George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

[bigticket1]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

You certainly worded it better than I did....but it's kind of '6 of one, half dozen of the other', isn't it?

It happens all the time , and is probably how we are getting the player that this thread is named after.

[jack power]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

It very seldom gets to the point where a coach "pulls" a scholarship. Most coaches will sit down with a player and give them an honest assessment about the minutes that they will likely be getting in the future. If those minutes are going to be limited , many players decide to go to a program where their chances of playing are increased.

Exactly. It's not like it hasn't happened here before.

[SkippyJack]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

My own worthless opinion, pulling the plug on scholarships seems like it would have quite negative repercussions on the recruiting trail. Unless it can be spun as something else.

For example, if Horstman's scholarship was pulled, that word would travel quite quickly in SD basketball circles. For a recruit choosing between USD/SDSU, that would make a huge difference. Swing enough of those kids (and it wouldn't be hard), and suddenly USD has the upper hand in recruiting. The same goes for pretty much every kid on the roster, they all run in the same AAU circles, know each other, been to camps together, etc.

Ever wonder why we always seem to have a few former Dakota Schoolers walk on to ride pine every year? My suspicions are that one reason is it maintains a very good relationship between the coaching staff and Mr. Seville (who posts here periodically, sorry if I spelled your name wrong). The coaches are always going to push HARD for the Cody Larsons coming out of high school, without a very solid relationship with the Schoolers, there is little to no chance. The consequences of cutting any scholarship player without cause of some sort (beyond playing ability and a shiny new recruit) could be disastrous, IMO.

Another food for thought, although somewhat unrelated. To most more-than-casual fans, players like Andre Gilbert got A LOT of leeway within the program. Why? IMO, the coaches were desperate at that time to get some kind of foothold in recruiting Minneapolis. A successful career for Gilbert would have given them a nice talking point whilst in Minneapolis living rooms.

Most coaches want to win. That means short and long term. It is so hard to establish recruiting relationships, I doubt they would risk cutting somebody loose just to get somebody "better."

So by all means necessary push out the "non local" recruits as there is no loss to the recruiting relationship - in fact, pushing aside someone from outside the traditional recruiting area to make room for a "homeboy" is ok? And of course let us not forget the current fundraising efforts which are so successful - Donors will open their pocketbooks happily if the teams are successful and even better, filled with local product...... If only we could clone Brayden Carlsen

[Nidaros]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

So by all means necessary push out the "non local" recruits as there is no loss to the recruiting relationship - in fact, pushing aside someone from outside the traditional recruiting area to make room for a "homeboy" is ok? And of course let us not forget the current fundraising efforts which are so successful - Donors will open their pocketbooks happily if the teams are successful and even better, filled with local product...... If only we could clone Brayden Carlsen

I realize there is sarcasm in this post, but seems like the program advances with the best players available. To worry about being local is really old fashioned and I am an old guy who remembers seeing the Daniel brothers play for USD. That team could have had two more local guys and finished with a 500 season, but instead they were national champs due to a combination of local guys, Nelson, Kiewel and Haugland, plus two from Brooklyn NY. So that worked out okay. Pressures towards recruiting local guys is a big mistake. Just saying,..

[MrAugustana]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

I realize there is sarcasm in this post, but seems like the program advances with the best players available. To worry about being local is really old fashioned and I am an old guy who remembers seeing the Daniel brothers play for USD. That team could have had two more local guys and finished with a 500 season, but instead they were national champs due to a combination of local guys, Nelson, Kiewel and Haugland, plus two from Brooklyn NY. So that worked out okay. Pressures towards recruiting local guys is a big mistake. Just saying,..

I agree with you on this 100%. To me, the "must have local talent" thing is an absolutely ridiculous concept, especially if you're trying to build a successful Division I program. If the available local talent isn't at a high enough level, you're doing your program a disservice if you take a kid strictly because he's from the area.

To be clear, I think it's important to get local D1 talent if it's good talent. If you've got a stud coming out of a high school in the SD area that's getting offers from several other mid-major and major D1s from outside of the region, then yes, SDSU should try like crazy to keep that kid in-state (assuming he fits the program's expectations and that kind of thing). But this idea that a roster should have a certain number of kids from the area just because that's what fans want and expect seems like a surefire way to keep yourself from reaching next-level success.

I'm not sure how you would define "non-local" recruits vs. "local" recruits, but let's say, for example (and this is completely theoretical), that Brookings High School had a point guard in '08-'09 who was the best point guard in the state of South Dakota. To be clear, he's not necessarily better than a few of the out-of-state point guard options the Jackrabbits are recruiting, but he's lived in Brookings his entire life, has played four years of high school basketball there, and, as has been implied in the past, fans need to feel a connection with local talent. As a result, he gets a scholarship offer, and Nate Wolters, an out-of-state kid, ends up playing somewhere else. I can't imagine too many Jackrabbit fans would have been happy with that decision knowing what they know now, whether they would have realized it at the time or not. And I'd argue with anybody on these boards who feels that South Dakotans don't view Nate Wolters as "one of their own," even though he only lived in South Dakota for four years.

Just my thoughts. Sorry if I'm rambling. Our D2 message boards have been a little quiet the past few days and I'm itching for some good conversation.

[MontanaRabbit]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

I agree with you on this 100%. To me, the "must have local talent" thing is an absolutely ridiculous concept, especially if you're trying to build a successful Division I program. If the available local talent isn't at a high enough level, you're doing your program a disservice if you take a kid strictly because he's from the area.

To be clear, I think it's important to get local D1 talent if it's good talent. If you've got a stud coming out of a high school in the SD area that's getting offers from several other mid-major and major D1s from outside of the region, then yes, SDSU should try like crazy to keep that kid in-state (assuming he fits the program's expectations and that kind of thing). But this idea that a roster should have a certain number of kids from the area just because that's what fans want and expect seems like a surefire way to keep yourself from reaching next-level success.

I'm not sure how you would define "non-local" recruits vs. "local" recruits, but let's say, for example (and this is completely theoretical), that Brookings High School had a point guard in '08-'09 who was the best point guard in the state of South Dakota. To be clear, he's not necessarily better than a few of the out-of-state point guard options the Jackrabbits are recruiting, but he's lived in Brookings his entire life, has played four years of high school basketball there, and, as has been implied in the past, fans need to feel a connection with local talent. As a result, he gets a scholarship offer, and Nate Wolters, an out-of-state kid, ends up playing somewhere else. I can't imagine too many Jackrabbit fans would have been happy with that decision knowing what they know now, whether they would have realized it at the time or not. And I'd argue with anybody on these boards who feels that South Dakotans don't view Nate Wolters as "one of their own," even though he only lived in South Dakota for four years.

Just my thoughts. Sorry if I'm rambling. Our D2 message boards have been a little quiet the past few days and I'm itching for some good conversation.

I think your right on with this post. SDSU or USD or Augie or College X should be trying to get the best possible talent they can get. Shouldn't matter whether that kid is from South Dakota or Mars as long as he fits with what the team is trying to do. It's always nice to keep a qualified local product in state but we shouldn't be offering a scholarship based solely on the kid being from SD.

Where I think the slope gets slippery is "pulling" a scholarship. If a kid comes in, works his tail off and does everything the coaches ask, but his talent just doesn't develop to the level the coaches thought it would. Is it right to "pull" his scholarship? I'm not nearly familiar enough with the inner workings of CBB to know if that actually happens.

[OldHare]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

I think your right on with this post. SDSU or USD or Augie or College X should be trying to get the best possible talent they can get. Shouldn't matter whether that kid is from South Dakota or Mars as long as he fits with what the team is trying to do. It's always nice to keep a qualified local product in state but we shouldn't be offering a scholarship based solely on the kid being from SD.

Where I think the slope gets slippery is "pulling" a scholarship. If a kid comes in, works his tail off and does everything the coaches ask, but his talent just doesn't develop to the level the coaches thought it would. Is it right to "pull" his scholarship? I'm not nearly familiar enough with the inner workings of CBB to know if that actually happens.

I would expect the commitment by the student and the coaching staff ought to be a two way street. If the coaching staff felt the student athlete was valuable to offer the scholarship, the commitment would last as long as the student athlete attempted to fulfill the commitment to the team whether he was on pace for school records or he was on pace for the end of the bench. I would not expect the coaching staff to assume the players are disposable if they did not mature to the level expected during the recruiting. It is not like a walkon player who wants to be a part of the team for their own reason which rarely would be expecting to get lots of playing time. If there is a time and place that there is a mutual decison for the student athlete to leave and explore other schools, that is great. If the student athlete was not following the prescribed agenda, that could also lead to another discussion. I just do not see the coaches discarding student athletes without a good reason. I know of a young woman who left the Jackrabbit women's team bcause she did not see enough playing time coming her way for the amount of time and effort to be on the team. Those things can happen to a person.

[MrAugustana]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

I think your right on with this post. SDSU or USD or Augie or College X should be trying to get the best possible talent they can get. Shouldn't matter whether that kid is from South Dakota or Mars as long as he fits with what the team is trying to do. It's always nice to keep a qualified local product in state but we shouldn't be offering a scholarship based solely on the kid being from SD.

Where I think the slope gets slippery is "pulling" a scholarship. If a kid comes in, works his tail off and does everything the coaches ask, but his talent just doesn't develop to the level the coaches thought it would. Is it right to "pull" his scholarship? I'm not nearly familiar enough with the inner workings of CBB to know if that actually happens.

I thought a lot about this after Minnesota State-Mankato's disastrous 2011-12 season, when they finished 13th out of 14 teams in the NSIC. During the following offseason, their roster was basically cut in half (maybe even more than that), and I know at least a few of the kids dismissed from the team were on scholarship and had their scholarships pulled. A few ended up at various NSIC schools after transferring, but I thought it was interesting that Coach Margenthaler was apparently ok with shedding half of his team in order to bring in new players and transfers to regain championship-level status (which they did earn the following season, coincidentally). So I guess I'd say that it does actually happen.

[SanDakotaState]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

I thought a lot about this after Minnesota State-Mankato's disastrous 2011-12 season, when they finished 13th out of 14 teams in the NSIC. During the following offseason, their roster was basically cut in half (maybe even more than that), and I know at least a few of the kids dismissed from the team were on scholarship and had their scholarships pulled. A few ended up at various NSIC schools after transferring, but I thought it was interesting that Coach Margenthaler was apparently ok with shedding half of his team in order to bring in new players and transfers to regain championship-level status (which they did earn the following season, coincidentally). So I guess I'd say that it does actually happen.

I think Zach Monaghan had a little bit to do with MSU having a bounce back year.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

I agree with you on this 100%. To me, the "must have local talent" thing is an absolutely ridiculous concept, especially if you're trying to build a successful Division I program. If the available local talent isn't at a high enough level, you're doing your program a disservice if you take a kid strictly because he's from the area.

To be clear, I think it's important to get local D1 talent if it's good talent. If you've got a stud coming out of a high school in the SD area that's getting offers from several other mid-major and major D1s from outside of the region, then yes, SDSU should try like crazy to keep that kid in-state (assuming he fits the program's expectations and that kind of thing). But this idea that a roster should have a certain number of kids from the area just because that's what fans want and expect seems like a surefire way to keep yourself from reaching next-level success.

I'm not sure how you would define "non-local" recruits vs. "local" recruits, but let's say, for example (and this is completely theoretical), that Brookings High School had a point guard in '08-'09 who was the best point guard in the state of South Dakota. To be clear, he's not necessarily better than a few of the out-of-state point guard options the Jackrabbits are recruiting, but he's lived in Brookings his entire life, has played four years of high school basketball there, and, as has been implied in the past, fans need to feel a connection with local talent. As a result, he gets a scholarship offer, and Nate Wolters, an out-of-state kid, ends up playing somewhere else. I can't imagine too many Jackrabbit fans would have been happy with that decision knowing what they know now, whether they would have realized it at the time or not. And I'd argue with anybody on these boards who feels that South Dakotans don't view Nate Wolters as "one of their own," even though he only lived in South Dakota for four years.

Just my thoughts. Sorry if I'm rambling. Our D2 message boards have been a little quiet the past few days and I'm itching for some good conversation.

This is what I was talking about. Not many elite SD basketball players are going to choose SDSU if it gets the reputation of cutting kids loose. As a matter of fact, that word would probably spread throughout the country pretty quickly. It wouldn't be long and we would be back to signing kids late who weren't getting much DI interest.

Of course coaches will recruit the best players. Note I said best, not most talented. In some cases, there are kids who help the program get better even though there are more talented players available.

Somebody else mentioned cloning Brayden Carlson, I don't think there were many mid-majors after him (although I could be wrong on that). There were posters on this board as recently as his sophomore year questioning his ability. If he had been from St. Cloud instead of Brookings, I doubt if he would have gotten an offer. It probably didn't hurt that he is a Schoolers alum either. In other words, Carlson might be the perfect example of a local kid offered a scholarship over a "better" player from out of the area. Hometown kid, ties to dominant local AAU team, good student, good citizen, etc. All those positives added up mean Carlson was the better recruit, just not the most talented recruit.

[MrAugustana]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

I think Zach Monaghan had a little bit to do with MSU having a bounce back year.

Yes, he was a contributor to their quick recovery.

[discoDancinJackrabbit]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

Also it can't hurt having George in practice for the rest of this season. Make the team get better !

[TK22867]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

Are you kidding me with some of these posts? There is no such thing as "pulling a scholarship". A scholarship is simply not-renewed. They are renewed on a year-to-year basis, and there is never a guarantee that a player will be on scholarship the entire time he/she is on campus. The athlete knows this full well when enrolling in a school knowing that they are being paid to go to school for their ATHLETIC ABILITY.

This happens ALL THE TIME in Division 1 athletics. Because of how bad not renewing a scholarship sounds, it is rarely called that or needed. Typically, for a player that is not good enough to remain on the roster, the coach will sit them down and essentially tell them that there are no minutes to be had for said player moving forward. That player will continue to be isolated from the rest of the team in practices, etc., until said player finally decides it is a waste of time (and their career) for them to remain on the team. Then comes the transfer, which saves face for both the university and the player.

I understand the premise behind committing to a student for 4 years, but that is not how the real world works. Some schools will keep a player under scholarship if a career-ending injury occurs while playing the sport, but not always.

You can't complain about how our coaches are divvying up scholarships, and then turn around and complain about the lack of talent on our roster. It's like complaining what the cook makes when the cook is not allowed to choose the ingredients. Ya'll complain about our programs not taking the next step, but then turn around and criticize the coaches for doing what it takes to help take that next step.

This is also a good tie-in to oversigning recruits in football. If you think "pulling a scholarship" is bad, just Google "SEC football oversigning" and you'll really learn how it works in big-boy D1 athletics.

[discoDancinJackrabbit]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

Its how we ended up with George Marshall.

[SF_Rabbit_Fan]

Re: George Marshall....Possible New Transfer

Are you kidding me with some of these posts? There is no such thing as "pulling a scholarship". A scholarship is simply not-renewed. They are renewed on a year-to-year basis, and there is never a guarantee that a player will be on scholarship the entire time he/she is on campus. The athlete knows this full well when enrolling in a school knowing that they are being paid to go to school for their ATHLETIC ABILITY.

This happens ALL THE TIME in Division 1 athletics. Because of how bad not renewing a scholarship sounds, it is rarely called that or needed. Typically, for a player that is not good enough to remain on the roster, the coach will sit them down and essentially tell them that there are no minutes to be had for said player moving forward. That player will continue to be isolated from the rest of the team in practices, etc., until said player finally decides it is a waste of time (and their career) for them to remain on the team. Then comes the transfer, which saves face for both the university and the player.

I understand the premise behind committing to a student for 4 years, but that is not how the real world works. Some schools will keep a player under scholarship if a career-ending injury occurs while playing the sport, but not always.

You can't complain about how our coaches are divvying up scholarships, and then turn around and complain about the lack of talent on our roster. It's like complaining what the cook makes when the cook is not allowed to choose the ingredients. Ya'll complain about our programs not taking the next step, but then turn around and criticize the coaches for doing what it takes to help take that next step.

This is also a good tie-in to oversigning recruits in football. If you think "pulling a scholarship" is bad, just Google "SEC football oversigning" and you'll really learn how it works in big-boy D1 athletics.

I agree with the bold. That's what happens the vast majority of the time.

Edit: Probably what happened with Prince, honestly.