CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,861
|
Macklin
Jul 9, 2005 20:17:32 GMT -5
Post by CTHoya08 on Jul 9, 2005 20:17:32 GMT -5
Brief article on the new age limit rule. Not much in it, but there is this quote from Macklin, "For Macklin, the change has forced him to re-evaluate his future. " I don't have a list of schools right now," he said. "I'm starting over." What does this mean for us? sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2104409
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,426
|
Macklin
Jul 9, 2005 20:29:38 GMT -5
Post by MCIGuy on Jul 9, 2005 20:29:38 GMT -5
Brief article on the new age limit rule. Not much in it, but there is this quote from Macklin, "For Macklin, the change has forced him to re-evaluate his future. " I don't have a list of schools right now," he said. "I'm starting over." What does this mean for us? sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=2104409As of right now I wouldn't worry over it. The reports for weeks have either had Gtown leading or had quoted Macklin saying that he is re-opening up his list. Of course every tme he re-opens the list it turns out to be the same old schools:Gtown, Wake, UNC, etc. Lets see how this plays out.
|
|
idhoya
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,177
|
Macklin
Jul 9, 2005 22:46:32 GMT -5
Post by idhoya on Jul 9, 2005 22:46:32 GMT -5
everyone else is on hold until Macklin comes. Word is that III and staff have shadowed him all over the Nike Camp. I wouldn't worry about him re-opening. He knows where he wants to go by now.
|
|
RBHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,132
|
Macklin
Jul 9, 2005 23:25:32 GMT -5
Post by RBHoya on Jul 9, 2005 23:25:32 GMT -5
I read this article about a week ago that states: "Although Macklin has long maintained his desire to attend college — preferably at an ACC school" which made me worry a bit since the primary competitors for him were UNC, Wake, and MD, with UVA and Va Tech as lesser threats. The thread doesnt quote him on it or anything, but its still disconcerting. home.hamptonroads.com/stories/story.cfm?story=88554&ran=52872I also saw a quote from him somewhere today where he said something like "I would've looked at the NBA, but now I gotta go to college." which I suppose can be interpreted in multiple ways, but it certainly doesnt sound like hes very interested in classroom success nor in staying in the NCAA for long at all.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,426
|
Macklin
Jul 10, 2005 0:56:25 GMT -5
Post by MCIGuy on Jul 10, 2005 0:56:25 GMT -5
And much of the Baltimore reporting concerning DaJuan Summers talked up the possibility of going to a ACC school. What's the difference?
Ohio based websites have recently made talk of Macklin and Ohio State.
The truth is Gtown is not a sexy name to these writers and people tend to take the program for granted. Out of sight, out of mind kind of thing.
|
|
PopeJohn2
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Ultimate bailout is yet to come and unavoidable. Uncle Sam gonna pay your debt for you!
Posts: 1,465
|
Macklin
Jul 10, 2005 13:47:00 GMT -5
Post by PopeJohn2 on Jul 10, 2005 13:47:00 GMT -5
If your Macklin and looking to go to the NBA in one year, then it would seem that you would want to go to a dominant college team so that you minimize the chances of hurting your spot in the draft, especially one that goes deep in the NCAA. By going to a weaker team, you risk diminishing your value, unless you basically step up and dominate. At the end of the day, I think Mack makes the financially logical decision by picking the strongest team. And that team would be...
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,756
|
Macklin
Jul 10, 2005 14:49:18 GMT -5
Post by DFW HOYA on Jul 10, 2005 14:49:18 GMT -5
"One and dones" are not what Georgetown is all about. There are plenty of places for the athlete who is more suited to passing time for his 19th birthday instead of passing his classes.
|
|
PopeJohn2
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Ultimate bailout is yet to come and unavoidable. Uncle Sam gonna pay your debt for you!
Posts: 1,465
|
Macklin
Jul 10, 2005 15:02:43 GMT -5
Post by PopeJohn2 on Jul 10, 2005 15:02:43 GMT -5
sure we would be about "one and done" if we were able to attract that caliber talent. we havent been in the recent history as the top talent hasnt been interested in coming here. would you pass up iverson or melo or the like if you had the opportunity? i say take the "one and dones' as they help your program rise in prominance if only for a year cause it will pay dividends for years down the road. one or two schollys per year is worth it if you can get it. i say welcome macklin if you can get him. my concern is that we wont be able to.
|
|
nychoya3
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,674
|
Macklin
Jul 10, 2005 15:13:54 GMT -5
Post by nychoya3 on Jul 10, 2005 15:13:54 GMT -5
I'm sympathetic DFW, but it appears pretty clearly that, on a limited basis, JTII is not adverse to one and done players and apparently the admin backs him in this. Macklin bears all the markings of a guy who's "passing time." So did Vernon Goodridge, who Georgetown did everything they could to get. Goodridge has all sorts of academic questions, comes from a prep school that is a bit on the shady side, and then committed under very strange circumstances to Mississippi State. I'm not thrilled, in that I always prefer serious student athletes - guys who at least make an effort, even if they aren't rhodes scholars - to being a waystation. The reality of the thing is that the top-50 or so players in every class have NBA on the brain in a pretty major way.
This isn't to say I'm against recruiting kids who COULD be one and done, based on their talent levels. We need to aim high. Fundamentally, the staff are really the only people situated make these decisions, in that they talk to the kids and see their transcripts and the like. I trust that they'll strike an appropriate balance.
|
|
DFW HOYA
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,756
|
Macklin
Jul 10, 2005 15:19:17 GMT -5
Post by DFW HOYA on Jul 10, 2005 15:19:17 GMT -5
sure we would be about "one and done" if we were able to attract that caliber talent. we havent been in the recent history as the top talent hasnt been interested in coming here. would you pass up iverson or melo or the like if you had the opportunity? Yes. And that's not specific to AI, but to the one and dones in general. Any perception that basketball players are strictly mercenaries in residence that are not there to study is a corrosive element into the program. Simply put, Georgetown can do better than to compete in this regard. "Over the past two seasons, Thompson's leading scorers – Allen Iverson in 1996 and Victor Page in 1997 – have left Georgetown as sophomores to enter the National Basketball Association draft. And among the 17 athletes Thompson brought to the university as freshmen from 1992 through 1996, seven withdrew before reaching their senior years. That 59 percent retention rate compares with a rate of about 90 percent for all freshmen who enter Georgetown.
"That's clearly disappointing to us," said Georgetown's long-time dean of undergraduate admissions, Charles A. Deacon III. He added that as a result of these early withdrawals, Georgetown would begin scrutinizing athlete applicants more carefully..."Our admissions committee will be looking more than ever for a true commitment to getting a degree," Deacon said. (Page A1, Washington Post, Aug. 17, 1997)
|
|
|
Macklin
Jul 10, 2005 16:16:04 GMT -5
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Jul 10, 2005 16:16:04 GMT -5
One and dones are not the way that the program should be going. I actually think that they are dangerous to the long-term health of the program. Players that come into a progarm with the idea of using it as a spring board to the NBA already have placed themselves before the team in terms of looking at the team as a means to an end - that is incidently what they are doing with a high quality university education. Ask Cincy fans if they feel that the value of their degrees has been deminished because of the public perceptions created by their student athletes in the basketball program, and I'm sure you'll get a pretty interesting answer about how the success of Huggins' program has been essentially robbing Peter to pay Paul. In addition, if this player gets injured or doesn't perform up to expectations with the team then he is a locker-room cancer until he transfers out. There are also numerous examples of programs taking a chance on these one and done players and their off the court and in the locker room conduct severely damaging the program.
|
|
JimmyHoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Hoya fan, est. 1986
Posts: 1,867
|
Macklin
Jul 10, 2005 16:27:41 GMT -5
Post by JimmyHoya on Jul 10, 2005 16:27:41 GMT -5
I also think the type of people a typical "one and done" player surrounds himself isn't what we want to be affiliated with anyway.
|
|
SirSaxa
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 747
|
Macklin
Jul 10, 2005 16:33:11 GMT -5
Post by SirSaxa on Jul 10, 2005 16:33:11 GMT -5
DFW makes a good point. I agree -- partially. 1. A flat out "one and done" who is not prepared to do GU level work should not be brought in. 2. There are a lot of kids who MIGHT depart after one year, or two, or who knows. If they are prepared for GU academics -- by their educational preparation AND their attitude toward academics, bring them in. 3. The quote was from 1997, and it did not cover ONLY NBA departures, but 5 other guys who left for various reasons. I think the other 5 (6 if you consider that Victor did not go to the NBA, and probably should never have been admitted to GU anyway) is a much more serious issue than a one-and-done. When guys like Bethel, Hall and Thomas -- an entire class, all depart... that's really bad for the program. Before anyone thinks this is intended as a slam on Craig, we all know there have been lots of transfers out at GU for many years. But to have starters and key players departing, and so many departures... that was a more recent phenomenon. Guibunda and Reed leaving this year... that's not surprising given a new coach and system, so I think we need to give JT3 a little leeway for a year or two before assessing his record on this. 4. The college game and the NBA are different than back in the day... as we all know. Duke and Stanford have early departures. There is no way a program can compete at the top level without losing some kids early. DFW, I don't believe you are opposed to that, but rather to the kids who are certain to depart after one year and who really aren't interested in education at all -- But that is my assumption of your view, please correct this if I am wrong. 5. The more "real students" we can recruit, the better for the entire program, the consistency and team development, the senior leadership we've discussed, and the less of a problem it would be if we lose an occasional early departure.
|
|
Locker
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,265
|
Macklin
Jul 11, 2005 8:36:32 GMT -5
Post by Locker on Jul 11, 2005 8:36:32 GMT -5
Would we refuse to accept student prodigies in other fields (say, computers, or acting) just because they might move on to greener pastures before graduation?
Do you think Stanford wishes it had not accepted Tiger Woods or John McEnroe?
While I don't want to accept mere mercenaries, I think we should remain open to taking good kids who are potentially talented enough to leave early -- so long as JT3 can manage the risk to the basketball program's success. From a reputational risk standpoint, I just don't think if we took the next Marvin Williams or Luol Deng that it would reflect badly on the university.
Not commenting one way or the other on whether Macklin meets that standard.
|
|
Jack
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,411
|
Macklin
Jul 11, 2005 10:27:26 GMT -5
Post by Jack on Jul 11, 2005 10:27:26 GMT -5
To me, it depends on how you view your university. If you want to be a basketball factory, then you don't care whether a one and done player ever attends class, just whether he helps the team win and goes on to bring future recruiting glory by being highly drafted.
If you want to be a university that aims to educate the whole person, then you only recruit and accept student-athletes who see a value to college education beyond the playing time and opportunity to refine their post game. That does not mean they need to be potential Rhodes scholars or even that they need to pledge themselves to 4 year commitments, although finding a few of those would be great. It means they intend to take advantage of the entire college experience and use it to grow emotionally, intellectually, and athletically. That is how I hope Georgetown will behave.
None of that is to say that Macklin is not the latter type of student-athlete. I don't know him and I don't know what is in his head. I know that the selected quotes are discouraging to me. I am willing to give a case like Iverson a pass because I do believe Georgetown's impact on him was positive and went well beyond a showcase for his basketball talent. Given his personal troubles before coming to GU, there was no reason to believe that he would be a one and done player, and Pops' fatherly influence on Allen was a good reason to give him a chance.
In the end, I think the NBA age limit is going to be a terrible thing for college basketball in the short run, with a rash of one and done players further making a mockery of the concept of the student-athlete. Only if the NCAA gets serious about schools recruiting players who are committed to learning and forces those who are not to head to the NBDL instead can the new limit bring any kind of balance to college athletics.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Macklin
Jul 11, 2005 11:12:54 GMT -5
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 11, 2005 11:12:54 GMT -5
Bravo, Jack!
In addition, I'd like to echo one point...
Just because someone says they want to go to the NBA doesn't mean they don't take education seriously. I'd bet that at least 90% of our basketball players would have jumped after their freshman season had they been lottery picks. That doesn't mean they don't value education. But the NBA is their dream.
Taking it one step further...How many incoming Georgetown Freshmen have a dream job? President, Supreme Court Justice, CEO, whatever... If they were offered that job after freshman year, and a guaranteed $10MM or so, would they jump? I think the majority would. Does that mean they don't value education? Of course not.
Lastly, the only real difference, as far as we know, between Vernon Macklin saying he'd like to go pro as soon as possible, and some random SFSer saying he'd like to be president, is that it is somewhat realistic that Macklin is an NBA player at 19 or 20, while the SFSer is wholly unlikely to ever be president, even when he is 35.
|
|
RDF
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 8,835
|
Macklin
Jul 11, 2005 13:24:46 GMT -5
Post by RDF on Jul 11, 2005 13:24:46 GMT -5
the Age Limit isn't going to change much at all other than hopefully saving the kids who think they're ready and are nowhere near ready. As to Macklin, I think people are going overboard about speculation as to what his plans are--he's someone who might not be ready for NBa until his JR season and yet everyone assumes he's 1 and done because he expressed interest in looking into his options--before Draft Limit was put in place.
I've got some info from latest update on him via Scout.Com's Ohio State webiste "Bucknuts.com". They interviewed Macklin and he listed his options as "OSU, Hoyas, UNC, and Wake". The writer from Ohio State said said "it's obvious Georgetown has piqued his interest a great deal".
Macklin said this about Hoyas; "I watch all of their games on television. I also talk to their Coach all of the time. I really like the way they play".
OSU writer also mentioned that Vernon plans on making a decision before the end of the summer.
In addition to this, I would simply say that when it comes to taking kids who could go to NBA after 1/2 years, you have to advise them on what's best for them/their future. If they are guaranteed a spot in top 5 or 10 you tell them to leave. The key is to take good people and those who can handle the academic side and put forth the effort while in school, and more importantly have the majority of your team be kids who plan on staying. 1/2 players leaving early on a team doesn't kill anything--if they are good enough and handle themselves as other student athletes, I'm all for it. College is supposed to be an experience to better yourself and if a kid can come in and does what is asked and has opportunity to make millions of dollars because of his time at GU--how is that bad?? It's not being a basketball factory if you produce good people and talented players. It's not as if GU is trying to become Cincinnati here.
|
|
EasyEd
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 7,272
|
Macklin
Jul 11, 2005 13:28:51 GMT -5
Post by EasyEd on Jul 11, 2005 13:28:51 GMT -5
It means they intend to take advantage of the entire college experience and use it to grow emotionally, intellectually, and athletically.
Add spiritually.
|
|
|
Macklin
Jul 11, 2005 17:26:55 GMT -5
Post by StPetersburgHoya (Inactive) on Jul 11, 2005 17:26:55 GMT -5
the Age Limit isn't going to change much at all other than hopefully saving the kids who think they're ready and are nowhere near ready. As to Macklin, I think people are going overboard about speculation as to what his plans are--he's someone who might not be ready for NBa until his JR season and yet everyone assumes he's 1 and done because he expressed interest in looking into his options--before Draft Limit was put in place. I've got some info from latest update on him via Scout.Com's Ohio State webiste "Bucknuts.com". They interviewed Macklin and he listed his options as "OSU, Hoyas, UNC, and Wake". The writer from Ohio State said said "it's obvious Georgetown has piqued his interest a great deal". Macklin said this about Hoyas; "I watch all of their games on television. I also talk to their Coach all of the time. I really like the way they play". OSU writer also mentioned that Vernon plans on making a decision before the end of the summer. In addition to this, I would simply say that when it comes to taking kids who could go to NBA after 1/2 years, you have to advise them on what's best for them/their future. If they are guaranteed a spot in top 5 or 10 you tell them to leave. The key is to take good people and those who can handle the academic side and put forth the effort while in school, and more importantly have the majority of your team be kids who plan on staying. 1/2 players leaving early on a team doesn't kill anything--if they are good enough and handle themselves as other student athletes, I'm all for it. College is supposed to be an experience to better yourself and if a kid can come in and does what is asked and has opportunity to make millions of dollars because of his time at GU--how is that bad?? It's not being a basketball factory if you produce good people and talented players. It's not as if GU is trying to become Cincinnati here. I think that people on this thread are arguing two different points. Some seem to be saying that if a player (let's take Mike Sweetney for example) fit into the system, are team players, work hard at being a student-athlete and member of the campus community - and he makes an informed economic decision to leave the program to make NBA money then that is fine. I don't think that anyone would say that it is fair for someone who has made an effort to integrate themselves into the program and the campus to forego a year of an NBA salary. However, I think that the type of player that many people through out this post are discussing "one and done" players who see college as only a means to the end of getting into the NBA draft - and as such is not contributing anything academically, to the team, or actually interested in the program in any sort of broader way. I think most of us can agree that this type of player is dangerous to the program or at the very least to the public perception of the program.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,744
|
Macklin
Jul 11, 2005 17:36:24 GMT -5
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 11, 2005 17:36:24 GMT -5
St. Pete, you're right that there are two types of players.
What I was trying to say is that just because someone says they'd like to be "one and done" doesn't mean that they are the second type of player. At least one of the UNC crew that just won a national title talked about the possibility of going pro, but they did not seem to be skip class/do their own thing types (I could be wrong).
The idea that you'd like to jump to the pros after a year doesn't mean you don't try to learn during that year; doesn't mean you don't contribute. It doesn't mean you might not stay longer. If just means if you're a lottery pick, you'd go. Who wouldn't?
|
|