I never thought of it this way but from a coaches perspective it makes a lot of sense
From Pitt Gazzette Narduzzi and his AD on satellite camps:
** A few final comments from Narduzzi and Barnes on the satellite camp issue:
Narduzzi: "One of the reasons not to have them, which is a moot point at this point, is being with our kids back on campus. We’ll have a program that starts up. Our kids are there and we’re allowed to work with them and do some sort of football-related activities for two hours during the week. If we’re not there, it’s hard to have those activities. When you have 105 children there, it becomes time we’re taking away from our kids. One of the things that came out between the time there were no satellite camps to when they brought them back was the opportunities for kids. As the ACC as a whole, we totally disagree with that. If we’ve got 20 scholarships to give, we’re going to give 20 opportunities. Everybody is going to give those opportunities out.”
Barnes: “I look at this as short term and long term. In the short term, that space is available and will we play in it. Will we play in it? Yet to be determined, but we may do that a little bit this summer. We’re looking at plans for that. Pat and I have talked a little bit about it, but we haven’t sat down. We need to talk about the specific plans of doing it.”
"As it relates to satellite camps, one of the biggest issues is the culture and how you mitigate the influence the non-scholastic entity has on football. It isn’t by having satellite camps. I promise you that. That’s an issue. Another issue is we spend all this time trying to keep up with the Jones’. Two things are impacted by that, minimum. One of them is we have 25 new student-athletes coming to our campus. We should be spending our time with them, not out in the hinterlands chasing other camps. The second is the quality of life of our coaches. They spend an inordinate amount of time on the road anyway. Now, if we’re back in this game, there is going to be less time at home for them. The non-scholastic entities are really concerning to me. It’s part of a bigger issue that’s a culture, this camp culture. We need to take a comprehensive look at this, back at the football oversight level and really look at this long-term and comprehensively and come back to the table with legislation. You understand we’re here short term, but long term, there’s got to be a better solution.”
“The first run at this didn’t work the way it was intended to work. So, where do we go from here? I don’t know, but it wasn’t a good start.”
From Pitt Gazzette Narduzzi and his AD on satellite camps:
** A few final comments from Narduzzi and Barnes on the satellite camp issue:
Narduzzi: "One of the reasons not to have them, which is a moot point at this point, is being with our kids back on campus. We’ll have a program that starts up. Our kids are there and we’re allowed to work with them and do some sort of football-related activities for two hours during the week. If we’re not there, it’s hard to have those activities. When you have 105 children there, it becomes time we’re taking away from our kids. One of the things that came out between the time there were no satellite camps to when they brought them back was the opportunities for kids. As the ACC as a whole, we totally disagree with that. If we’ve got 20 scholarships to give, we’re going to give 20 opportunities. Everybody is going to give those opportunities out.”
Barnes: “I look at this as short term and long term. In the short term, that space is available and will we play in it. Will we play in it? Yet to be determined, but we may do that a little bit this summer. We’re looking at plans for that. Pat and I have talked a little bit about it, but we haven’t sat down. We need to talk about the specific plans of doing it.”
"As it relates to satellite camps, one of the biggest issues is the culture and how you mitigate the influence the non-scholastic entity has on football. It isn’t by having satellite camps. I promise you that. That’s an issue. Another issue is we spend all this time trying to keep up with the Jones’. Two things are impacted by that, minimum. One of them is we have 25 new student-athletes coming to our campus. We should be spending our time with them, not out in the hinterlands chasing other camps. The second is the quality of life of our coaches. They spend an inordinate amount of time on the road anyway. Now, if we’re back in this game, there is going to be less time at home for them. The non-scholastic entities are really concerning to me. It’s part of a bigger issue that’s a culture, this camp culture. We need to take a comprehensive look at this, back at the football oversight level and really look at this long-term and comprehensively and come back to the table with legislation. You understand we’re here short term, but long term, there’s got to be a better solution.”
“The first run at this didn’t work the way it was intended to work. So, where do we go from here? I don’t know, but it wasn’t a good start.”
