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>

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×