Change to recruit contact rules

@PABaseball posted:

I actually have a bit of a different take. I don't think early commitments are a huge issue, I think over recruiting is a much much bigger issue. The kids who commit early are typically studs and typically stay studs. Do I think it's foolish to commit as a 14 year old? Yes. Do I think it's a crisis? No.

As of right now there are 274 2026s (9th graders) committed to schools. My guess is that over half of those are not real. Kids just going on their PG accounts and messing around. There is one committed to our program who I can assure you will not be coming here. Look at Vanderbilt's 2026 class. Safe bet says neither kid is actually recruited to go there, especially the 3'2 400lb kid.

If the NCAA wants to fix the biggest issue in recruitment - they would cap the number of players each school could take per year. 12 kids max between the portal, juco, and HS. Can't pull from portal until JC/HS guys have signed their NLIs.

PG is supposed to verfy every name submitted with the coaching staff.

@PitchingFan posted:

I would disagree on the relationship thing.  That is what recruiting is all about.  If you have the relationship it is easier to recruit.  My middle son spends hours cultivating these relationships because when it comes down to it, it makes it harder for them to tell him no.  I have always said recruiting is like dating.  Dating is all about relationships.

Dating is fun the first few years.  Then it turns into something else that might be better, but might not.

Of course coaches should cultivate relationships in junior and senior year of HS.  It doesn't seem necessary younger than that, is all I'm saying.  Leave a bit of honeymoon for when the kids actually get to campus.

To me this was a smart and necessary response to the growing usage of the transfer portal.

This is not the same recruiting world as it was even a few years ago. Why would any college coach who has any pressure to win not look to fill weaknesses with proven college level talent first?

I know there are some programs that have not gone that route yet, but when push comes to shove what coach that is on the hot seat going to turn down a proven 21 year old for the 18 year old that committed when he was 14 if talent level is even close.

I see no downside for the highschool player with the new rules... While there's always a chance of disruption before a player is scheduled to arrive on campus. This at the very least takes away 1-3 years less that a kid has to worry about what is going on at his eventual destination.

If you are an absolute stud when you are 14 and can commit P5, the same schools will be there drooling over you when you are a junior. Only now that player will have a slightly clearer picture of what might possibly be at the school when they get there. And I do mean slightly.

And on the school's side when they commit a 8-9 grader it's pure projection. I think schools will be much happier recruiting something much closer to the final product that will arrive on their campuses. And if that means schools are now going to have to work a little harder to compete for the top talent then that's another win for the recruits.

IMO this is a win / win

As mentioned before, many of these very young committs are the children or grandchildren, of big $ donors or alumni. It's probably the closest they might ever get to a college roster, but some are deserving.

@PABaseball posted:

I actually have a bit of a different take. I don't think early commitments are a huge issue, I think over recruiting is a much much bigger issue. The kids who commit early are typically studs and typically stay studs. Do I think it's foolish to commit as a 14 year old? Yes. Do I think it's a crisis? No.

As of right now there are 274 2026s (9th graders) committed to schools. My guess is that over half of those are not real. Kids just going on their PG accounts and messing around. There is one committed to our program who I can assure you will not be coming here. Look at Vanderbilt's 2026 class. Safe bet says neither kid is actually recruited to go there, especially the 3'2 400lb kid.

If the NCAA wants to fix the biggest issue in recruitment - they would cap the number of players each school could take per year. 12 kids max between the portal, juco, and HS. Can't pull from portal until JC/HS guys have signed their NLIs.

I find your last paragraph interesting.  I'm not sure where I stand on this.  Because I think you should be able to recruit an entire portal class.  I don't think you should be limited to just getting HS kids.  UT women's basketball is interesting and has no high schoolers coming in.  I don't know what that means but it is interesting.  I don't think that will ever happen in baseball but I won't be surprised if it is not close.  I could see a bottom dweller in SEC or ACC loading up with transfer guys without using a lot of HS or juco guys.

Daddyballer

please define the word “proven”. Will the player have the tools, the chemistry to benefit the team. In depth discussion is required.

Bob

@Consultant posted:

Daddyballer

please define the word “proven”. Will the player have the tools, the chemistry to benefit the team. In depth discussion is required.

Bob

For the sake of this specific discussion I would define "proven" as a level of statistical and measurable accomplishment above the highschool / travel ball level.

Of course there will always be intangibles like chemistry , work ethic, and baseball IQ that cannot be objectively measured. But those intangibles are as much a mystery when bringing in a freshman as they are when bringing in a 5th year grad transfer.

If anything, there is more of a track record that can be vetted on the transfer player than the highschool freshman.

I'm sorry if this is dense of me but do you suppose this means a 2025 can't even write an introductory email to a coach with their summer schedule and video links?  Or do you think the ban is just referring to calls to coaches?  And do you think this  eliminates any reason for a 2025 to go to a Showball or Headfirst in the rising junior summer?  thanks for any opinions.

@Dadbelly2023 posted:

I'm sorry if this is dense of me but do you suppose this means a 2025 can't even write an introductory email to a coach with their summer schedule and video links?  Or do you think the ban is just referring to calls to coaches?  And do you think this  eliminates any reason for a 2025 to go to a Showball or Headfirst in the rising junior summer?  thanks for any opinions.

I was thinking the same thing. Can they even submit questionnaires. Would that be considered contact from the player. If so, we will be filling out a lot of questionnaires and sending a lot of emails in the next 6 days. Want to make sure teams that he is interested in and could be a fit have all his summer plan information (for my 2025 son).

@Dadbelly2023 posted:

I'm sorry if this is dense of me but do you suppose this means a 2025 can't even write an introductory email to a coach with their summer schedule and video links?  Or do you think the ban is just referring to calls to coaches?  And do you think this  eliminates any reason for a 2025 to go to a Showball or Headfirst in the rising junior summer?  thanks for any opinions.

The new rule doesn't change email rules for the high school student. They can still send emails to college coaches at any age. SB and HF will be interesting (events prior to 8/1). Remember, this rule change in for D1. No change for D3. I guess the Ivy and Patriot coaches will have to limit their recruiting conversations to rising seniors (again, at events prior to 8/1).

I’m not sure, after talking to several coaches, that anybody has a clue what can be done along those lines. But I will say if it was me I would be making all the phone calls I could make this week and emails I could make that fit within the current rules.     I’m guessing you will still be able to fill out questionnaires and email information, but they will not be able to reply to you in any form or fashion.  
One coach said there has been a request for more detailed explanations from the NCAA involving verbiage   And I’m guessing that means what can I say and not say. Are there any words that cannot be used?  

Ahhh.  I emailed one of the HA showcase camps.  Here's what I got:

Interesting.  Just as a note, I seem to remember that when my son went to Headfirst in 2018 as a rising senior, they had an armband system for different school years.  Coaches were actually only able to talk to some kids (certainly rising seniors, maybe rising juniors?) but not the younger ones, to those they could only say "thanks for your interest, I'm not allowed to talk to you".  At least, that's how I remember it, but maybe others have more recent info.

That is response is completely accurate but in a whole accurate.  Coaches can still communicate as long as you are on their campus.  But they cannot talk about you coming there or anything along those lines, scholarship, offer, or any interest.  So that will make it interesting because he can't say anything along the lines of we would love to have you.  So no D1 coach will go to an outside camp except on their campus unless there is a misunderstanding.  As I said, the coaches are not completely sure what they can do right now other than be real careful starting next Tuesday.

My 2024 son and I were discussing this thread last night.  For context, he committed to a P5 this fall.  On his high school team there is 2025 who's committed to an SEC school.  There is another 25 who's been talking to different P5 schools.

He said that the SEC commit has been told that they will talk to him this summer and they are doing it by the book.  The other 25 is super excited.  He said, "All I have to focus on now is shoving this summer and getting bigger and better.  I don't have to worry about our RC texting me all the time telling me to call schools."

My son then said, "It was super stressful after an outing at Lakepoint to get a text with 6 schools you have to call in the next couple days.  I'd have liked this rule to be in effect."  Then I said, "Dude, you said you after you committed it took all the pressure off you!"  My son is a total later bloomer.

Every athletic program has an NCAA compliance officer who is there to advise coaches on just about anything you can think of.

So I wouldn't worry about coaches not knowing what to do and not do.

Not all of them care about following the rules even if they know them. There are coaches already calling out tampering. It only happens if you get caught….
At the very least, I would expect a lot of the telephone game: coach tells someone not directly associated with the school that they are interested in xyz player, that person tells someone at the travel team who tells the kid.

We were at a tournament in Florida summer before freshman year of college and my son pitched 2 innings with his buddies. He hadn’t told the college coach he was going. He had a text within minutes of coming off the field from the college coach saying that his friend had just sent him video of the innings. I didn’t see any D1 coaches there as it was not a high profile tournament and they weren’t high profile teams. As it is always said, baseball is a small world and my guess is that will be taken advantage of.

@baseballhs posted:

Not all of them care about following the rules even if they know them. There are coaches already calling out tampering. It only happens if you get caught….

Not if there is a penalty if you do!

Historically most of the things that the NCAA imposes have to do with money or control. Almost always blatantly in favor of member schools vs student athletes. IMO there is a big money angle to this new ruling. Effectively they are taking influence and money away from big name “scouting services” like PG, PBR, etc. by rendering their showcases, camps, events, and rankings  less important. And adding importance to on campus camps put on by schools. College coaches won’t go see 15 & 16 year old events in the numbers that they have historically and I imagine players will figure this out and not so many will attend. More money will be spent at NCAA institutions and less will be spent in the private sector. The NCAA can claim “for the greater good” all they want but I don’t buy it. IMO it’s about money.

@PitchingFan posted:

I find your last paragraph interesting.  I'm not sure where I stand on this.  Because I think you should be able to recruit an entire portal class.  I don't think you should be limited to just getting HS kids.  UT women's basketball is interesting and has no high schoolers coming in.  I don't know what that means but it is interesting.  I don't think that will ever happen in baseball but I won't be surprised if it is not close.  I could see a bottom dweller in SEC or ACC loading up with transfer guys without using a lot of HS or juco guys.

I don't have any issues with an entire portal class. Only issue with taking a portal only class is the timeline of it all. NLIs are signed in the fall - how many kids would be in the portal at that point? It's risky to wait until the college season to do the bulk of the recruiting.

That being said there are three kids on our mid major committed to P5s for next year. We have played against two of them. Coaches have their hands tied.

@DaddyBaller posted:

To me this was a smart and necessary response to the growing usage of the transfer portal.

This is not the same recruiting world as it was even a few years ago. Why would any college coach who has any pressure to win not look to fill weaknesses with proven college level talent first?

IMO this is a win / win

This new rule has zero impact on the portal/transfers. Schools will still be pulling from the portal as long as it is an option. Only difference is coaches will no longer have to go to Georgia or FL to watch 8th graders play and PG/PBR are going to lay some people off.

It seems like a rash of high school 2025s and 2026s are suddenly "committed" since this was announced.

@ILoveBaseball04 posted:

It seems like a rash of high school 2025s and 2026s are suddenly "committed" since this was announced.

haste makes waste ...
may the force be with them.

@mjd-dad posted:

haste makes waste ...
may the force be with them.

Oh they will feel the force. Sooner or later.

Lol, so folks were making a big deal about the invite tournaments son's summer travel team was scheduled to go to this summer (5 are out of state and these tournaments are supposed to be one of the draws about being on this particular team).  Does this mean those tournaments are now...much less important?

Honestly, not that concerned for son, as our hope was simply that he'd get on a good team to face good competition to continue to develop and improve.    He did make the team he'd hoped to make, will be playing with other excellent players, and should face excellent competition.

@ILoveBaseball04 posted:

Lol, so folks were making a big deal about the invite tournaments son's summer travel team was scheduled to go to this summer (5 are out of state).  Does this mean those tournaments are now...much less important?

Honestly, not that concerned for son, as our hope was simply that he'd get on a good team to face good competition to continue to develop and improve.    He did make the team he'd hoped to make, will be playing with other excellent players, and should face excellent competition.

Those big invitation tournaments have never been as important as the teams that attend them think (and say) they are. They only benefit about 15% of the players. And that’s under “normal” conditions. With all that has happened in the past 3 years (extra years of eligibility, transfer portal, shrinkage of MLB draft, and changes to recruiting) those big tournaments are even less important now. I think this was mentioned by someone earlier in this thread, and I agree, but look for PG, PBR etc. to let a bunch of people go.

@adbono posted:

Those big invitation tournaments have never been as important as the teams that attend them think (and say) they are. They only benefit about 15% of the players. And that’s under “normal” conditions. With all that has happened in the past 3 years (extra years of eligibility, transfer portal, shrinkage of MLB draft, and changes to recruiting) those big tournaments are even less important now. I think this was mentioned by someone earlier in this thread, and I agree, but look for PG, PBR etc. to let a bunch of people go.

@adbono While I am in 100% agreement with you on the myth of the importance of big time highschool travel for the vast majority of players I don't think it's going anywhere any time soon.

95% of parents have no clue about the college baseball recruiting process. I say that as someone who was one of the clueless until I stumbled upon this site.

The industry has convinced parents that if you are not playing on the best travel team at the biggest tournaments your kid is going to be left behind.

While PG might have to develop some new content since they won't be able to Livestream 9th graders making commitment announcements anymore I don't think this rule will have any impact on their business. People will still do whatever it takes to have their kid named an 11u All American.

@DaddyBaller posted:

@adbono While I am in 100% agreement with you on the myth of the importance of big time highschool travel for the vast majority of players I don't think it's going anywhere any time soon.

95% of parents have no clue about the college baseball recruiting process. I say that as someone who was one of the clueless until I stumbled upon this site.

The industry has convinced parents that if you are not playing on the best travel team at the biggest tournaments your kid is going to be left behind.

While PG might have to develop some new content since they won't be able to Livestream 9th graders making commitment announcements anymore I don't think this rule will have any impact on their business. People will still do whatever it takes to have their kid named an 11u All American.

I would like to not agree with what you said. But I can’t. You are probably right.

@adbono posted:

Those big invitation tournaments have never been as important as the teams that attend them think (and say) they are. They only benefit about 15% of the players. And that’s under “normal” conditions. With all that has happened in the past 3 years (extra years of eligibility, transfer portal, shrinkage of MLB draft, and changes to recruiting) those big tournaments are even less important now. I think this was mentioned by someone earlier in this thread, and I agree, but look for PG, PBR etc. to let a bunch of people go.

I don't know if I agree with this statement completely.   Of course, I am only speaking from a sample size of one, but my 2024 son probably doesn't get the offers he received had he not participated in the PG WWBA Jupiter tournament.   He was able to take his stats, measurables, and video from that outing, communicate it to schools that he was reasonable capable of attending, and ultimately led to offers and a D1 commitment.   I don't believe that would have happened had he not played with his travel team and given the opportunity to participate in those bigger tournaments that you speak of.   

I know that my son has had a great year pitching with his high school team this Spring, and I also know that not a single college scout has attended a single one of his high school games.   I don't know how he would have been given much opportunity by D1 schools had he not had the travel team and the big tournaments to use for his reach out emails.   Maybe it would have been different if he was a 94 mph High School sophomore, but he wasn't, so playing the travel ball/showcase tournaments was his only real option to get noticed in my opinion.   

To the extent it matters, curious about competitive summer high school teams that attend these tournaments, not youth teams.

@ILoveBaseball04 posted:

To the extent it matters, curious about competitive summer high school teams that attend these tournaments, not youth teams.

Need to explain.  Youth which I interpret middle school and under since you clarified versus high school do not rarely attend WWBA in Jupiter.  I don't think coaches will go watch younger players now since they cannot talk to them or recruit them.  I think they will just wait until are more grown and have a clearer picture of what they will be.  I think it will kill some of the bigger youth tournaments even up to age 15.

@PitchingFan posted:

Need to explain.  Youth which I interpret middle school and under since you clarified versus high school do not rarely attend WWBA in Jupiter.  I don't think coaches will go watch younger players now since they cannot talk to them or recruit them.  I think they will just wait until are more grown and have a clearer picture of what they will be.  I think it will kill some of the bigger youth tournaments even up to age 15.

Ah, that makes sense.  Yes, I would also see youth at 8th grade and under (14U and under), but I can see that it could impact 15U, as well.  The tournaments that have been hyped by son's travel organization are 15U invites, with some PBR/PG in there.

@PitchingFan posted:

Need to explain.  Youth which I interpret middle school and under since you clarified versus high school do not rarely attend WWBA in Jupiter.  I don't think coaches will go watch younger players now since they cannot talk to them or recruit them.  I think they will just wait until are more grown and have a clearer picture of what they will be.  I think it will kill some of the bigger youth tournaments even up to age 15.

I agree with this as it’s essentially what I said. Although this may be worded a little better.

We just committed a couple of 2027s before the deadline.  8th graders.
We had a top 20 recruiting class coming in last year and 6/14 are still around.  Insanity.

@baseballhs posted:

We just committed a couple of 2027s before the deadline.  8th graders.
We had a top 20 recruiting class coming in last year and 6/14 are still around.  Insanity.

I would bet that those two 8th graders are a donor's/alumni's son or grandson.

Nope. Top ranked 14 year olds…

@baseballhs posted:

We just committed a couple of 2027s before the deadline.  8th graders.
We had a top 20 recruiting class coming in last year and 6/14 are still around.  Insanity.

Just to be clear, when you state that "we had a top 20 recruiting class coming in last year and 6/14 are still around."  I assume that to mean that your program enrolled 14 freshman or transfers, and after 1 semester only 6 of the 14 are still included in the roster.   Am I correct in that assumption?   If so, that is a staggering amount of defections.  I have recently reached the conclusion that a D1 scholarship offer is nothing more than an invited opportunity to try out for a D1 baseball program and nothing more.

@Ster posted:

Just to be clear, when you state that "we had a top 20 recruiting class coming in last year and 6/14 are still around."  I assume that to mean that your program enrolled 14 freshman or transfers, and after 1 semester only 6 of the 14 are still included in the roster.   Am I correct in that assumption?   If so, that is a staggering amount of defections.  I have recently reached the conclusion that a D1 scholarship offer is nothing more than an invited opportunity to try out for a D1 baseball program and nothing more.

That is only freshman. Not including transfers and this was freshman entering in 2021. 6 are still here for 22-23, 5 on the roster.

@Ster posted:

If so, that is a staggering amount of defections.

Defections?  I assumed it was cuts.

Also, no way to know, I assume, how early all of those 14 committed?  And whether the 6 survivors were early or late commits?  Walk-ons vs scholarship players?  That's the part that is relevant to the NCAAs changes - are they going to improve things?

@Ster posted:

I have recently reached the conclusion that a D1 scholarship offer is nothing more than an invited opportunity to try out for a D1 baseball program and nothing more.

I don't think that's a fair conclusion, but others might agree with you.

Keep in mind that there are differences between D1 programs and the conferences that they are in. That will sometimes determine who plays, who stays and who moves on. I think too many recruits and their families get so excited about an offer from one of the top programs in the country they don't ask enough questions. Maybe that is why the NCAA revisited not having players committ 5 years before they graduate, although I stand by my assumption that there is a family/business connection between the school and recruit.