Big 10 recruiting rules?

Interesting.  Google "oversign":

https://forum.huskermax.com/th...ng-explained.110690/

They definitely do have more than 35 players in the fall at most Big 10 schools, though.

No such thing for any conference. Could never happen with the way draft and eligibility are structured anyway

anotherparent posted:

Interesting.  Google "oversign":

https://forum.huskermax.com/th...ng-explained.110690/

They definitely do have more than 35 players in the fall at most Big 10 schools, though.

I just found that too, interesting.

according to the link provided, they cannot oversign. If a player is drafted, they have to wait till he is signed before they replace him, which leaves them WAY late to the recruiting party when it comes to getting a replacement.

   The link bemoaned the competitive disadvantage it gives BiG teams, but I like that they are not allowed to oversign like at some of the other schools. I have known some talented kids who were lured to some big name baseball schools, only to rot on the bench, or not play at all due to oversigning- something the RC's neglect to mention when they are attracting the kids to the school.

Ohio has 38 on roster.

Huh? That article makes no sense at all.

First of all, to answer the OP, there are NO rules for verbal commitments because they are just that: verbal offers. Therefore there are no NCAA rules to regulate them. Secondly, many kids verbally commit but that doesn't mean they have promises from the coach/school for any sort of athletic scholarship. Many times it's just a verbal promise for academic money. That's why coaches like good students; they feel they have money to "offer" them due to academic aid promises.

And lastly, there is a hard D1 NCAA rule that limits the athletic scholarships (27) and money percentages (11.7%). So if a kid signs for 50% at the early signing period you can bet that % is accounted for amongst the other early signers and existing rostered players who are expected to be present the following fall when the early signer shows up on campus. It's the only reasonable path if the school wants to steer clear of NCAA violations. If a B10 school is honoring their scholarships for 4 years then I can see some limitations--the school does not want to sign another kid because they still have to account for their expected upperclassmen. So if an early signer tells the coach he may sign a professional contract, his NLI is STILL binding for the school until he signs and therefore the school cannot be 100% sure whether the player will actually show up on campus. If he does then the school will be in violation if they signed (LOI) some other kid during the period leading up to the draft.

But of course they can make verbal offers to as many kids as they want and certainly many kids will show up in the fall who have 0% athletic scholarship.

I think the implication is that they cannot give NLIs for scholarships over the limit (as SEC and ACC schools do?), and therefore they have to recruit players who will have plenty of academic or need-based financial aid, i.e. "walk-ons".  Presumably that puts them at a disadvantage in recruiting - less likely to recruit high-school players who might be drafted?  

Apparently it applies to football also, there was a lot of discussion about it in 2011.

anotherparent posted:

I think the implication is that they cannot give NLIs for scholarships over the limit (as SEC and ACC schools do?), and therefore they have to recruit players who will have plenty of academic or need-based financial aid, i.e. "walk-ons".  Presumably that puts them at a disadvantage in recruiting - less likely to recruit high-school players who might be drafted?  

Apparently it applies to football also, there was a lot of discussion about it in 2011.

Exactly my point. B10 is no different than SEC or ACC or any other D1 conference. They are ALL limited by the 11.7 amongst 27. They cannot "oversign" because a NLI is a binding agreement and if a signee shows up on campus (and they didn't expect him) that extra NLI would put them in violation the rule.

ABSORBER,

That makes sense as to why they may have to wait until after a drafted player signs, so they can have their money, but doesn't stop them from as many walk one as they want.

I have a hard time believing a P5 conference looking to climb the ranks and move towards an SEC/ACC level would put sanctions on the schools in their conference so that they could only sign players in July after their senior year of high school. One month before school starts kids already have housing deposits down, tuition paid for, and more often than not are already enrolled in classes. Kids committing to Big 10 programs have options, waiting until July to see money that might never come does not sound like a good option, especially when there are other strong programs recruiting you. 

A kid from our summer team was committed to a Big 10 program, but was drafted and signed out of high school. I ran into the coach at a fall tournament and asked what he thought. He said that they weren't happy and thought he had a chance to start in the IF as a freshman, but were somewhat relived because he was on a 60% scholarship and with the draft not going the way they thought it would they would be able to bring their juniors back for their senior year and not have to cut as many freshmen. 

So if there is a rule, it is not enforced or followed by anybody. I also read the post from that forum, it's just one guy on sharing information. I can't find anything else online that backs it up from after 2011. Chris Tracy hasn't been the IU coach for 6 years now, scholarships were not guaranteed for 4 years at the time either so likely old information.  

TPM posted:

ABSORBER,

That makes sense as to why they may have to wait until after a drafted player signs, so they can have their money, but doesn't stop them from as many walk one as they want.

Also my point above. And most "walk-ons" are non-scholarship (athletic) players who. verbally committed to the school. This is exactly my point to the OP who asked about verbal commitments.

PABaseball posted:

I have a hard time believing a P5 conference looking to climb the ranks and move towards an SEC/ACC level would put sanctions on the schools in their conference so that they could only sign players in July after their senior year of high school. One month before school starts kids already have housing deposits down, tuition paid for, and more often than not are already enrolled in classes. Kids committing to Big 10 programs have options, waiting until July to see money that might never come does not sound like a good option, especially when there are other strong programs recruiting you. 

A kid from our summer team was committed to a Big 10 program, but was drafted and signed out of high school. I ran into the coach at a fall tournament and asked what he thought. He said that they weren't happy and thought he had a chance to start in the IF as a freshman, but were somewhat relived because he was on a 60% scholarship and with the draft not going the way they thought it would they would be able to bring their juniors back for their senior year and not have to cut as many freshmen. 

So if there is a rule, it is not enforced or followed by anybody. I also read the post from that forum, it's just one guy on sharing information. I can't find anything else online that backs it up from after 2011. Chris Tracy hasn't been the IU coach for 6 years now, scholarships were not guaranteed for 4 years at the time either so likely old information.  

Again, we can't confuse "commitment" with NLI. Many P5 commitments do not sign NLI's. This is not obvious to the casual observer. Clearly schools bringing in 20-22 players (freshman and transfers) are not offering athletic scholarships to all of them--they have freshman (who are on campus), sophomores, and juniors who all are on athletic scholarship already. Of course any NLI signed in November won't be an issue for another year and a few months. Lots of things change during that time.

So again, I believe the only "policies" are NCAA D1 Baseball regulations and the only "sanctioning" entity is the NCAA.

My son walked on at Iowa his first year, did not sign an NLI. We had a verbal commitment from coach as to what would happen with money in subsequent years and that has been adhered to. That doesn't seem consistent with what the article says. And I think freshman year they started the fall practices with maybe 45 on the roster?

How many high draft-pick high-school players were committed to B1G schools, I wonder?  How many in-state draftable players commit to B1G schools?  There are certainly drafted players in B1G states who were committed to non-B1G schools.

If those big state schools can attract local players with financial need scholarships (i.e. as walk-ons) then I would guess that's what they're doing.  But, it's a disadvantage not to be able to pile up top talent, if that's what is going on.

Thanks all. I understand that the NLI is the ultimate binding agreement (been through this with my 2020) and that it doesn't technically affect verbal offers, but if a conference does have different signing rules I'm sure if affects the overall recruiting process for the schools which is why I was asking.

ABSORBER posted:

PABaseball posted:

I have a hard time believing a P5 conference looking to climb the ranks and move towards an SEC/ACC level would put sanctions on the schools in their conference so that they could only sign players in July after their senior year of high school. One month before school starts kids already have housing deposits down, tuition paid for, and more often than not are already enrolled in classes. Kids committing to Big 10 programs have options, waiting until July to see money that might never come does not sound like a good option, especially when there are other strong programs recruiting you. 

A kid from our summer team was committed to a Big 10 program, but was drafted and signed out of high school. I ran into the coach at a fall tournament and asked what he thought. He said that they weren't happy and thought he had a chance to start in the IF as a freshman, but were somewhat relived because he was on a 60% scholarship and with the draft not going the way they thought it would they would be able to bring their juniors back for their senior year and not have to cut as many freshmen. 

So if there is a rule, it is not enforced or followed by anybody. I also read the post from that forum, it's just one guy on sharing information. I can't find anything else online that backs it up from after 2011. Chris Tracy hasn't been the IU coach for 6 years now, scholarships were not guaranteed for 4 years at the time either so likely old information.  

Again, we can't confuse "commitment" with NLI. Many P5 commitments do not sign NLI's. This is not obvious to the casual observer. Clearly schools bringing in 20-22 players (freshman and transfers) are not offering athletic scholarships to all of them--they have freshman (who are on campus), sophomores, and juniors who all are on athletic scholarship already. Of course any NLI signed in November won't be an issue for another year and a few months. Lots of things change during that time.

So again, I believe the only "policies" are NCAA D1 Baseball regulations and the only "sanctioning" entity is the NCAA.

I would not say many hold off on signing the NLI. In baseball the NLI is a good thing, it means your money will be there. With such limited scholarships and the abundance of talent readily available to replace them, kids are signing their NLI when they get it. Regardless, bills start coming in from the bursar office in May, families are not going to be holding out until mid July to sign an NLI. Of all the Big 10 guys I know every single one of them signed in Nov. I can't imagine a school like IU (10 drafted in 2019) has all their incoming freshmen waiting until July to sign. All these schools also announce their signing class in Nov during the early signing period, if it is a rule it appears to be a non enforced rule. 

PABaseball posted:

ABSORBER posted:

PABaseball posted:

I have a hard time believing a P5 conference looking to climb the ranks and move towards an SEC/ACC level would put sanctions on the schools in their conference so that they could only sign players in July after their senior year of high school. One month before school starts kids already have housing deposits down, tuition paid for, and more often than not are already enrolled in classes. Kids committing to Big 10 programs have options, waiting until July to see money that might never come does not sound like a good option, especially when there are other strong programs recruiting you. 

A kid from our summer team was committed to a Big 10 program, but was drafted and signed out of high school. I ran into the coach at a fall tournament and asked what he thought. He said that they weren't happy and thought he had a chance to start in the IF as a freshman, but were somewhat relived because he was on a 60% scholarship and with the draft not going the way they thought it would they would be able to bring their juniors back for their senior year and not have to cut as many freshmen. 

So if there is a rule, it is not enforced or followed by anybody. I also read the post from that forum, it's just one guy on sharing information. I can't find anything else online that backs it up from after 2011. Chris Tracy hasn't been the IU coach for 6 years now, scholarships were not guaranteed for 4 years at the time either so likely old information.  

Again, we can't confuse "commitment" with NLI. Many P5 commitments do not sign NLI's. This is not obvious to the casual observer. Clearly schools bringing in 20-22 players (freshman and transfers) are not offering athletic scholarships to all of them--they have freshman (who are on campus), sophomores, and juniors who all are on athletic scholarship already. Of course any NLI signed in November won't be an issue for another year and a few months. Lots of things change during that time.

So again, I believe the only "policies" are NCAA D1 Baseball regulations and the only "sanctioning" entity is the NCAA.

I would not say many hold off on signing the NLI. In baseball the NLI is a good thing, it means your money will be there. With such limited scholarships and the abundance of talent readily available to replace them, kids are signing their NLI when they get it. Regardless, bills start coming in from the bursar office in May, families are not going to be holding out until mid July to sign an NLI. Of all the Big 10 guys I know every single one of them signed in Nov. I can't imagine a school like IU (10 drafted in 2019) has all their incoming freshmen waiting until July to sign. All these schools also announce their signing class in Nov during the early signing period, if it is a rule it appears to be a non enforced rule. 

Sorry if I was unclear. I wasn't saying any player delays signing. I would think they could lose that scholarship if they waited. Coaches want to know as early as possible the player plans on attending. When I said "do not sign NLI's" I meant they don't sign because there is no NLI to sign; they are NOT receiving a scholarship. They either receive no money or are receiving academic or need-based financial aid. So out of 22 or so newcomers, perhaps 15-18 may be true freshman (non-transfers), and out of that number perhaps 8-10 are receiving any athletic money. The point is many verbally committed players do not receive athletic dollars and therefore don't affect the 27 and 11.7%.

anotherparent posted:

I think the implication is that they cannot give NLIs for scholarships over the limit (as SEC and ACC schools do?), and therefore they have to recruit players who will have plenty of academic or need-based financial aid, i.e. "walk-ons".  Presumably that puts them at a disadvantage in recruiting - less likely to recruit high-school players who might be drafted?  

Apparently it applies to football also, there was a lot of discussion about it in 2011.

Agree. This doesn't specifically say NLI, but that's how I read it.

https://iuhoosiers.com/documen...andbook.pdf?id=27323

I heard from an RC who verified that they cannot give out NLIs over the limit and are consistently being reviewed for compliance.

However, along comes a HC from Michigan who went to Omaha, who figured out a way to make it work, obviously!