roster reading

quote:

Why bring up CofC, that program has consistently been a winning program, attended NCAA playoffs on a regular basis, under former coach and the new coach is a disciple of Ray Tanner and did well last year.

I love C of C. My son said he would have loved to go there after seeing all the colleges he played against. I actually asked him last year where he would have gone after playing at some great schools. C of C was his 1st choice and USC was his second.
TPM I can see you still can't read. I said the comment was funny referring to TOO much Charleston and too little college.
Now that 3 of the group have turned this personal as usual I will just resist further comment.

infielddad,
You bring up good points about how we do not know what is discussed between players and coaches.

A good example would be Ray Tanner, who routinely has many more walk ons that one might consider desirable, however, my understanding is that he gets lots of kids and parents calling especially from alumni, offers them walk on opportunities but players and their folks know it's most likely a long shot. You might find this very prevelant among schools where generations of families attended the school, the player has no intention of going anywhere else, but only wants a chance to try out. If the coach is upfront in his intentions, no problem. Years ago the coach could give books, or small scholarships, and the kids would be happy to sit the bench, he can't do that anymore, but why not give them a chance to try out? The NCAA allows all teams to hold open tryouts, and no fall roster limit, perhaps still a lot for that reason.
I know that Polk did this, and very upset that now he had to turn players away who normally might have a chance to just practice with the team. You might find this is one of the reasons why SEC rosters are so large, lots of these schools include generations of familes that intended, and for many families, there is no where else you will go, but where your mama, papa, sisters, brothers, uncles, aunts and grandma and grandpa went. Not all coaches subscribe to that philosophy, regardless of alumni families.

I don't know if it is like that on the west coast.

Maybe I just didn't get your point, but what did or does it matter anyway, bringing up Charleston?

I happen to like charleston very much and Myrtle Beach, I can see why your son loved it there, but it really seems to be not irrevalent to the discussion.

You do have a fixation on not sitting out, yet you support the D1 program like no other can compare. In one sentence it's the only way to go, in others it's let the buyer beware.

quote:

Originally posted by infielddad:

quote:

Originally posted by observer44:
.

quote:

Originally posted by infielddad: If the player truly is cut, he can transfer and play at any school other than a DI. There are a wealth of options in CA. Some of the DII's are certainly competitive with the program involved in this topic.

Actually not the case this year...

...have talked to some of the CA DII coaching staffs...due to budget cuts the UC's and the CA states are NOT accepting mid year transfers...

This leaves only a couple DII's and the potentially expensive NAIA's...or out of state.


.

O'44, thanks for that update.
It would also leave JC's and DIII's. Many of those options might be considerably less expensive than the school in question.

IFD...you are very good!...right you are!..I had meant to say "a couple DIII's"...and a good reminder about the JC's...


.

Regarding cutting scholarship players mid year (D1):

A scholarship player can be cut mid-year in the sense that he is no longer welcome at practice, but his scholarship remains intact until the end of the academic year. Also, his name remains on the 35 man roster.

A program can reduce athletic aid for fraud, disciplinary problems (as judged by the main university, not the athletic department), becoming academically ineligible, or for voluntarily leaving the program. (15.3.4.2) That aid could, in principle, be redistributed to other players in the following term. (15.5.3.2.3) If the aid is terminated in the fall, the player is no longer a counter in the aubsequent spring semester, and would not need to be included in the 35 man roster (17.2.8.3 and 15.5.1)

So, as I see it, if a coach decides in the fall that a scholarship player won't be able to contribute, he has incentive to run the player off. It gives him an extra spot on the 35 man roster, and gives him some flexibility in scholarships for other players. For example, the coach could increase the scholarship for a player in the spring term with the understanding that the player would have a corresponding decrease in the subsequent year.

Now, about the program mentioned in the original post. I know nothing about the fall roster. And I only know the coach by reputation. He's a straight arrow with repect to recruiting. Lots of programs bend the rules by sending letters and emails to potential players which are ostensibly about camps, but which are actually clear recruiting. The program in question follows the rules strictly. So I suppose that the players involved have all been informed of and are aware of their odds.

Secondly, that college offers substantial discounts to any student who attended a Catholic high school, a discount for SAT scores above 1200 and even more for scores above 1350 (IIRC). I don't remember the exact amounts, but it is tens of thousands of dollars. So for the right student, the cost of attendence can be less than a UC or CSU school. If he hopes that he may be good enough to play baseball at a mid-level D1, why not give it a whirl? I think it is entirely plausible that there are players on the fall roster who intend to stay in that college, whether they make the team or not.

Thanks 3FG, makes a lot os sense to what you say. And thanks for the rule.
I am assuming that is why we can find large fall rosters at many schools where state paid tuition is available, the student walks on to try out, doesn't make the team but still has intentions to remain at the school.
While reading rosters is helpful, it doesn't always tell the story between the differences in a recruited walk on or a walk on for try out only.

quote:

Originally posted by 3FingeredGlove:

A program can reduce athletic aid ...or for voluntarily leaving the program. (15.3.4.2) That aid could, in principle, be redistributed to other players in the following term. (15.5.3.2.3) If the aid is terminated in the fall, the player is no longer a counter in the aubsequent spring semester, and would not need to be included in the 35 man roster (17.2.8.3 and 15.5.1)

Which brings up the age old, but rarely talked about practice of coaches running players off. If you are a scholarshipped player and the coach wants his scholarship back, the fastest way to accomplish that is to get the student to leave school. It does happen. Many times the job is left up to the strength and conditioning coach, who lets the player know, that if he stays, he's going to brutalize him in the workouts.

Not saying it happens at all schools or even a majority of schools, but it does happen. The worst violators are usually the same programs that you see over recruiting.

quote:

Which brings up the age old, but rarely talked about practice of coaches running players off. If you are a scholarshipped player and the coach wants his scholarship back, the fastest way to accomplish that is to get the student to leave school. It does happen. Many times the job is left up to the strength and conditioning coach, who lets the player know, that if he stays, he's going to brutalize him in the workouts.

Not saying it happens at all schools or even a majority of schools, but it does happen. The worst violators are usually the same programs that you see over recruiting.

Not saying this does not happen, but I have never heard of any cases of this. I would think that this would become big news if it happened. What would stop the abused person from reporting this type activity? The media would have a field day with it. It actually sounds like something that could end up going to court. That sounds like threatening torture!

While college athletics might have its faults, I hope no one has stooped to this level. I would think if this practice got out it would be very counter productive for recruiting.

There is another CA D1 with a Fall 2009 D1 roster that has 50 names on it. I am not familiar with all the players but there are definitely some high profile names and baseball legacies on the list. I assume they also have to get to 35 by spring, looks like there will be some very stiff competition.

quote:

Originally posted by cheapseats:
There is another CA D1 with a Fall 2009 D1 roster that has 50 names on it. I am not familiar with all the players but there are definitely some high profile names and baseball legacies on the list. I assume they also have to get to 35 by spring, looks like there will be some very stiff competition.

Again...I would suggest that this is a trend...and I have to be wondering, particuarly in CA, with the poor economy and huge budget squeeze hitting the school incredibly hard both the state and the privates, if schools are going to continue fully funding the baseball programs. Increased (wide open) competition would be one way to to squeeze out/in any un disovered/underappreciated/cast off talent.

44
.

quote:

Originally posted by cheapseats:
There is another CA D1 with a Fall 2009 D1 roster that has 50 names on it. I am not familiar with all the players but there are definitely some high profile names and baseball legacies on the list. I assume they also have to get to 35 by spring, looks like there will be some very stiff competition.

Sons old school had 55 names on their roster and over 100 at the start of their fall practices!



You can make this real simple by just looking at that and where their incoming recruits come from.

On the other hand, son's current school has only 30 on the roster, down 4 from last year. There are still some schools out there that are not over-recruiting.

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
... but I have never heard of any cases of this.

I personally know a strength and conditioning coach who is tasked with this job. Very common in football when they realize a scholarshipped player won't pan out, but he has run off baseball players also.

The reason I started this thread was just to help educate parents of younger players that this does occur, whether these players were invited, or just showed up to try to walk on. It was not my intention to bash a well respected college.

There has been so much great input that will really help the parents of future college players. One thing that sticks out in my mind from all the posts is there is much more to college baseball than just D1! There are so many other levels that might be a better experience for your son that you should be open-minded and explore all options.

This year seems like a "perfect storm" for college admissions due to severe budget cuts in the UC/CSU system. Add to that the severe cuts @ the junior college level in CA and some kids may have a really tough time finding some place to play this year. At DeAnza community college in Cupertino CA they have over 8,000 students that can't get classes according to the local newspaper. If a player decides to transfer to a JC can the coach help him get classes?

Players may need to research more schools and be more open to out of state schools and programs of all levels.

Not to open another can of worms but I wonder if all the walk-ons in CA schools could partially be a result of the explosion of travel teams the last few years with more players continuing to play baseball past LL. My son is only 19 but when he was 13 there were NO travel teams in our county. Now there are many to choose from. I think this is fairly representative of many areas across the country?

Have to remember that in times of recession, lost jobs, college enrollements go up, so you can't assume that high enrollements just include HS grads, but all segments of the population.

quote:

My son is only 19 but when he was 13 there were NO travel teams in our county. Now there are many to choose from. I think this is fairly representative of many areas across the country?

It's a lucrative business.......$$$

This is what the stink is all about.

Stephen F Austin

And this is a D1. Red flag for my boys!!

I think that this has been a great topic, thanks CaBB for starting it, over recruiting has always been a hot topic areound here and will continue to always be.
Basically, with the economy the way it is, with parents not being able to find student loans, losing money on their 401k's, and house values, credit drying up, people need to find ways to help pay for education, and securing a scholarship in any sport is one that they will always seek out. There are reasons why students seek out scholarships, the main one helping to pay for education, or helping them to get into a school they may not otherwise be able to, that will never change. The shift of population to warmer climates also has changed, therefore those schools in those climates (closer to home) is going to feel the brunt of over enrollment, over recruting, etc.

The biggest change I see in college baseball, is players who would otherwise head off to college, now take the money and become professionals. The MLB scholarship plan will become very attractive as an alternative.

I personally am very glad that we have been there and done that.

FWIW, I don't see how schools can not fully fund, as they have to pay more out for scholarships now than before, they have to continue to compete for players and you can't do that with offering them nothing. What you might see is a drop in spring roster sizes, as you can now see in some programs, even at the larger ones. But if that is the case, they drop athletic scholarships, more and more importance will be on grades, for academic money.

quote:

This is what the stink is all about.

Stephen F Austin

And this is a D1. Red flag for my boys!!

workinghard,

Without knowing why there are 60 players out there in the fall, how do we know there is anything wrong. Now if someone actually "recruited" all 60 players, I would understand. Looking at the roster it looks like there is room for 9 of the 60. I find it hard to believe that all 60 of those kids were sold a bill of goods.

Of the 26 that are listed on their roster, it includes 7 new "recruited" JC transfers and 6 new freshman "recruits". All 13 "recruits" are listed on their actual roster.

I'm not sure why they have 60 players out there, but it doesn't mean they are doing anything wrong. Until they start cutting their recruits, I'm not sure if this is anything to be alalmed about. It could very well mean that there are some kids who made a bad decision though. Truth is you could have a hundred kids trying out in the fall and it doesn't necessarily mean there is any wrongdoing.

Looks to me like there might be room for 9 non recruited players to make a Div I roster. Maybe most of those players didn't really expect to make the roster and have planned accordingly.

My point is, we need more information to determine if anything is wrong in this case and other cases. I do know of good players who have been recruited by schools mentioned here as over recruiting schools. At least in some of those cases, we have known that the player knew exactly what was going on and willing to live with it. They were set up (by the original college) to attend Juco that same year if things didn't work out. The lure to play at the highest level is strong for talented players. Many times they do end up transfering to a Juco and things still end up working out in the end.

The thing that stinks is when a kid was either uninformed or unhappy or a scholarship player is cut and they can't transfer to another DI school without sitting out a year. They did nothing wrong! I know it has been that way in Football and Basketball before it happened in baseball, but both Football and basketball are full scholsrship sports where baseball, is partial, now at least 25%. We are not talking about equal situations.

These rules might have been made for good reasons, but IMO they are bad rules and need to be adjusted.

PG makes good points, we don't know the situation and again all NCAA schools (I think all divisions) have to allow non scholarship players (walk ons) a chance to practice and try out.
The way I am thinking is that there are 28 scholarships and room for 8 walk ons. Some of these programs may not know who is going to show up, so they will not go out looking for 8 players who will not take scholarships but leave the door open for walk ons.
However, what is not right is telling a RECRUITED walk on he has a place on the team and then he shows up and has to try out, that's deceiving but we do not know what the coaches tell others.
I have never seen a scholarship player show up in teh fall, and not have a place on the roster, and do not know of any player who was actually "cut", perhaps they lost some scholarship money, but they had to have already known the before they came in the fall. I have heard of players who by their junior or senior were told their roles would not be as expected, giving them a chance to look elsewhere at their exit interview.

I was curious so I did a random search of some schools in the mid atlantic, southeast and south for 2009 fall or 2010 rosters. All schools except for one, have either been to Omaha over recent years or in the regional or super regionals, consistantly.
Most schools with current rosters, met the 35 man requirement, or under, with just 2 schools over that amount by no more than three.
Some of these schools are considered "baseball powerhouses".
So I was wondering, is over recruiting just more predominant in smaller programs and further west?

quote:

Originally posted by PGStaff:
Truth is you could have a hundred kids trying out in the fall and it doesn't necessarily mean there is any wrongdoing.

My point is, we need more information to determine if anything is wrong in this case and other cases.

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:
The way I am thinking is that there are 28 scholarships and room for 8 walk ons.

I believe the number dropped to 27 max scholarships this year.

I have to go now, I think I see some nits.

CPLZ,
Oops, 27 right, but you got the idea anyway.

.

- Is it possible that the smaller programs and the west coast programs are simply more transparent? Fall rosters are a very inexact source of information. There are no set "rules" for fall roster information. Some schools are very forthright about how many players they have in the fall, and list them all in the fall. Other programs never even post a fall roster. Some schools try out 30 players before they even list the fall roster. Nothing stops a program from listing 30 players and there could be 30 more in the fall practices not listed on the rosters. School can even shift back and forth year after year. We are assuming that those roster listings of 30 or 35 players are everyone that is in fall camp, or has been in fall camp.


.

OB44,
I am going to assume that the info posted on the roster may not include those walk ons that may be added to teams with smaller #'s later on.

I have always been under the assumption a scholarship player showing up does not have to "try out" against 35 others to be considered on the teams roster. Except maybe in the days of redshirting many players. A player should already have that spot secured but has to "try out" for a starting position not to make the team.

A few of the programs that I mentioned historically don't over recruit and some have. But from what I see, if we are going to interpret rosters, everything seems to be the way it should be.

PG-

I have never heard of this amount of kids showing up to tryout at a D1 unless it was a first year program.
Have seen it a bunch at Juco's but not at an established D1 university.

TPM-

You are correct. Per NCAA rules, the school must allow a tryout period. I guess if a coach wants to look at that many kids to find talent, makes his job a little easier.

Good for the kids then, maybe he will find a few diamonds in the rough and a recruited walk-on can be let go. Just saying......

workinghard,

As a second year coach, he had 26 on roster last season, so perhaps this is how he does it, but it may not be working, with their record of last year, he needs to find a better way.
Then again perhaps he has no budget for travel?


But pointing out that 60 players hit the field, without a fall roster, can tell you much about a program, and how the coach goes about his business.

But as PG points out, we just don't know all of the circumstances.

quote:

with their record of last year, he needs to find a better way

Agreed - and in more ways than one. Below are quotes by Baylor Head Coach Steve Smith after Baylor's 12-2 victory over Stephen F Austin in May:

quote:

On (SFA Head Coach) Johnny Cardenas instructing his pitcher to throw at Gregg Glime

“Their coach (Johnny Cardenas) admitted to both me and the home plate umpire that he has instructed his pitcher to throw at our hitter two or three innings prior (to the eighth inning) and that is why he jerked the pitcher and the catcher out of the game after that happened. The new guy out there (Chris Court) throws at Gregg (Glime). The guy they wanted to hit, by instruction of the coach, by his own admission, was because Raynor (Campbell) was swinging wood tonight. How someone finds that offensive, I don’t know. Maybe if our entire team came out here swinging wood, maybe that would show you up.”

On Raynor Campbell using a wooden bat::

“For one guy who is hitting .240 with a metal bat to come out here and swing wood, he is just trying to figure it out. The guy hit .320 last year in the Cape swinging wood. He was going to give it a try to see if he can find a feel for it, that’s not showing anybody up. Obviously it set me off to hear him articulate that so clearly. End of story. (Stephen F. Austin) will not be coming back here as long as (Johnny Cardenas) is there….

http://www.baylorbears.com/spo...ecaps/051209aad.html

.

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:
But pointing out that 60 players hit the field, without a fall roster, can tell you much about a program, and how the coach goes about his business.

But as PG points out, we just don't know all of the circumstances.

Which brings up a VERY important point for anybody even considering heading to DI as a recruited walk on or a walk on...

...it is a good idea to know as best you can how the program does it's business,

...but it is simply imperitive that you know how the program does it's business WITH YOU...

You need to know what you are doing, have a purpose and reason, who know where you stand with the program, you are taking a risk, but make it a very well calculated one. Talk directly to the coaching staff, know the specific need they have (position and charcateristics), know why they think YOU help them fill it. Know how many others they have recruited for this position. How many you will have to beat out, if any. It is simply not enough to be welcomed for a try out, you need to be very clear on what, how and why. There may be 60 players out, but if you are the only or one of a couple candidates for a specific role you can improve the odds dramatically. You may not have to beat out 60 players, maybe only 1, maybe none.

I agree that far too many players take a shot at DI, wthout much hope, without any research, without properly judging their talent in the eyes of the decision makers, and many do so without improving their risk in any way.

I agree too that it's a given that you would rather have a full scholarship and an assured place, and it might be a better choice logically to play at another level other than DI, or another school...

but I am also not one to tell a player to give up a dream, things do happen, someone has to fill those 8 spots. But IF there are good solid reasons why a player wants to take a shot at one of the minimum eight positions of a DI roster, it is important for them to do it in a way that improves their prospects, logically, rationally, well thought and well planned out.


.

OB44,
Great post, truly. For the player that is going to walk on, it should be required reading. That being said, those that are overly focused on "D1" or "the scholarship", should know that they have strayed from the critical moments that will form Juniors experience over the next 4 years.

In all the talk on this site lately about who should talk to coaches about what, and when...sometimes what gets lost is what they should be talking about.

I remember the trepidation with which I approached what I considered the tough topics, not wanting to give out the wrong impression or harm juniors chances. After a couple of recruiting visits it became apparently clear to me, that what I (actually, "we", Junior and I) really need to do, was have a well prepared idea of what I wanted to know, and then formulate a plan for getting answers.

Without the answers to the tough questions, players and parents truly are flying blind with hope as the only co-pilot. In the big scheme of things, although the scholarship seems the #1 priority going in, it really is the fit of the program that will last as defining the total of the moments. Knowing where you sit and what your prospects for the future are, are much, MUCH, more important than the scholarship details. The scholarship is money, the players role in the program is the experience...something that money can't buy.

quote:

Originally posted by workinghard:
Per NCAA rules, the school must allow a tryout period.

Could you point me to a rule reference for that?

3FG,
I don't know where the rule is, perhaps a rule between member institutions and the NCAA? And I also thought that tryouts had to be posted or announced somewhere.

There is no such thing?

quote:

Originally posted by CPLZ:
In all the talk on this site lately about who should talk to coaches about what, and when...sometimes what gets lost is what they should be talking about.

I agree.

Great posts by both OB44 and CPLZ!

Why would I argue with the "Rules Guru".

I was under the impression this was the case since ever school site that I have ever visited mentioned a "tryout date". Shame on me for assuming. I also thought I had heard it mentioned that a D1 had to have it posted for all interested in trying out.

This is the best I could come up with.

"• Once you’re on a college campus, most teams will offer you an open tryout if you’re not being offered scholarship money or preferred walk-on status. The chances are small, but it’s worth a shot if you think you can earn a roster spot."

and

"The typical walk on player is one that comes out in the fall of the year. Usually after seeing a notice for baseball try-outs. (Many schools still require their programs to hold try-outs)"

No "Per NCAA Rules" though.

I know that open tryouts are an accepted practice. Not sure if there is a rule. I know guys that have all of a sudden out of the blue decided to tryout at my son's college.
Fall rosters do not always have all the guys trying out in the fall. As noted the fall roster on the web is not always the same as that required to be submitted to the NCAA.
My son is still listed on the roster and is no longer eligible. Some coaches put very little effort into their web sites.

May not be a rule, just something they do, I always thought it was mandated by the NCAA?

I believe it is a NCAA rule as well. Coaches often do not publicize the date to keep numbers down.

I took a quick look and found several NCAA colleges posting open tryouts.

An example:

By Tyler Koonce, Baseball Contact

CAPE GIRARDEAU, Mo. - Southeast Missouri State baseball head coach Mark Hogan announced that the Redhawks will hold open walk-on tryouts at 3 p.m. on Wednesday, Sept. 3 at Capaha Field.

All interested participants must be enrolled at Southeast with at least 12 credit hours. They also must be registered with the NCAA Clearinghouse along with a physical on file. Players need to arrive at the tryout in baseball attire.

If you have any questions, please contact the Southeast baseball office at (573) 986-6002.

Wait, could this be for gender equality?

I have read and heard some conflicting views on the benefits to a program if they run off a NLI baseball money player at the end of fall ball.

Two questions: One, doesn't the player count on the 35 man roster once he sets foot on campus(hence cannot be replaced for any reason) and Two, can the unused portion of that players baseball money be shifted to another player already on scholarship at that time. If you know for certain I would appreciate the answer.