Key NCAA Rule Change for Recruiting Communications

I'd be interested on how others view these changes.  Do you see loopholes?  Do you expect people to still find some way to get to early commitments?

I'm thinking this might put a ton of pressure on the junior year fall travel ball season.  PG's Ft. Myers tourney probably doesn't need any more hype, but geez that becomes an even more significant fall event (if that's possible).

I also wonder how this will influence the player for whom baseball comes first, and yet, who loves football or another fall sport.  Can that player afford not to be on the baseball field during junior year fall?

You will not see college guys at 14U tournaments anymore.  I think they will do recruiting at 15U tournaments but I also think they will start doing a lot more college on campus camps and players or teams will have to go to on campus camps because that is the only place the coach can get to know the player.  I believe you will have camps with the top level teams of 14 or 15U teams playing on college campuses so they can talk to the players.  Remember, the rules only apply off campus.  So if I can get the players on my campus I can build relationships with them just not talk about recruiting, scholarships, or playing for me.  But I can build those relationships.

A good summary from: https://keepplayingbaseball.or...ng-rules-april-2023/

"The new legislation goes into effect April 26th and will apply to everyone, forcing even underclassmen who have already verbally committed to a program to cease communication with the coaches at schools they plan to attend until August 1 of the summer before junior year."

Can someone post a link to the actual rules?  Will previous verbal commitments be considered invalid?

Will PG and PBR will take down all their commitment data before junior year?  Presumably players won't be able to tweet out commitments before that date?

KPB also says (echoing PF):

"Coaches and programs will adjust to find new loopholes to gain a competitive advantage in spite of the new rules. The most obvious work-around will be an increased value placed on both individual and team camps, which will still be considered open communication and available to all. If a school really wants to build a relationship and possibly clue you in to an offer that is coming on August 1 (“We aren’t allowed to offer you, but if it was August 1 we’d offer you XYZ…”), camps are the easiest way."

From baseballamerica:  https://www.baseballamerica.co...-recruiting-process/

"One recruiting coordinator at a Power Five program said in the day after the new rules were announced, he got 21 texts from travel ball coaches asking him how they could get around the new restrictions. "

I'm sure the Canes and other top programs will figure out how to get their kids in front of and in conversation with coaches.  If not, I have the plan and would be glad to share it.  It is less complicated than most think.  Just a lot of coordination.

There's been a lot of conversation on this topic in this thread:

https://community.hsbaseballwe...ecruit-contact-rules

Many different opinions here. I'm not as convinced as others that there will be fewer coaches attending 14U tournaments. Coaches are still making their lists and wanting to see guys in person early. They can't start having player initiated phone conversations, but they can get the word to players that they're interested, and want to see them at their camps.

Perfect Game grumpy about this…

I agree with MidAtlanticDad.

Interesting thread - was wondering if there i a business opportunity here. 

If the rule states that the contact can only be had on campus - is that only the coaches campus or any campus?

What if there were a tournament organization that used college campus fields for play?  You can hit 100+ fields at higher education institutions within a 45-60 minute drive of Philadelphia.  I would bet most major metropolitan cities are similar.

The teams can even use the college dorms and maybe food halls in the summer.

The colleges earn $ by charging a fee for the firld, room / board.

The coaches get to scout the kids within a small geographic area.

Kids and parents get a feel for campus living can tour the campus if the schools they are interested in are close.

I haven't been to or involved in any PG type events so not sure if this is even logistically possible.

Just an idea.

@NewUmpire posted:

Just an idea.

Not a new one.

Headfirst showcases consist of a large number of schools.  When my son went in 2018, they had a wristband system for different years; my recollection is that D1 coaches were allowed to have conversations with kids after the official date, but not younger.  That would tell me that the talking by coaches is restricted to kids on your own campus.

Any large tournament works the same way, though, so no need to reinvent the wheel.

@NewUmpire posted:

What if there were a tournament organization that used college campus fields for play?  You can hit 100+ fields at higher education institutions within a 45-60 minute drive of Philadelphia.  I would bet most major metropolitan cities are similar.

Son gets invites to something like this all the time. It is a bus tour where they play at several schools in the North East. Not sure they do everything that you listed, but they do a number of those items. I thought it was interesting but, to far and too long of a trip from South Texas. The may start to get more business from the change. Just looked for one of the emails it is called the BBA College bus tour.

For all of those wondering why this happened...... just found out that the rules change was a result of a suggestion put in by the NCAA student athlete committee.  Good for them!

I know it affects baseball,  softball has had this rule for awhile.

Only on your campus.
The coach cannot say we are interested in you.  
there are a lot of showcases that only use college fields and these will grow.  The difference is the coaches will be there more.  I have read several P5 schools put a note that their camp schedule will be changed

I will say this again:  if, in fact, coaches can't make offers of scholarship, any player tweeting an early commitment or posting it publicly will immediately draw attention to that school for breaking the rules.

In that situation, why would PG and PBR (and others) list college commitments before junior year?

So if no-one publicly announces a verbal commitment, wouldn't there be less point to doing it?

Does anyone know, is this retroactive?  Are underclassmen with verbal commitments now not considered committed, since they can't communicate with the coaches?

@anotherparent posted:

Does anyone know, is this retroactive?  Are underclassmen with verbal commitments now not considered committed, since they can't communicate with the coaches?

My son is a '25 verbal commit.  His school had a call with their recruiting class once this rule was announced.  It is retroactive in the sense that the communications/contact rules apply to these verbal commits.  So, essentially a "blackout" period of ~3 months for phone conversations (which previously needed to be initiated by my son).  However, my son can continue to send texts/emails with updates to the coaches, they simply can't respond (which was always in place related to text/email).  Coaches were clear at the beginning, this rule change doesn't impact their commitment to the player nor the player's commitment to the school/program.  Again, it is all verbal to begin with and we all know the range of views on that topic.

I would add that he can attend their camps if he wants to and then they could communicate there similar to other players.  I assume they couldn't discuss the composition of the existing verbal offer, but they could discuss all other relevant topics.  There was no pressure by the coaches to attend these camps (and I don't think my son will attend), and for a '25 the change is not that big of a deal.  The coaches know these players spring/summer schedules and will likely come to see them play at some point anyhow.  '26s (and younger) probably want to be attending the camps of the schools they committed to.

You can commit early just can't be contacted by the school starting today.  If offers are out there, they are still good because a commitment is non-binding anyways.  Some have said they have offers and will announce on such and such date and that would be fine because the offers are out there already.  Most coaches have worked their butts off the past few days trying to get the young guys to commit while they can still talk.  I think the top guys who have offers on the table will still commit at some point.  My son had offers for 2 years and for 6 months from UT before he finally committed so if this were the situation and UT had said our offer will still be good when you decide then he could have posted it and there would not have been anything illegal about it.

FYI

Perfect Game and others will not post commitments unless verified by coaches. So everything you see on their site is verified.

If a recruit says he committed to a program, it doesn't mean an offer was made.

I said that a couple of years ago and got killed over that statement TPM.  But I saw guys I knew were walk-ons that had posted commitments.  The school had made no offers to them and yet they had committed to the school.

Seriously...all I've seen in the last week are tons of commitments - 2026s and even 2027s (which seems crazy to me, but there it is).

Agreed. There has been 8th and 9th grade "commitments" in the past, however in the past week or so I have seen more then ever before. Betting there are a lot of schools trying to get these players "committed" and "off the table" before the deadline. I think this will lead to more last minute drops if they don't develop (IMO). I think if I was a parent of a player that was getting these last minute (before the 26th) hurry up and "commit" offers.  I would have a higher level of concern.