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.