Commiting Early

A couple of years ago there was a kid (can't remember his name) from the Tampa area who verballed to Florida after his freshman year. He was all-county (or whatever they are there) and both parents attended Florida. I believe his dad was a Florida athlete in another sport.

quote:

I have read about the arguments against signing early

i may be wrong,but i'm pretty sure you can't sign until your sr year. so it's only a verbal thing, non binding.

i don't think it's good for either you or the school. lots can happen in those 2 or 3 yrs.

I think some kids say "yes" because it takes the guess-work out of the process--they have a place to go and a path mapped out. It's also a status symbol, a sort of affirmation that they are an elite player with enough going on to attract a school very early in their HS career. (Bragging rights.) And maybe the school is their dream school, or seems like the right way to go in order to move on in the process toward a pro career. Maybe the recruiting coaches are very persuasive, offer enough money, or coax the young man with promises of lots of freshman playing time... who can say what the reasons are for each kid.

On the negative: you might limit the possibilities with other schools that could be a better fit (academic, social, athletic) down the road. Most fresh and soph boys I know haven't a clue yet about what they want in a college experience beyond the baseball. This begins to crystalize in Jr & Sr year, but only if the parents get them out and looking at lots of campuses. This is REALLY important, because a baseball career can end in a single game with an injury and then you're suddenly a student without athletics as part of the school mix. What if baseball doesn't work out like you thought? You need an education, too. And you need an athletic program that will allow you to get the education you want, with baseball or without it.

Another negative: what if another school would have offered you more money, or plays the type of ball that's a better match for your athletic abilities? Who can say how a player will develop and strengthen as a fresh or soph? How miserable to be on a team that does not value speed if that's one of your strengths... Once the school has your commitment so early on, do they have to negotiate with you as rigorously as a guy that has not committed yet? They are free to continue looking around and you are not. Kinda one sided.

I sort of like to think of the process as a marathon, not a sprint.

The player that I think RJM is talking about played on 2B's summer team. He verballed the summer after his freshman year, right after he got back from playing on the 16U USA Baseball national team. Simply amazing defensive SS. He throws 90 across the IF effortlessly. Humble, hard working young man. He's my second favorite middle infielder.

Jake Tillotson

I've never actually talked with him or his folks about how the early verbal worked out for them, but they are a pretty close-knit family and my guess is that they're happy he's staying close to home, and it's worked out just fine.

quote:

Originally posted by 20dad:

quote:

I have read about the arguments against signing early

i may be wrong,but i'm pretty sure you can't sign until your sr year. so it's only a verbal thing, non binding.

i don't think it's good for either you or the school. lots can happen in those 2 or 3 yrs.

I meant verbal. Anyway thanks for the responses so far. I do think it's crazy that kids verbal so early for many of the reasons stated. I was just wondering what made kids "say yes" at such an early age. I assume they would be getting some pretty nice offers financially.

In FL, at least right now, good grades will get you reduced or no tuition, so a 33% scholarship offer would go toward room and board, and an in-state player could go to college nearly free. A pretty sweet deal.

Waiting for Lane Kiffin to come along and offer your kid in 7th grade is waiting too long! I think we should start selling "futures" for our kids while still in the womb.

OK, seriously...I think freshman/sophomore commitments should be rare->non-existent...if for no other reason than you still don't know the maturity level of your kid and what type of school they can really handle. Personally, I never looked at a college choice as a means to further a possible(?) pro career. We just looked for the best college based on that old word "fit" (different for each kid)...baseball player or not.

But I am not walking in everyone else's shoes...so I will just say that I hope for the best for everyone's decisions.

A kid on my son's team was offered during the state playoffs his freshman year (he started on varsity as an 8th grader). He committed during the summer. For them it was a state supported school so he could get lottery scholarship $, the offer was very generous, given the recruiting tendencies of other schools they did not anticipate getting a better offer, so the kid went ahead and committed. Time will tell whether it was a good call or not.

My son went to a baseball camp when he was an 8th grader and he did really well. The recruiting coach and the catching coach came up to us after the event and said they saw enough to ask if my son would like to verbally commit to their D1 college. My husband and I just kind of humbly laughed and thought he was joking,brushed over the question and thanked them for everything.We had never been aware of the fact kids are actually committing that early.
Come to find out,they still ask a mutual coach how my son is doing.I wonder now what would have happened if we said yes?

warningtrack,

IMHO - this is not a good idea. Your limiting options and choices at a time, when you need options and choices. I fail to see the upside for almost any player or parent. Yes there is a huge ego stroke here, but I think most people can see through that. You haven't bettered your position (nothing binding), you've taken your son off the "market", and motivation won't be what it used to be.

Life is about options and choices. When a school offers a 9th or 10th grader, the parents have to make the decision....there is little involvement from the young man. When a school offers an 11th or 12th grader there is much more involvment from the young man (he is more mature, understands the implications of HIS choice, has done due diligence in researching school and baseball program). This recruiting process has matured my son a lot, and I'll bet most college players and parents feel the same way. My son knows how to set goals, handle himself in front of adults, and communicate with coaches. This experience has been a tremendous life lesson in selling himself. He has earned his choices and options

There are always exceptions, but those are going to be a very, very, very small group of student athletes. Their reasons will vary.

fenwaysouth

quote:

Originally posted by fenwaysouth:
warningtrack,

IMHO - this is not a good idea. Your limiting options and choices at a time, when you need options and choices. I fail to see the upside for almost any player or parent. Yes there is a huge ego stroke here, but I think most people can see through that. You haven't bettered your position (nothing binding), you've taken your son off the "market", and motivation won't be what it used to be.

Life is about options and choices. When a school offers a 9th or 10th grader, the parents have to make the decision....there is little involvement from the young man. When a school offers an 11th or 12th grader there is much more involvment from the young man (he is more mature, understands the implications of HIS choice, has done due diligence in researching school and baseball program). This recruiting process has matured my son a lot, and I'll bet most college players and parents feel the same way. My son knows how to set goals, handle himself in front of adults, and communicate with coaches. This experience has been a tremendous life lesson in selling himself. He has earned his choices and options

There are always exceptions, but those are going to be a very, very, very small group of student athletes. Their reasons will vary.

fenwaysouth

Very well said. I agree and thus why I asked what are some of the reasons these kids say yes so early. Are they getting more money to commit early?

warningtrack.....The only reasons I can come up with are:

1) Multi generation "legacy" with stud athlete
2) Brother/sister of stud athlete goes there
3) Son or daughter of administration/coach
4) Financial hardship - but even this is reaching as there is no committment from the institution until later in process. I'll assume 100% athletic scholarship for stud athlete would have to be verbally committed.
5) There is building with your family name on campus

Can you come up with any others? I'm looking from the outside in on this one.

fenwaysouth

quote:

A kid on my son's team was offered during the state playoffs his freshman year (he started on varsity as an 8th grader). He committed during the summer. For them it was a state supported school so he could get lottery scholarship $, the offer was very generous, given the recruiting tendencies of other schools they did not anticipate getting a better offer, so the kid went ahead and committed. Time will tell whether it was a good call or not.

Lefty's Dad,

This sounds like it might have been done illegally, but there's probably more to the story.

Whether people like it or not, early commitments are becoming more and more popular every year, especially at the highest level of college baseball.

Is the amount of the offer discussed and agreed upon for these early verbals?

It all becomes moot if the coaching staff changes in the next three years and/or the kid changes his mind---at the early stage like this the committment is basically coming from the player not the school

TR,
The commitment is coming from the school. One of the coaches using this process is on the West Coast and he started it to build UC Irvine and continues it.
George Horton did it at Oregon. I think it is being done to an extent at OSU and is now being done by the new staff at Washington.
Others are doing it.
The schools are offering these kids a scholarship and that is what is driving the early commitments.
While there may be a few exceptions, the player is only committing when an offer has been communicated.

quote:

Whether people like it or not, early commitments are becoming more and more popular every year, especially at the highest level of college baseball.

PG, would you care to express your thoughts on whether you feel the early commitments are good for 1.) the player, 2.) the school, and 3.) college baseball in light of the new rules on scholarships/roster limits, grades and APR progress, especially in light of the numbers that are leaving schools after one year?

quote:

Originally posted by warningtrack:
This has been discussed before at length. But if you had the opportunity to commit early to a big time school would you do it? What would be the factors that would make you say yes? When I say early I mean during your freshman or sophomore year. The process these days is really excellerated for some. If those opportunities exist how do you handle them?

I have read about the arguments against signing early, I tend to agree with those. However I am curious as to the other side where kids do verbal early. What makes you say YES so early in the process!

WT,

Given how you framed the situation (verbal commit FR or SO year of HS) I would strongly advise my son NOT to do it. Here's my thinking:

Does a 14-16 year old understand the myriad of things that need to be considered when making a college choice (academic requirements, major offerings, academic respect for the Uni./major program, tenure/commitment of the coach, quality of coaching at his position, fit to campus culture, etc.)?

Keeping his word. He's given his word to a coach and the university 3-5 years before he ever gets there. Is he going to be willing to keep his word in spite of all the other offers he will likely receive, and potentially all the changes that might occur at the Uni. and with the baseball program? Most guys this age can't even commit to the same girlfriend for more than a couple of weeks!

Does the kid understand that this is "nothing more" than a verbal commitment on the part of the coach/Uni. too, and the harsh reality is that they might not honor it, or even tell him they're not honoring it until it's too late?

I guess the factors that would make me advise him to do it would be if I felt in my heart he grasped all those factors above - that would be a very rare HS FR or SO.

If the opportunity existed, I would advise my son to explain all these uncertainties to the offering coach, thank him for his consideration, and politely decline at this time. If son was truly interested in the college program, I'd advise him to ask the coach if he could continue to contact the coach with his stats and updates throughout HS.

My opinion is that these early commitments fall into a few catagories. One, a decision of pride & prestige. Two, an uninformed decision; thinking this "guarantees" them a scholarship. Three, a financial decision; there's no other way the kid's going to be able to go to college so the family is "grasping at straws" and hoping the Uni. will live up to their verbal commitment.

WAG!

quote:

PG, would you care to express your thoughts on whether you feel the early commitments are good for 1.) the player, 2.) the school, and 3.) college baseball in light of the new rules on scholarships/roster limits, grades and APR progress, especially in light of the numbers that are leaving schools after one year?

infielddad,

Not that my opinion carries any weight and will change things, but….

1 – The player – I actually see this as a disadvantage. If the player is good enough as a freshman or soph., he should be good enough as a junior or senior. If he’s not good enough as a senior, things could backfire for the player. The player has the most to lose, but it seems to be working out for most players. The player can always decommit, but could have lost some great opportunities along the way.

2 – The School - I see it as somewhat of a necessity if the school wants to compete for the best players in the country in the future, because many of their competitors will be getting the top players to commit early. If a college recruiter, I would be very involved in finding the top underclassmen, getting them on campus, and trying to get a verbal commitment.

It is somewhat of an unfair advantage to the big schools with the largest recruiting budgets. They are able to cover things more completely regarding underclassmen. Also, the most talented young kids are not as likely to commit early to So & So U. as they would if it were Miami, Arizona State, LSU, Florida, Texas, or other top program.

The school always has the hammer when it comes to recruiting. They might honor the scholarship, but if they think they’ve made a mistake, they will make it clear to the recruit that he will not fit in (they no longer want you). Now if you are the recruit, what would you do? Start at a program that doesn’t want you? Most start looking elsewhere and the college recruits a different player.

Advantage between Player and School – Definitely… School!

3 – College Baseball – We can only follow whatever system they use.

Note: While we carry no weight, I do think we are most responsible for much of the early committing that takes place these days. Colleges can basically follow the lists of top underclassmen or attend top underclass events. These players become prime candidates to attend the college’s camps where most all of the early committing happens. Never before have the top underclassmen been so identifiable. We actually saw this coming several years ago and it isn’t likely to stop unless the NCAA decides to do something about it. I don’t think they will!

PG,
Thank you!
One additional aspect to this is the dichotomy even within a conference, based on academic and admission requirements and considerations.
ASU can use this process. Stanford cannot.
Fullerton can use this process. A school like UC Davis really cannot.
In the SEC, I wonder if Vanderbilt can do early offers/comitments?
I guess the more selective admissions schools could use it but the player has to know admissions can play a major role in that process.
I agree with you that the NCAA may need to/should look at this, and likely will not.

My son played with a player who verballed early to a top D1 school after his freshman year. This player has since graduated and opted to go the pro route. His younger brother, now a senior in hs, just finished all his official visits while the older brother watched and listened to all the great stories.

The older player now tells my son that it would be best to wait and enjoy the whole recruiting process, something he never got to do. I don't think he regrets it but I think offers good advice from someone who has been there.

Two things I see in the early committing process

01--players at that age do not truly know what they want

02-- the parents are blinded by the offer and think it is super--something to tell the neighbors but they , in my mind have not thought it out in detail

This thread has listed some of disadvantages of early verbals. Here's some reasons why players do commit early. My knowledge about this relates to players who are now juniors (2011). Many good players have been offered excellent scholarships with most of the activity beginning in August and continuing throughout the fall. Most of those offers have a limited duration, because the schools plan on getting commmitments early. If the offered player doesn't accept fairly quickly, the school moves on.

• Players should go where they are wanted, and an early offer certainly says "we like you."
  
• For the schools which are offering early, the available money will be mostly committed by winter. If the offering school is already on a player's short list, declining the offer means effectively abandoning the possibility at that school.
  
• There is a rhythm to recruiting, and whether we like it or not, much of the major D1 recruiting and commitments are finished early in the junior year. That's the situation as it exists this year. For example, CSU Fullerton was mentioned earlier in this thread. They have written recently that they already have 7 commitments from 2011 players.
  A player who bucks this trend should have genuine concern about finding a good fit. Waiting until most of the spots are already taken could mean that the player will end up choosing a school for baseball reasons.
• It appears to me that some of the schools which are offering early are using it as a strategy to overcome a recruiting disadvantage, e.g. poor facilities or a losing tradition. They offer a scholarship which is somewhat "over market". The offer may indeed be the best that the player will receive, both financially and as an opportunity to immediately contribute.
  
• Some players with poor freshman/sophomore GPAs have committed to schools that are a stretch for admission. It gives them a tangible and desirable "carrot" to succeed at their studies, with typically a defined target GPA.

I still am not into very early commitments (fresh and sophmores in HS), but think it pretty much is common these days for prospects to commit early by junior year. Those I know who have committed early do so not for the coaching staff but more for the program and the school, whether because their parents were alumni or geography makes it convenient and affordable. We all know coaches may not be there when you come in two, three years so the recruit should be aware that these things change.

Here in FL, because of Bright Futures, commitments are made with the understanding that the player will hopefully qualify for state tuition, which makes it more affordable for coaches budget.

Also there is a strong correlation between early commitments (those are the top players in each class) and success in all sports, according to a interview I heard with an individual who ranks football players within scout.com.

PG is correct, the coach controls the recruiting and it doesn't always mean that he is going to offer early every player that may be a top pick for their draft class, he has to assure himself some of his commits will show up, if not he has a lot of last minute recruiting to do. These guys know what they are doing.

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:
I still am not into very early commitments (fresh and sophmores in HS), but think it pretty much is common these days for prospects to commit early by junior year. Those I know who have committed early do so not for the coaching staff but more for the program and the school, whether because their parents were alumni or geography makes it convenient and affordable. We all know coaches may not be there when you come in two, three years so the recruit should be aware that these things change.

Here in FL, because of Bright Futures, commitments are made with the understanding that the player will hopefully qualify for state tuition, which makes it more affordable for coaches budget.

Also there is a strong correlation between early commitments (those are the top players in each class) and success in all sports, according to a interview I heard with an individual who ranks football players within scout.com.

PG is correct, the coach controls the recruiting and it doesn't always mean that he is going to offer early every player that may be a top pick for their draft class, he has to assure himself some of his commits will show up, if not he has a lot of last minute recruiting to do. These guys know what they are doing.

The part above "These guys know what they are doing" is interesting. How good are these guys? What makes them good at recruiting? How much time do they spend at it? What separates the great recruiters form the average recruiters? This might be a good topic.

When coaches/schools are not permitted to talk about recruits until the NLI is official how can a school write about 2011 committs at this stage of the game--that is a violation

Can you cite the rule that prohibits college coaches talking about commited players?

"Verbal commitments are non-binding. NCAA rules prohibit college coaches from talking to the media about recruits until they have signed their national letters of intent."

quote:

Originally posted by Vicarious Dad:
"Verbal commitments are non-binding. NCAA rules prohibit college coaches from talking to the media about recruits until they have signed their national letters of intent."

Vicarious Dad that is a quote not a rule.
I was wondering because 3FG (who knows the rules) stated that CF Fullerton, wrote recently there are 7 recruits from 2011. If this is against NCAA rules, who is THEY and if there is a rule, can you give it?

http://www.fullertontitans.com...c-rel/112009aaa.html

I saw what he wrote. Maybe, he knows the players. Or maybe he knows the coaches at CSF. I don't see any mention of verbal commitments on the team's website; only those who signed Nov 15. Let's ask 3fingeredglove the question:

"Can college coaches talk to the media about verbally-committed recruits?"

TPM

It is a fact that they cannot speak about any recruit before the NLI is done--call Sully and he will tell you

Vicarious Dad's quote is correct, but be careful to not read more into than it says. Here's an actual rule:

13.10.2 Comments Before Signing. Before the signing of a prospective student-athlete to a National Letter of Intent or an institution’s written offer of admission and/or financial aid, a member institution may comment publicly only to the extent of confirming its recruitment of the prospective student-athlete. The institution may not comment generally about the prospective student-athlete’s ability or the contribution that the prospective student-athlete might make to the institution’s team; further, the institution is precluded from commenting in any manner as to the likelihood of the prospective student-athlete’s signing with that institution.

So a college can't comment publicly about "the student-athlete", which means a specific recruited player, other than to say that he is being recruited. There is nothing in this rule to prohibit a school from making public statements about its recruiting progress in general.

The CSF statement was written in a letter sent to some 2011 players. I wouldn't have written about it it if I thought that it broke any rule. Mentioning 7 committments is OK; providing a list of the players' names wouldn't be.

I didn't see anything wrong with your statement. We (TPM and I) went to you for a ruling.

quote:

Originally posted by 3FingeredGlove:
Vicarious Dad's quote is correct, but be careful to not read more into than it says. Here's an actual rule:

13.10.2 Comments Before Signing. Before the signing of a prospective student-athlete to a National Letter of Intent or an institution’s written offer of admission and/or financial aid, a member institution may comment publicly only to the extent of confirming its recruitment of the prospective student-athlete. The institution may not comment generally about the prospective student-athlete’s ability or the contribution that the prospective student-athlete might make to the institution’s team; further, the institution is precluded from commenting in any manner as to the likelihood of the prospective student-athlete’s signing with that institution.

So a college can't comment publicly about "the student-athlete", which means a specific recruited player, other than to say that he is being recruited. There is nothing in this rule to prohibit a school from making public statements about its recruiting progress in general.

The CSF statement was written in a letter sent to some 2011 players. I wouldn't have written about it it if I thought that it broke any rule. Mentioning 7 committments is OK; providing a list of the players' names wouldn't be.

I was confused a bit as TR questioned what you had said, "coaches/schools are not permitted to talk about recruits until the NLI is official how can a school write about 2011 commits at this stage of the game--that is a violation."

That's why I was asking about the exact rule, I knew that they are permitted to speak about recruits in general (no I didn't have to call Sully, bad comment there), and commits, as long as they are not mentioned by name.

Thanks 3FG, it wasn't you I was questioning.

TPM


Not a bad comment at all--I thought he was your s confidant and info source

And you can question me anytime because as you say so proudly "I am never wrong"--at least in your mind

quote:

Originally posted by TRhit:

And you can question me anytime because as you say so proudly "I am never wrong"--at least in your mind

Show me where I said that. Go ahead, show me.

So a coach CAN TALK about their recruits as long as they are not mentioned by name, you didn't state that, so I got up your shorts because your statement was not CLEAR, just as you would get up mine and others, got that?

TPM

Lets get one thing straight here---You would never be allowed to get up my shorts nor would I want to get up yours--I do have some taste and pride

You made the statement the other day in an ambiguous form--Give it up Lady--


And if he is not mentioning the names he is not talking about them--that is what I said--saying they have 7 recruits does not speak about them specifically and by name

quote:

Originally posted by fenwaysouth:
warningtrack,

IMHO - this is not a good idea. Your limiting options and choices at a time, when you need options and choices. I fail to see the upside for almost any player or parent. Yes there is a huge ego stroke here, but I think most people can see through that. You haven't bettered your position (nothing binding), you've taken your son off the "market", and motivation won't be what it used to be.

Life is about options and choices. When a school offers a 9th or 10th grader, the parents have to make the decision....there is little involvement from the young man. When a school offers an 11th or 12th grader there is much more involvment from the young man (he is more mature, understands the implications of HIS choice, has done due diligence in researching school and baseball program). This recruiting process has matured my son a lot, and I'll bet most college players and parents feel the same way. My son knows how to set goals, handle himself in front of adults, and communicate with coaches. This experience has been a tremendous life lesson in selling himself. He has earned his choices and options

There are always exceptions, but those are going to be a very, very, very small group of student athletes. Their reasons will vary.

fenwaysouth

Great post. Our experience in the recruiting process mirrors yours.