruiting year so it won't be a surprise to anyone in the future.

AMEN! Very well said, I completely agree.
B
bigbluepuma
Lawboy wrote:
Lawboy wrote:
Not to mention, what happens if Kona went to Notre Dame, liked it, but still liked BYU more, and realized his commitment to BYU just became stronger? What if?




What if.......Kona went to ND and liked it , and jumped ship? What if?


Good point. But makes no difference since he has no offer now. Only makes a difference if BYU is still his #1 choice on LOI day, since we closed that door. I'd rather the kid shoot us in the back, than we shoot ourselves in the foot.


I absolutely DO NOT think we shot ourselves in the foot. Allow me to illustrate: A few years ago,following a barely above .500 year, during fall camp, we had a BIG openning game coming up, when one of our star players (and anothergood player) broke team rules. Bronco didn't even hesitate. He suspended them from practices, and from the openning game. We won the game, and have had a fair amount of success sinse that time.



About the same time, USU had several players caught breaking the law. Coach Guy "handled it in house" Nobody lost anyplaying time, or any practise time. A few months later (still during the same season), his big star running back (one of the first group) got into big trouble with the law, and missed the rest of his career from his cell. Coach Guy is gone now, and you can judge the success of the program for yourself. Now, do you still think being firm in what Bronco asks of his players and recruits is shooting ourselves in the foot? This will pay dividends in the long run, and probably in the short run as well.
G
gmj81
jonnylingo wrote:
the whole situation just sucks.


On that... we can ALL agree!
Page 2 of 7
This is an archived topic from the original CougarCorner forum. New replies are not accepted.