ADVERTISEMENT

Sooo....are we worried about Amarion Brown?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Morrischiano

All American
Dec 3, 2019
5,457
6,978
113

I've never seen a verbal commit take 4 officials to other schools over the course of 2 weeks. I would say this is trending to a de-commit. Thoughts?
 
I stopped getting excited about verbal commitments until they sign the letter. Until then I assume no one is actually committed.
Also with the free transfer rule now HS recruiting isn't as important as it once was. So my hope for this program isn't resting on each recruit in each class.
If he wants to be here great. If not no biggie
 
Keeping FL kids in the fold during Covid is problematical for schools like us. Has he ever been to campus? How well does he know the coaching staff?

I’ll be surprised if he signs with us. He is going back to Auburn for a 2nd visit. There will be other suitors for him.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cicero grimes
Giving a verbal doesn't mean you have to keep your word.
Nothing will happen if you de-commit and sign LOI with another program
I really means nothing.
But if verbally committing to a school meant you lose your redshirt year if you de-commit, then it would mean something
 
Keeping FL kids in the fold during Covid is problematical for schools like us. Has he ever been to campus? How well does he know the coaching staff?

I’ll be surprised if he signs with us. He is going back to Auburn for a 2nd visit. There will be other suitors for him.
It looks like he never took an official to RU.
 
I stopped getting excited about verbal commitments until they sign the letter. Until then I assume no one is actually committed.
Also with the free transfer rule now HS recruiting isn't as important as it once was. So my hope for this program isn't resting on each recruit in each class.
If he wants to be here great. If not no biggie
Losing a 4* commit is a "biggie", particularly at a skill position.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BROTHERSKINNY
We are all guessing and mine is 40% chance of keeping

If he was not returning to auburn it would be a bit higher
 
I stopped getting excited about verbal commitments until they sign the letter. Until then I assume no one is actually committed.
Also with the free transfer rule now HS recruiting isn't as important as it once was. So my hope for this program isn't resting on each recruit in each class.
If he wants to be here great. If not no biggie

Forget even signing with Rutgers.
Wake me up when a recruit actually produces on the field.

Every verbal commit has an "excellent" highlight tape.

Who was the last signee that wasn't projected to be a starter and the next great Teel, Britt, Rice, Davis or McCourty?
 
  • Like
Reactions: drewbagel423
Giving a verbal doesn't mean you have to keep your word.
Nothing will happen if you de-commit and sign LOI with another program
I really means nothing.
But if verbally committing to a school meant you lose your redshirt year if you de-commit, then it would mean something
i dont know what it should be but i do think there should be some impact if you commit and then bail. If you're not sure, then dont commit. and i you are sure at the time, commit and take the penalty if you were wrong and want to go elsewhere later.
 
In my day your word was your bond.
That's a noble sentiment, and I'm not sure when your day was. But in reality, in my experience, that whole word as bond thing was never universally the case at any time I can remember (I'm middle-aged). And given human nature, I seriously doubt it was at any time prior. Was just a thing people said a lot but many didn't actually follow.

People's word is/was/will-be their bond until push comes to shove (i.e. when circumstances change, fiscally or otherwise). Then a pretty large percentage of people switch from word-as-bond to looking out for number one. This has been exacerbated by the vastly greater access to all kinds of information we all enjoy today. People can easily see just how many others out there are treating their word more as a sales pitch, or a form of leverage, than as some kind of bond.

And by people, I'm including organizations such as corporations, universities, etc., as well as individuals.

Edit...

To give an example that shows how what I said above isn't an entirely cynical view, consider a hypothetical example of a player from an impoverished background, and from across the country, that gives their word when they commit to a school. At the time, they truly intend to stick to that word when making a commitment.

But then circumstances change. The player's single mom gets very sick and the player needs to stick closer to home to care for their mom. Also, the player has younger siblings and feels a responsibility to be around for them as well.

Now the player's situation is such that leaving home for the school to which they originally committed would be ethically questionable. Yeah, they made a promise to the school. But they also have an obligation to their mom. And that obligation, IMO, transcends any promise to play a sport for a particular school.

In this case, their word was their bond, but circumstances changed and now they need to look out for number one (where "one" is their mom, not them).

Life is full of such situation changes. So I'm not all that sure where a commitment to a school to play football lies on the ethical correctness scale when compared to all the crap life can throw at college age kids.
 
Last edited:
Giving a verbal doesn't mean you have to keep your word.
Nothing will happen if you de-commit and sign LOI with another program
I really means nothing.
But if verbally committing to a school meant you lose your redshirt year if you de-commit, then it would mean something

Wonder if similar restrictions could or should be put on coaching staffs.
How would people like a system where if a school offers a scholarship, you have to honor it?
No more "non-committable" offers.

Would stop schools from offering 100 scholarships when they only have spots for 25 kids.
 
I stopped getting excited about verbal commitments until they sign the letter. Until then I assume no one is actually committed.
Also with the free transfer rule now HS recruiting isn't as important as it once was. So my hope for this program isn't resting on each recruit in each class.
If he wants to be here great. If not no biggie
That's where I'm at, basically. It's nice and slightly exciting to get verbal commitments from high ranked players and all. But until the player is on campus and practicing with the team, I view it as an entirely unhatched chicken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: superfan01
Wonder if similar restrictions could or should be put on coaching staffs.
How would people like a system where if a school offers a scholarship, you have to honor it?
No more "non-committable" offers.

Would stop schools from offering 100 scholarships when they only have spots for 25 kids.
Exactly.

That's the thing that's changed as the level of information access has improved over the past decade or two. Organizations, such as college sports programs, could get away with murder in the past because the knowledge of their potentially unethical practices would be somewhat limited. It wouldn't become widespread knowledge, at least not very quickly.

Nowadays, all the various actors involved have a relatively equal insight into what everybody else is doing. Players may feel they are showing the same levels of loyalty to their "promises" as everybody else, including the sports programs themselves.
 
Wonder if similar restrictions could or should be put on coaching staffs.
How would people like a system where if a school offers a scholarship, you have to honor it?
No more "non-committable" offers.

Would stop schools from offering 100 scholarships when they only have spots for 25 kids.
Maybe if a school offers and the player accepts , the school can't claim its non committal and if reneges not one freshman in the incoming class that year can be red-shirted.
As for players and verbal commit can't officaly visit other schools and unoffical visits must be reported by the school that verbal visits giving the school committed to an option to de commit the kid without punishment.for pulling offer
 
  • Love
Reactions: redking
Maybe if a school offers and the player accepts , the school can't claim its non committal and if reneges not one freshman in the incoming class that year can be red-shirted.
As for players and verbal commit can't officaly visit other schools and unoffical visits must be reported by the school that verbal visits giving the school committed to an option to de commit the kid without punishment.for pulling offer
I wouldn't change a thing. I don't see any need to make things less flexible than they are. The flexibility can serve both schools and players.
 
I think you give a offer to a recruit he should be able to sign it and it is a done deal. If he doesn't sign it in a week then it is open on both side to take it or void it. This way you know exactly where you stand with the recruit and he knows it can be gone any second.
 
Giving a verbal doesn't mean you have to keep your word.
Nothing will happen if you de-commit and sign LOI with another program
I really means nothing.
But if verbally committing to a school meant you lose your redshirt year if you de-commit, then it would mean something
1) To say that a verbal means nothing is simply not true. The large majority of verbals hold.

2) So you are suggesting that the NCAA sanction a player who decommits from a verbal commitment? How is that possible since, by definition, the NCAA does not recognize the verbal commitment?

3) On the subject of not keeping your word, I am more troubled by the oxymoronic concept of the "non-commitable offer" which is practiced by all schools, including RU.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TRU2RU
That's a noble sentiment, and I'm not sure when your day was. But in reality, in my experience, that whole word as bond thing was never universally the case at any time I can remember (I'm middle-aged). And given human nature, I seriously doubt it was at any time prior. Was just a thing people said a lot but many didn't actually follow.

People's word is/was/will-be their bond until push comes to shove (i.e. when circumstances change, fiscally or otherwise). Then a pretty large percentage of people switch from word-as-bond to looking out for number one. This has been exacerbated by the vastly greater access to all kinds of information we all enjoy today. People can easily see just how many others out there are treating their word more as a sales pitch, or a form of leverage, than as some kind of bond.

And by people, I'm including organizations such as corporations, universities, etc., as well as individuals.

Edit...

To give an example that shows how what I said above isn't an entirely cynical view, consider a hypothetical example of a player from an impoverished background, and from across the country, that gives their word when they commit to a school. At the time, they truly intend to stick to that word when making a commitment.

But then circumstances change. The player's single mom gets very sick and the player needs to stick closer to home to care for their mom. Also, the player has younger siblings and feels a responsibility to be around for them as well.

Now the player's situation is such that leaving home for the school to which they originally committed would be ethically questionable. Yeah, they made a promise to the school. But they also have an obligation to their mom. And that obligation, IMO, transcends any promise to play a sport for a particular school.

In this case, their word was their bond, but circumstances changed and now they need to look out for number one (where "one" is their mom, not them).

Life is full of such situation changes. So I'm not all that sure where a commitment to a school to play football lies on the ethical correctness scale when compared to all the crap life can throw at college age kids.
I never make a promise I can't keep. Otherwise I simply don't promise and say, I'll try my best. It's worked out very well for my business. I'll never promise you your concrete won't crack, I always say I'll do my best to ensure it doesn't crack.
 
1) To say that a verbal means nothing is simply not true. The large majority of verbals hold.

2) So you are suggesting that the NCAA sanction a player who decommits from a verbal commitment? How is that possible since, by definition, the NCAA does not recognize the verbal commitment?

3) On the subject of not keeping your word, I am more troubled by the oxymoronic concept of the "non-commitable offer" which is practiced by all schools, including RU.
>1) To say that a verbal means nothing is simply not true. The large majority of verbals hold<
True most keep their word.
But some still visit other programs after verbaling to a school and look to see if they like that school better.
Also some use verbals like insurance, commit to a school to make sure you have a place to go and wait for a better offer and accept that instead of honoring verbal.

>2) So you are suggesting that the NCAA sanction a player who decommits from a verbal commitment? How is that possible since, by definition, the NCAA does not recognize the verbal commitment?<
It's about time the NCAA got involved in kids accepting offers and then look for a better one.
This way recruits would hold off and wait for the type of school they want to be part of to offer or take the offer they think will be the best they will get.
Add another rule that covers a kid's responsibility after verbaling to a school.

>3) On the subject of not keeping your word, I am more troubled by the oxymoronic concept of the "non-commitable offer" which is practiced by all schools, including RU.<
agree, that's a practice that needs to be stopped
If not, then maybe my suggestion kids be held accountable is the wrong way to treat a kid that verbals to one program and decides to de-commit an sign LOI with another.
 
In my day your word was your bond.

By no means universally practiced, but moreso than these days. As far as a recruit that has a LEGITIMATE family problem I don't see that as breaking your word. And my guess is that you weren't around when the promises were made to the Lenni Lenape or other tribes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bilderberg_News
Giving a verbal doesn't mean you have to keep your word.
Nothing will happen if you de-commit and sign LOI with another program
I really means nothing.
But if verbally committing to a school meant you lose your redshirt year if you de-commit, then it would mean something
Will and should never happen, until they sign on the dotted line they aren’t obligated. Schools pull offers from kids all the time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Wolv RU
I never make a promise I can't keep. Otherwise I simply don't promise and say, I'll try my best. It's worked out very well for my business. I'll never promise you your concrete won't crack, I always say I'll do my best to ensure it doesn't crack.
I also try hard to not make promises I cannot be certain to keep. It's extremely rare that I'll make an outright promise. And even then, I'm very careful how I word promises.

However, no matter how expressly I convey the fact that I cannot make, and am not making, a promise, people often refer back to a thing as something I promised. I guess because people are very often quite imprecise with language and hear what they want to hear. Which is why we have contracts and lawyers, I guess, for whatever that's worth. 🙂

With respect to verbal commitments by CFB recruits, I don't actually regard them as any kind of promise. I think of them as expressed intentions. The term commitment is, IMO, used imprecisely here. They should change the term to "verbal expression of intent".
 
Not worried in the least bit. If he wants to attend Rutgers great. If not, it's his decision and wish him the best. As for Rutgers WR position, they'll be other Recruits right around the corner and Coach Underwood is a good one.
 
Usually Auburn recruits better than the 36th best recruit in Florida. Usually competing with Georgia and Alabama for talent, not Rutgers. Coach Harsin might need to be reminded that he’s not at Arkansas State and Boise State anymore.
 
Not worried in the least bit. If he wants to attend Rutgers great. If not, it's his decision and wish him the best. As for Rutgers WR position, they'll be other Recruits right around the corner and Coach Underwood is a good one.
I think, like pretty much always, recruiting will likely go as our win-loss record goes. So I'm not worried about recruiting so much as about how hard this upcoming season is going to be (pretty hard, I think). Win enough and play competitively and recruiting will take care of itself.

I think five wins and competitive losses is probably good enough to keep our good recruiting class mostly together for 2022. Fewer wins, or too many blowouts, and some of our better recruits may become more ripe for the picking by other teams with better success.

This isn't unique to us. It's just how it is for everyone, except some schools with a long history of winning upon which to fall back during inevitable periodic slumps.
 
Will and should never happen, until they sign on the dotted line they aren’t obligated. Schools pull offers from kids all the time.
If pulling offers without a good reason has consequences for the school, holding the kids to their verbals might stop the ones that commit but know if a better program offers, they're gone .
Make it fair for both and giving your word mean more than lip service for the kid and the school that will pull offers if someone better shows up.
 
No need to worry, since we have no control. Coach Underwood has worked hard here. Flip a coin. It would be nice to get him to campus. We have 2, and Evans can play WR. I think if the coaches think he is gone, we will start hearing about us moving on to other committed 4 🌟.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT