Open Tryout vs. Commitment?

since it is a Div 3 college (Gettysburg College) no one has any guarentee roster spots. There is no athletic money invested in you. Even Division 1 college have tryouts for walk ons and often have more players then they need for their college team. They either redshirt them, suggest they transfer, or they dont make the team.

I'd say scratch it off the list!

PopTime, I have to agree with TPM here. Scratch it off the list. There are too many good DIII programs with similar academics in your part of the country whose coaches will tell you exactly where you stand. I wouldn't waste the time or effort.

quote:

Originally posted by Jack Bauer:
since it is a Div 3 college (Gettysburg College) no one has any guarentee roster spots.

Are you trying to say that no DIII coach will commit to a kid prior to the kid enrolling in the school because there isn't athletic money involved? I think you're wrong. In fact I know you are. But congratulations on figuring out the school from the very tough clues I gave. You must have been great in History class. Now let's work on your spelling and grammar.

Jack Bauer

Once again you feed people misinformation

I know a multitude of Division III programs where players go in with a committment from the coach.

In fact, I just received an email from a Division III coach asking for names of players as well as our Fall travel team schedule so he can come see them play

TR
who? WHO?!?

It all depends on the school and the coach's philosophy. In our D-III searches, we found some schools that would actively recruit a player, just for the sole purpose of coming to the school for the open tryouts, while others would recruit a player for a slot on the team, but of course, playing time was solely up to the player's performance.

My younger son was recruited, and is heading off in about two weeks to, a D III, no athletic money of course, but "commitment" from the school's coach meant a guaranteed roster spot as a freshman. Naturally, no promises after that. It's been our understanding that many DIII's do the same thing. That's about all they can commit as academic money is not based upon athletics, and all students face the same standards there.

We don't have our hearts and minds set on DIII schools yet, we have a couple of major showcases coming up so who knows? But DIII's seem to be the most interested at the moment. So, I'm wondering, in the absence of an NLI, how do DIII coaches actually "commit" to a player? Is it just a warm smile, a handshake and a promise? Very scary. Or is there some instrument in writing that DIII coaches use?

I am not that familiar with D3 recruting.

I am familiar with the recruiting process though and only suggest that for my son, I would feel more comfortable being given some type of commitment for making the team roster after someone has seen him play and of course then it would be up to son to prove himself for a starting position.

I know that D3 coaches do not have a lot of money to travel the US looking for players and usually rely on open tryouts. To ask a player to come try out, then inform him he needs to get into the school and show up for a CHANCE to play doesn't seem right, but he was being honest about the situation. For me that doesn't fly, but then it may for someone else.

Imagine your son committing to a large D1 and showing up in the fall to discover 45-50 other players are there too. While a school can have an unlimited amount on their roster, less than 30 can make the actual travel roster, 25 for post season play for D1. So do know it happens everywhere in every situation, often times coaches not being honest with intentions about your son or his game plan for his next squad.

There are MANY top Div 1 schools that do not actively recruit. By this I mean they very seldom go to scouting events outside of their area, rely heavily on the local talent and the fact that many would give anything to play at their school, seen or unseen. My son was recruited by 3 top D1 schools, who never once had seen him play, only that his name was on a rankings list and that meant he was good. Personally he didn't want to go play somewhere where someone had not seen him play, or at a skills showcase at least or at their camp.

When seeking out the right situation for your son, I would pay attention to the recruiters who have seen your son play, or have had someone (lots of recruiters have eyes everywhere) given a recommendation. That means they really want him to play for the team, not "try out" in the fall. Chances are if they are really interested the coach will find a way to see your son. This way, he (your son)doesn't have to get to fall practice to "try out" for the coach whether it be D1,2 or 3. He knows that he is guaranteed a spot on the team for at least one year, regardless of whether he plays everyday or is a sub or becomes a redshirt, and he can make it HIS choice if he wants to stay or leave, not the coaches.
I was told something once, I have passed it on here and will again. When seriously considering where to go play, it should be at a school where the recruiting coach and HC have done their job, finding the best talent they can afford to have, without having to disappoint recruits (top talent or not) when they show up to compete against double a roster size in the fall just for a roster spot. Parents and players are so blinded by the fact that their son got an offer from a top 25 school in the country, only to find out nightmares occur everyday. I would imagine this happens in all divisions.
Be aware that this situation can happen to anyone, my son telling me that some of the guys he met at the cape (top talent) made choices that were top schools, but not necessarily good choices in the end for them. After being at these top schools many have made choices to go to smaller programs where they can start everyday, instead of playing behind someone else or competing every year against 5 or 6 for teh same position. Very few coaches actually do take their recruits and make them better players for their programs. How can you get enough individual instruction with 45 on a roster and 3-4 coaches? Many become revolving doors.

I didn't mean to hijack the thread, just that we come up against so many different recruiting stories, some seem good some seem bad, but in the end, happiness will be where your son will have a fair chance from the first time he sets foot on the field because he was truely wanted for whatever the coaches saw in him, not just another to try out.

TPM offers some great advice.

Also--here is a thread that really helped me out in questions about D-III recruiting.
Over-recruiting in D-III

quote:

To ask a player to come try out, then inform him he needs to get into the school and show up for a CHANCE to play doesn't seem right, but he was being honest about the situation. For me that doesn't fly, but then it may for someone else.

Imagine your son committing to a large D1 and showing up in the fall to discover 45-50 other players are there too. While a school can have an unlimited amount on their roster, less than 30 can make the actual travel roster, 25 for post season play for D1. So do know it happens everywhere in every situation, often times coaches not being honest with intentions about your son or his game plan for his next squad.

There are MANY top Div 1 schools that do not actively recruit. By this I mean they very seldom go to scouting events outside of their area, rely heavily on the local talent and the fact that many would give anything to play at their school, seen or unseen. My son was recruited by 3 top D1 schools, who never once had seen him play, only that his name was on a rankings list and that meant he was good. Personally he didn't want to go play somewhere where someone had not seen him play, or at a skills showcase at least or at their camp.

When seeking out the right situation for your son, I would pay attention to the recruiters who have seen your son play, or have had someone (lots of recruiters have eyes everywhere) given a recommendation. That means they really want him to play for the team, not "try out" in the fall. Chances are if they are really interested the coach will find a way to see your son. This way, he (your son)doesn't have to get to fall practice to "try out" for the coach whether it be D1,2 or 3. He knows that he is guaranteed a spot on the team for at least one year, regardless of whether he plays everyday or is a sub or becomes a redshirt, and he can make it HIS choice if he wants to stay or leave, not the coaches.
I was told something once, I have passed it on here and will again. When seriously considering where to go play, it should be at a school where the recruiting coach and HC have done their job, finding the best talent they can afford to have, without having to disappoint recruits (top talent or not) when they show up to compete against double a roster size in the fall just for a roster spot. Parents and players are so blinded by the fact that their son got an offer from a top 25 school in the country, only to find out nightmares occur everyday. I would imagine this happens in all divisions.
Be aware that this situation can happen to anyone, my son telling me that some of the guys he met at the cape (top talent) made choices that were top schools, but not necessarily good choices in the end for them. After being at these top schools many have made choices to go to smaller programs where they can start everyday, instead of playing behind someone else or competing every year against 5 or 6 for teh same position. Very few coaches actually do take their recruits and make them better players for their programs. How can you get enough individual instruction with 45 on a roster and 3-4 coaches? Many become revolving doors.

I didn't mean to hijack the thread, just that we come up against so many different recruiting stories, some seem good some seem bad, but in the end, happiness will be where your son will have a fair chance from the first time he sets foot on the field because he was truely wanted for whatever the coaches saw in him, not just another to try out.

Sorry...disregard that last post...hit the wrong button

quote:

To ask a player to come try out, then inform him he needs to get into the school and show up for a CHANCE to play doesn't seem right, but he was being honest about the situation. For me that doesn't fly, but then it may for someone else.

It just seems to me that choosing a team that way is a little lazy. And safe! So I can see part of the reason he does it. He doesn't want to take any risks on someone he hasn't seen try out for 4-5 weeks in the fall. But how do other coaches manage it? A little homework, a little scouting, a couple of phone calls and bam, he pulls the trigger right? Sure it's risky but so is the way the coach in question does it. A kid could look like All American material at the fall try out and go into the tank in the spring when it counts right?
He told us his Asst. coach is going to three TOP96 events in the next few weeks but he really couldn't tell us why, given his style of player selection. It just seems weird. If he per chance ever reads this thread, I think he's a nice enough guy! But if he really wants to know what the topper was for my son not being thrilled with his program it's this: The coach is also the D-line coach for the football team and admitted that he doesn't even make it to all the fall practices due to his football "obligations". That was the clincher right there.

quote:

in the absence of an NLI, how do DIII coaches actually "commit" to a player? Is it just a warm smile, a handshake and a promise?

Can anyone answer this? I believe they're forbidden to use Letter of Intent-like documents. Is it just verbal? Anyone with a DIII kid out there?

"Anyone with a DIII kid out there?"

My son is a returning D3 player (will be a junior this year).

At his college, there was no document signed formalizing the verbal agreement that he would play baseball there or receive a spot on the roster. His initial commitment was made to the head coach in one of their periodic phone calls, and then the coach followed it up with a letter welcoming him to their program, saying they were excited to have him on board, etc.

Technically there are open tryouts in the Fall, but the coach doesn't expect to see any surprise, non-invited recruits show up. If they are serious about playing for the program, they have had significant contact, have made a visit to the school, and in most cases the coach has made a trip out to see the player in a game situation - or at least he has gotten as much info as possible about the player from some other coach he trusts. I did hear of one walk-on (two years older than my son) who made the team without ever having talked with the coach before setting foot on campus, and became a starter by his junior year.

This year the total roster will expand to 46 players and a JV team will be added. All 46 players will compete in the Fall to determine which roster they make, varsity or JV, and all positions are considered open for competition, even those held by returning starters. But my understanding is that the 46 known players will all receive a spot on one of the rosters as long as they meet all of the team expectations and fulfill the academic requirements.

That's just the way it is done at one D3 school...

In our case, it came down to two D-III schools. One school has open tryouts every year, and returners must try out as well. The only guarantee was the chance to try out.

The other school, and the one that appealed to my son, was up front and the coach point blank told him that when he actively recruits a player, and that player commits with a deposit, he will be on the team--and the rest is up to the player to perform. They do have open tryouts in the fall, but my guess is that is to fill the roster, as needed, when players don't show up as expected.

The bottom line in this discussion is that DIII coaches are so very similar to DI coaches in that:
1. They know who they have returning at each position, including players who didn't get much playing time previously.
2. They know what new players are coming in (unless there are late surprises) and what positions they can potentially play, what their strengths and weaknesses are, etc.
3. They have a pretty good idea of what their depth chart looks like, which includes returning and new players.
4. And like DI coaches, they are ultimately going to play the players who will give their teams the best chance to win, no matter what class they are in, how experienced they are, how heavily they were recruited, etc.

We rejected that school three years ago, when I was struck by how unprepared and, dare I say, underinvolved this particular coach seemed with regards to recruiting and team selection, in season and off season conditioning, and coordination/ advocacy of summer baseball opportunities for his players. I believe that this team's record adequately reflects his preparation and commitment to the entirety of the process, relative to his peers.

This particular coach has been there for a long time at the same school...I suspect he's anchored in a time when D-III players, budgets, and competition weren't what they have become.

Still, some of the most successful and professional coaches in D-III have or have had 20-30 year tenures. Class and talent trumps the ravages of time. Some get wise, others just get old.

We have met a number of wonderfully motivated, prepared, and informed D-III coaches over the years. Believe me, the age of the coach, the academic reputation of the school, and competitiveness of the particular conference are independent of the work-habits of the head coach- some guys have it, and sadly, some don't.

In my opinion and limited experience, this guy doesn't. When you consider the cost of this particular school, and the difficulty of getting academic money there, you need to re-consider. If your kid can play, flee.

C/D

recommend the recent series in the ny times about div III recruiting

quote:

If your kid can play, flee

Agree. Run and hide like you stole something.

I'm the father of two D-III guys, one having transferred from a D-II. At D-III's, you don't sign anything (a la NLI) as you do at D-I's and D-II's. Coach's guarantee of roster spot in our case was made orally, but prior players/parents told us that was as good as gold.

JT and others have described it pretty well.

Nowhere, at any level, is there much of a true guarantee. Even with scholly's, they're one year renewable, at the option of the school. Smart coaches honor their verbal commitments that the scholly will be there for four years (when my oldest red-shirted at his D-II, the coach said "of course we'll honor his scholarship for a 5th year"), but players tire of watching so a fair number transfer when it's obvious PT won't be happening much.

After day one, it's what you get done on the field, when you get your chance, while keeping the grades at a satisfactory level, at every level.

quote:

Originally posted by dominick:
recommend the recent series in the ny times about div III recruiting

You wouldn't have a link to that would you Dominick?

Thanks to everyone who's responded to my initial post. I think my son has pretty much turned the page on that school. The campus was great, the area very interesting, the food in the dining hall was surprisingly good, but, well, you know the rest.
Anyway, another coach left a phone message earlier today that he'd really like to get my son out to his school for a visit "SOON". He saw son in a showcase a month or so ago and liked what he saw. Since then they've exchanged a couple of phone calls and emails. Son really likes him. I think if he likes the campus, ballfield, ect... and gets an offer he'll jump. He'd really like a legitimate chance to compete for playing time as a freshman too. Is that a fair question to ask a coach during a visit? Can he expect an honest answer? I wonder.

POPTIME

I dont think the NY Times article gives a very true picture of Division III recruiting---this is not a knock on Haverford but they do not seem to beat the "bushes" as strenuously as other Division III programs--but then that could be because of their academic standards--they have a small pool to fish in

As for the coach keeping his word I have seen many Division I and II coaches go back on their word regarding playing time, scholarship or no scholarship.

You have to trust the handshake but be sure he is looking you right in the eye when you shake hands.

There comes a time when you have to trust someone

Poptime,
That's a fair question but not sure your son will get the answer he is looking for.
All players have to work for their position, regardless of where you attend. And a lot depends of who stays and who leaves as well, who is injured, who is not producing, who is, etc. As we have said before, MOST freshman are not starters, no matter where they attend.

Your son just needs to go to the place he will be happiest at, learn that college baseball is different than the HS experience and be the best player he can be. He alone is the ONLY one who can guarantee his playing time.

Here's a pretty cool story I read in the paper this AM that falls into this discussion on a couple of levels. Jeff Tardif of the Framingham (MA) American Legion team was all set to attend Trinity (CT) this fall. The newspaper article said he had been accepted and was planning to "WALK ON". After a nice pitching performance in the State Championships in Sandwich MA, Coach Aoki of Boston College offered him a scholarship on the spot! Bye bye Trinity.
So, I guess Trinity is one of those schools that requires you to enroll and then try out? Surely Tardif had other options because he has been lights out all year, HS and Legion. I don't get it.
Another way it relates is maybe the coach invited him to walk on, only to have the player take a better offer, you know "the kid who didn't show up".
Anyway, it's an interesting story that probably plays out a lot. I think until these DIII schools start offering a player something more concrete about their future it will happen again and again. It's a risk some schools are willing to take I finding out more and more.

http://www.metrowestdailynews.com/sportsColumnists/view...37371&format=&page=1

POPTIME

I know the baseball people at Trinity I can safely say they don't do it that way. One of our players was set to play there without the requirment of being accepted first. I might also note that Coach Decker is one of the finest gentleman around.

Any committment a coach makes to a player, scholarship or not, is always contingent upon acceptance to the school. Also keep in mind that a player at the Division I or II levels needs to be qualified by the Clearinghouse a requirement totally apart from the college acceptance.

I am sure dollars fit into the story you relate since one school is a Division I and the other is a Division III school.

That's what I figured TR, I'm sure the newspaper reporter, being a newspaper reporter, got his facts messed up. I had read an earlier piece, when Jeff made the paper's all star squad that he WOULD BE PLAYING baseball at Trinity next year. Nothing about trying out or walking on. I'm sure it was a question in this case of the player not keeping his word to the coach, not vice-versa.

I guess the $80K the mother referred to is the difference in cost between the two schools with the BC scholarship?

I checked the COA of the schools and both are about $44K.

I am confused after reading Trinity's website. If your student does not qualify for financial aid and there are no merit awards how are 47% of students receiving financial aid at that school? Does the school have an endowment that helps students that fall into gray areas??

Baseball is ultimately a meritocracy. When facing choices regarding level of play, the higher you reach, the less likely you are to get the PT you want. If you are really honest about your skills, you should know your odds.

NOTE: HaverSon just finished this process. After four years, he had started more games than any player in school history at any sport, but no promises were ever made.

In regards to Haverford baseball beating the bushes, I doubt many DIII schools carry players from as many states or from as far away. In '06 I think they had only one player from PA, but at least 14 other states represented, plus of course, France. <s>

btbbalfannumber1-Thank you very much for your research. I appreciate your effort and will check into this info more. This is what's so great about the hsbaseballweb-so many people that care and are helpful!

Just as a follow up to the initial question. Those of you who were there heard this too. At the College Select in Binghamton a few weeks ago they had a DIII coach speaking who was basically asked this question. He stated (to paraphrase), that if he's gone through the work to see a player, watch his video, make phone calls, invite him for a visit, make his pitch to the player, have the player agree to come to the school and play, that he (the coach) would show the utmost loyalty to the player he's actively recruited. In other words "If I've recruited you and convinced you to come to my school, you have a spot on my team". He said that he belives that many many other DIII coaches operate the same way. Music to my ears. He fell short of saying that the spot was guaranteed, but he said that a kid would really have to screw up bad (show up in poor shape, c*rappy attitude ect...) to lose his slot as a freshman. And he also said he shows the same loyalty to his returning players, which is in contrast to the Gettysburg coach who stated to us that he has no problem with the wholesale cutting of upperclassman role players in order to make room for promising freshmen.

Hate to dredge up this old thread but I thought it odd that the coach from Gettysburg called my son's varsity coach yesterday to inquire about him, and then reached my son on his cell phone last night. He told us when we were on campus that he selects players exclusively from open tryouts after the boys have enrolled, but it sure sounds like he's recruiting to me. He asked for my son's video and said he hopes he'll consider Gettysburg when he makes his college choice. Strange.