Skip to main content

I see numerous schools that show lots of commitments. Some of these schools have only a few seniors graduating and appear to have large returning classes. I understand that schools will over recruit and maybe all the kids showing committed may not be getting athletic money. 

As I understand it, schools must notify returning athletes if thier scholarship is being renewed and amounts. 

Does the NLI or NCAA moniter school commitment amounts? Do the sum of these new NLI’s and returning commitments have to stay below the 11.7 or can schools actually commit to more than the 11.7 as long as it is cut down to 11.7 by the start of the season Or before they actually come to campus?

Last edited by wareagle
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

wareagle posted:

Does the NLI or NCAA moniter school commitment amounts? Do the sum of these new NLI’s and returning commitments have to stay below the 11.7 or can schools actually commit to more than the 11.7 as long as it is cut down to 11.7 by the start of the season Or before they actually come to campus?

Just from what I've read (not first-hand knowledge), neither NLI or NCAA monitor commitment counts. The numbers are too fluid. I'm pretty sure the school's primary concern is end of year reporting. As long as the number is less than or equal to 11.7 when the school year ends, they are in compliance. If the school gets accused of an infraction, they have to produce proof. That could include a situation where one sport gets accused of a violation and the entire athletics department gets audited.

MidAtlanticDad posted:
wareagle posted:

Does the NLI or NCAA moniter school commitment amounts? Do the sum of these new NLI’s and returning commitments have to stay below the 11.7 or can schools actually commit to more than the 11.7 as long as it is cut down to 11.7 by the start of the season Or before they actually come to campus?

Just from what I've read (not first-hand knowledge), neither NLI or NCAA monitor commitment counts. The numbers are too fluid. I'm pretty sure the school's primary concern is end of year reporting. As long as the number is less than or equal to 11.7 when the school year ends, they are in compliance. If the school gets accused of an infraction, they have to produce proof. That could include a situation where one sport gets accused of a violation and the entire athletics department gets audited.

MidAtlantic, I do not claim to be a rules expert. But I’m pretty sure the roster has to be finalized BEFORE the season starts, not at the end of the year. If you could wait until the end of the year, teams would not have cuts following the fall practice and just keep guys on for injuries or performance and then make massive cut before deadline at the end of the season. Not sure about other divisions, but this certainly is not how it happens at D1 level. Your roster limit is set by some deadline prior to season starting. This is why injuries put such a strain on collegiate programs. They can’t just call someone up from the farm system like professional teams can. 

youngGun  - That is also my understanding.   D1 rosters have to be set prior to the beginning of the spring season in February.  I've seen some programs post their upperclassmen in the Fall and then post the freshmen later after the Fall tryout or practices.  My son's D1 school did this, because there was very little turnover once you got past freshmen year.

WarEagle - I don't think it is the schools posting commitments, I think it is the individual recruits/travel organizations pledging verbal commitment to schools that you are referring to.   I've never seen a college officially post their commitments until after they've signed an NLI or enrolled.  

You may be surprised how many of those commits are not receiving athletic scholarship and are either getting academic money or no money at all. This type  of commits will never sign an actual NLI. You can theoretically bring in hundreds of non scholarship players and then cut down to the 35 man roster.

 

theres a juco here in Texas known for having 100 or more kids every year

 

Fenway

I am sure that is correct.  I am wondering if all those kids ( looking at 2019 class) with verbal commitments actually sign NLI in November then it appears that the schools would have to be over committed. At least roster wise if not probably financial as well. I think it is impossible to know, which is why I wondered if anyone monitors it. Or can schools just sign them up and still have a year to figure out what sticks or what they want to keep? I am pretty sure this is the case for non scholarship players but what about the kids that actually receive athletic money commitments?

Last edited by wareagle

2018's new team has 43 coming in for the fall after the draft and after a couple that decided to transfer.  Has to get to 35..... Probably a couple I don't know about that are transferring, 1-2 freshman will wash out, 1-2 to grades and transfer at the break... and maybe have to cut a couple.  I believe the roster has to be turned in like 12 days prior to the first spring game in Feb.   Making the 35 is one thing, making the 26 is another. 

You only sign an NLI if you're getting baseball money.  You can "commit" to a program with baseball money, academic money, a combination of both or nothing at all.  A commitment means absolutely nothing with regards to the school or the NCAA....you don't count unless you're receiving baseball money and/or are put on the spring roster.  

younggun posted:
MidAtlanticDad posted:
wareagle posted:

Does the NLI or NCAA moniter school commitment amounts? Do the sum of these new NLI’s and returning commitments have to stay below the 11.7 or can schools actually commit to more than the 11.7 as long as it is cut down to 11.7 by the start of the season Or before they actually come to campus?

Just from what I've read (not first-hand knowledge), neither NLI or NCAA monitor commitment counts. The numbers are too fluid. I'm pretty sure the school's primary concern is end of year reporting. As long as the number is less than or equal to 11.7 when the school year ends, they are in compliance. If the school gets accused of an infraction, they have to produce proof. That could include a situation where one sport gets accused of a violation and the entire athletics department gets audited.

MidAtlantic, I do not claim to be a rules expert. But I’m pretty sure the roster has to be finalized BEFORE the season starts, not at the end of the year. If you could wait until the end of the year, teams would not have cuts following the fall practice and just keep guys on for injuries or performance and then make massive cut before deadline at the end of the season. Not sure about other divisions, but this certainly is not how it happens at D1 level. Your roster limit is set by some deadline prior to season starting. This is why injuries put such a strain on collegiate programs. They can’t just call someone up from the farm system like professional teams can. 

I may be misunderstanding, but I don't think the NCAA is concerned with roster size as it pertains to exceeding financial aid limitations. Regardless of who played or who was on the roster, the school cannot exceed 11.7 baseball scholarships for the school year. It doesn't matter if a transfer came in and got a 1 semester scholarship, or a kid left after only receiving the fall scholarship, or whatever the mix might be.

So I understand that 43 can show up in fall but only 11.7 scholarships. If someone washes out then that money can be transferred to another player and they must get to 35 by season. But can they commit money for more than the 11.7 before fall starts or before season starts then have to release someone primarily because they overcommitted?  From what I read, the student gets penalized pretty heavy if they change thier mind, but the school not so much?? Just trying to understand the process. 

The 11.7 scholarships pertains to players who are receiving baseball money and have signed an NLI.....no, a school cannot go into the fall with more than 11.7 on the books regardless of whether or not kids leave.  If they are at 11.7 and a kid leaves after fall semester, yes, they can give that money to someone else in the Spring....but they can't have 14.7 signed to NLI's thinking that they are just going to boot 3 after the fall.  

Thanks Buckeye. That clarifies it pretty well. I assume the same applies to draft kids on NLI. Schools have to allow the money for those kids and then if they go in the draft then the school can move that committed money to others but they can’t over sign kids on NLI’s assuming that they will lose some in the draft. 

Last edited by wareagle

Never assume parents are being straight forward when they talk about scholarships. I heard someone say their kid got 50%. What he got was a 50% college loan. What’s often even worse misinformation is info passed on from a third party who doesn’t understand the process.

I told people my kids received 75% between baseball/softball and academics. I was very clear two thirds was academic money. It came back around both kids received 75% for sports. 

bacdorslider posted:

2018's new team has 43 coming in for the fall after the draft and after a couple that decided to transfer.  Has to get to 35..... Probably a couple I don't know about that are transferring, 1-2 freshman will wash out, 1-2 to grades and transfer at the break... and maybe have to cut a couple.  I believe the roster has to be turned in like 12 days prior to the first spring game in Feb.   Making the 35 is one thing, making the 26 is another. 

Agree, Clemson always had around 43-45 players in the fall and cut that down prior to spring and the start of the season. Most of the guys went to the developmental squad or D Squad, not sure about who had money etc but i know several over the years made the roster the next year so something to be said about that. Several who were scholarshipped with money were told to find teams elsewhere as playing time was limited and weren't getting a spot next season.

Plus you have to take it with a grain of salt that they are SIGNING a scholarship.  Tradition at my son's new school is that they have everyone going to college SIGN, so the one's who are getting academic money feel just as important as those who are getting sports money to go to college.  I had to bite my tongue when I heard that.  There are also a lot of kids everywhere that SIGN for baseball even if they are getting no baseball money.  I have a friend whose son is getting full ride academic and was told point blank that he will only be allowed to tryout for JV baseball the first year and then be evaluated.  He SIGNED saying he was going to X school to play baseball on a scholarship.  Made a big deal about it just like a kid going to a P5 school on large baseball scholarship.  Had a friend's jersey who was there several years ago on and a cap.  I just had to laugh when I saw it.

PitchingFan posted:

Plus you have to take it with a grain of salt that they are SIGNING a scholarship.  Tradition at my son's new school is that they have everyone going to college SIGN, so the one's who are getting academic money feel just as important as those who are getting sports money to go to college.  I had to bite my tongue when I heard that.  There are also a lot of kids everywhere that SIGN for baseball even if they are getting no baseball money.  I have a friend whose son is getting full ride academic and was told point blank that he will only be allowed to tryout for JV baseball the first year and then be evaluated.  He SIGNED saying he was going to X school to play baseball on a scholarship.  Made a big deal about it just like a kid going to a P5 school on large baseball scholarship.  Had a friend's jersey who was there several years ago on and a cap.  I just had to laugh when I saw it.

The high schools call the local media and get all their kids headed for college sports in the paper. There’s no harm. It’s good PR for the high school program.

PitchingFan posted:

Plus you have to take it with a grain of salt that they are SIGNING a scholarship.  Tradition at my son's new school is that they have everyone going to college SIGN, so the one's who are getting academic money feel just as important as those who are getting sports money to go to college.  I had to bite my tongue when I heard that.  There are also a lot of kids everywhere that SIGN for baseball even if they are getting no baseball money.  I have a friend whose son is getting full ride academic and was told point blank that he will only be allowed to tryout for JV baseball the first year and then be evaluated.  He SIGNED saying he was going to X school to play baseball on a scholarship.  Made a big deal about it just like a kid going to a P5 school on large baseball scholarship.  Had a friend's jersey who was there several years ago on and a cap.  I just had to laugh when I saw it.

Really, why?

Here's an example. My son plays with a kid who is committed to Vandy. His dad told me "when the time comes, we will take whatever is better -- if the financial aid we can get is a better deal than the baseball scholarship, we'll take the financial aid." So in that case, if the financial aid is better, that kid will be signing a financial aid agreement, not a baseball scholarship. If there is a photo op at school and he is wearing a Vandy hat and jersey, should people bite their tongue because he is not signing an NLI?

What about players going to service academies? They don't sign an NLI -- they are on exactly the same deal as every other student at those schools. Should Army, Navy, and Air Force commits be allowed in the photo ops for  kids signing with colleges?

2019Dad posted:
PitchingFan posted:

Plus you have to take it with a grain of salt that they are SIGNING a scholarship.  Tradition at my son's new school is that they have everyone going to college SIGN, so the one's who are getting academic money feel just as important as those who are getting sports money to go to college.  I had to bite my tongue when I heard that.  There are also a lot of kids everywhere that SIGN for baseball even if they are getting no baseball money.  I have a friend whose son is getting full ride academic and was told point blank that he will only be allowed to tryout for JV baseball the first year and then be evaluated.  He SIGNED saying he was going to X school to play baseball on a scholarship.  Made a big deal about it just like a kid going to a P5 school on large baseball scholarship.  Had a friend's jersey who was there several years ago on and a cap.  I just had to laugh when I saw it.

Really, why?

Here's an example. My son plays with a kid who is committed to Vandy. His dad told me "when the time comes, we will take whatever is better -- if the financial aid we can get is a better deal than the baseball scholarship, we'll take the financial aid." So in that case, if the financial aid is better, that kid will be signing a financial aid agreement, not a baseball scholarship. If there is a photo op at school and he is wearing a Vandy hat and jersey, should people bite their tongue because he is not signing an NLI?

What about players going to service academies? They don't sign an NLI -- they are on exactly the same deal as every other student at those schools. Should Army, Navy, and Air Force commits be allowed in the photo ops for  kids signing with colleges?

I'm betting that the kid you know that committed to Vandy wasn't told that he would be allowed to tryout for the JV.  Being told that is essentially the same as being told that he isn't good enough to play baseball at that school. Based on the situation as presented by PitchingFan I would have the same reaction as he did. It is a farce that this kid presented the illusion that he was recruited to play baseball at the school in question.  Lots of schools have open tryouts for any player that wants to give it a shot - qualified or not. This was the case when I played and we had over 200 show up one year.  Our coach called them "The Amazings" - because it was amazing how bad they were.  A kid that is walking on into an open tryout should not be part of a photo op for recruited athletes. To me it doesn't matter where the money comes from or even if there isn't any money involved. The determining factor should be whether a kid was recruited or not.  

adbono posted:
2019Dad posted:
PitchingFan posted:

Plus you have to take it with a grain of salt that they are SIGNING a scholarship.  Tradition at my son's new school is that they have everyone going to college SIGN, so the one's who are getting academic money feel just as important as those who are getting sports money to go to college.  I had to bite my tongue when I heard that.  There are also a lot of kids everywhere that SIGN for baseball even if they are getting no baseball money.  I have a friend whose son is getting full ride academic and was told point blank that he will only be allowed to tryout for JV baseball the first year and then be evaluated.  He SIGNED saying he was going to X school to play baseball on a scholarship.  Made a big deal about it just like a kid going to a P5 school on large baseball scholarship.  Had a friend's jersey who was there several years ago on and a cap.  I just had to laugh when I saw it.

Really, why?

Here's an example. My son plays with a kid who is committed to Vandy. His dad told me "when the time comes, we will take whatever is better -- if the financial aid we can get is a better deal than the baseball scholarship, we'll take the financial aid." So in that case, if the financial aid is better, that kid will be signing a financial aid agreement, not a baseball scholarship. If there is a photo op at school and he is wearing a Vandy hat and jersey, should people bite their tongue because he is not signing an NLI?

What about players going to service academies? They don't sign an NLI -- they are on exactly the same deal as every other student at those schools. Should Army, Navy, and Air Force commits be allowed in the photo ops for  kids signing with colleges?

I'm betting that the kid you know that committed to Vandy wasn't told that he would be allowed to tryout for the JV.  Being told that is essentially the same as being told that he isn't good enough to play baseball at that school. Based on the situation as presented by PitchingFan I would have the same reaction as he did. It is a farce that this kid presented the illusion that he was recruited to play baseball at the school in question.  Lots of schools have open tryouts for any player that wants to give it a shot - qualified or not. This was the case when I played and we had over 200 show up one year.  Our coach called them "The Amazings" - because it was amazing how bad they were.  A kid that is walking on into an open tryout should not be part of a photo op for recruited athletes. To me it doesn't matter where the money comes from or even if there isn't any money involved. The determining factor should be whether a kid was recruited or not.  

Agree 100% with your last sentence

I wasn't reacting to the JV example -- agree with you there -- but to the general idea that there must be baseball scholarship $ or it's somehow invalid

Here comes the old cliche .... Worry about what you can control. Don’t spend time worrying about what you can’t control. Put your energies in the right place.

Who cares what some kid did who is only going to get a JV opportunity? At some point he will have to answer to, “What happened?”

 

 

Wow.! Seriously? You have to bite your tongue because there are kids signing who are not getting athletic money or signing an NLI? Who cares? Everyone who attends college on a baseball scholarship may have to answer to "what happened?" As a HS coach, I have seen far more players return home or leave a school to commit to a JC after a year, then not.  Look at the rosters of many of the top tier JC's and you will find numerous players who played D1 the prior year and were not able to stick with the team. Many of these players were very talented HS players! My son has already seen a couple of players who had committed with athletic scholarships to his new home, quietly bow out to attend JC's due to grades. As RJM stated, "worry about what you can control" and be careful what you have to say about those who you think are undeserving...the baseball god's are always watching and mostly unforgiving. 

Y’all did not read what I said.  They had every kid going to college sign because they did not want to recognize the athletes and not the regular students.  They do a signing day and every senior sits down and signs something.  I had to bite my tongue because that is as snowflake as it gets.  Let’s not offend anyone.  I agree athletic and academic are equal. Never said they were not.  

I do not believe a kid who walks on should act like they are on scholarship so crucify me.  I believe you should be honest in you or your child’s awards or lack there of.  Does not make them second class citizen but just be honest.   

If you want to recognize scholars do so but not just because athletes do it. 

Last edited by PitchingFan
PitchingFan posted:

Y’all did not read what I said.  They had every kid going to college sign because they did not want to recognize the athletes and not the regular students.  They do a signing day and every senior sits down and signs something.  I had to bite my tongue because that is as snowflake as it gets.  Let’s not offend anyone.  I agree athletic and academic are equal. Never said they were not.  

I do not believe a kid who walks on should act like they are on scholarship so crucify me.  I believe you should be honest in you or your child’s awards or lack there of.  Does not make them second class citizen but just be honest.   

If you want to recognize scholars do so but not just because athletes do it. 

Touché 

There are plenty of recruited D1, D2 and obviously D3 players who will not be signing NLI’s who will be on a college team and get in the field a year out of high school. The faux signing ceremony isn’t a big deal. It’s recognizing they will be headed to college ball.

Even the JV kid is in the program for a year. It’s probably nothing to be blaring the horns over. But, who cares!

At our high school no one was signing anything real. Those signing NLI’s had already returned them. It’s just a PR ceremony for the kids and the high school. Half of them will be transferring or out of the game in two years. 

The harsh reality of D1 ball is half the players leave to play someplace else within two years. Committing to a program is nothing more than an opportunity. There aren’t any guarantees the commitment leads to a good situation. 

Worrying about who gets what, goes where and plays is a waste of time. I cared most for my kids, then the kids I coached in travel and my kid’s high school and travel teammates. I never sweated the small stuff. 

I once bet another parent $20 one of the travel kids would never be a starter where he chose. But I still rooted for him to make me wrong. 

Last edited by RJM
2019Dad posted:
Really, why?

Here's an example. My son plays with a kid who is committed to Vandy. His dad told me "when the time comes, we will take whatever is better -- if the financial aid we can get is a better deal than the baseball scholarship, we'll take the financial aid." So in that case, if the financial aid is better, that kid will be signing a financial aid agreement, not a baseball scholarship. If there is a photo op at school and he is wearing a Vandy hat and jersey, should people bite their tongue because he is not signing an NLI?

What about players going to service academies? They don't sign an NLI -- they are on exactly the same deal as every other student at those schools. Should Army, Navy, and Air Force commits be allowed in the photo ops for  kids signing with colleges?

I agree that kids committing to play as walk-on, academic, or athletic, etc. should be allowed to have there moment.  

But the sample you cite here is concerning.  Vandy is an SEC school and has to abide by SEC rules.  But they are manipulating the player you know. Instead of giving him whichever is most (academic or athletic), why not give the player both.   They can, some schools will tell you they can't, but they (private schools) absolutely can pair academic money with athletic money in the players first year if the player has a HS GPA of 3.5 in core classes, 1200 SAT, or 26 ACT.

Some schools may not have the funding, but recently it came to light that Tim Corbin is making over $2mil/year at Vandy, so they have the funding for the baseball team.   Here is why they won't do it.  SEC has rules as do the rest of the P5 that guarantees athletic scholarships for 4 years.  It makes it easier for them to shuffle players off the roster if they don't have "baseball" money.  They don't have to worry about the player staying at school and taking up baseball money.

I too know some players committed to Vandy and they don't belong there academically.  They will get baseball money.  If they don't pan out on the field, they will be told they can stay at school, but won't be part of the baseball team.  They will most likely leave because they came to play baseball and don't have Vandy ( the school with the highest average SAT scores in the country) academic aspirations.

Other players will take academic money, and if they don't pan out on the field, they simply are not part of the team anymore.  This is why other schools are very upset with the way Vandy is able to manipulate the system.  Most SEC schools have to recruit within their own state because they simply don't have the ability to lure athletes from around the country and churn them the way Vandy can.

 

By having a pool of lesser academic athletes on baseball scholarship and a pool of academic baseball players on academic/need scholarships Vandy is able to manipulate the system unlike any other in the SEC and few in College baseball.  Again, if the player in question warrants baseball money and academic money, why not give him both?

 

Because then they wouldn't be able to commit 20 players every year for 35 roster spots.

 

  

Pedaldad posted:
2019Dad posted:
Really, why?

Here's an example. My son plays with a kid who is committed to Vandy. His dad told me "when the time comes, we will take whatever is better -- if the financial aid we can get is a better deal than the baseball scholarship, we'll take the financial aid." So in that case, if the financial aid is better, that kid will be signing a financial aid agreement, not a baseball scholarship. If there is a photo op at school and he is wearing a Vandy hat and jersey, should people bite their tongue because he is not signing an NLI?

What about players going to service academies? They don't sign an NLI -- they are on exactly the same deal as every other student at those schools. Should Army, Navy, and Air Force commits be allowed in the photo ops for  kids signing with colleges?

I agree that kids committing to play as walk-on, academic, or athletic, etc. should be allowed to have there moment.  

But the sample you cite here is concerning.  Vandy is an SEC school and has to abide by SEC rules.  But they are manipulating the player you know. Instead of giving him whichever is most (academic or athletic), why not give the player both.   They can, some schools will tell you they can't, but they (private schools) absolutely can pair academic money with athletic money in the players first year if the player has a HS GPA of 3.5 in core classes, 1200 SAT, or 26 ACT.

Some schools may not have the funding, but recently it came to light that Tim Corbin is making over $2mil/year at Vandy, so they have the funding for the baseball team.   Here is why they won't do it.  SEC has rules as do the rest of the P5 that guarantees athletic scholarships for 4 years.  It makes it easier for them to shuffle players off the roster if they don't have "baseball" money.  They don't have to worry about the player staying at school and taking up baseball money.

I too know some players committed to Vandy and they don't belong there academically.  They will get baseball money.  If they don't pan out on the field, they will be told they can stay at school, but won't be part of the baseball team.  They will most likely leave because they came to play baseball and don't have Vandy ( the school with the highest average SAT scores in the country) academic aspirations.

Other players will take academic money, and if they don't pan out on the field, they simply are not part of the team anymore.  This is why other schools are very upset with the way Vandy is able to manipulate the system.  Most SEC schools have to recruit within their own state because they simply don't have the ability to lure athletes from around the country and churn them the way Vandy can.

 

By having a pool of lesser academic athletes on baseball scholarship and a pool of academic baseball players on academic/need scholarships Vandy is able to manipulate the system unlike any other in the SEC and few in College baseball.  Again, if the player in question warrants baseball money and academic money, why not give him both?

 

Because then they wouldn't be able to commit 20 players every year for 35 roster spots.

 

  

To clarify, the discussion was about need-based financial aid or a baseball scholarship -- academic money wasn't part of the conversation.

My understanding is that schools are not allowed to pair need-based financial aid with athletic scholarships -- the student has to pick one or the other.

Also, I know another player who was told by Stanford that with his family income he would qualify for 100% financial aid (grants). Of course, the baseball program would benefit by not having to use any part of the 11.7 scholarships. This player ended up committing elsewhere (note: he would have still needed to get a certain ACT score for Stanford), but it does highlight the advantage provided by broad-based financial aid systems (available to all students) at schools like Stanford. I think Vanderbilt has a similar system.

Plenty of D1's pair academic scholarships with partial athletic scholarships.  That is extremely common.

It has been said here, many times, that it is in the athlete's best interests to get at least 25% in athletic money.  Make sure the school has "skin in the game".

What a lot of people lose track of is that the goal is to play college Baseball.   Too many think they "made it" and achieved their goal when they get a college commitment.  All that does is get your foot in the door.  All the more reason to go where you are loved and wanted.  

2019Dad posted:
To clarify, the discussion was about need-based financial aid or a baseball scholarship -- academic money wasn't part of the conversation.

My understanding is that schools are not allowed to pair need-based financial aid with athletic scholarships -- the student has to pick one or the other.

My apologies for the misunderstanding. They definitely can not pair need and athletic money.  It would all end up counting as athletic money. 

But the concept is the same, they just have another way to get more than 35 athletes in and sort through them. Any player going to Vandy, can certainly get athletic money at another SEC or other P5 school.  I still see it as manipulating the system and encouraging most players to something that is not in their own bets interest.  Just my very humble opinion.

bacdorslider posted:
its complicated..... do you have first hand exp. with recuiting, committing, signing , enrolling and attending Vanderbilt or is thi your opinion based on what you have heard?

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Very good question, but i is not that complicated.  Let's just say that I am an informed individual and deal in facts, not speculation.  This is not unique to Vandy, there are other programs manipulating the system as well.

Here is what is known: Vandy has 19 commits from 2019, and 17 from 2018, and 17 from 2017 (those  numbers in 2017 and 2018 don't include players signed in the draft).  Simple math, 17 and 17 equals 34...35-34 =1.  What are they going to do with the 19 from 2019.  How do they get them all in?  Ever here a coach talk about making the fall roster vs the spring roster?

Compounding the problem, this year they have several returning seniors that they did not count on.  And, they already have 14 in the 2020 class.  Assuming all 2017s leave before 2020 class arrives, that still leaves 50 players for 35 spots.  Somebody has got to leave.

But don't take my word for it, here is a link to a recent article documenting the logjam of players at Vandy.

https://www.tennessean.com/sto...19-roster/688056002/

 

 

Here's something I've wondered about -- if a player commits to College XYZ, and on PerfectGame where they list the commitments for that school, the player is at the bottom of the list [note: the commitments are listed in order of PG rank] . . . should that be a red flag? I mean, on the one hand, sure, PG could be often wrong . . . OTOH an independent scouting service has judged all of the other commits as being better than you!

well in 2018 i think they started with 22 and after a coupke could not gwt in and the draft that number is 11 and from that their could a couple that do not show, decide its noy for them . the 2017 did not lose anyone to the draft but did have 2 that left on their own. 2019 have not signed yet, so who knows about that number . i agree thwy are over the limit and yes having 4 sons that have all played college baseball i am fully aware of the differences between "fall" and "spring" team like vandy have to over committ. they lose too many to the draft incoming and after 2-3 years

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
2019Dad posted:
2019Dad posted:
bacdorslider posted:
doesnt PG list the commitments by their ranking ?

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Yup, that's what I said.

Not trying to be flip about it. But that's the question, if you are at the bottom or near the bottom -- or let's say, before you commit you realize you would be near the bottom -- should that be a red flag?

The kids in your sons class that are ranked a bit higher than him should not be his biggest concern, lol. He will be competing against guys that could be 4 years+ older and experienced than a freshman. Don’t let anyone outwork you. Be humble. Be coachable. And don’t be afraid to compete. 

CatsPop posted:

Just happened to one in our area.  Completed Freshman year, now he's JUCO bound.  Bacdorslider said that this Fall Vandy will have about 43 kids playing ball, which means 8 won't be around come mid-February.

This (over-recruiting) was the subject of a thread last spring in which I called attention to the large number of announced 2018s at a number of prominent D1 schools - including Vanderbilt. During that discussion I was “assured” that at least 10 of  the Vandy commits would sign in the upcoming 2018 draft. I didn’t believe that to be a realistic assumption and it didn’t happen. Now there is a logjam and players will have to leave.  But it’s not just Vandy - this is going on everywhere.  It underscores the importance of seeking the right level in the beginning - because you are going to end up there anyway. My son is a 2018 and he is going to a great JuCo program and I couldn’t be happier for him. He will play for 2 years instead of sit and will also get basic academic class work out of the way. JuCo is a great option for many kids and it doesn’t get the consideration that it should from all of those chasing the D1 holy grail that they aren’t ready for anyway. 

ADBONO  I could not agree more... There are 3 coming to campus in the 2018 class and any or all could have gone in the draft.  Somehow someway  Vandy has to get the number down.   I would guess the fall will decide the fate of a few.  Parents have to understand what they are getting into.  For my first two sons they could have gone to a mid-major and most likely sat the bench, wondered if they were going to get cut etc.  Instead they went to a very good Juco and ended up moving on to the mid-major more prepared and ready to play not just be on the team.   My youngest son  was in a different  spot.  We knew that after the draft , if he did not sign he would start at Vandy this summer taking classes and working out with the trainer.  That's a good head start for him as he is  soph eligible  in 2020.  However he has to produce and earn his time like every other player.  If he had been a late commit to Vandy and maybe did not have the rankings, accolades  and draft attention we would have considered another route for him.  I do know that if anyone can figure out the situation and do what is right for all involved it's TC.

3and2Fastball posted:

It is hard to wrap my mind around the concept of a kid    attending Vanderbilt and that not being in "their best interests" when all or most of their education at that incredible institution is being paid for!!!! 

Are there a lot of kids transferring out of Vandy?

history shows  2-3 a year transfer, flunk out, quit.

adbono posted:
CatsPop posted:

Just happened to one in our area.  Completed Freshman year, now he's JUCO bound.  Bacdorslider said that this Fall Vandy will have about 43 kids playing ball, which means 8 won't be around come mid-February.

JuCo is a great option for many kids and it doesn’t get the consideration that it should from all of those chasing the D1 holy grail that they aren’t ready for anyway. 

My son just spent the weekend at Iowa's All Star series, a four-team tournament featuring the top 64 high school seniors from around the state. Of those, I counted about 10 going to D1 schools — including kids playing collegiate golf, hockey and football. Another group of about 10 were going to D2 (I think one) and D3s. The rest were going to Jucos.

We looked closely at the Juco option and the only thing I would warn is that you need to look at the academics. My son is going into college with about 35 credit hours from dual enrollment and AP credits. Juco might have been good for his baseball, but there was a very limited pool of classes he could have taken.

Thanks for that shock factor. Never realized the list was in ranking.   Just looked to see where mine stood in his class.  In the middle, which is where I thought he would be.  The bottom three in his class have no pics beside their PG profile.  But it is weird because I clicked on it three different times and the players moved in position each time except the top player.  It would concern me if my son was at the bottom or the bottom of several players being recruited for the same position.  There are only two LHP's in his class and he and the other one are fairly even.  I think the good part for them is there are only 4 there currently, and 1 or none coming in,  I believe that is bigger than most think.  When we were going through the recruiting process, we looked at who/how many will you have to compete with just to get on the field.  I know some don't think this is a big deal but it is.

Iowamom23 posted:
adbono posted:
CatsPop posted:

Just happened to one in our area.  Completed Freshman year, now he's JUCO bound.  Bacdorslider said that this Fall Vandy will have about 43 kids playing ball, which means 8 won't be around come mid-February.

JuCo is a great option for many kids and it doesn’t get the consideration that it should from all of those chasing the D1 holy grail that they aren’t ready for anyway. 

My son just spent the weekend at Iowa's All Star series, a four-team tournament featuring the top 64 high school seniors from around the state. Of those, I counted about 10 going to D1 schools — including kids playing collegiate golf, hockey and football. Another group of about 10 were going to D2 (I think one) and D3s. The rest were going to Jucos.

We looked closely at the Juco option and the only thing I would warn is that you need to look at the academics. My son is going into college with about 35 credit hours from dual enrollment and AP credits. Juco might have been good for his baseball, but there was a very limited pool of classes he could have taken.

Your comment about the academic side of JuCo is a valid point.  All are not created equal in this regard and the range is a big one. We looked hard at that and it had a lot to do with our eventual decision. My son could have gone much closer to home but the academic opportunity was not the same. 

RoadRunner posted:
2019Dad posted:
2019Dad posted:
bacdorslider posted:
doesnt PG list the commitments by their ranking ?

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Yup, that's what I said.

Not trying to be flip about it. But that's the question, if you are at the bottom or near the bottom -- or let's say, before you commit you realize you would be near the bottom -- should that be a red flag?

The kids in your sons class that are ranked a bit higher than him should not be his biggest concern, lol. He will be competing against guys that could be 4 years+ older and experienced than a freshman. Don’t let anyone outwork you. Be humble. Be coachable. And don’t be afraid to compete. 

Well, RJM posted above "The harsh reality of D1 ball is half the players leave to play someplace else within two years." 

I won't specify the school, but I saw in the commits for a P5 the following PG national ranks: 74, 159, 184, 282, 284, 353, 365, 460, 500, 500, and 1000. If my son had a "1000" ranking -- which really means a ranking somewhere between 2000 and 4000 -- and I saw the rest of the recruiting class at that school, it would make me wonder whether that was the right fit for him. JMO

2019Dad posted:
2019Dad posted:
bacdorslider posted:
doesnt PG list the commitments by their ranking ?

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Yup, that's what I said.

Not trying to be flip about it. But that's the question, if you are at the bottom or near the bottom -- or let's say, before you commit you realize you would be near the bottom -- should that be a red flag?

That is a good question.  I was looking at Arkansas over the past few years.  The best Freshman pitcher this year was one of the lowest pitching recruits and the top 5 recruits are all gone after one year.  A few years ago the bottom 4 was Blaine Knight, Barrett Loseke, Weston Rogers, and Kacey Murphy.  That was the 1 and 2 that lead them to the championship series and one of their best relievers.  All three were drafted.  I think it is easy to rank the top 100 but the further out you go the more difficult it is to differentiate between players.  That is where competitiveness and mental makeup play a big role. 

d-mac posted:
2019Dad posted:
2019Dad posted:
bacdorslider posted:
doesnt PG list the commitments by their ranking ?

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Yup, that's what I said.

Not trying to be flip about it. But that's the question, if you are at the bottom or near the bottom -- or let's say, before you commit you realize you would be near the bottom -- should that be a red flag?

That is a good question.  I was looking at Arkansas over the past few years.  The best Freshman pitcher this year was one of the lowest pitching recruits and the top 5 recruits are all gone after one year.  A few years ago the bottom 4 was Blaine Knight, Barrett Loseke, Weston Rogers, and Kacey Murphy.  That was the 1 and 2 that lead them to the championship series and one of their best relievers.  All three were drafted.  I think it is easy to rank the top 100 but the further out you go the more difficult it is to differentiate between players.  That is where competitiveness and mental makeup play a big role. 

On this board too much stock is put into PG ratings, IMO.  Their (PG) ratings are not the gospel.  In general, they are most accurate at the top (just like everyone else's) and the accuracy declines as you move down the scale of talent (just like everyone else that ranks players).  Some PG events do a really good job and others don't.  Some college programs may use PG (or PBR or UA) rankings as a reference but they are not the determining factor in any kids recruiting process. Coaches recruit kids based off what they SEE, not what they READ. 

2019Dad posted:
RoadRunner posted:
2019Dad posted:
2019Dad posted:
bacdorslider posted:
doesnt PG list the commitments by their ranking ?

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Yup, that's what I said.

Not trying to be flip about it. But that's the question, if you are at the bottom or near the bottom -- or let's say, before you commit you realize you would be near the bottom -- should that be a red flag?

The kids in your sons class that are ranked a bit higher than him should not be his biggest concern, lol. He will be competing against guys that could be 4 years+ older and experienced than a freshman. Don’t let anyone outwork you. Be humble. Be coachable. And don’t be afraid to compete. 

Well, RJM posted above "The harsh reality of D1 ball is half the players leave to play someplace else within two years." 

I won't specify the school, but I saw in the commits for a P5 the following PG national ranks: 74, 159, 184, 282, 284, 353, 365, 460, 500, 500, and 1000. If my son had a "1000" ranking -- which really means a ranking somewhere between 2000 and 4000 -- and I saw the rest of the recruiting class at that school, it would make me wonder whether that was the right fit for him. JMO

There are plenty of kids who do a PG event freshman or sophomore year but then don’t go back. For many their rankings would increase. You can’t put that much stock into PH rankings when it comes down to junior/senior year if they haven’t been recently. I’d say college coaches can accurately assess what they need. And if they’re getting kids in the top 200 they’re probably not doing a bad job. 

Son went fall of sophomore year, graded an “8” and a high follow as a 15 year old. That was the last PG Showcase we ever felt inclined to attend. It does not reflect accurately the player he is now, but I don’t need to give PG $650 to validate his skill level as a rising senior. The college coaches showing interest in him provide that validation.

family friend had a son (same year as mine) who went to a PG event and pulled a hammy in the 60 yd dash, so he has a much slower time that what he really runs (he’s a 6.8 guy). She asked me if it would be worth it to get him to another PG showcase to get a better 60 time posted. My response was “is he getting in front of D1-D2 schools this summer and are they recruiting him?” Her answer was yes and no they are not recruiting him. I told her spending $650 with PG isn’t going to change that.” 

Just my story and opinion

Last edited by GaryMe
GaryMe posted:

Son went fall of sophomore year, graded an “8” and a high follow as a 15 year old. That was the last PG Showcase we ever felt inclined to attend. It does not reflect accurately the player he is now, but I don’t need to give PG $650 to validate his skill level as a rising senior. The college coaches showing interest in him provide that validation.

family friend had a son (same year as mine) who went to a PG event and pulled a hammy in the 60 yd dash, so he has a much slower time that what he really runs (he’s a 6.8 guy). She asked me if it would be worth it to get him to another PG showcase to get a better 60 time posted. My response was “is he getting in front of D1-D2 schools this summer and are they recruiting him?” Her answer was yes and no they are not recruiting him. I told her spending $650 with PG isn’t going to change that.” 

Just my story and opinion

Midwest Mom posted:

There are plenty of kids who do a PG event freshman or sophomore year but then don’t go back. For many their rankings would increase. You can’t put that much stock into PH rankings when it comes down to junior/senior year if they haven’t been recently. I’d say college coaches can accurately assess what they need. And if they’re getting kids in the top 200 they’re probably not doing a bad job. 

The way I look at it, if the coaches are so accurate in their assessments, why do half of the kids transfer within two years? As far as the PG rankings go, I think they are roughly accurate in their buckets, but not within those buckets (Top 100, 101-499, 500, 1000). And of course there are exceptions. And I know so many kids ranked without ever doing a PG showcase that I don't think that is the determining factor. Anyhow, to each his own, in my opinion if my kid had a "1000" ranking and the other kids in his recruiting class had rankings like 168, 222, etc., it would make me go "hmm." I am not saying that PG rankings are the determining factor in any coach's recruiting practice -- for all I know the college coaches never even look at them -- all I'm saying is that I as a parent would use them as a sanity check to know if my kid is "fishing in the right pond".

2019Dad posted:
GaryMe posted:

Son went fall of sophomore year, graded an “8” and a high follow as a 15 year old. That was the last PG Showcase we ever felt inclined to attend. It does not reflect accurately the player he is now, but I don’t need to give PG $650 to validate his skill level as a rising senior. The college coaches showing interest in him provide that validation.

family friend had a son (same year as mine) who went to a PG event and pulled a hammy in the 60 yd dash, so he has a much slower time that what he really runs (he’s a 6.8 guy). She asked me if it would be worth it to get him to another PG showcase to get a better 60 time posted. My response was “is he getting in front of D1-D2 schools this summer and are they recruiting him?” Her answer was yes and no they are not recruiting him. I told her spending $650 with PG isn’t going to change that.” 

Just my story and opinion

Midwest Mom posted:

There are plenty of kids who do a PG event freshman or sophomore year but then don’t go back. For many their rankings would increase. You can’t put that much stock into PH rankings when it comes down to junior/senior year if they haven’t been recently. I’d say college coaches can accurately assess what they need. And if they’re getting kids in the top 200 they’re probably not doing a bad job. 

The way I look at it, if the coaches are so accurate in their assessments, why do half of the kids transfer within two years? As far as the PG rankings go, I think they are roughly accurate in their buckets, but not within those buckets (Top 100, 101-499, 500, 1000). And of course there are exceptions. And I know so many kids ranked without ever doing a PG showcase that I don't think that is the determining factor. Anyhow, to each his own, in my opinion if my kid had a "1000" ranking and the other kids in his recruiting class had rankings like 168, 222, etc., it would make me go "hmm." I am not saying that PG rankings are the determining factor in any coach's recruiting practice -- for all I know the college coaches never even look at them -- all I'm saying is that I as a parent would use them as a sanity check to know if my kid is "fishing in the right pond".

I don’t disagree with you. I’m actually a fan of PG.  All I’m saying is it’s not necessarily apples to apples because kids are seen at different times in their development - I know a kid who was seen freshman year and ranked high follow. Today he wouldn’t be a high follow - he’s one of the top kids in our state and is highly sought after as a rising senior.  His PG rank hasn’t changed so he might look like a high follow in a class made of up majority top 200.  He’s not top 200, but he’s probably top 500. Just saying we can recognize that the system isn’t perfect.  It’s good but not perfect, so I’m not too surprised when I see some variations in rankings in class, which happens a lot outside of the very top baseball schools. 

2019Dad posted:

The way I look at it, if the coaches are so accurate in their assessments, why do half of the kids transfer within two years? 

I've thought about this A LOT over the past couple years, mostly to try to help my son avoid this situation.  I don't think it's because coaches are wrong in their assessments 50% of the time.  If a coach brings in multiple, similarly talented kids to compete for playing time, he's doing his job, but he's going to end up with one kid playing while the other kids are sitting and contemplating transfer, quitting or worrying about getting cut.  Since baseball isn't a game in which subs get lot of playing time, transferring out is the only way for many kids to see the playing field.  So my conclusion was to steer my kid to schools (I insisted on HA schools so he'd get a good education) where his talent could stand out, and make sure he could hit (so he'd still be in the line-up somewhere even if another player was stronger defensively).

2019Dad posted:
GaryMe posted:

Son went fall of sophomore year, graded an “8” and a high follow as a 15 year old. That was the last PG Showcase we ever felt inclined to attend. It does not reflect accurately the player he is now, but I don’t need to give PG $650 to validate his skill level as a rising senior. The college coaches showing interest in him provide that validation.

family friend had a son (same year as mine) who went to a PG event and pulled a hammy in the 60 yd dash, so he has a much slower time that what he really runs (he’s a 6.8 guy). She asked me if it would be worth it to get him to another PG showcase to get a better 60 time posted. My response was “is he getting in front of D1-D2 schools this summer and are they recruiting him?” Her answer was yes and no they are not recruiting him. I told her spending $650 with PG isn’t going to change that.” 

Just my story and opinion

Midwest Mom posted:

There are plenty of kids who do a PG event freshman or sophomore year but then don’t go back. For many their rankings would increase. You can’t put that much stock into PH rankings when it comes down to junior/senior year if they haven’t been recently. I’d say college coaches can accurately assess what they need. And if they’re getting kids in the top 200 they’re probably not doing a bad job. 

The way I look at it, if the coaches are so accurate in their assessments, why do half of the kids transfer within two years? As far as the PG rankings go, I think they are roughly accurate in their buckets, but not within those buckets (Top 100, 101-499, 500, 1000). And of course there are exceptions. And I know so many kids ranked without ever doing a PG showcase that I don't think that is the determining factor. Anyhow, to each his own, in my opinion if my kid had a "1000" ranking and the other kids in his recruiting class had rankings like 168, 222, etc., it would make me go "hmm." I am not saying that PG rankings are the determining factor in any coach's recruiting practice -- for all I know the college coaches never even look at them -- all I'm saying is that I as a parent would use them as a sanity check to know if my kid is "fishing in the right pond".

Saying that because half of the kids transfer, it means the coaches missed on their assessments isn't really that accurate of a statement IF you are just talking about skill.  There are just so many other factors:

A.  Does the kid like the place he is playing? (Small Town kid moves to a big city to, Big Town kid goes to a college town to play, etc.)

B.  Kid just plain gets homesick. (Mom, Dad, Girlfriend, etc.

C.  Pitcher who doesn't care for his PC.

D.  Gets injured.

E.  School is too hard, and wants to transfer to a less demanding university.

There are so many other reasons too.

I don't know that half the kids transfer? .. that's a huge number.   The fact is every year since I have been coming here ( 2009)  everyone has to go through the reality phase.  Mostly that Johnny is not as good as either the coach , the parent , the player thought he was and their goals were were placed to high. Maybe due to getting so much marketing thrown at them, maybe because they have no idea what they are talking about. So here's the travel ball parent test.  Pick either A or B.

1.) WWBA  and there are 40 RC's all huddled together and talking, texting, charting , are they "A" crazy  interested in "my boy"  or answer "B" comparing their fantasy football teams ?

2.) Jupiter WS  there are  50 scouts  behind the screen packed in like sardines, are "A" fighting for the front row to see how great my sons swing is  or "B" trying to stay in the shade.

3.) PBR event, pick one  they are all the same..... 100's of  RC's ...... every college team represented  10 are standing down the 3rd base line.... are they "A" watching the footwork on my stud infielder and his cannon arm,  or "B" trying to check out the sister or mom of a player and not get caught looking ?

4.)  Three weeks ago I was talking to a RC and I quote " I drove to Lake point to see a kid and not only was he terrible the team he was on and the team they were playing was terrible. " 

Here's how it works..... the big dog gotta eat first.... so the SEC then ACC and the PAC12  are going to cherry pick the best 10-12 players they can from where ever they darn well please. They have the money and they get who they want.  

Next are the Big 10 schools, some eastern schools , great schools they take the best from their area.   

Then the SEC and ACC come in again later in the recruiting cycle and take players for what they call the second tier recruits.

Next are the mid-majors, not always fully funded, but take the best in-state kids that are left and the Jucos that turned out alright.  maybe a few from neighboring states. 

If you are not getting any interest from P5 schools by your soph summer and / or interest from national travel teams, or Area Code, East Coast Pro then  you should probably start at the mid-major and work down.  Of course there is always an exception..... maybe you are it.....  Don't bother going to P5 camps, paying a ton of money.... etc....   Another true story..... player was on a recruiting visit to a nice baseball school in Kentucky and not UK.   as he and his family were being lead around they opened a door that went out onto the field... and as luck would have it, there was a camp going on.... and that's when I saw about a 50 players and parents have the uh hu  moment..... 

IF these power 5 schools want you they are not going to invite you to a camp, they are going to call you, they are going to call you daily, they are going to get you to campus "on a academic visit" and make sure they are in the office when you come by. They are going to write your offer on a dry erase board and point to it.   

I mean come on, do you know how many emails these guys get on a daily ?   If you want to answer emails go ahead, if you want to post videos go ahead.... won't do much good really.... 

Take your player to a local college and watch the games, be honest can I play with these guys, am I built like this, as fast as quick, arm as good..... and if you can get one coach or anyone to believe that your son has talent maybe he can go to bat for you.... these coaches are not going to give you 60k in money move you across the country to play D3 ball if they do not have a very good idea of who you are.    Sending tons of emails etc... it does not work that way..... they recruit you , you don't convince them... 

 

 

bacdorslider posted:

I don't know that half the kids transfer? .. that's a huge number.   The fact is every year since I have been coming here ( 2009)  everyone has to go through the reality phase.  Mostly that Johnny is not as good as either the coach , the parent , the player thought he was and their goals were were placed to high. Maybe due to getting so much marketing thrown at them, maybe because they have no idea what they are talking about. So here's the travel ball parent test.  Pick either A or B.

1.) WWBA  and there are 40 RC's all huddled together and talking, texting, charting , are they "A" crazy  interested in "my boy"  or answer "B" comparing their fantasy football teams ?

2.) Jupiter WS  there are  50 scouts  behind the screen packed in like sardines, are "A" fighting for the front row to see how great my sons swing is  or "B" trying to stay in the shade.

3.) PBR event, pick one  they are all the same..... 100's of  RC's ...... every college team represented  10 are standing down the 3rd base line.... are they "A" watching the footwork on my stud infielder and his cannon arm,  or "B" trying to check out the sister or mom of a player and not get caught looking ?

4.)  Three weeks ago I was talking to a RC and I quote " I drove to Lake point to see a kid and not only was he terrible the team he was on and the team they were playing was terrible. " 

Here's how it works..... the big dog gotta eat first.... so the SEC then ACC and the PAC12  are going to cherry pick the best 10-12 players they can from where ever they darn well please. They have the money and they get who they want.  

Next are the Big 10 schools, some eastern schools , great schools they take the best from their area.   

Then the SEC and ACC come in again later in the recruiting cycle and take players for what they call the second tier recruits.

Next are the mid-majors, not always fully funded, but take the best in-state kids that are left and the Jucos that turned out alright.  maybe a few from neighboring states. 

If you are not getting any interest from P5 schools by your soph summer and / or interest from national travel teams, or Area Code, East Coast Pro then  you should probably start at the mid-major and work down.  Of course there is always an exception..... maybe you are it.....  Don't bother going to P5 camps, paying a ton of money.... etc....   Another true story..... player was on a recruiting visit to a nice baseball school in Kentucky and not UK.   as he and his family were being lead around they opened a door that went out onto the field... and as luck would have it, there was a camp going on.... and that's when I saw about a 50 players and parents have the uh hu  moment..... 

IF these power 5 schools want you they are not going to invite you to a camp, they are going to call you, they are going to call you daily, they are going to get you to campus "on a academic visit" and make sure they are in the office when you come by. They are going to write your offer on a dry erase board and point to it.   

I mean come on, do you know how many emails these guys get on a daily ?   If you want to answer emails go ahead, if you want to post videos go ahead.... won't do much good really.... 

Take your player to a local college and watch the games, be honest can I play with these guys, am I built like this, as fast as quick, arm as good..... and if you can get one coach or anyone to believe that your son has talent maybe he can go to bat for you.... these coaches are not going to give you 60k in money move you across the country to play D3 ball if they do not have a very good idea of who you are.    Sending tons of emails etc... it does not work that way..... they recruit you , you don't convince them... 

 

 

Agree with all of the above - except you shortchanged the Big 12.  The answers are all “B” by the way. 

Catchdad44 posted:

I always find it humorous when people say go juco, you will play like there aren't a ton of kids riding the pine in juco as well! Here is the deal go where you are loved regardless of division that's where you will be given the best opportunity to succeed and that is still just opportunity!

I'm not sure whose posts you are reading.  I don't think its been suggested that the JUCO route is easy - it is very competitive.  The fact is that there are a ton of kids that want to play college baseball and the overwhelming majority of them are not ready (for a number of reasons) to secure playing time at any 4 year program as freshmen (or sophomores).  And you are not getting better if you are not playing.  This is especially true for position players. IMO JUCO is a practical alternative that more players should consider. I always find it amusing when people dismiss JUCO as something that their kid is too good for.  Your last sentence is 1000% correct. 

adbono posted:
Catchdad44 posted:

I always find it humorous when people say go juco, you will play like there aren't a ton of kids riding the pine in juco as well! Here is the deal go where you are loved regardless of division that's where you will be given the best opportunity to succeed and that is still just opportunity!

I'm not sure whose posts you are reading.  I don't think its been suggested that the JUCO route is easy - it is very competitive.  The fact is that there are a ton of kids that want to play college baseball and the overwhelming majority of them are not ready (for a number of reasons) to secure playing time at any 4 year program as freshmen (or sophomores).  And you are not getting better if you are not playing.  This is especially true for position players. IMO JUCO is a practical alternative that more players should consider. I always find it amusing when people dismiss JUCO as something that their kid is too good for.  Your last sentence is 1000% correct. 

I think we are in agreement, I just didn't explain myself! JUCO is a great alternative to a four year if that's who is recruiting you but don't expect the competition to be any less difficult. My main point being go where you are recruited, talk to the coaches about where you and your skill set fit in the program that's where you belong regardless of division and then it still doesn't work out sometimes!

Catchdad44 posted:
adbono posted:
Catchdad44 posted:

I always find it humorous when people say go juco, you will play like there aren't a ton of kids riding the pine in juco as well! Here is the deal go where you are loved regardless of division that's where you will be given the best opportunity to succeed and that is still just opportunity!

I'm not sure whose posts you are reading.  I don't think its been suggested that the JUCO route is easy - it is very competitive.  The fact is that there are a ton of kids that want to play college baseball and the overwhelming majority of them are not ready (for a number of reasons) to secure playing time at any 4 year program as freshmen (or sophomores).  And you are not getting better if you are not playing.  This is especially true for position players. IMO JUCO is a practical alternative that more players should consider. I always find it amusing when people dismiss JUCO as something that their kid is too good for.  Your last sentence is 1000% correct. 

I think we are in agreement, I just didn't explain myself! JUCO is a great alternative to a four year if that's who is recruiting you but don't expect the competition to be any less difficult. My main point being go where you are recruited, talk to the coaches about where you and your skill set fit in the program that's where you belong regardless of division and then it still doesn't work out sometimes!

We are in complete agreement! 

I would also add to to the discussion that DII and DIII are becoming more and more competitive as the over-commitment issue continues. I spoke with a RC/Asst Coach at a prominent DII school in So Cal this past week and he told me he is already getting calls from several power 5 D1's in the west asking if they would take players that aren't going to make their roster after the fall season. This coach said it is happening more and more every year.

Then you have talented players that go to these power 5 schools that over commit thinking they will sit their freshman year, get experience and play the next two years. Then, low and behold they end up becoming practice players because the next recruiting class the following two years are also over committed and they have two studs in each of those classes that play their position as well. Its a vicious cycle that becomes extremely demoralizing for some.

I asked the head coach of this DII school what is the one big difference that his transfers from big D1 schools say about playing at a DII? He said, "Certainly not the skill level or quality of play. Most of the guys in DII can play D1. The players all say its how the coaching staff treats them. They care about the players on and off the field much more. Its much more stressful from a job security standpoint for a D1 coach. Winning is essential and players (pitchers definitely) are on a much shorter leash."

My son is a low D1 (at best) player and has offers at every level (called "spots" at D3's??). He is also a "dirtbag"/gym rat. He wants to be on the field all the time. He realizes now he may not get that opportunity at a D1 and does not want to constantly look over his shoulder year after year to see what new stud is coming to take his spot. I think the discussion with these coaches helped him make his decision easier. 

2019cubdad posted:

I would also add to to the discussion that DII and DIII are becoming more and more competitive as the over-commitment issue continues. I spoke with a RC/Asst Coach at a prominent DII school in So Cal this past week and he told me he is already getting calls from several power 5 D1's in the west asking if they would take players that aren't going to make their roster after the fall season. This coach said it is happening more and more every year.

Then you have talented players that go to these power 5 schools that over commit thinking they will sit their freshman year, get experience and play the next two years. Then, low and behold they end up becoming practice players because the next recruiting class the following two years are also over committed and they have two studs in each of those classes that play their position as well. Its a vicious cycle that becomes extremely demoralizing for some.

I asked the head coach of this DII school what is the one big difference that his transfers from big D1 schools say about playing at a DII? He said, "Certainly not the skill level or quality of play. Most of the guys in DII can play D1. The players all say its how the coaching staff treats them. They care about the players on and off the field much more. Its much more stressful from a job security standpoint for a D1 coach. Winning is essential and players (pitchers definitely) are on a much shorter leash."

My son is a low D1 (at best) player and has offers at every level (called "spots" at D3's??). He is also a "dirtbag"/gym rat. He wants to be on the field all the time. He realizes now he may not get that opportunity at a D1 and does not want to constantly look over his shoulder year after year to see what new stud is coming to take his spot. I think the discussion with these coaches helped him make his decision easier. 

I hadn't really heard of the practice of D1 coaches contacting other schools to see if they had spots for overcommits, but that sure is interesting and makes some sense. 

Can't speak to the west, but in the southeast - D2 and Juco ball is on par with D1.  A couple of years ago I ran into a pitcher who left Louisville for fear of not getting reps to come to a Peach Belt conference school (D2).  He told me that he thought he was going to come down and dominate the conference.  Once he got here, he said he would have had better chances to become a regular pitcher if he had stayed at Louisville.  He said he had no idea how thick the talent was in the southeast.  

If you want to play competitive ball, the opportunities are there.

 

a few thoughts.... i agree there are plenty of d2 guys that could play D1 ball. but thats a broad stroke. all this P5 stuff is kinda non sense. without trying to offend, in baseball theres the SEC and then there are a handful in the ACC and PAC12 but honestly the Big 10 and Big 12 are not there . also as far as players getting caught up in the over committing thing, you have to as a player know if you are in the first round of recruiting or the second round of if ypu are filling out the roster. usually you can tell based on scholarship what they really think of you. you cannot go into it thinking that you will sit as a freshman, you have to be honest and say, can i play as a freshman if not dont go there .

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>
bacdorslider posted:
a few thoughts.... i agree there are plenty of d2 guys that could play D1 ball. but thats a broad stroke. all this P5 stuff is kinda non sense. without trying to offend, in baseball theres the SEC and then there are a handful in the ACC and PAC12 but honestly the Big 10 and Big 12 are not there . also as far as players getting caught up in the over committing thing, you have to as a player know if you are in the first round of recruiting or the second round of if ypu are filling out the roster. usually you can tell based on scholarship what they really think of you. you cannot go into it thinking that you will sit as a freshman, you have to be honest and say, can i play as a freshman if not dont go there .

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Just look at Perfect Game 2019 Commits. Oklahoma, Wichita State, Michigan, etc. I can name more. They are all over committed. Iowa may even be this year. Seniors are coming back unexpectedly. As far as free agents, look at who the reps are signing. They are not signing guys that sat on the bench for D1s for three years. They want guys that played and played at a high level at d2, NAIA or D1.

Its become a huge problem. My son's high school team has 9 D1 commits this season and three of them won't start this year.

bacdorslider posted:
a few thoughts.... i agree there are plenty of d2 guys that could play D1 ball. but thats a broad stroke. all this P5 stuff is kinda non sense. without trying to offend, in baseball theres the SEC and then there are a handful in the ACC and PAC12 but honestly the Big 10 and Big 12 are not there . also as far as players getting caught up in the over committing thing, you have to as a player know if you are in the first round of recruiting or the second round of if ypu are filling out the roster. usually you can tell based on scholarship what they really think of you. you cannot go into it thinking that you will sit as a freshman, you have to be honest and say, can i play as a freshman if not dont go there .

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Texas, Texas Tech and TCU might disagree...

 

2019cubdad posted:
bacdorslider posted:
a few thoughts.... i agree there are plenty of d2 guys that could play D1 ball. but thats a broad stroke. all this P5 stuff is kinda non sense. without trying to offend, in baseball theres the SEC and then there are a handful in the ACC and PAC12 but honestly the Big 10 and Big 12 are not there . also as far as players getting caught up in the over committing thing, you have to as a player know if you are in the first round of recruiting or the second round of if ypu are filling out the roster. usually you can tell based on scholarship what they really think of you. you cannot go into it thinking that you will sit as a freshman, you have to be honest and say, can i play as a freshman if not dont go there .

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Just look at Perfect Game 2019 Commits. Oklahoma, Wichita State, Michigan, etc. I can name more. They are all over committed. Iowa may even be this year. Seniors are coming back unexpectedly. As far as free agents, look at who the reps are signing. They are not signing guys that sat on the bench for D1s for three years. They want guys that played and played at a high level at d2, NAIA or D1.

Its become a huge problem. My son's high school team has 9 D1 commits this season and three of them won't start this year.

2019cubdad,

I think you are misunderstanding bacdorslider. There are plenty of D1 schools overcommitting players because coaches' jobs depend on it.  But P5 is not relevant in baseball, not the way it is football and basketball. You can look at the stadiums, the attendance to games, and most specifically the coaches salaries as indicators.   Players are willing to overcommit, drop their commitments to other D1s, etc to play for an SEC team.  They don't care that Arkansas has committed 80 players in the last 4 years. 

So it is SEC first,  then ACC (top 2/3) and PAC (again top 2/3), but the  Big10 and Big12 don't have the same extent interest level of the fan base, the stadiums, and coaches salaries just are not there with isolated schools being the exception.  So kids overcommitting to these other P5 schools might be better served to consider offers from other conferences like the Southern Conference, the American Athletic conference, Sun Belt, Conference USA, and Atlantic Sun which have equal or deeper overall baseball talent than the Big 10, Big 12.  There are programs like Mercer, Coastal Carloina, Cental Florida, South Florida, Rice, etc (just naming a few, these conferences are really deep) that have superior programs by comparison to what you see in most of Big 10 and Big 12.  Mercer has dominated both ACC and SEC opponents over the past decade. Georgia stopped playing Mercer last year, because they were 1-7 against Mercer the previous 4 years.  Coastal Carolina won the CWS as a member of the SoCon two years ago, and is now in the Sun Belt.  Heck, in the tiny population state of South Carolina, USC and Clemson struggle with in state rivalries with schools like Coastal, Furman, College of Charleston, USC Upstate, an Charleston Southern more than thy do with in-conference opponents.

It pains me to say it, but anyone of those 'mid major' programs has more talent in any given year than my home state OSU Buckeyes do.  So talking P5 in baseball, just is not the same as NCAAF. 

Bacdorslider is right in his next post; it won't change unless the athletes and their parents stop overcommitting.

baseballhs posted:
bacdorslider posted:
a few thoughts.... i agree there are plenty of d2 guys that could play D1 ball. but thats a broad stroke. all this P5 stuff is kinda non sense. without trying to offend, in baseball theres the SEC and then there are a handful in the ACC and PAC12 but honestly the Big 10 and Big 12 are not there . also as far as players getting caught up in the over committing thing, you have to as a player know if you are in the first round of recruiting or the second round of if ypu are filling out the roster. usually you can tell based on scholarship what they really think of you. you cannot go into it thinking that you will sit as a freshman, you have to be honest and say, can i play as a freshman if not dont go there .

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Texas, Texas Tech and TCU might disagree...

 

I agree. Not the first time you have shortchanged the Big 12 in your posts. 

When the NCAA capped DI rosters at a maximum of 35 players in 2007, they opened an unintended "can of worms." At least, I hope it was unintended.

Prior to 2007, there had always been a certain number of players who might have been at the margin for DI programs; but, who for a host of reasons individual to them, would decide to stay at their chosen school.  As a result, it wasn't unusual to see DI rosters number in the 36-45 range.

Players and coaches involved understood that playing time for them would likely be limited, and that was generally okay with those involved. There was much less gnashing of teeth over "over recruiting" in that environment because there was no hard-and-fast edict to deal with; limiting the roster to 35 players.

Introduce the 35-man limit and, suddenly, coaches are faced with the prospect of trying to recruit to exactly that number if they want to avoid the anguish of cutting and transferring; and the vast majority do want to avoid that. Unfortunately, there are a host of uncontrollable factors that make the objective almost impossible to attain consistently. When you consider the vagaries of the draft on both the incoming 18-year-olds  and the returning 21-year-olds, the inevitable injuries and subsequent recovery periods, the toll of academic and disciplinary washouts, and a host of personal reasons for players' decisions to transfer or quit, coaches are recruiting to, at best. an imprecise estimate of their final needs.

Add to this the common belief among coaches that a roster of even a few less than 35 will exponentially increase the prospects of losing games over a 56-game regular season schedule, and you get a natural inclination to err a bit on the high side on the number of commitments accepted.

For all of these reasons, I think the 35-man roster limit was ill advised and ought to be rescinded. 

baseballhs posted:
bacdorslider posted:
a few thoughts.... i agree there are plenty of d2 guys that could play D1 ball. but thats a broad stroke. all this P5 stuff is kinda non sense. without trying to offend, in baseball theres the SEC and then there are a handful in the ACC and PAC12 but honestly the Big 10 and Big 12 are not there . also as far as players getting caught up in the over committing thing, you have to as a player know if you are in the first round of recruiting or the second round of if ypu are filling out the roster. usually you can tell based on scholarship what they really think of you. you cannot go into it thinking that you will sit as a freshman, you have to be honest and say, can i play as a freshman if not dont go there .

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Texas, Texas Tech and TCU might disagree...

 

You are correct they might..... that's why I said a handful..... My son pitched a TTU so I do kinda feel I have some insight. 

I agree the 35 man roster should be rescinded - I think a roster limit of 30 would be better! I would also create a rule where if the schools don't release a player to play somewhere else they can't use the scholarship dollars until he can.

That will slow down the recruiting process, spread out the talent and take "God complex" out of coaching and make the schools really think about the recruits they are bringing instead of just stockpiling talent.

Of course the coaches won't like it, they will have to work harder, be accountable and there will needs on both program and player sides to find the right fit and get along. if a 65 game season is to much for 30 players cut it back.

adbono posted:
baseballhs posted:
bacdorslider posted:
a few thoughts.... i agree there are plenty of d2 guys that could play D1 ball. but thats a broad stroke. all this P5 stuff is kinda non sense. without trying to offend, in baseball theres the SEC and then there are a handful in the ACC and PAC12 but honestly the Big 10 and Big 12 are not there . also as far as players getting caught up in the over committing thing, you have to as a player know if you are in the first round of recruiting or the second round of if ypu are filling out the roster. usually you can tell based on scholarship what they really think of you. you cannot go into it thinking that you will sit as a freshman, you have to be honest and say, can i play as a freshman if not dont go there .

Get Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36>

Texas, Texas Tech and TCU might disagree...

 

I agree. Not the first time you have shortchanged the Big 12 in your posts. 

Well , if you can convince me otherwise... OSU scrimmaged VU last week  it was not close..... of course Texas, TCU and Tech are quality programs  but hardly , Georgia , VU, Miss St. Ark, South Carolina, Florida, LSU, Mizzo,  it is what it is

We can all agree that the SEC has been the strongest conference recently. In fact, based on the 21st century rate of CWS titles, in another three or four hundred years it should catch the PAC 12 in overall number of CWS titles:

PAC 12: 28 CWS titles overall, 5 so far this century

SEC: 11 CWS titles overall, 6 so far this century

 

2019Dad posted:

We can all agree that the SEC has been the strongest conference recently. In fact, based on the 21st century rate of CWS titles, in another three or four hundred years it should catch the PAC 12 in overall number of CWS titles:

PAC 12: 28 CWS titles overall, 5 so far this century

SEC: 11 CWS titles overall, 6 so far this century

 

Well played 2019Dad. That’s funny!

In fairness though, it was the Big 12 that got snubbed rather than the PAC 12.

There’s obviously some good spirited conference bias at play in this thread though...which is fun. However, The argument might have been better if it was made for warm weather schools vs cold. 

As far as “quality”...Texas is arguably the best (or one of the best) collegiate baseball programs of all time. 6 titles, 6 runner up finishes. (Disclaimer, I grew up rooting against Texas...so no homer-ism here).

This is from their wiki page. 

Texas holds the records for most appearances in the College World Series (36), most individual CWS games won (85), most overall NCAA Tournament games won (240), and most NCAA Tournament appearances (59); the second-place programs in these categories have 25 CWS appearances (Miami), wins in 74 CWS games (Southern California), 192 overall NCAA Tournament wins (Florida State and Miami), and 56 NCAA Tournament appearances (Florida State), as of June 11, 2018.

 

PlayWithEffort posted:
2019Dad posted:

We can all agree that the SEC has been the strongest conference recently. In fact, based on the 21st century rate of CWS titles, in another three or four hundred years it should catch the PAC 12 in overall number of CWS titles:

PAC 12: 28 CWS titles overall, 5 so far this century

SEC: 11 CWS titles overall, 6 so far this century

 

Well played 2019Dad. That’s funny!

In fairness though, it was the Big 12 that got snubbed rather than the PAC 12.

There’s obviously some good spirited conference bias at play in this thread though...which is fun. However, The argument might have been better if it was made for warm weather schools vs cold. 

As far as “quality”...Texas is arguably the best (or one of the best) collegiate baseball programs of all time. 6 titles, 6 runner up finishes. (Disclaimer, I grew up rooting against Texas...so no homer-ism here).

This is from their wiki page. 

Texas holds the records for most appearances in the College World Series (36), most individual CWS games won (85), most overall NCAA Tournament games won (240), and most NCAA Tournament appearances (59); the second-place programs in these categories have 25 CWS appearances (Miami), wins in 74 CWS games (Southern California), 192 overall NCAA Tournament wins (Florida State and Miami), and 56 NCAA Tournament appearances (Florida State), as of June 11, 2018.

 

You would have to look long & hard to find anyone that detests the University of Texas more than I do.  But PlayWithEffort’s post is spot on. Their baseball program can’t be left out of this conversation. 

old_school posted:

...[coaches] will have to work harder, be accountable ...

If you aren't aware that DI coaches as a group already work extremely hard and feel very accountable for their actions to a variety of disparate constituencies (not the least of which would be the players they recruit), you don't know many DI coaches very well.

Prepster posted:
old_school posted:

...[coaches] will have to work harder, be accountable ...

If you aren't aware that DI coaches as a group already work extremely hard and feel very accountable for their actions to a variety of disparate constituencies (not the least of which would be the players they recruit), you don't know many DI coaches very well.

I never said they didn't work hard, I believe there could be a better standard.

Take a pole of highly successful people and see how many feel they don't work hard in whatever occupation. I seem to recall countless posts on this website and many others that say hard work is the minimum standard nothing special. Of course that is for players but I wouldn't see why it shouldn't apply to coaches as well. 

I have a client that is in the process of laying of 35% of its work force across the country...that will make you feel very accountable. 

bacdorslider posted:

I don't know that half the kids transfer? .. that's a huge number.   The fact is every year since I have been coming here ( 2009)  everyone has to go through the reality phase.  Mostly that Johnny is not as good as either the coach , the parent , the player thought he was and their goals were were placed to high. Maybe due to getting so much marketing thrown at them, maybe because they have no idea what they are talking about. So here's the travel ball parent test.  Pick either A or B.

1.) WWBA  and there are 40 RC's all huddled together and talking, texting, charting , are they "A" crazy  interested in "my boy"  or answer "B" comparing their fantasy football teams ?

2.) Jupiter WS  there are  50 scouts  behind the screen packed in like sardines, are "A" fighting for the front row to see how great my sons swing is  or "B" trying to stay in the shade.

3.) PBR event, pick one  they are all the same..... 100's of  RC's ...... every college team represented  10 are standing down the 3rd base line.... are they "A" watching the footwork on my stud infielder and his cannon arm,  or "B" trying to check out the sister or mom of a player and not get caught looking ?

4.)  Three weeks ago I was talking to a RC and I quote " I drove to Lake point to see a kid and not only was he terrible the team he was on and the team they were playing was terrible. " 

Here's how it works..... the big dog gotta eat first.... so the SEC then ACC and the PAC12  are going to cherry pick the best 10-12 players they can from where ever they darn well please. They have the money and they get who they want.  

Next are the Big 10 schools, some eastern schools , great schools they take the best from their area.   

Then the SEC and ACC come in again later in the recruiting cycle and take players for what they call the second tier recruits.

Next are the mid-majors, not always fully funded, but take the best in-state kids that are left and the Jucos that turned out alright.  maybe a few from neighboring states. 

If you are not getting any interest from P5 schools by your soph summer and / or interest from national travel teams, or Area Code, East Coast Pro then  you should probably start at the mid-major and work down.  Of course there is always an exception..... maybe you are it.....  Don't bother going to P5 camps, paying a ton of money.... etc....   Another true story..... player was on a recruiting visit to a nice baseball school in Kentucky and not UK.   as he and his family were being lead around they opened a door that went out onto the field... and as luck would have it, there was a camp going on.... and that's when I saw about a 50 players and parents have the uh hu  moment..... 

IF these power 5 schools want you they are not going to invite you to a camp, they are going to call you, they are going to call you daily, they are going to get you to campus "on a academic visit" and make sure they are in the office when you come by. They are going to write your offer on a dry erase board and point to it.   

I mean come on, do you know how many emails these guys get on a daily ?   If you want to answer emails go ahead, if you want to post videos go ahead.... won't do much good really.... 

Take your player to a local college and watch the games, be honest can I play with these guys, am I built like this, as fast as quick, arm as good..... and if you can get one coach or anyone to believe that your son has talent maybe he can go to bat for you.... these coaches are not going to give you 60k in money move you across the country to play D3 ball if they do not have a very good idea of who you are.    Sending tons of emails etc... it does not work that way..... they recruit you , you don't convince them... 

 

 

This is the most honest, smartest, and at times, most humorous summary of a high school player's recruiting experience I have ever read! It very much crystalizes the process our son experienced. He had his sights on top D-1 power 5 schools. We received snippets of interest here and there but no offers. He has ended up at a mid-major school which ended up being a perfect fit for him. Looking back, I wonder if he had been "committed" to a top school, would he have showed up and never played? I agree that the only way you can be sure your son will play is if he is a scholarship player (and lives up to potential of course).

adbono posted:
PlayWithEffort posted:
2019Dad posted:

We can all agree that the SEC has been the strongest conference recently. In fact, based on the 21st century rate of CWS titles, in another three or four hundred years it should catch the PAC 12 in overall number of CWS titles:

PAC 12: 28 CWS titles overall, 5 so far this century

SEC: 11 CWS titles overall, 6 so far this century

 

Well played 2019Dad. That’s funny!

In fairness though, it was the Big 12 that got snubbed rather than the PAC 12.

There’s obviously some good spirited conference bias at play in this thread though...which is fun. However, The argument might have been better if it was made for warm weather schools vs cold. 

As far as “quality”...Texas is arguably the best (or one of the best) collegiate baseball programs of all time. 6 titles, 6 runner up finishes. (Disclaimer, I grew up rooting against Texas...so no homer-ism here).

This is from their wiki page. 

Texas holds the records for most appearances in the College World Series (36), most individual CWS games won (85), most overall NCAA Tournament games won (240), and most NCAA Tournament appearances (59); the second-place programs in these categories have 25 CWS appearances (Miami), wins in 74 CWS games (Southern California), 192 overall NCAA Tournament wins (Florida State and Miami), and 56 NCAA Tournament appearances (Florida State), as of June 11, 2018.

 

You would have to look long & hard to find anyone that detests the University of Texas more than I do.  But PlayWithEffort’s post is spot on. Their baseball program can’t be left out of this conversation. 

Hey guys I said the Pac-12 and Big -12 had a few good teams and of course they do,,,, but top to bottom the SEC is stronger, especially if you don't count Alabama baseball.... I heard they are going to the Gulf South conference.

Hmmm...I'm inclined to agree with bacdorslider.  and do not think that he should have backed from his original pecking order, especially with the surge in the SEC over the past two decades.

But our "collective awareness" of college baseball tends to be shaped by what we see in football.  It is not the same.  The changes instituted back in 2009 that made the limits of 35 roster spots, with 11.7 scholaships for 27 spots, and no one less than .25 leveled the playing field among the 300 D1 programs to large degree.

Many top players are selecting to play at baseball outside P5 for better exposure, increased playing time, lower cost of attendance, better academic fit, certain coaching philosophy, etc.  Although there will still be plenty of over-commits at many P5 schools, many of those "over-commit" players will end up scrambling to find a D2 or Juco spot.

Whether the NCAA intended to improve the situation for the players or not, the effect is that it has.  Graduation rates were abysmal among P5 powerhouse baseball programs.  Arizona, the biggest offender, had a practice of bringing in dozens of freshman on .1 scholarships, or books only scholarships.  Then (Arizona and most other power programs) effectively held fall tryouts for those that would make the "travel roster". Their (Arizona) graduation rates were in single digit percentages - like 3 to 9.

The SEC has the highest coaches' salaries, the biggest stadiums, and the largest attendance. These are facts, not debatable opinion.  So it is the is the big dog - cynically because it is the most willing to exploit it's young baseball players to make a buck.  Realistically, it is because it has the biggest investment. , Then comes the ACC and PAC.  The BIG 12 definitely before the BIG10, but only because Texas is so top heavy.  Pull out Texas and it is the BIG10 when it comes to baseball. 

Go44dad posted:

First round draft picks since 1965 wins it?  Please...

Draft picks last year by conference

SEC 90

B12 48

ACC 44

P12 40

B10 29

The results are in. There will be no recount. 

Last year was an aberration. I like the 2017 draft picks by conference:

ACC: 75 (average of 5.4 per team)

SEC: 75 (5.4 per team)

P12: 46 (4.2 per team)

B12: 43 (4.8 per team)

B1G: 35 (2.7 per team)

Ivy: 13 (1.6 per team)

Those are the six conferences generally known as the "Power 6," right?

Go44dad posted:

First round draft picks since 1965 wins it?  Please...

Draft picks last year by conference

SEC 90

B12 48

ACC 44

P12 40

B10 29

The results are in. There will be no recount. 

OK Go44dad, they all have great players, but I just presented one piece of evidence in support of bacdorslider's assertion (that I 100% agree with but Big12 fans and Pac fans seem to take issue with).  Of note, my son was recruited by schools in every P5 and 4 of the 8 the Ivy's, has the measurable and academics that he could have gone anywhere he wanted.  Ultimately he signed with a great D1 baseball program in a smaller conference for multiple reasons, staff, proximity to home, academic match, coaching philosophy, success with pitchers in the draft, etc.

I was trying to give other conferences (outside the SEC) the benefit of the doubt by going back to the beginning of the draft, but I like recent history even better.  If I combine your 2018 numbers with 2019dad's from 2017, the clear pecking order is SEC first, then the ACC followed by the PAC, Big12 and Big10.  It is kind of what we all know if you follow the sport beyond ESPN coverage.

There is no doubt that Texas is an elite and possibly best the program historically, as are USC and Stanford in the PAC.  Without those teams, those conferences are not even close to the SEC currently or historically.  But when it comes to the SEC, you could take out LSU and Florida, and you would still be left with Auburn, Vandy, SC, Ole Miss, Miss St., A&M, UGA, Kentucky, etc.  The SEC is different.  I say this as someone who grew up in  BIG10 country and lived in midway between Columbus and Ann Arbor for my first 40 years. Spending the last 8 in the southeast and following the college baseball for decades, my opinion is that  most Big10 and Big 12 team, outside of a few schools, would struggle in D2 conferences in the SE, which are really just an extension of D1.

2019Dad posted:
 

Last year was an aberration. I like the 2017 draft picks by conference:

ACC: 75 (average of 5.4 per team)

SEC: 75 (5.4 per team)

P12: 46 (4.2 per team)

B12: 43 (4.8 per team)

B1G: 35 (2.7 per team)

Ivy: 13 (1.6 per team)

Those are the six conferences generally known as the "Power 6," right?

3 to 6 draft picks per team, of those what 10% or so make a career of the MLB...chase the dream if you can but you better have fall back plan. I would be curious how many of the 90% or so that don't make it actually have one. Being an assistant coach in single A is even less appealing then playing it. 

old_school posted:
2019Dad posted:
 

Last year was an aberration. I like the 2017 draft picks by conference:

ACC: 75 (average of 5.4 per team)

SEC: 75 (5.4 per team)

P12: 46 (4.2 per team)

B12: 43 (4.8 per team)

B1G: 35 (2.7 per team)

Ivy: 13 (1.6 per team)

Those are the six conferences generally known as the "Power 6," right?

3 to 6 draft picks per team, of those what 10% or so make a career of the MLB...chase the dream if you can but you better have fall back plan. I would be curious how many of the 90% or so that don't make it actually have one. Being an assistant coach in single A is even less appealing then playing it. 

I completely agree with you about coaching in single A. But I know a couple of guys who have done it and loved it. They were career minor leaguers who made it to AAA. They retired when they couldn’t find a MLB organization to sign them for AAA. The strategy all along at that point was to get into coaching.

They both made enough money playing 8-10 years in the minors to not starve. Older AAAA players often make 100k in the minors for a few years. Plus weeks in the majors is a 40K paycheck. One of them spent two years in Japan and made 1M.

i would think the bus rides and Econo Lodges would suck. But these guys have a passion for the game. They see themselves in MLB dugouts some day. 

One kid’s dad told me when the kid was playing he could fall asleep on the floor of the back of the bus with a blanket. I went to a few of his AA games. He was having the most fun of everyone in pregame.

To each their own I guess, I would like to see my son sharpen his skills to be the owner of the organization! I am getting old and maybe I just am not enough of a dreamer but the lifestyle just isn't that impressive to me.

Almost of all of these kids would be better served by putting the same work ethic they used on the ballfield into a career with big upside or most any good entrepreneurial endeavor.

2019Dad posted

Last year was an aberration. I like the 2017 draft picks by conference:

ACC: 75 (average of 5.4 per team)

SEC: 75 (5.4 per team)

P12: 46 (4.2 per team)

B12: 43 (4.8 per team)

B1G: 35 (2.7 per team)

Ivy: 13 (1.6 per team)

Those are the six conferences generally known as the "Power 6," right?

Haha, easy now......My son was one of those 13 Ivy selections.  There were four kids drafted from his team that year.  Power 6 - that's pretty funny.

9and7dad posted:
2019Dad posted

Last year was an aberration. I like the 2017 draft picks by conference:

ACC: 75 (average of 5.4 per team)

SEC: 75 (5.4 per team)

P12: 46 (4.2 per team)

B12: 43 (4.8 per team)

B1G: 35 (2.7 per team)

Ivy: 13 (1.6 per team)

Those are the six conferences generally known as the "Power 6," right?

Haha, easy now......My son was one of those 13 Ivy selections.  There were four kids drafted from his team that year.  Power 6 - that's pretty funny.

Did anyone analyze only position players that were drafted? I wonder how much those numbers changed. 

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×