How much has it changed?

Great post. I don't know the answers, but you make excellent observations and it is hard to argue with the categories you have described. I am watching this process for the third time (with my youngest son) and my best observation is that it is different for different players and different schools and there is no one way that any of this happens.

I am in contact with recent recruits and things really haven't changed much. In fact the coaches have become more computer savy and rely on web sites and Technology even more.
Many colleges have staff that evaluate DVDs etc and inform the coach about who to look at.
I remember UNLV had a guy who evaluated my son's DVD and he was the one who called us. Miami U also has staff that evaluated DVDs. Some of the smaller colleges the HC or coordinator might be the ones who evaluate. It doesn't take long for an evaluator to see what he need. It really hasn't changed and is probably most efficient use of their time.

Can you define borderline grades? Kid is a solid B student. (3.2 at an academically challenging private school) Is that borderline at a D1?

Blprkfranks,

Your post got me to thinking - and reflecting.

Nothing I did worked out well as far as college recruiting goes. With my eldest son - it was an unmitigated disaster. And with my youngest - it was yet another struggle through the gates of hell.

So - the way I figure - if the recruiting world is changing - I may actually be right now - even though I was wrong then. LOL

One thing is for sure - college recruiting is something I never ever want to go through again. I have been through it 3 times - and that is enough for any human being. IMO.

gamefan:

It depends on the college and on the high school. If it is a high school known for its rigor and with a reputation for sending lots of kids to competitive colleges (adademically) then the 3.2 is very good, especially when combined with a strong SAT or ACT score. If, however, it is from an average to below average high school and the kid is trying to go to Stanford or Duke -- and the SAT scores are below 1000 -- then forget it.

Many things have changed over the past 5 years. For one... More and more recruiting is done earlier than before.

It is a very "hot" topic among college coaches. Some for and some against, but all realizing things are much different.

Not so sure much has changed other than the forms of communication and the ease of accessing them in that you now have youtube, texting, emails, dvd's that weren't quite so prevelant 5 or so years ago. And there are always a few tweeks of the NCAA rules.

But, the basics....player and NOT the parent should be communicating with the coach. Better have your grades together since no one wants a player who can't stay eligible even if he throws 100mph. Gotta get yourself seen at the right showcases, camps etc.((DVD's and all are great but most coaches want to actually see you.)

Seems to me to be pretty much the same game it has always been when it comes to recruiting when you get down to the basics.

gamefan, I would bet that a 3.2 GPA and top notch talent would get you into just about any school you choose.

fillsfan


In todays atmosphere the 3.2 is good for most schools but not the high academic schools

According to the documentary I watched a few days ago on PBS, the Harvard's of this world take kids who play sports with below standard GPAs and SATs. That was right out of the horses mouth. They called them Athletic Admits and they set aside a % of Athletic Admits every year . A very revealing documentary. I was surprised at the %.

Blprkfrnks,

Thanks for starting a valuable thread, and as the owner/administrator of this site, I do not take it as site bashing.

Our forums are the best source of updated recruiting information, in the form of recruiting stories from parents who have recently been through the process and those who went through it a while ago but whose sons have moved on to either a higher level or "real life", as well as very valuable advice from coaches, scouts and other baseball professionals. But I heartily agree that there's a need to update the non-forum articles on our website!

It's difficult for me to find the time to research and coordinate those updates because I have a "real job" and run this site as an unpaid hobby. But let's all work together to update the content.

Any members who would be willing to volunteer a couple of hours or more, please send me a PM (Private Message), or an email at hsbaseballweb@comcast.net. You can either tell me an article that you would like to help update, or if you give me a little info about your interests and background, I'll send you links to a few related articles on our site, and ask you to pick one of them to offer input on bringing the info up to date. I'll compile and edit the updates, and publish them to our website.

Thanks to all of you who post questions AND answers in our forums. YOU are what this site is all about!


Julie

PG, I agree. My son was asked to make a verbal commitment his sophmore year while his HS team attended a camp at the college. Thank goodness he said no, even though it was his favorite at the time.
The vast majority of schools recruiting my son came while playing on a high level travel team, even though he played for a nationally ranked high school team. The travel team played all their tournaments at colleges, except the Perfect Game at East Cobb and Jupiter. This opportunity offered him a tremendous amount of exposure and opportunities to view the campus and student life. He committed in August before his Sr. year to one of those (SEC) colleges.
I spoke with his college coaches at the Perfect Game tournament this week at East Cobb and they stated that they "have completed their recruiting for the "010 Sr. class and are looking at the '011 players". To me, that is astonishing!

HeyBatter, I agree that DVD's may be useful but coaches want to see you play and obviously you better get to the schools early. I don't necessarily agree with this early process but I don't forsee things changing.

quote:

Originally posted by Clint Taylor:
I don't necessarily agree with this early process but I don't forsee things changing.

There's two things that will force a change to this, and it probably won't swing all the way back, but will find some middle ground.

The first is mistakes...if you are getting commits earlier and earlier, there are going to be some mistakes made. That will cause some trepidation on the part of coaches.

The second is missing out on the late comers. Not having any scholarship money left for a kid who,
a. lives in your backyard
b. wants to attend your school
will certainly cause some schools to hold back.

This will take time to ferret itself out, but it's where it will probably go. Beating everyone else to the punch, which is essentially what early commits is all about, does not come without inherent risk.

It's become the sliding scale of blue chippers. Once only the rare blue chipper got the early commit...the can't miss prospect. Now, the scale is sliding, and continuing to pick up speed, in the redefinition of blue chip, early commit, prospects.

I agree that recruiting is done earlier but that doesn't mean kids have to commit earlier which I think is unwise. Some kids are not ready to be recruited early and some of it has to do with physical maturity. Just because your kid is not identified as a prospect in 8th or 9th grade does not mean they might not have greater upside in the future. Also, things change quickly in college baseball. You may commit to an undesirable situation if done too early. There will always be some risk though no matter when the ultimate decision is made.

To answer the original question, I don't think much has changed other than the advent of electronic communications and the various communication forms available.

Lets not make this more complicated than it is. To play past high school, it takes two basic things - talent plus exposure. Each are equally important since if either one is missing, I can guarantee some young man's dream will end.

I didn't take any offense to the original criticisms so I hope no offense is taken when I express my opinions. I have lots of recruiting experience. A) from my son's experience five years ago and B) from being a member of this website for the past five years.

When did anyone say there was a rule that parents should not communicate with a coach or that coaches ONLY wanted to speak to players nowadays?

From my experience, when coaches want to speak to a player, they will call and ask to speak to the player. I think parents would be foolish to just leave it between the coach and the player. Wouldn't you be curious what type of man you are entrusting your son to for the next four years? Doesn't it make sense to size them up for yourself? Moreover, before investing a lot of money in plane trips and camps or other visits, wouldn't you want to speak to the coach and see if they were indeed interested? What if they were just looking to fill out a camp roster? How would your son determine these things at 15, 16, or 17 years of age? There are a million things you can figure out by asking the coach a few basic questions. Where did you see my son play? What did you think of his abilities? What would your plans be if you were to recruit him?

Obviously, these questions can be asked some time after the coach has contacted your son (perhaps in a follow-up phone call that you the parent initiate) but I would ask them before spending a lot of time and money on a pipe dream.

I would never advise a parent to hype their son to the coach as I think that would be a turn-off. These are just people like you and me. Before my son was recruited, I spoke to the recruiting coordinator. Before my son signed, I spoke to the head coach. My son would not have attended where he did if the coach could not answer my basic questions and established a trust factor with me. As it turned out, they were men of their word. I would never leave all that up to just my son.

quote:

Originally posted by Blprkfrnks:
One of the things I have noticed on this website is that very few of the pointers, tips, and examples have been updated since I have begun visiting this site. I sometimes fear that the recruiting landscape is constantly changing and with some of the recent rule changes for college baseball the information is becoming outdated..

A hobby of mine that I rarely share is that I enjoy cooking and collecting cookbooks from "days gone by" How does this relate? IMO, recruiting is much like an old recipe that also evolves by other cooks sharing new ingredients and processes. Once there was once a simple meatball, over time sauerkraut and cranberries and then you ended up with a sweet-n-sour meatball, but in the end it's still a meatball.

Maybe there is some validity that the HSBBW cookbook needs to be updated. IMHO, that is done within the forums and because rules and processes change so frequently it is up to every reader to apply these variations, rules, and experiences to their own recipe card.

I came on this site in 02 or 03 and being from the North many of the national recruiting practices were not relevant to our area, and always changing. We had to pick-n-choose those ideas to follow and revise those that did not fit. Recruiting is not a black-n-white process and I don't know if this site should ever be perceived as providing the golden rule, but, rather a place for newbies and veterans to share experiences, ideas, and opinions.

Clevelanddad you have a point, why entrust a teenager to determine whether a coach is smoking him. I wish I had taken the reins during the early part of his recruitment. I would have known early on he wasn't as good as the form letters indicated.

You can bet those coaches don't leave it up to their sons to do all the communication with potential schools. This whole early recruitment thing has really gotten out of hand.

quote:

Originally posted by Clint Taylor:
I spoke with his college coaches at the Perfect Game tournament this week at East Cobb and they stated that they "have completed their recruiting for the "010 Sr. class and are looking at the '011 players". To me, that is astonishing!

My son '10, is being recruited by a number of schools who already have verbal commitments from a large number of players. UNC for example has verbals from 13 players in the 2010 class according to the article written on the PGCrossChecker web site recently. This, I assume, does not include any JuCo players they might get.

Point is, "Over Recruiting" by many of the larger colleges seems to have changed as well. I'm sure that many of the players who gave verbal commitments weeks if not months ago to UNC have no idea that they are still out there recruiting players. When the dust settles, who gets the scolly and who gets told to move along?

So sportsfan how has over recruiting changed ? Seems much the same to me.

quote:

Originally posted by BobbleheadDoll:
So sportsfan how has over recruiting changed ? Seems much the same to me.

Maybe I am wrong, but I don't remember hearing about the over recruiting a few year ago that you do today. Perhaps it still happened, but with the internet, PG, Baseball America and such today, it's much more widely publicized.

Who knows, JMO.

I have been talking about it for the last 4 years. The subject seemed almost taboo back then. You can find a lot of threads on this topic. Over recruiting is alive and well. It can be a real shocker when you think you are on the team and find out you aren't one of the chosen ones. Pretty tough with the new D1 sit rule.

Son has 3 friends that were recruited to high profile programs last year. They all played as freshmen, but not too many innings. They all were released recently. In other words they were told their scholarships were not being renewed for this next year.

You can't overemphasize "FIT"! Research the program and don't think just because you were a stud in high school you will continue to be viewed as a stud in a high D1 program. All these boys most likely will be going to a JC and then hopefully finding another program to transfer into.

I've heard of another player as well who was just released from a high-profile program.

It may be reality, but it's tough when you're viewed as a disposable commodity. Not only can it be devastating to a player and his family, it can also cause the loss of valuable credits in the process of transferring.

There are programs out there who do not practice this and who guarantee roster spots for all 4 years (provided there are no academic or off-the-field issues). You've got to do your homework to find out which programs are as loyal to the player as the player is to them.

Quote
_____________________________________________________
Point is, "Over Recruiting" by many of the larger colleges seems to have changed as well. I'm sure that many of the players who gave verbal commitments weeks if not months ago to UNC have no idea that they are still out there recruiting players. When the dust settles, who gets the scolly and who gets told to move along?
______________________________________________________


This is why we as parents need to jump off the "baseball rat race" we call recruiting. Once you leave HS and in many cases during HS, baseball becomes a "business" and so many are drawn into the vortex of training, select teams, showcases, etc. etc in order to get a scholarship to a JC, let alone the big D1 programs. Most American kids are not dedicated enough to really train on their own and have too many other hobbies that interfere with the time needed to qualify for a big program and this especially includes schoolwork.

quote:

Originally posted by Pop Up Hitter dad:
This is why we as parents need to jump off the "baseball rat race" we call recruiting. Once you leave HS and in many cases during HS, baseball becomes a "business" and so many are drawn into the vortex of training, select teams, showcases, etc. etc in order to get a scholarship to a JC, let alone the big D1 programs. Most American kids are not dedicated enough to really train on their own and have too many other hobbies that interfere with the time needed to qualify for a big program and this especially includes schoolwork.

PHD:

You are spot on with this comment. I was at the Area Code tryouts in Ca this week and was talking to a scout. I was told later that there were over 70 there….almost 1 to 1 on players…another story. Anyway he said in Ca at least “if you can play we will find you there are just too many of us and word travels” and that there were lots of ways to be seen without spending a lot of money. He said be wary of expensive “scout teams” (his cost $50) He also recommended that we stay away from expensive paid showcases that the best were getting in for free, he said there were lots of parents of marginal players spending lots of money funding “scouting services, showcases etc”

I saw this in Arizona two weeks ago with tons of expensive “academy teams” at the tournament. What happened? Two of the final four teams were put together for just this tournament at low cost to the players and they beat out most of the “academy teams” Why? The kids could play. I saw one well known academy that had 4 teams and none of them made the top 32.

I am not saying I agree 100% just posting what the scout told me and that you can work the system without spending a lot of money. The better the player the less it will cost you. Try to have a realistic view of your son….. I know it is easy to say but hard to do.

quote:

Most American kids are not dedicated enough to really train on their own and have too many other hobbies that interfere with the time needed to qualify for a big program and this especially includes schoolwork.

I think this part of your post is wrong.There are many fine young American ball players that bust thier butts in the classroom, in the weight room and on the field.
I also think that some of these kids do need some down time to have some fun.There is nothing wrong with some video games, hanging with friends if your business is taken care of.
As far as the big programs,many , many kids are not ready for them straigt out of HS.The ones that are usually play right away.
College baseball is competitive and as your son leaves HS and goes into the college venue,he best have his priorities in hand,because it is a tough schedule,competitive environment where all the players are good, academics are important all four years, and there isnt much free time once the season gets going.

I want to add that I do not think cutting a kid after he has a scholarship is good at all.The NCAA in their quest to make college baseball and esp. the academic side better in my opinion made it worse.
Kids take a scholarship and then get cut, have to sit a year, so all the control is with the coaches.I think every player should get 1 transfer without penalty, just becasue mistakes are made.
The coaches can cut loose the players they feel were a mistake , but the athlete has no where to go.
This is supposed to be about the player.Maybe they will need to limit the fall roster size to 35 as well.That would protect the players some.

Fan in D1 if they cut a scholarship guy they lose a roster spot so I don't see that happening. The problem is that if they don't cut the player and he sits the bench he will lose another year as well when he transfers.

Yes, it has happened.Dont want to get specific on an internet site.

I just think they will need to limit fall rosters as well.

I have never seen it but I am sure it may happen. Once the money is committed the player gets it for the year and the roster spot is gone.
You also will probably never see a 35 player limit in the fall. Coaches make mistakes and they need to cover their bases.

My point was the NCAA has given the coaches the ability to cover thier mistakes, but it does nothing to protect the kids.Thats just my opinion.

The fact that this has gone on for years shows hum much they care about protecting the kids. They know hat has been going on and don't seem too concerned. There is no advantage to the college or coaches. They have an advantage to leave it as it is.

Over recruiting (even in some of the better programs), is because coaches don't know how to recruit and manage their roster. They don't have discussions with their current players regarding what will they do if drafted, and often times don't know who is going to show up in the fall, so they protect themselves by asking more to come then needed. They also protect themselves against those they will lose due to ineligibility.

It takes a certain skill to figure it all out and some are better at it than others.

Cutting a first year scholarship player is wrong, cutting a current scholarship player is not wrong if the player has not performed as expected.

It's a numbers game, and those that don't know how to figure out the numbers usually get caught with too many.

Some coaches still have more show up than needed, mainly so the player can wear the colors in the fall and say he played with the squad at one point in his college career. I do beleive Ron Polk did this and so does Ray Tanner, just to name a few. I don't see anything wrong with that, as long as the player and his family know the score.

quote:

Some coaches still have more show up than needed, mainly so the player can wear the colors in the fall and say he played with the squad at one point in his college career. I do beleive Ron Polk did this and so does Ray Tanner, just to name a few. I don't see anything wrong with that, as long as the player and his family know the score.
Posts: 12147 | Location

That is really ridiculous.Who cares about wearing some colors in the fall so you can say you did???? it doesnt mean a whole lot if your cut.And how would players and parents know the score? Are they told this? There wouldnt be a team out there that I would want to just wear colors in the fall.What are these baseball Gods are something.Over recruiting to thendegree some of these schools do is ridiculous and should be stopped by the NCAA.Thats all I have to say about it.There is no reason to have 50 guys come to cut 15. coaches need to do their homework and recruit the right kids to begin with.

It's not as ridiculous as you think.

I listened in to the recruiting talk at the Stanford Camp. Each year Stanford recruits extra kids. Last year they had 44 kids for 35 spots. The extra recruits are told upfront that if they impress, or there are injuries or someone quits they can earn a spot. If not, they just got into a great school that they probably would have been denied at otherwise.

They said that some of the UC's do this as well. They are covered by having a few extra players to fall back on, and the players that obviously are borderline D1 players anyway get into a better academic school. Sounds like a win-win to me.

As TPM said, they are up front about, so what is wrong with that.

fanofgame,
You might not beleive me but there are places where grandparents, and parents, aunts and uncles have attended and they take the colors very seriously. It has been a huge part of their lives growing up.

There are players that may not be of the calibur the coach wants for the team, but are willing to walk on and take a shot for a chance to make the spring roster, but if they got to wear aq uniform they are very happy. Some of them return year after year to walk on.

This is totally different than over recruiting because the coach didn't do his homework.

There are guys like TPM suggests. They tryout as walk ons with little chance of success. Their family has had generations who graduated from a particular college. This type of guy is probably not a huge %.
The bulk would more likely guys who talk to the coach and get no money nut are encouraged to tryout. Some are guys who the coach recruited but due to numbers or a lack luster fall get cut. I have talked to several who thought they were on the team and got cut. If you attend a college and know that you have to make the rosters and could get cut, that is fair. It may not be nice but at least you were informed. There have been some great players who have been cut after fall tryouts. Also important to know that you have to make the 25 man travel roster. You would be surprised how many don't realize this.

quote:

quote:

Originally posted by Pop up hitter dad
Most American kids are not dedicated enough to really train on their own and have too many other hobbies that interfere with the time needed to qualify for a big program and this especially includes schoolwork.



quote
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Originally posted by fanofgame
I think this part of your post is wrong.There are many fine young American ball players that bust thier butts in the classroom, in the weight room and on the field.

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

fanofgame, sorry to have offended you, I did paint with a broad brush. I should have said "some" not most. From what you have posted in the past your son is one of the hard workers. I agree kids need downtime, but in college as you said there is little of that. In a month my son is due to hit baseball "boot camp", I can't wait to tell you all how he does.

BOF, thank you for your response, it takes guts to go against the establishment in baseball and thanks to an honest scout to speak the truth.

Tpm, others,

I guess I wasnt looking at it from that viewpoint. My son just likes to play. I would guess there would be plenty of young men who would want to be on stanfords roster or others especially if there is family tradition, and get the education.
I was just looking at it from a baseball only standpoint and thats a lot different.

PUHD,
you did not offend me.I am referring to a lot of kids besides my son when I say they work hard.Many kids that go to IVIES, ARMY etc work their tails off to be on that field.