I was recently informed about the proposals that are listed in the subject line. As I understand it, no college recruiting would be allowed in the Spring or Fall. This would greatly affect AAU basketball, since this is the period of time in which they play. For some of these players, this is their only chance to get noticed. Please do not pass these measures. Many parents spend a lot of money on AAU, and the purpose is for the player to improve, but it is also with hopes that their child may get noticed. If passed, this may limit how many get involved in AAU, if they are never allowed to be watched by college recruiters. Please consider these factors and vote against this measure.

Sincerely,
Michelle Johnson
Strong, AR

(I have two daughters (10th and 11th) grade who play basketball pretty much year round, so I was concerned about these proposals. Thanks for your hard work. I know women's basketball has come a long way in the last 20 years, and I organizations like yours are part of the reason why. Looking forward to hearing the outcome on this. )

It seems to me that these proposals [essentially] are attempting to eliminate the Spring and Fall recruiting periods in women's basketball. This means that players would not be seen at any events such as Boo Williams, Blue Chip, USJN, and Blue Star. I feel that this will drastically reduce opportunities for young women.

I have coached AAU basketball for more than ten years and both of my daughters have played on the Division I level. Therefore, I am quite familiar with the college recruiting process and I am totally against shackles being applied to tens-of-thousands of student athletes to benefit the hidden agendas of a few hundred college coaches.

I say, “Leave it alone!” . . for it is well established that the policy of laissez faire . . to let people do as they choose . . is far superior to autocratic rule in most things. I urge you to strongly consider this thought.

Yours truly,

Brion Hathaway
Long-time AAU coach & parent

Women’s Basketball Coaches Association:

I am writing to you about our concerns regarding the upcoming January recruiting proposals, 2004-142 and 2004-146

I currently sit on the board of directors for an AAU girl’s basketball club “James River Blaze” that has begun its 21st year in Richmond, Virginia. Our club is a non-profit organizati on that provides quality girls basketball programs for all girls.

I’m very concerned about the upcoming proposals, as this is very important because of the huge impact this would have to countless/potential players that depend on the several times available for exposure tournaments; including the spring and fall sessions. Having these different periods provides a broader range of quality players and more diversity from colleges and universities to participate in the recruiting process.

If you shorten the exposure – window of opportunity, you will take away the flexibility of recruiters to view players and also limit the player’s ability to be seen. Less time means less exposure.

I truly understand that you have a limited recruiting budget, but from my personal experience anything that limits the recruiting process is detrimental to both the player and a university/college program. Please reconsider these recruiting proposals as they will tremendously effect how you continue to evaluate and recruit prospects.

Sincerely,

Larry Dahn
James River Athletic Club

My name is Karen Hathaway. I am the mother of two former female high school basketball players who attended Christ the King H.S. in New York. I am writing to you to express my concern with the recent proposals (#'s 2004-142 and 2004-146) made by the WBCA. I strongly urge you NOT to adopt these proposals. As you are most likely aware, many of the girl's high school teams have limited travel budgets and the only opportunities that these girls have at being scouted are during the spring and fall recruiting periods when the girls can play on club teams which are funded by the parents. These tournaments are not only important for recruiting, but also provide the opportunity to develop skills and help the player experience better competition than is often found in the school leagues. I feel that continuing to limit the recruiting period of female athletes will be extremely detrimental to the future of women's basketball. These limitations will only serve to make it more difficult for female basketball players to be evaluated by college recruiters. This will result in less opportunities for these players to be offered scholarships as well as an increase in female athletes transferring from the college they choose due to limited exposure to the coaching staffs.

Please consider the possible negative results of these proposals. It is very important that we all continue to expand opportunities for female athlete and ensure that we do not limit them.

Best of luck in the New Year.

Thank you,

Karen Hathaway

I strongly disapprove of proposals 2004-142 and 2004-146. I feel that this will hinder girls from getting college exposure. They work hard all year and deserve to be evaluated by the college coaches.

Thank you.

Sincerely,
Jeff Jones
(Assistant Coach of Penn Jersey Panthers - Galloway, NJ)

I currently serve as a head coach for the Nativity Crusaders of Ozone Park, New York (7th grade girls CYO team).

I am deeply concerned about proposals 2004-142 and 2004-146 created by the WBCA. Based on what I have read, these proposals do nothing to help out our young women during the recruiting process. I have a daughter who is currently in the 6th-grade. Her dream is to one day play college basketball. With the current proposal, it will make it much more difficult to get the much deserving young women scholarships. I was never much of an advocate of women's basketball until my daughter started playing. I am a very big fan of women's basketball and have dedicated my life in helping young women achieve their hopes and dreams.

Limiting the recruiting process hurts AAU programs, basketball tournaments, camps, etc. A large amount of female athletes earn their scholarships during the summer months. High school is just not enough anymore. Recruiting during the High School season is very tough, as you have the College Basketball season going on as well.

Limiting the recruiting process hurts everyone from colleges to the kids themselves. I see no purpose in doing this to our young women of the future.

THEREFORE, I AM AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL. I OPPOSE THIS PROPOSAL. I REJECT THIS PROPOSAL.

Regards,

Derrick G. Mullen
Basketball Coach

I am writing to express my concern over pending legislation, which in my opinion is detrimental to the future of women’s basketball and our athletes. I have coached high school basketball since 1979, AAU basketball since 1984 and have been President of the NVWBCA since 1985. In that time I have felt blessed to be a part of the growth in athletic opportunities for young woman and been able to witness first hand the phenomenal growth of our sport and the tremendous advancement made by the players as a result of the increased opportunities. The battles for fair and equitable opportunities are still being fought on a daily basis at high schools and colleges across the nation. I am, therefore, puzzled by the notion that “we have reached the top and that the battle is won”. Have we really reached a point where the very people who have worked so hard to expand the opportunities for female athletes now are taking a hand in limiting those opportunities?

I have been fortunate enough over the past years to coach over 150 Division 1 players and many more Division II & II players both in AAU and in high school. I have spoken to numerous coaches in support of still other athletes that I did not have the opportunity to coach directly. Whether it has been in my role as a high school coach, an AAU coach, a knowledgeable observer or as the President of a group that organizes and runs college showcase camps, I have always tried to put the players first. When I worked the WBCA Regional and Elite camps in the early nineties, I felt assured that the WBCA was of like mind in putting the players first. I am, therefore, concerned that the latest spate of legislation seems to severely limit the opportunities for exposure for our players. I understand the emphasis on getting the high school coach involved, but know first hand the numbers of coaches who don’t wish to be involved outside of their seasons. I understand the concern about certain practices of certain AAU coaches, but feel strongly that these are in the minority. I understand the concern about certain entrepreneurs in the camp & showcase business, but feel that the NCAA certification process has moved clearly in the direction of controlling these. Further, these concerns pale by comparison to the excesses on the men’s side, yet there seems to be a movement to take the same draconian measures that have been taken on the men’s side. It has always been my understanding that fair and equitable do not always mean that things must be the same. It seems to me that we are in danger of “throwing out the baby with the bathwater”. This legislation will not hurt the top players nor will it hurt the top programs, but it will hurt those players who do not always command the top interest and those programs that are unlikely to be able to sign the top players. What about the girl who works hard day by day – year by year, but whose high school team does not appear on the radar of those coaches who must now limit their travel due to budget constraints and who must determine the merits of going to see ONE kid at a high school game? There will soon be limited or no opportunities to show off their skills and perhaps turn someone’s head at a showcase or a well-attended AAU tournament. These chances are shriveling up. I can already see the effect of the previous legislation which resulted in several players in our area being overlooked because coaches don’t have enough opportunities to see the players. These are kids who bear scrutiny and impress over time with their ability to play the game, to understand the game and to contribute on a team level. They don’t stand a chance when coaches’ opportunities for evaluation are limited. The spectacular athletes are not suffering, but many kids with Division I talent are. They simply are not going to be seen by the right coach at the right time. We are in danger of legislating these kids right out of the picture. To be honest, a large number of my players that went Division I became consummate role players. To be sure, a good number became impact players in their programs, but the majority of them were building block players who made their programs better. They may have never gotten the chance without AAU and the open communication between AAU coaches, high school coaches and college coaches. It is clear that the recent legislation has begun to break those bonds. And now we seem to be heading further down that path. It occurs to me that we have much more to lose than to gain with this clearly limiting legislation.

If I do not understand the intent or impact of this legislation, please enlighten me. If, in fact, the legislation does indeed limit opportunities for female athletes, then you must examine your conscience. I know several of you and you have recruited some of my players. I know how hard you have worked to attain your status in the game. Just remember that there is a girl somewhere that is working hard to prepare to fulfill the promise that we have made to them - that they would get a fair chance. Don’t forget the battles that have been fought and won over the years and do not make the expedient choice to go along with the guys. I urge you to look closely at this legislation and view carefully the impact that it will have on the young athletes in this year and future years.