Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)

Committed? Well, maybe?

Posted: 01/11/2013 9:18 AM

Committed? Well, maybe? 


Simple question - When a kid says he's committed, why should he be taking trips around the college world? If he's committed, it seems to me that he ought to be off the circuit and not having his ego massaged by traveling to different schools.

I kind of like the Northwestern approach -- if we've offered you a scholarship and you say that you're committed, you should take yourself off the market and stop shopping.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 01/11/2013 9:27 AM

Re: Committed? Well, maybe? Post Rating (1 vote)


I think both sides get to decide what's best for them on a case by case basis. Nothing is final until the kid signs, enrolls, and starts practicing. If a recruit commits, then later decides he wants to look around in order to make sure he made the right decision, then he has the right to do that. If a school decides to have a policy that they won't hold a scholarship for a recruit who is actively taking visits and looking around, then they have the right to do that as well.

As long as both sides are open about their perspective and how they are treating the process, then the consequences are clear and you can't really ask more than that.

Reply | Quote
  • Calnole
  • Walk-on
  • Rating: 3.1/5 this site
  • 81 posts this site

Posted: 01/11/2013 10:39 AM

Re: Committed? Well, maybe? Post Rating (2 votes)


If your a 17 year old kid.....

Give me a reason why not to take your 5 OV's?

Recruiting is a game and kids play it well.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 01/11/2013 11:53 AM

Re: Committed? Well, maybe? 


I have a problem with the idea that the kid says he's "committed" and then shops around. Call me a purist, but I'd rather the kid say he's not committed in which event, I have no problem with him continuing to talk to other teams and taking visits.

If the verbal commitment is worthless, why create the impression that the issue is resolved? Just don't understand the whole exercise.

Incidentally, I recall Dan publishing last year an article that lays out the whole recruiting time table and what the school can and can't do during each of the various phases of the process. It might be a good idea to republish it.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 01/11/2013 8:23 PM

Basics of signing day (overview of process) 


Here's the article from last year.

THE BASICS OF SIGNING DAY

DAN GREENSPAN
PUBLISHER
Updated January 31, 2012

What is Signing Day?
Wednesday is the first day high school seniors can sign a binding Letter of Intent to play college football at a given program. The LOI guarantees the player a scholarship next season if he meets the necessary academic requirements of the school and NCAA.

Until Wednesday, a player can make a non-binding verbal commitment but still be recruited by other schools. Once he signs an LOI, he is locked into that commitment and can’t be recruited by other programs.


Whether or not players should sign an LOI instead of say a scholarship agreement, which gives him more freedom in the event of unforeseen developments like the departure of a coach or sanctions being handed down, is another matter entirely.

Why is it so important?
What the draft and free agency is to professional sports, Signing Day is to college football, an opportunity to acquire players that will form the core of the program for the next three, four or five years.

The increasing media attention has made it into a sort of national holiday for college football fans, a bridge between the end of the previous season and the start of spring practice.

ESPNU and CBS Sports will offer wall-to-wall television coverage Wednesday, while websites like Scout have allowed fans to cover the recruiting process from when a player is first offered to when he commits and ultimately signs.

What is the timeframe for players to sign?
Even though recruits have from February 1 to April 1 to sign an LOI, most of the drama will be over by the end of Wednesday night.

Are there any restrictions?
Teams can sign no more than 25 players to scholarships in any given class and have no more than 85 players on scholarship in the program at any time.

There are ways to get around that 25-man limit, such as early enrollees. Cal has two players – quarterback Zach Kline and offensive tackle Christian Okafor – that are now on campus, attending classes and eligible to participate in spring practice.

...

Dan Greenspan is the publisher of Cal Sports Digest and covers the Pac-12 for Fox Sports/Scout.com. Follow him on Twitter @DanGreenspan.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 01/12/2013 8:00 AM

Re: Committed? Well, maybe? 



jonfromwlv wrote: Simple question - When a kid says he's committed, why should he be taking trips around the college world?
That's how you or I might do it.  Personally, I wouldn't say "committed" until I was.  Then again, I never had and never will have or understand what it is to have that level of talent and the associated value of that talent to protect.  My opinion might be a little different if I were considering the sort of future these kids are considering.

Another thing in defense of keeping one's options open as a recruit: CFB staffs are far from pure in their motives and they have enormous pressure placed on them to win (anyone hear from JT lately?).  Those sorts of pressures can cause staffs to place their own performance above the best interests of the player's they recruit.

 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 01/12/2013 10:00 AM

Re: Committed? Well, maybe? 


"Those sorts of pressures can cause staffs to place their own performance above the best interests of the player's they recruit." jrsmithe

Exactly! Not to be naive, but where is the NCAA and Pac-12 in actually protecting our "student-athletes"?

Last edited 01/12/2013 10:00 AM by jonfromwlv

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 01/12/2013 8:34 PM

Re: Committed? Well, maybe? 



jonfromwlv wrote:

Exactly! Not to be naive, but where is the NCAA and Pac-12 in actually protecting our "student-athletes"?
In allowing the kids as much freedom as they have in regard to recruiting.  The system is set up to allow multiple schools to have access to each recruit and allow the recruits to have so much exposure to different schools and to have so much time to make their decision and to back out of those decisions to a certain extent.  It's definitely a compromise and not ideal for either side.

 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 01/15/2013 10:25 AM

More from the underworld of recruting 


Yes, yes. I know all the complications and explanations, but can you really defend this system?

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/...928--ncaaf.html
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 01/15/2013 1:42 PM

Re: More from the underworld of recruting 



jonfromwlv wrote: Yes, yes. I know all the complications and explanations, but can you really defend this system?

http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/...928--ncaaf.html
Yes.  I don't make moral/ethical decisions based on what Lane Kiffin does.

 

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/17/2013 9:12 AM

Re: More from the underworld of recruting 



Revisiting this thread and thinking about Cameron Hunt.  Alls fair in love and war.  But I hope that the new Cal staff remembers this little steal by Oregon when they are on their feet next season and that they get as aggressive.  I understand that Hunt's issue was presumably the departure of Tedford and Michalczik but in general, I hope we stick it to Oregon and anyone else that come recruting in this area when we have more leverage - and that we go sniping in other backyards too.banghead

 

Reply | Quote

Posted: 02/17/2013 11:33 AM

Re: Committed? Well, maybe? 


jr- i understand where you're coming from, but in my view, it's on the recruit, not the recruiter. When the kid says he's "committed" it should mean something. It's not really on the school. In Hunt's case, I can understand his change of mind as Cal had coaching staff changes, and I would think that caused him to reconsider. However, I hate the idea of a kid giving a "commitment" then continuing to look around and shop himself.

Last edited 02/17/2013 11:34 AM by jonfromwlv

Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 02/18/2013 2:30 PM

Re: Committed? Well, maybe? 



Well, I guess we could adopt the no visits policy that some programs have.  When a kid commits, no visits to other schools are allowed.  If a visit is made by the recruit, his scholarship is cancelled.  Michigan and Texas do it. 

I don't blame Hunt.  We essentially failed to honor the circumstances of an agreement when we fired JT and Coach M.

 

Reply | Quote