Idea for new NCAA recruitment rule

[R1776U]

once you verbal, you sign immediately ... no more "decommitting" ... it'll make recruits think long and hard ... and force them to start making grown up decisions... also teaches honor/integrity

and for transferring players... you give up all but one year of eligibility... and if you are going into 4th year the only way to play is to transfer JUCO

thoughts???????

 

[R1776U]

oh and if schools don't self report violations of ALL current regs... automatic 15 year death of the program

 

[RUtix4me]

Or once you offer it has to be commutable. This goes two ways. Once a kid signs they lose all control of rights. At lest B1G now gotta a a 4 year scholarship now.

 

[PSU_Nut]

once you verbal, you sign immediately ... no more "decommitting" ... it'll make recruits think long and hard ... and force them to start making grown up decisions... also teaches honor/integrity

and for transferring players... you give up all but one year of eligibility... and if you are going into 4th year the only way to play is to transfer JUCO

thoughts???????

It would have to go both ways. If coaches give a scholarship offer it has to be binding. Under the current rules guys like Stills are almost forced into committing. He doesn't have the luxury of having a ton of big offers so when one comes, you jump at it. He knows if he doesn't Rutgers could pull that offer at any time. Even if he committed schools can pull the offer or ask them to grey shirt. Even after they sign they are only guaranteed for school to be paid for and not to join the team.

I don't understand why people get all high and mighty with verbal commitments. You would think all these people never broke a commitment. I am sure every single person on this board has broken a commitment. Weather that was a divorce, job change or broke up with a girlfriend ect. People do it every day but we expect a 17 year old kid not to because we get all butt hurt because our favorite team loses a player. This for them is their first major choice. It a sleazy business because you have coaches who are even less ethical. That offer can be here today and gone tomorrow.

Imagine if college admissions worked the same way. The letter would say congrats you been accepted to Rutgers however if you don't commit now we can pull this at anytime. We we are only taking the first two from your school district so if the other commit you are out. On top of that if you get hurt this offer is no longer valid. Would you tell your kid to wait to see if their dream school accepts them knowing your only back up option was Nassau junior college?

 

[sherrane]

How about if we stop taking these "commitment's" seriously? Many agree with Lou Holtz' perspective that a verbal commitment is like a commitment to a spouse. It is not. Marriage is a legally binding commitment, which means it's equivalent is the LOI. A verbal commitment is like a proposal and we know that not every proposal ends up in marriage.

 

[Upstream]

How about if we stop taking these "commitment's" seriously? Many agree with Lou Holtz' perspective that a verbal commitment is like a commitment to a spouse. It is not. Marriage is a legally binding commitment, which means it's equivalent is the LOI. A verbal commitment is like a proposal and we know that not every proposal ends up in marriage.

It's not even a proposal. It's like saying "I love you" after the third date. You might still break up after the 4th date.

 

[anon_ivydyf0amkzay]

Hell no...this is the only time a kid has power in this process...before national signing day!

Schools and its reps will just have to UN-bunch their collective panties when a kid changes his mind...

...schools survive...no irreparable damage is EVER done when a kid decommits; NONE!

 

[JQRU91]

It's not the kids that are calling it a "commitment." It's the process that refers to it as that. Maybe people would be less fussed about it if they called it something else.

 

[RUSK97]

It's not the kids that are calling it a "commitment." It's the process that refers to it as that. Maybe people would be less fussed about it if they called it something else.

I like it...let's start calling it a verbal consideration rather than commitment. That way none of the rules need to change.

 

[PSU_Nut]

I like it...let's start calling it a verbal consideration rather than commitment. That way none of the rules need to change.

I always thought they should call it going steady. Some recruits prefer open relationships where they can date other schools casually.

 

[urbanecane]

If Harbaugh can cut people two weeks before signing day the recruits should be able to pull some shenanigans too.

 

[Queztastic]

I don't understand why people get all high and mighty with verbal commitments. You would think all these people never broke a commitment. I am sure every single person on this board has broken a commitment. Weather that was a divorce, job change or broke up with a girlfriend ect. People do it every day but we expect a 17 year old kid not to because we get all butt hurt because our favorite team loses a player. This for them is their first major choice. It a sleazy business because you have coaches who are even less ethical. That offer can be here today and gone tomorrow.

Imagine if college admissions worked the same way. The letter would say congrats you been accepted to Rutgers however if you don't commit now we can pull this at anytime. We we are only taking the first two from your school district so if the other commit you are out. On top of that if you get hurt this offer is no longer valid. Would you tell your kid to wait to see if their dream school accepts them knowing your only back up option was Nassau junior college?

I think that the public pronouncements that certain recruits may make influence people's feelings on the issue. If the recruit just says he is committed (BTW agree we should use a different word) and then is quiet, its not as big of a deal if they change their mind later. However, I can see that when a recruit tweets to the world that the commitment is the best decision of his entire life, only to change his mind hours later, that may drive people crazy.

There needs to be an early signing period at the end of August before the HS football games start. Everyone who is sure of where they want to be can officially commit if they are sure that they know where they want to be. If not, they can wait until February. I realize that this creates a tough situation when a head coach is fired after a bad season, or leaves after a good season, but historically that has only been between 8% and 23% of the FBS coaches. Perhaps there can be a way to decommit and sign in February instead only if the coach you committed to is gone.

 

[RU76]

There needs to be an early signing period at the end of August before the HS football games start.

This is the fairest answer. Coaches cannot pull offers. Players will have security knowing they are locked into a destination before their HS season starts. Coaches will be forced to evaluate the academic situation carefully before making an early period offer. Coaches will know they have prospects locked in so they can continue to recruit positions for their needs.

And any kid who does not receive or accept an early offer will have a much better idea where he stands with particular schools since he will know who has actually committed to them. In other words, it will be more difficult for a coach to string along a player while the coach is waiting on someone else to decide. The entire recruiting process will be more transparent.

 

[dconifer]

once you verbal, you sign immediately ... no more "decommitting" ... it'll make recruits think long and hard ... and force them to start making grown up decisions... also teaches honor/integrity

and for transferring players... you give up all but one year of eligibility... and if you are going into 4th year the only way to play is to transfer JUCO

thoughts???????

Or just do what I do -- don't pay attention or get too interested in recruiting. It's turned into a bunch of silliness. There are so many web sites and media outlets looking for content, and there are a ton of young men perfectly willing to sit in the limelight while they make up their minds. What could go wrong?

NCAA football is a money machine. This is only going to get worse. I just wait until September and watch whoever signed on with the Terps...

 

[kapyoche]

There is only one entity more corrupt than Wall Street and it is big time college football.

It is so corrupt because of money. When there is too much money, people become deaf, dumb and blind.

The only thing we can do is to stop following it or supporting it.

 

[Doctor Worm]

once you verbal, you sign immediately ...

In other words, OP is calling (I think) for an elimination of the February signing date. Sign whenever you want.

This is not a new proposal and there are pros and cons:

PROS:

• Allows a kid who is sure where he wants to go, to be able to lock it down whenever he wants.
• Will dissuade schools from tossing around all these offers which are not unconditionally committable.
• Ends the practice of oversigning (at least under the proposal I have seen). 25 means 25. Kid gets hurt or doesn't qualify? Too bad. He counts against your 25.
• Ends reneging on verbal commitments. Kid says he's committed and doesn't sign, he's clearly not committed and no one will criticize the school for moving on.
• May have an egalitarian effect in that the traditional powers will no longer be able to poach the recruits of those lower on the food chain. (Which is a major reason why it will never happen.)

CONS:

• Accelerates the time line. Kids will be pressured to sign - when? Middle school?
• Takes away the only leverage the player has.
• Makes player vulnerable in event of coaching changes, etc.
• May not withstand a court challenge. Kid signs after his freshman year and then six months later sues for a release. Not a lawyer, but I don't see any legal justification for denying it. Courts very rarely enforce specific performance.
• Assuming that the player does have a escape clause, which I think it inevitable, then some schools will no doubt "counsel" some signees into "voluntarily" rescinding their signature.
• Just plain doesn't feel right.

IMO the cons outweigh the pros. But the suggestion is not crazy.

 

[mdh2003]

It's not the kids that are calling it a "commitment." It's the process that refers to it as that. Maybe people would be less fussed about it if they called it something else.

Probably a few thousand tweets that suggest otherwise.

 

[R1776U]

It would have to go both ways. If coaches give a scholarship offer it has to be binding. Under the current rules guys like Stills are almost forced into committing. He doesn't have the luxury of having a ton of big offers so when one comes, you jump at it. He knows if he doesn't Rutgers could pull that offer at any time. Even if he committed schools can pull the offer or ask them to grey shirt. Even after they sign they are only guaranteed for school to be paid for and not to join the team.

I don't understand why people get all high and mighty with verbal commitments. You would think all these people never broke a commitment. I am sure every single person on this board has broken a commitment. Weather that was a divorce, job change or broke up with a girlfriend ect. People do it every day but we expect a 17 year old kid not to because we get all butt hurt because our favorite team loses a player. This for them is their first major choice. It a sleazy business because you have coaches who are even less ethical. That offer can be here today and gone tomorrow.

Imagine if college admissions worked the same way. The letter would say congrats you been accepted to Rutgers however if you don't commit now we can pull this at anytime. We we are only taking the first two from your school district so if the other commit you are out. On top of that if you get hurt this offer is no longer valid. Would you tell your kid to wait to see if their dream school accepts them knowing your only back up option was Nassau junior college?

you're a pedo state fan.... you opinion holds little weight when it comes to upholding strict NCAA regs