Baker finds time to recruit for UNC, but never finds the time to sign contract(updated Wed.)

General UNC Scandal39

Link.

.
The Rock Hill Herald’s Darin Gantt is reporting that Baker is leaving Chapel Hill to take the defensive line coach’s job with the Dallas Cowboys.

Baker told the Herald that the decision was “a hard one” and that he “really fell for” the coaching staff and players at UNC. The Cowboys offered Baker the job last week, but Baker said he asked for some time to help UNC complete its recruiting class.

Baker was supposed to be the eventual replacement for the infamous John Blake who previously resigned after it was discovered he had contact with NFL agent Gary Wichard and received payments and/or loans from Wichard during his time in Chapel Hill.

Read more details about the previous shenanigans here.

____________________________________________________________________

Wed. update

This story is getting more interesting this morning.

According to JP Giglio of the N&O Baker never signed a contract with UNC:

Charlie Coiner replaced Blake in late September for the remainder of the 2010 season, but the former NFL assistant was brought in as a temporary solution. Baker was hired on Jan. 10 to fill Blake’s role on Davis’ staff on a full-time basis.

Baker, who was the Panthers’ defensive line coach last season, told The (Rock Hill, S.C.) Herald on Tuesday that the Cowboys’ undisclosed offer was too much to turn down.

“It was a huge difference … I mean huge,” Baker said Tuesday.

Baker never signed a contract with UNC, according to a school spokesman. Blake, who was in the final year of his contract, had a base salary of $240,000.

Here was UNC’s official announcement of Baker’s hire on 1/10/2001 supposedly about three weeks before the Cowboys offer came according to Baker’s quote in the original entry:

“Brian is regarded as one of the top defensive line coaches in the NFL and his experience was appealing because of his background as a college coach in the ACC,” said Davis. “He is an excellent communicator and his knowledge of our recruiting areas was critical.

“Hiring Brian was a cooperative effort among Everett Withers and our defensive coaches to bring in the best person for our program. Everett did an excellent job helping identify Brian as a top candidate and we worked together to bring him to Chapel Hill.”

So why did UNC announce his hire on January 10th, which at the time was unusual because many programs wait until after signing day to make or announce changes, when Baker hadn’t officially signed a contract to be a part of UNC’s staff?

If the Cowboys offer didn’t come until “last week” which would be around February 1st, then why wasn’t UNC able to get a deal done with Baker between when their original discussions started prior to his announcement on January 10th and February 1st?

Maybe that was because Baker was out recruiting and too busy to sit down and officially become a part of UNC’s staff because he did have enough to time to visit with the #1 recruit in the country Jadeveon Clowney who is from South Carolina:

Clemson head coach Dabo Swinney and new defensive ends coach Marion Hobby made their in person visit with South Pointe DE Jadeveon Clowney Tuesday afternoon at the school. “Clowney enjoyed it all,” said his coach Bobby Carroll. He liked Coach Hobby. They hit it off real good.” North Carolina’s new defensive line coach Brian Baker also met with Clowney Tuesday. Clemson and North Carolina were the only schools to visit Clowney at the school Tuesday

So here is the timeline:

-Jan 2nd – Carolina Panthers play their final home game.
-Jan 10th – UNC officially announces the hiring of Baker with Butch citing knowledge of their recruiting territory(SC maybe since he coached for the Panthers?)
-Jan 18th – visits #1 player in the country at his high school in SC
-Feb 1st(or last week relative to this week) – Baker claims the Dallas offer came
-Feb 8th – Baker officially takes job in Dallas
-Feb 9th – UNC says Baker never signed a contract with UNC

Has anyone ever heard of guys being announced as joining a coach staff before signing day that recruit for that university, never sign a contract while they recruit, and then bolt for a new job immediately after signing day? Why even announce that he was hired when he hasn’t signed an actual contract?

The Carolina Way?

General UNC Scandal

39 Responses to Baker finds time to recruit for UNC, but never finds the time to sign contract(updated Wed.)

  1. PackMan97 02/08/2011 at 3:04 PM #

    Any rumors on this guy being a possible “Rent-A-Coach” brought in just to sign the recruits before he headed back to the NFL?

  2. Deucepeters 02/08/2011 at 3:07 PM #

    This headline leads one to believe that this departure was due to the NCAA investigation of, or other uncertainties around, the UNC football program. While we don’t know all the details this seems like a logical step up for Baker and one he would take regardless of any issues around the program.

    We should all prepare ourselves for the NCAA to do like they have for so many programs this year….look the other way.

  3. baxter 02/08/2011 at 3:26 PM #

    It is actually not a step up since he was the DL coach for the Panthers a month ago – its a lateral move. Word was he was very interested in being a college HC eventually, so he dropped into the UNC staff after Fox was released from the Panthers. However, as far as his overall career goes, its lateral.

    Sucks for UNC, my bud was very high on this guy (honestly I was too, I though it was a slam dunk back in January).

  4. rtpack24 02/08/2011 at 3:43 PM #

    Baker leaving Chapel Hill what a joke, he was never there. He admitted in interview he took the job last week but held off announcing so as not to hurt UNC’s recruiting. If the local media should ask for a copy of his contract with UNC this should be public information. They will not produce it because it does not exist. Butch had him to help recruit for a few weeks. I am sure they told all the recruits he was going to Dallas. What a joke. I will give Butch some credit, he has some balls to continue to do business the way he does.

  5. Hungwolf 02/08/2011 at 4:33 PM #

    Wouldn’t he have to have a contract in order to have contact with recruits? All this continues to strenghten my belief that the UNC players and recruits have to be beyond stupid to throw their hats in the ring with the Butch Bunch!

  6. Wulfpack 02/08/2011 at 6:38 PM #

    He’s making more money, and it’s Dallas.

    http://blogs.charlotte.com/panthers/2011/02/baker-on-leaving-unc-i-mean-its-dallas.html

  7. novawolf 02/08/2011 at 6:43 PM #

    Now seriously, would any serious Defensive Line coach choose to coach in Chapel Hill over coaching the Dallas Cowboys…..please!!!!

  8. packalum44 02/08/2011 at 7:36 PM #

    I’m sure it was just coincidence that UNC is under a major NCAA scandal.

  9. baxter 02/08/2011 at 9:26 PM #

    from the charlotte piece –
    “He pointed to Davis moving through his new job to the head job at Miami, to John Blake’s time with the Cowboys leading him to Oklahoma as well as Paul Pasqualoni’s recent move from the Cowboys defensive line job to the University of Connecticut”

    Seriously, are people really pointing to John Blake not only as a positive, but as a positive coaching move.

  10. MemphisPackFan 02/08/2011 at 11:19 PM #

    I would be interested in knowing which recruits he worked with before signing day…

  11. blpack 02/08/2011 at 11:27 PM #

    Another chapter in this Chapel Hill book which smells like dead fish.

  12. pman27 02/09/2011 at 10:38 AM #

    From the N&O: “Baker never signed a contract with UNC, according to a school spokesman.”

    I guess you can’t call Baker a hired gun. The above plus Baker’s comments that he waited until after signing day to announce he was going to Dallas certainly make fodder for conversation on recruiting ethics. To be fair, its probably not much different than any other coach waiting until after signing day to announce a move. However, this guy came with NFL cred and was never really there, yet locked these kids into their LOIs.

  13. bradleyb123 02/09/2011 at 11:36 AM #

    This does smell bad. It’s yet another of those things that you can’t quite put a finger on, but you know it stinks to high heaven.

    This makes me think a change is needed with LOI rules. If a commitment can show something major has changed since he committed (like a coaching change), then maybe the NCAA should consider letting him out of his LOI.

    I’m sure there are a handful of commitments who worked with Baker, fully expecting him to be there this year. When, in reality, he NEVER WAS there. He never even signed a contract with Carolina. Wow.

    Like I said, this really stinks. It may not be against the rules as they’re currently written. But this stinks.

  14. Sw0rdf1sh 02/09/2011 at 11:54 AM #

    How does he get paid without a contract?

  15. Daily Update 02/09/2011 at 11:57 AM #

    Maybe like John Blake got paid? Wichard maybe? 😉

  16. LRM 02/09/2011 at 12:34 PM #

    So if he’s not officially employed by The Flagship, then how is it not a blatant violation for him to visit a recruit on behalf of them? Isn’t this *exactly* what an agent would have done?

  17. bradleyb123 02/09/2011 at 12:41 PM #

    Are we sure he didn’t sign a contract with Carolina?

    The link in the article took me to an article about Pitt, not Baker and Carolina. So I did a search at ESPN’s website and found this:

    http://espn.go.com/blog/dallas/cowboys/post/_/id/4678129/cowboys-finalize-brian-baker-as-dline-coach

    It states that Baker “signed a contract to coach at North Carolina, yet the Cowboys wanted him and offered him a deal to return to the NFL. Baker told reporters the Cowboys’ offer was hard to turn down.”

    Apparently Carolina has admitted that Baker did not sign a contract with them. Not disputing that, but does anyone have a link to that story?

  18. Daily Update 02/09/2011 at 12:57 PM #

    Read the entry Bradley. It was in Giglio’s article from today.

  19. Hungwolf 02/09/2011 at 1:00 PM #

    Now lets see if UNX self reports the violation or will they claim they didn’t know? UNX seems to care little about NCAA rules anymore!

  20. bradleyb123 02/09/2011 at 1:14 PM #

    ^^ Thanks, Daily. After I posted that I read over the entry again. But I was mainly wanting a link to the article. I just found it.

    http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/02/09/976856/unc-defensive-line-coach-leaves.html

    Hungwolf, is this an NCAA violation?

  21. Bowlpack 02/09/2011 at 1:46 PM #

    http://www.ncaa.org/wps/portal/ncaahome?WCM_GLOBAL_CONTEXT=/ncaa/NCAA/Legislation+and+Governance/Eligibility+and+Recruiting/Recruiting/recruiting.html

    Previous Cite: 13.1.2.2 General Exceptions. Next Cite: 13.1.2.4 Other Restrictions, Athletics Representatives.

    The following are additional restrictions that apply to an institution’s staff members and governing board. Violations of this bylaw shall be considered institutional violations per Constitution 2.8.1; however, such violations shall not affect the prospective student-athlete’s eligibility. (Revised: 4/27/00)

    (a) Institutional Staff Members — Off-Campus Contacts. Only those coaches permitted to recruit off campus as specified in Bylaw 11.7 may contact prospective student-athletes off campus. Institutional staff members (e.g., faculty members) may contact prospective student-athletes for recruiting purposes in all sports, on campus, or within 30 miles of campus during the prospective student-athlete’s official visit. (Revised: 1/10/91 effective 8/1/91, 4/28/05, 5/26/06)

    (b) Noncoaching Staff Members with Sport-Specific Responsibilities. A noncoaching staff member with sport-specific responsibilities (except a staff member who only performs clerical duties) shall not attend an on- or off-campus athletics event in the staff member’s sport that involves prospective student-athletes (e.g., high school contest, noninstitutional sports camp) unless the staff member is an immediate family member or legal guardian of a participant in the activity. A staff member who is an immediate family member or legal guardian of a participant may attend such an event, subject to the following conditions: (Adopted: 1/16/10, Revised: 4/13/10, 4/29/10)

    (i) Attendance shall not be for evaluation purposes (the staff member shall not provide information related to the performance of a prospective student-athlete back to the institution’s coaching staff); and

    (ii) The staff member shall not have direct contact with a prospective student-athlete or a prospective student-athlete’s parent (or legal guardian) or coach (other than the immediate family member, if applicable) participating in the activity.

    (c) Board of Governors/Regents. Recruiting contacts on or off campus between a member of the institution’s board of governors (or regents) and a prospective student-athlete are not permissible.

  22. PackerInRussia 02/09/2011 at 1:46 PM #

    ^As LRM said, if he didn’t have a contract, then it seems that there’s no different from him recruiting for UNC than for me to go out and unofficially recruit for NC State. Maybe UNC thought they were creating a loophole so that if it’s found that Baker did anything unethical (other than recruit for UNC while not officially employed by them), they can just say, “well he wasn’t actually working for us.” That sounds dumb, but at this point, is there anything they won’t try? Someone in the media would go along blindly with that explanation.

    By the way, is that picture/caption of Marvin Austin real (as in not a joke)?

  23. Master 02/09/2011 at 1:46 PM #

    Why should UNX care about the rules? They have apparently been told (according to the recruits) that they have not broken any rules in the past (coach was an agent, tutor cheated for players, players got freebies and trips), so what could be wrong with using a pro football coach to recruit during the final weeks of signing season?

    Nothing to see here… move along…

  24. Bowlpack 02/09/2011 at 1:48 PM #

    I’m not a lawyer, but it appears that if he didn’t sign a contract and therefore was not officially a coach then UNC may be in violation of recruiting rules since they’ve clearly stated that Baker’s decision to make the announcement post signing day is evidence that he was involved in recruiting.

  25. Gowolves 02/09/2011 at 1:57 PM #

    I am sure that I am in the minority. I want this to be another black eye on the tarholes. I just don’t see the problem here. Unless he had some unsavory connections to the recruits or agents. I think this is what it is on the surface. I mean we could try to connect the dots all day if we wanted to. He was hired and then something changed. That change was an offer from the Dallas Cowboys for a lot of money. If this was Jacksonville or KC I am almost positive he wouldn’t have taken it.

    I wish it was UNC cheating again

1 2

Leave a Reply