General

Why Does The NCAA Hate Will Muschamp And The Stability He Stands For?

Feb 12, 2010, 10:00 PM UTC

Sure, the team that just won the national championship has entered each of the last three offseasons needing to offload about ten kids, but the NCAA has more pressing matters like writing on your eyeblack (a courageous stand taken immediately after Tim Tebow’s eligiblity expired) and experiencing an emotional state other than crushing ennui. â†µâ†µWhy stop there, though, when you can restrict the recruiting visits of Will Muschamp?â†µ

â†µâ†µâ‡¥â†µâ‡¥The rule states that assistants “publicly designated” to be the next head coach are now bound by the same recruiting rules as the current head coach. That means Muschamp can make only one off-campus visit with a prospect and it can’t be during the critical spring evaluation period of April 15-May 31. Other assistants can have multiple off-campus visits. â†µâ‡¥

â†µâ†µâ†µMaryland offensive coordinator James Franklin, the Fridge apparent, is also affected by the rule, but Maryland doesn’t exactly have the wattage that Will “BOOM[MATRON FAIRY]” Muschamp does. â†µ

â†µâ†µNeither school is taking the rule change lying down. They’re asking the NCAA for an exemption: â†µ

â†µâ†µâ‡¥â†µâ‡¥“We are partnering with Texas to approach the NCAA about being grandfathered into the rule, since our contract was signed a year ago,” [Maryland A.D. Debbie] Yow said in an e-mail. “I believe our position has merit. Other than that, I do not think it professional to comment while the schools communicate with the NCAA.” â†µâ‡¥

â†µâ†µâ†µThe schools do have a point here. They signed a contract that now has negative effects on their ability to recruit, though it’s debatable how much impact Muschamp’s absence will have since Texas usually has 20 guys committed by April 15th. They’ll probably get their exemptions, and if they don’t it won’t be a huge deal because of Texas’s aforementioned recruiting chops and Franklin’s likely ascension after this season.â†µ

â†µ

â†µSo whatever on that specific complaint. Not a big deal. However, a question: Why is the NCAA killing these coach-in-waiting deals? Every offseason we see coaches jump ship for other jobs, leaving festive riots, disappointment, and jilted recruits in their wake. Then we get a tiresome tide of columns about it. This coach-in-waiting business was an innovation that allowed schools to keep important assistants around for a smooth transition of power, no riots involved. â†µ

â†µâ†µWithout it, Muschamp would be gone to Auburn or a half-dozen other schools. Franklin might be a head coach somewhere else, as well. The programs in question, both poacher and poachee, would face tense moments when they tried to get them back. If they managed it, there would be chaos at the previous school. Chaos spawns transfers and decommits and academic disruption that the NCAA is hypothetically against. Not to go all one-sentence paragraph on you, but a coach moving schools has a negative impact on the players that are hypothetically the NCAA’s top priority, and the NCAA just chucked a small measure of stability out the window because a few other coaches complained that a coach-in-waiting might have an infinitesimal recruiting advantage.â†µ

â†µâ†µIt’s not like the NCAA’s priorities are much in doubt anymore (hello 96-team NCAA tourney), but you can add this to the mountain of evidence that suggests the student-athletes aren’t at the top of the list. â†µ

â†µ

This post originally appeared on the Sporting Blog. For more, see The Sporting Blog Archives.

See More: