D3 recruits may be able to sign commitment letters soon.

Thanks Bishops for posting this good news!

BLD, thank you for the post and link.

Boy, I am not at all sure this is a positive development. IMO, and I have posted it here, the NLI can be so artificial.  Is the article saying we want to make D3 athletics and the NLI similar to everyone gets a ribbon?

For so many, an NLI is not meaningful into the future. It is not any reliable predictor of success or even competing in college.  ESPN has turned the NLI into something it never was, and is not except, perhaps for football and basketball.

Saving a D3 coach time/effort in recruiting after January of the senior year seems to make it easier for coaches. As BOF posted just today, the recruiting of his son accelerated in January of his senior year, after he did not sign a D1/2 NLI.

Whether it is for a pat on the back to get publicity or to lessen the "burden" on a D3 coach, I am not persuaded by either position, as a reason to change the current procedures...no NLI.

Infield Dad. I agree with you. My son did not choose his school until the end of May of his senior year, at his Baseball Banquet. There is no way that he would have been ready to sign today. He was just starting to really focusing on D3 about this time.
If you asked him today, if he regrets not having a paper to sign? I believe his answer would be no. D3 recruiting us just starting in earnest at some of the top baseball schools. D1 talent that did not get a NLI may now start considering D3.
I would be totally against it if it was binding.

I'd hate to disagree, but I do with the comment about this making it like everyone gets a ribbon.  Only one percent of student athletes make it to the college level.  That is hardly everyone gets a ribbon.  This is a seminal point in the lives of these athletes.  As a father of a child who is signing his NLI today, I am going to enjoy it, take as many pictures as I can, and be extremely proud of my son.  And, yes, I will pat him on the back.

Agree . . .

D3 "commitments," especially those linked to early decision, are already heavily stacked in favor of the institution.  They impose zero costs, consequences, or constraints on the school, but they take the athlete off everyone else's recruiting board.  The coach may promise a roster spot, but that costs him exactly nothing because he doesn't have a roster limit. 

 

The NLI does NOTHING for the athlete. The money is offered and accepted in the accompanying grant in aid form. All the NLI does is bind the athlete to the school and the transfer rules. I don't know what a "non-binding" NLI would say.

 

I understand why the schools would want this, but I have no idea why prospective D3 athletes would want NLI's.

If this goes through, I'm not sure what that says about D3 athletics in general, what it changes or what problem is solves.

 

It would seem to me that D3 athletics would be changing its charter as a well-rounded participatory college athletic experience just by adding or acknowledging this signing process.  It is not clear to me what problem (if any) this solves.  A non-binding written document has the same status as a non-binding verbal committment.  D3 is perfect just the way it is.  JMO. 

 

I think the point was limited to comparing a DIII "non-binding" letter to a ribbon. An actual NLI is a contract for an athletic scholarship. In DIII, there are no athletic scholarships and no roster limits, so signing a "non-binding" letter wouldn't be a very significant event. It sounds like this is mostly about the DIII commits being left out on Signing Day.

 

For the DIII student athlete and his family, committing to the school, getting your acceptance letter, and often receiving the financial aid package are the significant events during senior year of high school.

 

Basically it is so D3 athletes can participate in signing day if their school has one. It gives the student something to sign.

 

I know several Baseball players who have already "committed" to a D3 school. In my opinion this is not a good idea. The student may have an idea what they are going to pay for he school, but I have seen more than one player commit only to change his mind once they received the financial package. If you have already committed to a D3 school what leverage do you have in negotiating with admissions and the financial aid office.  

I think it is far better to keep your options open. From the article, since the letter is non binding, other schools can still continue to recruit you. But then whats the point of signing? How many coaches are going to say, "yeah, it is not binding but you committed". In reality their is not much they can do, but is their a point to signing a letter that in reality means nothing?If a High School chooses they can still celebrate the D3 commitments, if they chose to without this. 

The more I think about it the more I think it might be the first step down a slippery slope. 

Moosecheese, while I might have overstated the comparison, my perspective on the NLI is much different than yours, but I come at this with a son who did not sign one and had a great college career on and off the field.  Where I think we see the NLI through a very different lenses is whether the NLI being a seminal event  is a fact or question.  One aspect I have learned about playing beyond HS is that once a player steps onto a college baseball field, no one cares who signed an NLI or didn't and what anyone did before means nothing in terms of who plays tomorrow. 

On our local baseball board, a HS coach who is probably with the very top  coaches in the United States commented on the recruiting process,the NLI, the publicizing of NLI's and how the NLI and verbal is too often portrayed and viewed for something it is not, in college baseball.  Below is a cut and paste of his perspectives.  Where I really agree with this coach's perspectives is the NLI not being the destination but rather the "beginning of the pressure to get better."

 

"A college commitment is the beginning of the pressure to get better, not the destination. Players need to have getting better be their top priority rather than where they are playing in college.There needs to be understood standards that must be met to play college ball...   for a baseball player, it(the NLI/scholarship) may have paid for 25% (or less) of ONE year of college with zero assurances for year #2.  In fact, year #2 may be nothing or a reduction or being cut.  The committed athlete may not even make the roster for the spring after just a fall in college.  75% of the frosh play less than 25% of the innings for a division one team. That is published data.  So lauding the commitment, that is shaky to begin with, really feeds this problem."

 

To me, the NLI being something truly important or a seminal time might have a place in college baseball at D1 and D2, especially if others follow the Pac12 and college baseball scholarships become 4 years, not one(or less in too many situations.)

I fully get why many who have son's signing them today are celebrating the NLI and their son. Placed in the  context of a 4 year scholarship, and an NLI being an opportunity for the future involving incredibly hard work, determination and the "demand" to get better, I think the NLI can be important, Placed in the context of celebrating at school, getting publicity or being a seminal event, such as we see on ESPN with football and basketball, my view is the NLI can be experienced or portrayed as something it really isn't, in terms of the  future those hoping to play college baseball. IMO, so long as anyone having a son signing an NLI realizes the risks, the demands and the fact it is the beginning of a journey far more rigorous than most realize,the NLI can be important.

At the D3 level, I do not believe the NLI can or should be recognized or become a reality.  The article BLD linked, to my reading, suggests the underpinnings for doing a D3 NLI are for all the wrong reasons.

How can it be binding when there is no baseball money being given?

 

Are you saying coaches want to bind players without the coaches being bound in return?  Run from any coach who says that!

 

What do we do about the kid who's told he figures big in the coach's plans, only to show up in the fall of his freshman year to discover there are 55 other kids on the field who were all told the same thing?  Are coaches saying they want to reserve the right to cut kids, but bar them from going elsewhere at the same time? 

 

Hopefully someone will keep players from getting shafted.  The fact that a player feels left out of the hoopla because he didn't get a signing ceremony or some BS is not good enough reason to walk into a trap here.

The NLI is a document that heavily favors the College - NOT the athlete. Have you ever read and actual NLI? 

Great read on the reality of the NLI:

 

http://www.moneyplayersblog.co...g/2010/11/index.html

I see a risk with every college student or athlete.  If a student is not an athlete, there are risks.  If he or she does not perform academically, any scholarship or aid can and will be pulled.  Yes, the aid or academic scholarship usually covers four years, and the athletic scholarship does not, at most institutions, but the risks are at least similar.  An athlete should already understand that he or she has to work hard at the next level.  If not, a high school coach, travel coach or parents have not done their jobs.  

First I agree with much that has been posted here.

 

If you read the article it indicates the the NCAA will make this a ceremonial document that is non binding. To me this is fine, kids can sign and enjoy the process if they want. As noted by BLD at least in baseball much of the DIII recruiting comes after the signing period anyway.

 

Notice that the coaches wanted to make it binding (why not....if you are a coach) but there is/was resistance to this.  Make it a ceremonial document and move on. 

 

As a side note when my son "signed" he was signing the academic scholarship documents, which is what was important and I can assure you we celebrated that! 

 

Thanks for the link BLD.

Don't the Ivies provide something like this already -- a likelihood of admittance letter for student athletes.  They don't give athletic scholarship, as I understand it.   But I know kids who sign this letter on signing days at school signing ceremonies.  I think this is a completely non-binding thing. 

SD,

 

Not exactly.  Likely Letters come from Admission to inform a recruit they are extremely likely to be admitted (after the recruit has verbally committed to the Coach) if the recruit keeps their grades up, doesn't commit a serious crime, and provides an Early Decision application.  There is nothing to sign officially other than your ED application (which is binding) and application $ check.  Likley Letters are intended to compete with NLIs for athletes that Ivys want.  Ivy recruits can sign a blank piece of paper at signing cereomonies (as my oldest son did) at his high school.  

 

Some of the more savvy Ivy recruits will verbally commit, apply RD then change their online application to ED (binding) once the Likely Letter is received by the Ivy athlete from Admissions.  I would only consider this if the recruit has other options and a good amount of leverage.

 

Let me know if you have questions or if that didn't clarify.

"If you read the article it indicates the the NCAA will make this a ceremonial document that is non binding. To me this is fine, kids can sign and enjoy the process if they want. As noted by BLD at least in baseball much of the DIII recruiting comes after the signing period anyway."

 

Well, that takes care of my initial concerns.

 

Now I'm just concerned that the indulgent, helicopter parent, "everyone gets a trophy" attitude has infected the NCAA's offices.  Like they weren't mentally afflicted enough as it is.

 

fenway,

Can you clarify why this approach is an advantage?  The RD application would seem to reduce the chances of getting a Likely Letter and work against the recruit, and if he really wants to go to that school ED doesn't seem like a big risk.  But I'm sure I'm missing something.  Thanks.

 

Smitty28,

 

Ivy recruitment can be more risky than traditional D1 due to the Admissions requirements.  The other risk is that many top ivy recruits will end up passing over previous D1 scholarship offers due to the ivy recruitment timetable.  Many people I know understand this risk and have passed up on D1 scholarships to attend one of these (Ivy) schools mostly for academic reasons.

 

LL are issued after Oct 1 into December. There is really no getting around this additional risk the recruit is taking on.  I'm suggesting the risk can be managed if the recruit has leverage and options.  Leverage could be in the form of recruitment interest from other Ivys, Patriot or D1 interest.   The Ivy Coach is under more pressure to follow through with Admissions to issue a LL for the recruit if he knows the recruit will change his application from RD to ED.  This approach puts added incentive or pressure on the Coach to make sure a recruit gets a LL or he could go to another Ivy or D1 program.  If the Coach can't get Admissions to issue a LL, then the recruit isn't bound to the ED and would be free to pursue other options.

 

Please send me a PM Dialog if you want to discuss further as this is getting away from teh OPs original topic.

Fenway ... I've been told plenty of NESCAC athletes (of all sports) could have played mid level D1. Is part of this due to the Ivy admissions process going south on them at the last minute, other D1 offers are off the table and they want a top academic college?