Recruiting - Greg Odon

[pkhoya03]

Any info on this Greg Odon guy out of Indianapolis? Don't see him listed on the Recruiting Master Thread. I heard him briefly mentioned during the Rockets-TWolves game tonight and I couldn't find much online about him besides that he's rated #1 on InsideHoops.com's Class of 2006. The announcer on ESPN said that he'd be the #1 pick this year if he was eligible, but he might want to go to college for a few years. If the 20 year old age limit gets imposed, he might have no choice. Wonder if he's on JT3's wish list.

[GUHoya07]

I doubt he's on JT III's wishlist because this guy is definitely going pro unless an age limit is put into place.

[jerseyhoya34]

I think JT3 would have the green light to recruit a player like Oden. We're currently showing interest in players who may prefer to head to the NBA right away.

[TBird41]

GUHoya2007 said:

I doubt he's on JT III's wishlist because this guy is definitely going pro unless an age limit is put into place.

First off, I'm sure he's on JT3's wish list (you don't think JT3 would love to have Odon-doesn't mean he believes he can get him though) but also, I read the article on him in Sports Illustrated this winter and he was saying how much he wanted to go to college. He seemed like he actually wanted to go and had the grades and no eligibility problems (ala LeBron). I don't know if he's changed his mind since then, but he was definately considering going to school when the article was written.

[GUHoya07]

Im not talking about green lights or preferring to go to the NBA. Oden is a LOCK for the NBA without an age limit, someone like Rush was only considering it but very borderline.

[jerseyhoya34]

GUHoya2007 said:

Im not talking about green lights or preferring to go to the NBA. Oden is a LOCK for the NBA without an age limit, someone like Rush was only considering it but very borderline.

There are others, not just Rush.

[GUHoya07]

ok, Macklin, Goodridge, etc., but I wasn't ever talking about whether he'd have a green light or not. I was talking about how realistic it would be that they'd go to college.

[DFW HOYA]

Well, this is one of those topics that gets more play in the off-season, but I would argue that Georgetown should never be a place for the one-and-dones.

Part of the delicate balance between major college basketball and major college academics is the understanding that players will progress towards a degree. A Mike Sweetney was progressing to a degree and got an offer too good to pass up, and I don't blame him for trying. If a junior finance major got a six figure offer to start at Bear Stearns, he'd give some thought to taking it, too. (And, yes, I'd like to see Big Mike finish up and get the degree.)

However, obvious one and dones corrode the academic-athletic relationship because it is clear they have no intention of upholding the academic bargain and this ultimately reflects poorly on the University's reputation going forward.

In short, Georgetown shouldn't take short-timers because it never should need to.

[jerseyhoya34]

DFW said:

Well, this is one of those topics that gets more play in the off-season, but I would argue that Georgetown should never be a place for the one-and-dones.

Part of the delicate balance between major college basketball and major college academics is the understanding that players will progress towards a degree. A Mike Sweetney was progressing to a degree and got an offer too good to pass up, and I don't blame him for trying. If a junior finance major got a six figure offer to start at Bear Stearns, he'd give some thought to taking it, too. (And, yes, I'd like to see Big Mike finish up and get the degree.)

However, obvious one and dones corrode the academic-athletic relationship because it is clear they have no intention of upholding the academic bargain and this ultimately reflects poorly University's reputation going forward.

In short, Georgetown shouldn't take short-timers because it simply doesn't need to.

I think a lot depends on how you classify a one and done. Players who claim to be of the one and done mold (Charlie V) often do not turn out that way, and I do not fault coaches for trying to win as many games as possible. I also question how the institution would allow the academic-sports relationship erode. If Jimmy B can sit someone out for a tourney game because of grades, I think JT3 could manage. Maybe I trust JT3 too much in that department, but his father did a darn good job with most of the players of this kind of stock in terms of balancing athletics and academics.

[coachmcguirk]

Odem is a moose who could play in the NBA right now -- maybe he goes to college, but he won't be there long.

I doubt anyone at Syracuse thought Carmelo Anthony was "corrosive." Don't think JT felt that way about Iverson, either.

[DFW HOYA]

If you can find an front page article from the Washington Post circa 1997 called "Georgetown Basketball Faces A Philosophy Exam", it is a good article on why one and dones won't pass muster through the University going forward.

[TBird41]

It's on Lexis-Nexis for those who have access to it (which all students do through the library website). It's listed in the General News category and then search for the title DFW provided.

It's an interesting article, stemming from a struggle b/w JT and the dean b/c only 59% of the bball players brought in b/w 1992 and 1996 ended up reaching their senior, in comparison w/ 90% of the freshman from that time. And if that's the case, then I think DFW is right.
I think, however, that bringing in a one and done player like Carmelo or a two and done like Iverson is acceptable if it doesn't happen that often. If Georgetown is going to be a national power again, I think that GTown will have to do it occasionally and I don't think it's that big of a deal. If underclassmen are leaving every year, or every other year, well, that's not the kind of program that I want GTown to become b/c that's not the kind of program that JT's deflated basketball represents (or one that follows the Jesuit principles of Gtown).

[jerseyhoya34]

DFW said:

If you can find an front page article from the Washington Post circa 1997 called "Georgetown Basketball Faces A Philosophy Exam", it is a good article on why one and dones won't pass muster through the University going forward.

It didn't turn up on Google, but keep in mind that one and dones would be unlikely if the NBA implements the age restriction. Most high schoolers would need 2 years of college before heading to the NBA.

I think the idea that the program should restrict its recruiting pool is ridiculous. Esherick had his fair share of one and dones, namely Causey. He also had other situations that one could argue are also disruptive to the community, such as the mid-career transfers (Bethel, Hall, et al.). Nonetheless, he still managed to do a good job with his job, as he defined it, which was to be an academic mentor who coaches on the side, and I think some members of the academic community here respected him for that.

[DFW HOYA]

JerseyHoya34 said:

I think the idea that the program should restrict its recruiting pool is ridiculous. Esherick had his fair share of one and dones, namely Causey.

Matt Causey was not a one and done. He was a transfer. Big difference.

The classic definition of a "one-and-done" is a player who uses one year of college as a prelude to a pro career without a commitment to a four year degree; now or in the future.

"I have to move on. We won a national championship. I don’t want to make it sound bad but there’s really nothing more I could get out of college. I came here for a year, and I’m still going to get my degree. I won the Big East regular season, I won the championship. I won Rookie of the Year for the Big East and for the nation. So really there isn’t much more left."
--Carmelo Anthony

[GIGAFAN99]

Come on Jersey, to compare kids that transfer to kids that are using one year at a university to improve their NBA draft stock is disingenuous and you know it.

The question is not one of "disruption" but of an inconsistent mission of a university. There are arguments on both sides. And it is certainly not ridiculous to fall on the side of actually wanting to accept students who plan on completing their academic programs.

As for the "depends on what you mean" argument, I don't agree. There are plenty of players everyone knows are hired guns for basketball programs who have no intent of finishing their degrees. The arguments that "Well they could stay" or "at least they're getting some education" are just rationalizations for a practice that's sole intent is to win basketball games. You can argue that is a noble goal, but not persuasively against the notion that it is in fact, the only goal of such recruiting.

[jerseyhoya34]

DFW said:

Matt Causey was not a one and done. He was a transfer. Big difference.

The classic definition of a one-and-done is a player who uses one year of college as a prelude to an NBA contract without a commitment to a four year degree.

I don't see a big difference between Causey and an Iverson except the university spent an extra $30K on Iverson, and he will earn millions more than Causey will ever dream of. If we're talking about graduating players as the goal of the program, the WaPo article you cited has the following to say, "The NCAA uses a different measuring stick: It bases graduation rates on the number of athletes who earned diplomas from the universities in which they enrolled as freshmen." According to this standard, Causey and Iverson would be counted in precisely the same fashion in terms of graduation rates.

In reality, fine, there is a difference between Causey and Iverson in an academic sense because Causey is clearly intent on pursuing a degree. However, there is no difference for Georgetown, I would argue. Neither will pursue the degree at Georgetown and both expended University resources while they were here, except Iverson probably gave more back in the sense that more people would come to our games to see him than folks would to see Causey.

[DFW HOYA]

JerseyHoya34 said:

I don't see a big difference between Causey and an Iverson except the university spent an extra $30K on Iverson, and he will earn millions more than Causey will ever dream of....In reality, fine, there is a difference between Causey and Iverson in an academic sense because Causey is clearly intent on pursuing a degree. However, there is no difference for Georgetown, I would argue.

I'm sorry, but this is a completely specious argument.

Matt Causey (or Willie Taylor, or Antoine Stoudamire, or Ray Knight, or anyone else you want to cite) made a decision to continue their education elsewhere, and graduated (or in Causey's case, will graduate) in due course. They didn't "cost" Georgetown anything in a purely financial sense, only in NCAA graduation statistics, just like the non-athletic students who transfer affect the university's transfer statistics that make US News.

Conversely, a player that attends a school with the expectation that he will bolt for the first NBA opportunity serves nether the athlete nor the school in the long run. At a school like Georgetown, where the support of admissions-flexible scholarship basketball is by no means a consensus, any trend that the program is bringing in students with little or no interest in the school's academic interests can only serve to damage the program and its supporters within the university. It is this player that also costs a program, because their impact is so brief, the need to replace him is so great, and the program is ultimately set back by the dalliance.

Lute Olsen said it succinctly: "I am not interested in recruiting someone that may be coming out after one year, I think that is a disaster to our program. This year in our recruiting we had two players rated in the top five that had talked about coming out this year or after one year, we just dropped them off our list, one we didn't even make a home visit on. There is no way that somebody coming into your program for one year is going to help your program, in the long run they're only going to do more harm. "

But let me use the quote of another coach to make the point: "Teaching young people that education is unimportant and may be skipped in the pursuit of money hurts everybody. Because of basketball's popularity, failing to adopt some rule that stems the tide will flood the nation with this lesson in a way that baseball, hockey, golf and tennis never could. We need to motivate young people to pursue education, not avoid it."--John Thompson

[Jack]

The difference between Causey and a "one and done" is in the intent when you are recruiting them. When you recruit a player like Anthony with full knowledge that he is using your school as a draft showcase it is far different than recruiting a player who is coming to the university to play basketball while receiving an education who happens to transfer for non-academic reasons. It may be the rationalization of a fanboy, but I also see Iverson as a different case in that nobody knew he would be the number 1 pick in two years and his mother wanted him to come to play under Pops specifically for the guidance he could give him. AI's 2 years at Georgetown might not give him a degree, but there is no denying they were critical to his maturation as a person and his rehabilitation after his time in prison.

[jerseyhoya34]

GIGAFAN99 said:

Come on Jersey, to compare kids that transfer to kids that are using one year at a university to improve their NBA draft stock is disingenuous and you know it.

If it is disingenuous, the NCAA is disingenuous because they classify the two players in exactly the same way on graduation rates. I can see where Charlie Deacon is coming from, don't get me wrong, but, if I am a basketball coach, I look for basketball players, first and foremost. Do not let GU's mission statement or admissions policies fool you. We accepted players back then who would not make it in the "normal" academic pool and we still do so today. Even Mike Sweetney, for example, was not expected to finish his career at Georgetown when he was recruited, and I suspect the situation with Jeff Green is no different today, sorry to say.

[DFW HOYA]

JerseyHoya34 said:

Do not let GU's mission statement or admissions policies fool you. We accepted players back then who would not make it in the "normal" academic pool and we still do so today.

"Back then?" When was this?