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?
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
It looks like he never took an official to RU.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.
Losing a 4* commit is a "biggie", particularly at a skill position.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
I’m hopeful of keeping the kid, but WR is a position we can find other guys at.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
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.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
Exactly. Were he our coach we would not even be having this discussion. We would be discussing losing a 2 star recruit to someplace like UMASS.Chris Ash is no longer our coach.
In my day your word was your bond.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
most of the Ash signees....Who was the last signee that wasn't projected to be a starter and the next great Teel, Britt, Rice, Davis or McCourty?
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.In my day your word was your bond.
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
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.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
Exactly.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.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 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.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
1) To say that a verbal means nothing is simply not true. The large majority of verbals hold.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
Tell that to the Indians.In my day your word was your bond.
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.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.
>1) To say that a verbal means nothing is simply not true. The large majority of verbals hold<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.
In my day your word was your bond.
Will and should never happen, until they sign on the dotted line they aren’t obligated. Schools pull offers from kids all the time.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 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.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 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.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.
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 .Will and should never happen, until they sign on the dotted line they aren’t obligated. Schools pull offers from kids all the time.
You've never seen it because they weren't official visits.
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?