OrangeXtreme
The Mayor of Dewitt
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2011
- Messages
- 227,609
- Like
- 408,048
And this is why the SEC and ACC don't like these satellite camps. They are a blatant recruiting tool that gives certain schools an unfair advantage of contact with prospects off campus.
The ACC should allow them then. It's bad that they don't and it's ridiculous that they can't even hold them within their own state borders.
I would rather see them banned. Do you really think SU would pay for football to hold a satellite camp in Florida?And the satellite camps within NY didn't produce anything.
CuseLegacy said:I would rather see them banned. Do you really think SU would pay for football to hold a satellite camp in Florida?And the satellite camps within NY didn't produce anything.
The NY camps sure did produce. Isaiah Johnson's offer was earned at one of the downstate camps. You had NJ and MD kids attending those downstate camps. There were other offers as a result of the NY camps as well, not just his. It gets kids in front of the coaching staff without them having to travel 3/4 hours to Syracuse obviously. Buffalo and Rochester were also good camps.
Even if they didn't produce in their 1st or 2nd year it's crazy to think they wouldn't have. They were probably the BEST and most progressive thing Marrone ever did on the recruiting front.
So because there is a belief that SU wouldn't pay for one, they should be banned for everyone. This sounds like an SU issue not an NCAA issue.
No. It becomes a disparity in recruiting among schools... just like the facilities arms race. Banning satellite camps levels the "playing field" in recruiting.
No. It becomes a disparity in recruiting among schools... just like the facilities arms race. Banning satellite camps levels the "playing field" in recruiting.
then ban egregious facilities as well. Sorry, don't buy the argument. ACC should allow the camps and SU should do the best to hold them or be guests at them.