Early commitment question

CTbballDad posted:

RJM posted:

One of the best posts I ever saw on here was when someone asked a poster if his son knew where (regionally) he wanted to play college ball. The response was, “He’s fifteen. He has trouble figuring out what he’s wants for lunch.”

The problem with really early commitments is the players have stars in their eyes. Most can’t rationally make college decisions and decide which college is best for them academically. So, the parents have to make the decision. This isn’t always a good idea. This is a tough enough decision for any high school senior, much less a fourteen or fifteen year old.

Because girls mature sooner my daughter made her softball decision soph year when she was fifteen. She knew what she wanted to be when she grew up. She knew where she wanted to go to college based on the required major. She’s thirty now. She’s never worked a day in her life (and won’t) in her chosen major.

The college decision she made was fine for softball. But she had to work for two years building contacts and references for grad school due to her undergrad choice. While her college was tops in her major overall it had a mediocre reputation.

 

Great post, but the story about your daughter also applies to 18, 20, 22 year olds, etc.  One thing I told my wife, and many can/may roast me for this, is I want to make sure my son really enjoys his baseball experience in choosing his school.  That's because these years are fleeting.  He'll have decades to work afterwards.

Dont get me wrong, my oldest non-athletic daughter goes to a fine school as is my son.  But I'm also not a huge believer that the school is going to guarantee you anything after baseball.  If we can find a balance for both, that is ideal.

Question is, did she have regrets and was her Softball experience worth the 2 years of building contacts?  My guess is, as the years go by and she has a family of her own, and maybe a softball playing daughter, she'll really value the choices she made and take great pride in the fact she played college ball.

Her situation actually forced her into a situation I recommend. I started working then got my MBA at night and weekends. With a couple of years of work experience before starting I understood reality versus theory. 

My daughter’s situation forced her to work in a large international law firm doing research for two years before attending law school. 

Regarding GPA ....

There isn’t a standard from one school district to the next for GPA. My kids were asked their unweighted GPA and what level (honors, gifted, AP) courses they were taking. 

I recently saw an article that showed 80% of high school kids graduate with at least a 3.0. Therefore 3.0 is average or below average. 

hshuler posted:

Question: Don’t parents kind of have an idea of what kind of student their kid is before he gets to high school? Like whether he’s Stanford material?

Even if he’s in high school and in the recruiting process, wouldn’t you have a pretty good read on his academic capabilities?

I believe so.  When my middle son was being recruited, his academics were high and was being strongly recruited in football and baseball by HA's.  One very HA in particular was dual recruiting him and said I know we can get you in between the two sports.  But I'm not sure we can keep you in.  I could have told them that before any conversations started. 

My youngest son got a lot of attention from HA's including Stanford until he took ACT.  He is not a good test taker and it shows.  Working hard now to study and learn testing skills to get it up but would really struggle in HA.

My 3 cents.

RE: Standardized tests.

For top jobs in Banking, Investment, consulting, finance and others - as college summer jobs and post-college careers - believe it or not those HS test scores go right on the resume.

At both kids' college (HA, D1, non- scholarship college), there is intense focus on getting kids career-starting work (as opposed to a job). This requires the school's employment office (for want of a better term) to work in close collaboration with the hundreds and hundreds of employers who seek those students.

When each kid emailed the first drafts of their respective resumes, I was immediately struck by the HS ACT scores placed at the top of the education section. I thought it ridiculous to put a HS dated element on a college resume. Since I knew everything, I wanted that apparently irrelevent (and gratuitous) info removed. Both kids went back, emailed model resumes created by the employment office, and proved me wrong: top employers (the ones who pay six figures to a simple college grad and who spend large amounts to train the kids for years) wanted that info to help create the full story of the applicant. So, like it or not, discriminatory warts and all, those standardized tests impact tippy top employment opportunities. (cleary a minority when considering all college grads. But, I have actual proof [and both kids are on committtes which interview candidates and see resumes from other schools - not placing an ACT/SAT score says as much as putting the score on].)

RE: before HS commits.

Every coach wants the next Bryce Harper; and even if the kid goes pro out of HS, that type of commit is leveraged by the coach in recuiting other players. No coach rests his recruiting class on such  a talent, however. The reason is the kid - assuming his baseball skill trajectory  continues - will be a high draft pick and probably will not set foot on campus. Every power coach needs a recruiting class of top HS prospective draft picks, low HS prospective draft picks, players who will be developed and players who are absolutely committed to a college education. The trick is getting the right mix. Moreover, the best college coaches get that early HS commit and develops a deep relationship - with the kid AND the family - from the moment of the offer until the kid steps foot on campus. This means the college coach knows the HS classes, test  schedules, etc., of his recruit. Any academic hiccup is addressed, etc.

Where this relationship pays off is after a kid is drafted out of HS. At this point it becomes a battle between the pro-team (typically represented by the area scout and higher) and the college coach (who helped Sammy through every step in the process). A coach who recruited and disappeared for a while has a greater chance of losing the player then the coach who has become a mentor. (Of course, if that super-early recruit's skill trajectory falls off, the coach will maneuver out of the offer.)

RE: predicting who will be a top HS student.

It's a winnowing process. A kid who wasn't a good MS student will not become a good HS student. But, a kid who was a great MS student is no guarantee of future results. Lots of stuff happens in puberty - most of it not conducive to better grades (girls, raging hormones, driving, etc.). A parent needs to be on top of a academics - not doing it for the kid, but setting expectations, going to teacher conferences, getting involved, meeting the guidance counselor even before HS, showing as much pride in academics as sports. If a kid needs a tutor, needs to be tested for LDs, etc., this needs to be addressed ASAP.  

If a kid is advanced, a school policy of NOT allowing younger kids into classes MUST be challenged and overcome. (For example, our kids HS required precalc before calc. Both kids were talented in math. We banged on desks until the school made the exception; D finished HS with AB and BC and a third semester college calc for engineers class.) Its up to parents to understand and navigate this process.

RE: The college you attend most definitely impacts prospective careers.

A top student in a hard analytical major at a State flagship will not generally have a problem competing with an IVY grad in the career market for that first employer. BUT a kid in the middle of his class will. Athletes generally will NOT be that top student (at an IVY or a SF); BUT, employers do distinguish between a Princeton econ major and a University of San Diego business major. So, while the USD grad can and does get jobs, the Princeton major gets a career. Big difference between those two.

Sorry for this being so long, but too many of these realizations come at the back end of the process; it would be way better to come to this knowledge at the beginning.

Excellent "3 cents!", Goose! 

When the offers start coming in, the decision process is two fold:  1.  Which school is the best fit for the player, and 2.  Which offer is maximized from a $$ perspective?  If the kid loves the school, but the offer is a minimum %, then the family has to make a financial decision.  However, if another school makes a better offer, the kid must evaluate how they really feel about the school.  Sometimes the stars align, and the school that's a good fit also makes an offer that is hard to turn down.  

Even then, it still may be in the best interest of the kid to wait and see.  Until other commitments start rolling in.  What happens when you found a school that doesn't over-commit, and traditionally brings in 7 - 10 kids per signing class, and you kids class and position has a couple commitments to that school?  Your kid really likes this school, but is taking the "wise" advice and seeing who else is interested.  But now, with the new commitments, you run the risk of the spot may soon be gone.  Do you advise your kid to commit early as a Freshman or Sophomore to insure he has a spot, or do you advise your kid to wait it out and evaluate into their Junior year and run the risk of losing a really good in state offer?  There is no correct answer, however it's never as simple as making a blanket statement "early commitments should never happen".  

I think it really depends on what they were offered and how they progress as players.

If the offers are good, I doubt if they’d get more. Sometimes (not always) the longer you wait, there’s less money available. 

Sometimes, players dont always develop as projected and could end up getting a smaller percentage by waiting. 

That’s really a tough question to answer because it’s like trying to predict the future.  But give it a try and do follow up the child aswell to see improvement

FWIW, S received an offer from the local D1 (it was a power back then) at the end of his summer, rising senior year. Academics would have covered app 50% of COA; athletics would have covered 100% of the rest.

Even in hindsight it was best not to take it. He would have been cut following a 15 ERA first year (the next two years were only marginally better).

In our case (and every situation differs), we all agreed (as a family) he needed to go away from home for college. Personally, I dreaded watching first hand the maturation process; harkening back to my college years, he needed to stumble alone, get hungover so much he would learn his lesson BEFORE his first office Christmas party, fail at baseball, learn about girls, and otherwise engage in the follies and foibles of growing up.

I was pleased with the result; credit goes to his college coach who placed maturation ahead of baseball.  

I have a '22 who knows of every '22 commitment through social media.  He knows one of them personally because they've played together.  He's watched video of the others of available.   

He has a pretty mature take on it.  He's done one showcase and got put on the Top1000 list for what that's worth.  He regards the one commit he knows as 'just better than I am right now (his words).  He's seen video of one of the commits at his position and said the same w respect to his defense.   His take is that there's no rush and this gives him time to improve and compare favorably to verbal at elite programs.  That said, he has a list of dream schools and 2 of those schools have listed verbals at his position in his grade.  Which I wish he didn't have to deal with or think about before he steps on a high school campus.

Someone else on another thread has said this in the time I have been lurking around here, but an inordinate amount of college hopefuls are all shooting for the same 50-100 programs. You know the programs. Those are the ones that get the pick of the litter because everyone is knocking on their door...and typically are committing kids early and some over-committing to only end up sending guys packing early.

This is not to say that a players shouldn't aspire to those programs, but you need to be realistic and temper that aspiration with the realization that chances of making the next level may be better met by pursuing the less shiny object in front of them. The way I look at my son's priorities are like this:

1) Which school is going to give my son the better education and chances for future success?

2) Which school does my son have a better chance of contributing at earliest in his collegiate career? Where does he fit the best skills wise, both with the team and conference? Who is going to develop him?

3) Which school is going to provide HIM the experience HE wants in college (academically, athletically, and socially)?

Unless your kid is already a pro prospect in high school, the chances of developing into that draftable guy out of college is best at a D1 program. Top programs are recruiting and landing kids who are already pro prospects or who have been drafted out of HS, so unless they really fall off in college they will likely get drafted (or drafted again). But what about guys getting drafted for the first time out of a college situation. They come from all levels of college baseball (large majority D1), and within D1 they also come from the powerhouses and the "low D1" and "HA D1" schools. My point is, chances are best to get drafted from D1 programs, period. But that isn't what this thread is about. I went on a tangent.

My main point is, go where the fit is best academically, athletically and socially. I would not let the scholarship amount drive that train if you can avoid it.

elovell posted:

I understand all of the potential pitfalls of early recruitment of it falling through etc. I just wonder if there can be an impact on scholarship dollars. 

the answer is yes, there can be an impact

but there are a lot of variables in this question.   and no one can see the future.   did the kid commit to the first school that made an offer?  was the offer very attractive? or did he just commit because his dream school was offering?  If he waits, becomes a stud and has several schools offering  - then naturally his market value will be more.  If he commits to the first offer because it's his dream school, he may have received more later.  of course he may not develop and get nothing later. 

he could even get more from the P5 school he committed to,   if the kid develops and starts gaining a lot of momentum with the pros,  to the point where the school is worried about losing him to the draft, then they could come back and raise there offer in an attempt to make sure they make it to campus.

3and2Fastball posted:

.........................

If those 2022 kids got themselves a commit at a dream school, good for them!  It doesn't really matter about holding out for a "better deal".  If they want more money tell them to get a 3.5+ GPA in high school and get themselves some academic money.

100% agree with that.  If these kids got an offer to play for their dream school it is probably a fairly unique situation and a mute point.   They must be very talented & fortunate to get offers as 2022. However, if it is not their dream school then they may have left some $$ on the table.  Throwing in some top academic numbers can never hurt recruitability.