[Basketball]This is why you should hate Scott Drew

I don't have the time or interest in talking about your hang ups with Christianity/religion.

Go find the post where I said the coaching staff was without question. All I've done was provide a response to the claims made by others. I tend to give players of all universities a pass. I realize this may differ from your thinking, but they aren't professionals and I don't hold them to the expectation that they meet a standard of performance.

The Dunn issue was complex and no one was excusing his actions. It's relevance to this conversation tells me your agenda..we could be here all day talking about some of the fine scholars that OSU has produced.

You make a significant error when you equate good behavior with religion. A significant number of drug abusers are Bible thumpers, for example. I know some. And as an agnostic, I am well aware of the irony. But religious beliefs can not be dismissed out of hand as if they don't matter. They obviously matter to those who hold those beliefs. And I continue to hold the opinion that a significant component of Drew's success is his religion and the way he uses it is.

If that is cheating, then I suppose he is a cheater.

It has nothing to do with Christianity genius. I don't have an "agenda" so quit playing the victim.

It has to do with presenting Baylor as some moral standard for college athletics. You brought up how your coach instituted a "no cussing" policy, while cute I don't think it matters if you let a woman beater play out the season with no repercussions. Scott Drew is no more morally sound than Rick Barnes or Bill Self or Travis Ford. They use curse words, Drew plays guys who break their girlfriend's jaw. No moral highground.

Take that out of your recruiting equation and what are you left with? Middle of the pack facilities at best. That's why people think it's out of whack.

I agree with ElCid. He knows what he is talking about and you have not a clue.

This thread is starting to kick some ass. I wish the Baylor folk would come around more during Football season.

Either way, if Drew is the honest, moral, man who built a Baylor from scratch into a National Power he will not be at Baylor in a year or two.

If Drew is a cheating, lying, stealing bastard he will not be at Baylor in a year of two.

From a sense of practicality, I think most people outside of Waco have valid reasons to believe Scott Drew isn't playing by all the rules. There's already a lot of smoke and shady stuff going on that's gone public. (Threatening to deport a player and the negativity regarding Drew's recruiting tactics.) In addition, Baylor is currently beating out top programs who are known cheaters for recruits. I could be wrong, but I'm not sure if Scott Drew's charming personality and work ethic beats out $$$ and tradition.

I think Baylor fans and "everyone else" should agree to disagree on Baylor's recruiting tactics. Nobody will know what is really going on until something surfaces.

Interesting theory. I don't have a clue because I disagree with claiming a moral and religious high ground when a coaching staff and administration at a Baptist university allows a player to break his girlfriends jaw.

As much as I disagree with the Mormon church theologically I'd never be able to argue against BYU's moral compass on such an issue. Do you actually believe Baylor got it right by allowing him to play? If they got it wrong, how exactly am I to accept that they have some moral high ground in recruiting over any other Big 12 school? Because they say so? No, to me faith without works (action) is dead.

Of if I am right that religion and the way he uses it is a major component of his success, he will likely be at Baylor a long time.

Religion does not make one honest and moral. It is just a set of beliefs that usually contains a side issue of morality. It also does not mean that one has a license to lie and cheat--although some religious leaders seem to think so. My guess is that except for wearing his religion on his sleeve, Drew is no more or less moral than most basketball coaches--including that beacon of light, Rick Barnes.

Your logic is, "some teams win with less than academically gifted players, so obviously, academics for recruits as a whole aren't important." That's an overgeneralization . And it's not what I said, so let me clarify a little further. To the athletes where Christianity and academic commitment matter, Drew can pitch the following 1)value of the education 2) demonstrated commitment to Christian faith. So, all I've done is explain the pitch, it's up to you to tell me that it doesn't matter to kids. The numbers and the claims of the current players suggest it has some merit. I know that salespitch resonates quite well with recruits and their parents, and that's all I've said. If you want to refute that, go for it.

You're overgeneralizing what I've said a bit. If he were outworking EVERY D1 coach, we'd be number 1, wouldn't we? I don't think he's outworking every D1 coach, but let me add this:
1)Drew really only has to win a certain percentage of recruiting battles against Rick Barnes and Bill Self, and he's a success. If he takes one recruit from each, he has a program. That's basketball. It's easier to do than you think, because coaches like Barnes and Self are so arrogant, that they stick to the same pitch with every recruit. That's where a smart coach outworks his competition. And when they don't do their job and lose a recruit, what do they do? They call their friends in the press and try to slip in stories where they suggest they have inside knowledge. Lower end sportswriters.(Kirk Bohls?) will run that story.

Three seasons ago, Barnes cried in the press that he had knowledge of something illegal. The coach in question called Rick, told him that he'd like to discuss that with other writers and media present so that he could substantiate it and Rick Barnes said, "I was misquoted." Hey, that's Rick Barnes...

Barnes/UT has an enormous advantage in facilities, school, and location. Kids like Austin, they like the warm weather, and UT has big bucks. But Barnes is lazy. He's made too much money for too long and he just isn't in touch with young kids anymore.
Do I think he's a good coach? Sure. But he comes off as cold and distant to both recruits and parents. And he sends his assistant Rodney Terry to handle too many tasks that are his job. Drew's job isn't as difficult as it might first appears. The current powers don't work as hard as they like to suggest.

2) It's a team effort. The Baylor coaching staff works very, very hard. I've seen Baylor assistants more often at more AAU and youth basketball events than any other programs' coaches. Example: Baylor coaches were among the first to discover John Henson. Henson's dad had a relationship with Baylor that went back years, but his son was undiscovered for a long time in Texas. Hensons dad wanted his son at UNC, but bottom line, Baylor was one of the first programs to discover and recruit him.

3)Proximity to Houston is a big plus. Houston has enough college basketball talent to feed ten D-1 programs. It's the only reason A&M is relevant. The closer a program to Houston, the better they can be.

Here's the other thing that is going to make you guys spin in your saddles. There are quite a few college coaches that like and support Drew. They just aren't in the Big12. Duh.

And don't bother telling us he's pissed off anyone else in the Big12, no one gives a s--- and everyone can see it for sour grapes.

I am not arguing Dunn. But I have a religious background. I was once one of them and I know how these people think. Repentance and forgiveness is a major tenet of of their faith. You can yell hypocrite all you want, but that is something they really believe. Of course, I don't expect a Catholic like yourself to understand that.

Your theory is not crazy. But if UCLA offered a $1,000,000 raise, he probably see it as a sign to leave.

Please quote the exact wording of the "threat to deport."

Negative recruiting, to the extent it exists, is not smoke indicative of a cheating fire. There is no rule against negative recruiting. Sure, there may exist some sort of gentlemen's agreement among coaches not to engage in it, but all of the coaches do it anyway. Plenty of Baylor recruits heard negative things about Baylor from other schools.

Never once been called a Catholic. Kudos to you for being the first. I'm not calling hypocrite, in fact I wasn't even really thinking it. I'm calling it disingenuous and dismissing their so called moral superiority because it doesn't exist.

You are right about that!

Religious people see signs in everything and they think that God has a purpose in everything that happens. No doubt, in Drew's mind, it would be the voice of God himself to go minister to the heathers.

Cliff, your answers are good. Very good. But I don't agree that Drew is less moral than other coaches. FWIW, I think there are a lot of 'high' moral coaches out there.

But I can tell you right now Barnes, Self and Gillispie aren't in that mix. Ask former players. People talk. Gillispie may be changing, I think he's started to see differently his self-destructive ways. But he has some burned bridges.

How should Baylor have prevented that situation? I honestly want to hear your answer on that part. Do you know what happened and how her jaw was broken?

Do you know anything about the context of why the girl was there at his apartment that day? And, what do you suggest Drew should have done in that situation. Youre biased, your immediate response is to say he should have been kicked off the team, but it suits your agenda, because you don't have the long term interests of the girl, Lace Dunn or their son in mind. Just as an aside, are all parties to a spousal abuse case forbidden from work? I'm curious. That's really your only point here. If her jaw is broken, Lace Dunn should never play basketball again. Here is what you need to accept:
No one is making excuses for what happened. The problem is, we don't know precisely what happened. Only the two people there at the time know what happened.
Apparently, Dunn and this girl had a relationship that spanned quite a few years. They have a child together and they were sharing custody. It was mostly amicable, but there had been a list of issues between Dunn and the girl regarding the custody situation. But here's a weird twist, the girls father got involved and guess what? He defended Dunn. If we are looking for the best moral outcome, I'm not sure that helped, but I share it because it speaks to the uncertainty on how to best

It's easy to sit back and play judge and jury in this situation, but a family law judge would probably see this differently than we might as college basketball fans, and I don't think it's a stretch in suggesting that many would not forbid Dunn from being a student and playing basketball.

Are you suggesting it helps Dunn's son if he is prevented from completing a degree and earning a livelihood?

Okay, I will back off from the Catholic thing. I earlier asked if you were Catholic and you ignored me. So I figured that I might have hit pay dirt. Basically, I agree that the Baptists have no moral high ground. But if you don't think they believe it, as I previously mentioned, you don't have a clue. I mean, PJIII's mom is going to be very impressed with team prayer meetings and such like regardless what you and I might think.

In addition to that, there are any number of reasons for Drew's success, other than cheating on a significant scale. As I understand it, the NCAA has investigated Baylor and essentially found nothing. And you can't say that the NCAA is "protecting" Baylor. My guess is that the NCAA would love to get Baylor if they could.

Well, here's the quote:

I don't know the faith of Baylor's players, but can anyone verify if the 5 star players Baylor is getting are Baptist?

You guys are also talking like Baylor is Harvard. Why wouldn't a recruit make the venture to Iowa State over Baylor? Iowa State also offers a wonderful education and is a member of the prestigious AAU. Additionally, Fred Hoiberg is a high-class, respectful individual who was a ball boy for ISU, became a hometown hero at ISU, and played in the NBA for many years. After being diagnosed with a rare heart condition, Fred worked in the NBA offices and has many connections with NBA organizations.

So my question is, if a recruit wasn't Baptist, why would their strong religious beliefs draw them to Baylor rather than any other college where they could still practice their religious beliefs? From what I've researched, ISU has at least on-par academics, better facilities, a hometown-hero coach with NBA connections and great reputation, a school that has had some recent success (won the Big 12 championship in 2000 & 2001 and should have got the NC in 2000) and a great, supportive fanbase.

Okay, I don't know anything. Remember, I am an agnostic. I don't know if Drew is any more or less moral than any other coach. But I tend to gravitate to the underdog when I don't have a dog in the hunt. It seemed to me that Drew was being attacked in an unfair manner and so I voiced my opinion. As for high moral coaches out there, I suspect that the moral level of the coaching fraternity is somewhat higher than the general population, but probably not by much.

That Barnes or Knight didn't cotton to Drew fails to impress me. Not going to say a word about Self. I still have the hope that he will one day be our coach.

I would have suspended him for at least half the season, probably all year. If he was concerned about being a student and completing his degree he would be able to do so. He wouldn't have been "prevented" by anyone but himself. Was BYU wrong for suspending a starter who violated their code of ethics?

I don't expect Baylor to prevent such a situation. I do expect them to uphold their moral standard when it is inconvenient if they're going to lay claim to it's advantages. Baylor has no moral high ground, thus I reject it outright when considering the basketball program's rise. I'm left to consider the facility, which I'm underwhelmed by...and the supposed fact that Drew "outworks" everyone. If he outworks everyone fine, but excuse me for being skeptical. I already said I don't know or care if Drew is cheating. I just don't buy what Baylor fans are selling.

I'm sorry, you must have misunderstood. I asked for the language where there was a threat to deport. No such threat exists in your quote and it takes a pretty big leap to reach the conclusion that that was a threat to deport. It is equally plausible that the Baylor coaching staff had a good relationship with the kid's parents back in Colombia and the parents would have brought the kid back home if he didn't go to Baylor. That could have been what was meant by the text.

I'm guessing you don't understand that Baylor doesn't exclusively recruit Baptist kids. Second largest denomination represented on campus is Catholic (my wife and I are two Catholic Baylor alums).