Questions about early commits

I can't answer your questions, but I have been wondering about 2020s I have seen who have committed this summer (after the end of April, but before Sept. 1).  Is the only change effectively that coaches can't have recruiting conversations in person?  So the process prior to Sept. 1 of junior year is essentially the same, except it happens over the phone, instead of on the sidelines or on an unofficial visit (and the player has to place the call)?

Having a 2020 who recently (a few days ago) committed, I can say that it didn’t change anything for us. My son was fortunate enough to take several UV’s before the new rule was in place. 

I would think it would mostly affect those who haven’t taken UV’s before the new rules took effect. 

Chico Escuela posted:

I can't answer your questions, but I have been wondering about 2020s I have seen who have committed this summer (after the end of April, but before Sept. 1).  Is the only change effectively that coaches can't have recruiting conversations in person?  So the process prior to Sept. 1 of junior year is essentially the same, except it happens over the phone, instead of on the sidelines or on an unofficial visit (and the player has to place the call)?

Well, you can't take a visit now before Sept. 1 of junior year. I think it makes it a lot harder to commit without being able to visit. 

I can't see it making much difference at all.  Coaches will still get players to call them through their HS and travel coaches.  Unofficial visits will still happen in some form or another.  Parents will still feel panicked to take the first offer from a name school...and then tweet about it.  And much of this will still happen before September of Junior year.

Our 2nd son was recruited almost entirely by phone and email.  What will change about that from this new rule?

IMO, the rule (like most others) was written to not so much for the benefit of the players, but to not have to deal with kids dropping in all the time.  Every dad with his PG/PBR/etc... profile was inundating coaches with visits and calls.

"Dead periods" were created primarily for the same reasons - to give coaches a break.

The commitments will still happen for those that can...

hshuler posted:

Having a 2020 who recently (a few days ago) committed, I can say that it didn’t change anything for us. My son was fortunate enough to take several UV’s before the new rule was in place. 

I would think it would mostly affect those who haven’t taken UV’s before the new rules took effect. 

Congrats!

justbaseball posted:

I can't see it making much difference at all.  Coaches will still get players to call them through their HS and travel coaches.  Unofficial visits will still happen in some form or another.  Parents will still feel panicked to take the first offer from a name school...and then tweet about it.  And much of this will still happen before September of Junior year.

Our 2nd son was recruited almost entirely by phone and email.  What will change about that from this new rule?

IMO, the rule (like most others) was written to not so much for the benefit of the players, but to not have to deal with kids dropping in all the time.  Every dad with his PG/PBR/etc... profile was inundating coaches with visits and calls.

"Dead periods" were created primarily for the same reasons - to give coaches a break.

The commitments will still happen for those that can...

Wow.  I don't doubt what you wrote is true, but...wow.

Pedaldad posted:

justbaseball posted:

I can't see it making much difference at all.  Coaches will still get players to call them through their HS and travel coaches.  Unofficial visits will still happen in some form or another.  Parents will still feel panicked to take the first offer from a name school...and then tweet about it.  And much of this will still happen before September of Junior year.

Our 2nd son was recruited almost entirely by phone and email.  What will change about that from this new rule?

IMO, the rule (like most others) was written to not so much for the benefit of the players, but to not have to deal with kids dropping in all the time.  Every dad with his PG/PBR/etc... profile was inundating coaches with visits and calls.

"Dead periods" were created primarily for the same reasons - to give coaches a break.

The commitments will still happen for those that can...

Wow.  I don't doubt what you wrote is true, but...wow.

I'm with justbaseball mostly.  Won't make much difference.  And the rule change wasn't done for the "kids".  NCAA rules don't change how hard a kid throws, how much he spins it, how fast he runs or how hard he hits the ball.  The model has moved to PG / others collecting the data for them, then they go watch the ones that fit their program.  Still mostly in the same state / geo.

Why would the NCAA make the date September 1 when the kids are in school?  Why not Aug 1 or June 1?  Again, it has nothing to do with the kids.

I would replace the mostly "phone and email" with "established travel coach's recommendation" on above.  (even though that was justbaseballs experience.)

I still don't see how making the sharing of information more difficult benefits anyone with the decision on what college they attend.

If the NCAA really wanted to do anything to benefit the process, they would remove any restrictions on the date the LOI can be signed.  

Go44Dad is exactly right, these rule changes were just for show. If they had been serious about stopping early commits, they would have banned them outright or removed the time restrictions from the LOI. Instead, the NCAA in their infinite wisdom has done nothing but make it worse for the student athlete. The coaches are still heavily recruiting and making offers to the young kids, which takes the kid off the market. However, the kids can't even tour the faciliy or meet their future teammates before they make the biggest decision of their life so far. 

I know we are still very early in this rule change, but I don't see the early commits changing any time soon. It is possible that the parents (and the players) will realize the pitfalls of early commits without the benefit of even an unofficial visit, but as of today, that is not happening.  

It was bad timing for us.  My son has had a few unofficial visits but got more interest and offers once summer started.  The coaches have been good about not giving him a deadline but have also said they are still recruiting.  There is one school that is far from us and there is no way we get there this summer to visit (btw, they work around the no unofficial visit thing. They see the facilities they just don’t meet the coaches or get the guided tour).  The coach told us he should visit but also said there had been kids who commit and say they will visit later because they just want to play in a big conference. My son isn’t ready to do that and says he needs to feel comfortable.  There is some pressure to commit before spots disappear.

PedalDad,

You said it all in the first line of your OP....the NCAA is a self-serving organization.  Contrary to the commercials they run, it is not about the student athlete.   So, don't look for any help there.   The NCAA is as helpful as a hemorrhoid....always keep that in mind.

The concept of an early commitment is always going to fall on the shoulders of the recruit as well as its risk.   The process is set up that way, and it will continue to be unless there is a major change in college sports.   I agree with Go44Dad that if they really wanted to benefit the athlete they'd allow LOI to be signed anytime, but that isn't going to happen.   So, where does this leave everyone hoping to play scholarship ($$) baseball?  Same place, you just have to know ahead of time what you want (more parental and recruit research about the process), execute your recruiting plan earlier, and be willing to accept more risk if it comes to that because there is less time for a recruit to build a market (introduce additional suitors into the process) for himself.  But honestly, these recruiting changes aren't all that much different for most people willing to take an early commitment risk to play college baseball.   P5 coaches know they could have a line outside their door of kids willing to roll the dice on an early commitment.

As always, JMO.

The new rules probably won't  change anything for the elite programs, but will slow down a bit for the mid, to lower D1s.  

I think the rule proposed and accepted by the committee  was to stop the early recruitment of freshman and sophmores, even younger.  As Justbaseball mentioned, a lot of panic goes into the process, not all decisions are well thought as to the consequences of recruiting early.

Making September 1 the start date and not June 1, July 1 is because coaches are not in their offices at that time. Justbaseball is correct, coaches are on the road, come home and have meetings and work to do, don't always appreciate those drop ins, especially here in Florida where lots of summer tournaments take place. 

Pedaldad posted:

justbaseball posted:

I can't see it making much difference at all.  Coaches will still get players to call them through their HS and travel coaches.  Unofficial visits will still happen in some form or another.  Parents will still feel panicked to take the first offer from a name school...and then tweet about it.  And much of this will still happen before September of Junior year.

Our 2nd son was recruited almost entirely by phone and email.  What will change about that from this new rule?

IMO, the rule (like most others) was written to not so much for the benefit of the players, but to not have to deal with kids dropping in all the time.  Every dad with his PG/PBR/etc... profile was inundating coaches with visits and calls.

"Dead periods" were created primarily for the same reasons - to give coaches a break.

The commitments will still happen for those that can...

Wow.  I don't doubt what you wrote is true, but...wow.

TPM posted:

The new rules probably won't  change anything for the elite programs, but will slow down a bit for the mid, to lower D1s.  

I think the rule proposed and accepted by the committee  was to stop the early recruitment of freshman and sophmores, even younger.  As Justbaseball mentioned, a lot of panic goes into the process, not all decisions are well thought as to the consequences of recruiting early.

Making September 1 the start date and not June 1, July 1 is because coaches are not in their offices at that time. Justbaseball is correct, coaches are on the road, come home and have meetings and work to do, don't always appreciate those drop ins, especially here in Florida where lots of summer tournaments take place. 

 

 

Especially with the elite players, I also think it might slow down some who can now take official visits as juniors. Before the change, with official visits only coming after school starts in a kid's senior year, official visits were almost always reserved as a sort of "gift" to committed players and their families. Now, they become a true recruiting tool. I do wonder, though if this change pushes baseball even further toward the recruiting practices of football and baseball, where a player commits early, but still takes a lot of official visits, with many changing commitments right before the signing date. I think the date change provides schools with a huge incentive to shy away from the current culture of laying off of recruiting kids who have committed because now, they have a lot of extra time to get them on an official visit an woo them away.

I don't foresee a lot of official visits for juniors coming.

I do think people have tapped the brakes this summer, not sure exactly what the landscape is now.  Whether that lasts, we'll have to see.

Pedaldad posted:

 

Are there players and parents from 2020 and beyond that are excited about these new rules and intent on waiting to commit?

If committing such young players are not violating the letter of the new rules, they are at least violating the intent.  Should the NCAA step up the rules change to coincide with softball, and say no contact of any kind until September 1 of an athletes junior year?

I have a peripheral baseball relationship with some 2021s and 2022s. They are not happy with the rule change. They are planning to commit before junior year. If they do that, it will be without a sit-down with the coach on campus. Less information to make the decision. Maybe this will end up causing them to wait, but I doubt it.

In the context of these recent changes, I think softball probably did the right thing by not allowing any direct contact before junior year. It's not perfect, but I think it takes some of the pressure off of the young kids.

Does anyone know if this rule change prohibits current college players from showing young prospects around the school's baseball facilities? Many of these young prospects know college players through their coaches, travel programs, or high schools.

As far as I know, players cannot show recruits around unless on an official or unofficial visit. 

Recruits can attend camps. Some programs do not run their camps on the field but use practice fields. Players can go on campus visits thru the school. There are online videos of player facilities.

It really doesnt matter what the player wants, but more what the coaches are looking for their program.

TPM posted:

As far as I know, players cannot show recruits around unless on an official or unofficial visit. 

Recruits can attend camps. Some programs do not run their camps on the field but use practice fields. Players can go on campus visits thru the school. There are online videos of player facilities.

It really doesnt matter what the player wants, but more what the coaches are looking for their program.

My son was recently told that if he wanted to make a visit he could schedule it  through the school and then send a text when he was coming to the athletic facilities and they would leave and leave it unlocked for him to go through 

Midlo Dad posted:

I don't foresee a lot of official visits for juniors coming.

I do think people have tapped the brakes this summer, not sure exactly what the landscape is now.  Whether that lasts, we'll have to see.

I have to agree with you since a coach is only allowed 25 OVs per grad year and players only allowed 5. They will grant juniors an unofficial visit and their committs official as seniors before they sign. That hasnt changed.

I do know that top tier prospects will committ and for the rest of the 2020s, mid tiers dont have to rush and some still recruiting 2019s.

JMO

baseballhs posted:

TPM posted:

As far as I know, players cannot show recruits around unless on an official or unofficial visit. 

Recruits can attend camps. Some programs do not run their camps on the field but use practice fields. Players can go on campus visits thru the school. There are online videos of player facilities.

It really doesnt matter what the player wants, but more what the coaches are looking for their program.

My son was recently told that if he wanted to make a visit he could schedule it  through the school and then send a text when he was coming to the athletic facilities and they would leave and leave it unlocked for him to go through 

I dont think that I would tell anyone which program that is. 

I won’t but I can tell you it’s not uncommon.

TPM posted:

baseballhs posted:

TPM posted:

As far as I know, players cannot show recruits around unless on an official or unofficial visit. 

Recruits can attend camps. Some programs do not run their camps on the field but use practice fields. Players can go on campus visits thru the school. There are online videos of player facilities.

It really doesnt matter what the player wants, but more what the coaches are looking for their program.

My son was recently told that if he wanted to make a visit he could schedule it  through the school and then send a text when he was coming to the athletic facilities and they would leave and leave it unlocked for him to go through 

I dont think that I would tell anyone which program that is. 

Do you think that's against the rules, or just not in the spirit of the rules?

I don’t see how it breaks the rule.  It gets around it but you still have no communication with coaches.

MidAtlanticDad posted:

TPM posted:

baseballhs posted:

TPM posted:

As far as I know, players cannot show recruits around unless on an official or unofficial visit. 

Recruits can attend camps. Some programs do not run their camps on the field but use practice fields. Players can go on campus visits thru the school. There are online videos of player facilities.

It really doesnt matter what the player wants, but more what the coaches are looking for their program.

My son was recently told that if he wanted to make a visit he could schedule it  through the school and then send a text when he was coming to the athletic facilities and they would leave and leave it unlocked for him to go through 

I dont think that I would tell anyone which program that is. 

Do you think that's against the rules, or just not in the spirit of the rules?

I don't think NCAA rules have anything to do with it, rather than the universities rules.  Can a future student walk into the science lab to look around on their own? 

I am curious though so will inquire.

baseballhs posted:

TPM posted:

As far as I know, players cannot show recruits around unless on an official or unofficial visit. 

Recruits can attend camps. Some programs do not run their camps on the field but use practice fields. Players can go on campus visits thru the school. There are online videos of player facilities.

It really doesnt matter what the player wants, but more what the coaches are looking for their program.

My son was recently told that if he wanted to make a visit he could schedule it  through the school and then send a text when he was coming to the athletic facilities and they would leave and leave it unlocked for him to go through 

Can't do that due to a liability.

However, I guess that many programs have found a way, especially the bigger ones.  I guess that all tours can go through the admissions dept.  Some even have specific days when these are scheduled. You might see if that is an option. 

No persons including current  players involved in the athletic dept are allowed to be with a recruit.

fenwaysouth posted:

You said it all in the first line of your OP....the NCAA is a self-serving organization.  Contrary to the commercials they run, it is not about the student athlete.   So, don't look for any help there.   

The concept of an early commitment is always going to fall on the shoulders of the recruit as well as its risk...

P5 coaches know they could have a line outside their door of kids willing to roll the dice on an early commitment.

As always, JMO.

I understand the sentiment, but your first 2 paragraphs seem logically opposed to me.  The NCAA has definitively empowered recruits with the new legislation. I hate'm, but don't blame'm. 

If the recruits (and their parents) choose not to use that leverage to better their recruitment process and put themselves at the mercy of baseball coaches, well that is their own negligence and you can't put that on the NCAA or the coaches.

Recruits and parents should reject pressure to commit to a P5 or any institution because that school will move on to Joe Blow. The web pages of PG are littered with ghosts of prep star past that committed to the best school for all the wrong reasons. They end up with no spot on the team, a bunch of debt, and a lifetime of regret.

If Joe Blow and his parents will blindly accept an offer they can't discuss and can't understand from coaches they can't meet, it is irresponsible and potentially catastrophic financially.  People that make these types of decisions tend to be...not good at life. 

My advice to recruits and parents is that you probably shouldn't compete with them on those terms...because they're not good at life.

Pedaled posted:

Recruits and parents should reject pressure to commit to a P5 or any institution because that school will move on to Joe Blow. The web pages of PG are littered with ghosts of prep star past that committed to the best school for all the wrong reasons. They end up with no spot on the team, a bunch of debt, and a lifetime of regret.

If Joe Blow and his parents will blindly accept an offer they can't discuss and can't understand from coaches they can't meet, it is irresponsible and potentially catastrophic financially.  People that make these types of decisions tend to be...not good at life. 

 

If I am understanding what you have said, I totally agree.

This is a big part of the problem, parents and players are so afraid that if they don't accept an offer, even a walk on opportunity, they know it will go to the next guy. IMO, allowing your pre teen son to commit to a program early because everyone else is doing it, is irresponsible.  And coaches having their admissions office show recruits around is just another attempt at the NCAA to correct an issue but knew that there are more ways to skin a cat.

The new rules were meant to slow down the process, if more people sat back and allowed it to happen, you will find players committing when it is the right time for THEM to committ, not when everyone else is.

D2 and JUCO programs are full of former D1 players, who probably should have started there in the first place. I left out D3 because usually, those recruits have specific career goals and are high achieving students.

TPM posted:

D2 and JUCO programs are full of former D1 players, who probably should have started there in the first place. I left out D3 because usually, those recruits have specific career goals and are high achieving students.

I don't think you have to leave D3 out. Many of the top D3 teams rely on a steady stream of D1 drop-downs. The D3 World Series usually only has one or two HA schools.

I think it easier said than done. What is early? Before September 1 of junior year?  Take a look at the commitments for power five currently in the 2020 class. Kids can wait but there may not be any money left. Talking to parents can still happen. Recruits can call the coach and parentscan get on speaker to ask questions. Seeing the campus and facilities...they have ways to do that. My son is going to wait until end of summer or beginning of junior year but we saw it last year when kids committed later and were told by P5s, we wish we could offer more but it’s all we have left. We are not relying as much on amount but if it was an issue, the pressure would be more to get the money while it was still available.

MidAtlanticDad posted:

TPM posted:

D2 and JUCO programs are full of former D1 players, who probably should have started there in the first place. I left out D3 because usually, those recruits have specific career goals and are high achieving students.

I don't think you have to leave D3 out. Many of the top D3 teams rely on a steady stream of D1 drop-downs. The D3 World Series usually only has one or two HA schools.

Thanks.

PedalDad,

I agree with you on everything except on one point.  I don't think the NCAA (by moving the dates later) is going to change anything especially with P5 schools.  These guys are out recruiting through travel coaches and others 24x7x365.   I see a cottage industry growing even more for P5 scouts to feed recruiting information to college coaches because the time frame is shorter.  I do not see recruits empowered by the NCAA because there is less time to shop around to really figure out what a recruit wants...at least in my personal experience.  On the contrary.  

Son was recruited by a couple D1 P5s, a handful of D1 mid-majors, Ivy, Patriot and D3 schools over 20 months.  It took him time to figure out what he wanted, see these schools, and meet the coaches.   By moving the dates up, this would have limited him in making a major life decision.   I was fine with the previous dates, but my thing is the new school commitment date and recruiting timeline is limited by the NCAA.  I'd rather see the schools/coaches empowered through a financial or academic acceptance commitment when a recruit is ready to make that decision.   We don't need the NCAA's guidance or backwards  wisdom.  We need the schools financial commitment when a recruit verbals so both are committed.  Money talks and bullsh*t walks.

As always, JMO.

baseballhs posted:

I think it easier said than done. What is early? Before September 1 of junior year?  Take a look at the commitments for power five currently in the 2020 class. Kids can wait but there may not be any money left. Talking to parents can still happen. Recruits can call the coach and parentscan get on speaker to ask questions. Seeing the campus and facilities...they have ways to do that. My son is going to wait until end of summer or beginning of junior year but we saw it last year when kids committed later and were told by P5s, we wish we could offer more but it’s all we have left. We are not relying as much on amount but if it was an issue, the pressure would be more to get the money while it was still available.

Not offering money sometimes is a sign that they dont see a player as a big role player. If they want you, they find the money. Whether it be academic or needs based, they find it. They know who and who not to offer a walk on spot to. They need to fill their roster but technically they dont need 35 players. The P5 programs are best at it.  Coaches from all types of programs recruit on who will be major role players and who will not. They award money on that premise.  Thats why the best get to Omaha.

Go where they show you the love by giving a scholarship. It doesnt have to be a P5 program. Go be a big fish in small pond. 

Conversations with coaches can still happen via phone.  So can tours of campus, just not of athletic facilities--I'd like to think other aspects of campus life matter at least a little to recruits...  As for athletic facilities, am I wrong to assume that at a P5 school, they will at minimum be more than adequate?  Is a cool looking weight room and new lockers really that big a deal (to a 15 year-old kid maybe, but to the parents)?

Seems like allowing players to sign binding LOIs earlier would at least alleviate some risk for athletes.  You might be told 10 months after you commit that you won't ever make the roster, but you'd know you still have any scholarship $$ you were promised if you choose not to cut ties with the school and try to play elsewhere.  Definitely not a perfect solution, but right now the risks and rewards in this process seem tilted pretty heavily against student athletes.   Banning commitments entirely until, say, Sept 1 of junior year seems like it would invite under-the-table oral agreements--which again seems like a better deal for coaches than for recruits.  Why not bring it all out in the open and say "early commitments are ok, but both sides will have to put it in an enforceable written contract"?   

One other thought: If I were a D1 coach, I'd hire a couple of film school students for this summer to make an extensive interactive video tour of my athletic facilities, maybe add a couple of interviews with players and coaches.  Then I'd post the finished product to my program's web site.

Chico Escuela posted:

One other thought: If I were a D1 coach, I'd hire a couple of film school students for this summer to make an extensive interactive video tour of my athletic facilities, maybe add a couple of interviews with players and coaches.  Then I'd post the finished product to my program's web site.

You mean like this?  

https://youtu.be/uwYzZrBbxyk

MidAtlanticDad posted:

Chico Escuela posted:

One other thought: If I were a D1 coach, I'd hire a couple of film school students for this summer to make an extensive interactive video tour of my athletic facilities, maybe add a couple of interviews with players and coaches.  Then I'd post the finished product to my program's web site.

You mean like this?  

https://youtu.be/uwYzZrBbxyk

Clemson knows how to do it!  

OMG my son is in that video!!!

baseballhs posted:

I think it easier said than done. What is early? Before September 1 of junior year?  Take a look at the commitments for power five currently in the 2020 class. Kids can wait but there may not be any money left. Talking to parents can still happen. Recruits can call the coach and parentscan get on speaker to ask questions. Seeing the campus and facilities...they have ways to do that. My son is going to wait until end of summer or beginning of junior year but we saw it last year when kids committed later and were told by P5s, we wish we could offer more but it’s all we have left. We are not relying as much on amount but if it was an issue, the pressure would be more to get the money while it was still available.

The amount of athletic aid you should rely on is "$0.00" Because anything and everything can happen. Don't get yourself into a financial situation at your kid's school of choice that you cannot handle. Spending $65K a year to be a walk on at a private school is only going to be beneficial (IMO) if that family can afford the tuition (or is willing to go into debt for it) and the degree/institution has the horsepower to allow that student to pay off those loans in a short period of time (thinking engineering degree here or something to that effect, which doesn't marry up against being a NCAA athlete all that well). I know there are kids who can and have done it, I'm just saying it isn't easy.

If you are doing a vanilla degree like my son will be doing (business, history, education, etc), if you are paying private school $$$ I would recommend going after that school's highest regarded degree program that isn't engineering, to allow for recoupment of your education dollar investment quicker. Spending $65K a year for a degree in which the starting salary for the job is $30K a year is not a wise investment in my mind. 

  On a side note to recruting,  I was talking to a friend of mine who is a RC at a P5 school. He told me how he had been in Atlanta for 3 weeks and was sick of watching high school players try to play baseball.  I asked him if he found any prospects and he said a few. 

 I then asked him about a 2020 I know  that committed to his school  .. and he said yes he's committed, who knows what he will become in three years... He said he could develop over the next 2 years and maybe they could use him his soph year.... but he could also get cut in the fall.  He said that he's a "wait and see commit"

Do you think that 'getting cut in the fall" has ever entered the 2020's mind or his parents mind?  Or how that impacts his college future having to transfer , getting classes to transfer,  I for one doubt they ever think about anything past tweeting and instagramming. 

bacdorslider posted:

  On a side note to recruting,  I was talking to a friend of mine who is a RC at a P5 school. He told me how he had been in Atlanta for 3 weeks and was sick of watching high school players try to play baseball.  I asked him if he found any prospects and he said a few. 

 I then asked him about a 2020 I know  that committed to his school  .. and he said yes he's committed, who knows what he will become in three years... He said he could develop over the next 2 years and maybe they could use him his soph year.... but he could also get cut in the fall.  He said that he's a "wait and see commit"

Do you think that 'getting cut in the fall" has ever entered the 2020's mind or his parents mind?  Or how that impacts his college future having to transfer , getting classes to transfer,  I for one doubt they ever think about anything past tweeting and instagramming. 

 

Ouch.  A good reminder to choose a college with a baseball team you want to play for, not a baseball team that happens to be affiliated with a college.

Later commitments would help.  But how do you avoid cheating--coaches whispering the ear of players, parents, or travel team coaches that an offer will be there in a year?  How well are things working in softball?

Serious question:  How often do kids who get cut from a baseball roster decide to transfer because of baseball?  Maybe the college isn't a good fit or grades are bad *and* there is no roster spot... But how often do you think a kid who gets cut transfers to another school so that he can play?  It would be a tough situation...  From the outside, it's clear that school ought to be the primary factor, but I know it's not so cut and dried for many.

Chico Escuela posted:

bacdorslider posted:

  On a side note to recruting,  I was talking to a friend of mine who is a RC at a P5 school. He told me how he had been in Atlanta for 3 weeks and was sick of watching high school players try to play baseball.  I asked him if he found any prospects and he said a few. 

 I then asked him about a 2020 I know  that committed to his school  .. and he said yes he's committed, who knows what he will become in three years... He said he could develop over the next 2 years and maybe they could use him his soph year.... but he could also get cut in the fall.  He said that he's a "wait and see commit"

Do you think that 'getting cut in the fall" has ever entered the 2020's mind or his parents mind?  Or how that impacts his college future having to transfer , getting classes to transfer,  I for one doubt they ever think about anything past tweeting and instagramming. 

 

Ouch.  A good reminder to choose a college with a baseball team you want to play for, not a baseball team that happens to be affiliated with a college.

Later commitments would help.  But how do you avoid cheating--coaches whispering the ear of players, parents, or travel team coaches that an offer will be there in a year?  How well are things working in softball?

Serious question:  How often do kids who get cut from a baseball roster decide to transfer because of baseball?  Maybe the college isn't a good fit or grades are bad *and* there is no roster spot... But how often do you think a kid who gets cut transfers to another school so that he can play?  It would be a tough situation...  From the outside, it's clear that school ought to be the primary factor, but I know it's not so cut and dried for many.

A TON!!!

It is hard for a teenage boy to not jump at the first offer. If your goal is to play D1 baseball and a college coach offers you that opportunity (verbal), it's tough for kids to say no. They have to "bet on themselves" that there will be other offers coming . . .

My son knows two kids who committed to very top P5 programs (one PAC12 and one SEC) about December of freshman year. At the time, it was a big deal for those that knew them. Well, they're all rising seniors now, and one of the two has already been de-committed by the school, and I ran into the dad of the other kid at the WWBA and he told me his son (although still officially committed to the school) probably wasn't going to end up there. 

I do think the schools would think twice about offering so early if it entailed signing an NLI at that time. Sure, they could still pull the "we don't see you getting on the field" card, but having a signed NLI would create more risk for the school, and probably curb some of the early offers. 

Chico Escuela posted:

bacdorslider posted:

  On a side note to recruting,  I was talking to a friend of mine who is a RC at a P5 school. He told me how he had been in Atlanta for 3 weeks and was sick of watching high school players try to play baseball.  I asked him if he found any prospects and he said a few. 

 I then asked him about a 2020 I know  that committed to his school  .. and he said yes he's committed, who knows what he will become in three years... He said he could develop over the next 2 years and maybe they could use him his soph year.... but he could also get cut in the fall.  He said that he's a "wait and see commit"

Do you think that 'getting cut in the fall" has ever entered the 2020's mind or his parents mind?  Or how that impacts his college future having to transfer , getting classes to transfer,  I for one doubt they ever think about anything past tweeting and instagramming. 

 

Ouch.  A good reminder to choose a college with a baseball team you want to play for, not a baseball team that happens to be affiliated with a college.

Later commitments would help.  But how do you avoid cheating--coaches whispering the ear of players, parents, or travel team coaches that an offer will be there in a year?  How well are things working in softball?

Serious question:  How often do kids who get cut from a baseball roster decide to transfer because of baseball?  Maybe the college isn't a good fit or grades are bad *and* there is no roster spot... But how often do you think a kid who gets cut transfers to another school so that he can play?  It would be a tough situation...  From the outside, it's clear that school ought to be the primary factor, but I know it's not so cut and dried for many.

the attrition rate is high.... players transferring all the time.  2018's team is sitting on 41-42 players  gotta cut that to 35 by Feb.

bacdorslider posted:

Chico Escuela posted:

bacdorslider posted:

  On a side note to recruting,  I was talking to a friend of mine who is a RC at a P5 school. He told me how he had been in Atlanta for 3 weeks and was sick of watching high school players try to play baseball.  I asked him if he found any prospects and he said a few. 

 I then asked him about a 2020 I know  that committed to his school  .. and he said yes he's committed, who knows what he will become in three years... He said he could develop over the next 2 years and maybe they could use him his soph year.... but he could also get cut in the fall.  He said that he's a "wait and see commit"

Do you think that 'getting cut in the fall" has ever entered the 2020's mind or his parents mind?  Or how that impacts his college future having to transfer , getting classes to transfer,  I for one doubt they ever think about anything past tweeting and instagramming. 

 

Ouch.  A good reminder to choose a college with a baseball team you want to play for, not a baseball team that happens to be affiliated with a college.

Later commitments would help.  But how do you avoid cheating--coaches whispering the ear of players, parents, or travel team coaches that an offer will be there in a year?  How well are things working in softball?

Serious question:  How often do kids who get cut from a baseball roster decide to transfer because of baseball?  Maybe the college isn't a good fit or grades are bad *and* there is no roster spot... But how often do you think a kid who gets cut transfers to another school so that he can play?  It would be a tough situation...  From the outside, it's clear that school ought to be the primary factor, but I know it's not so cut and dried for many.

the attrition rate is high.... players transferring all the time.  2018's team is sitting on 41-42 players  gotta cut that to 35 by Feb.

And those extra 7 kids are likely pretty good ballplayers who could play somewhere.

Here are commits by a collection of D1 schools as of November, 2017.   This was the guide I used to give my son the green light (along with budget, fit, other attributes).  I took from this chart that 90% of the budget for the top P5 schools is spent by November of kids Junior years.  The 2019 kids were HS Juniors in November of last year.  If the right offer was given, he was free to commit.

The last set of NCAA rule changes will do nothing to this chart.  Do your own research for your situation.  Use all the disagreements above to stimulate your own thoughts about your family's situation.

Go44dad posted:

Here are commits by a collection of D1 schools as of November, 2017.   This was the guide I used to give my son the green light (along with budget, fit, other attributes).  I took from this chart that 90% of the budget for the top P5 schools is spent by November of kids Junior years.  The 2019 kids were HS Juniors in November of last year.  If the right offer was given, he was free to commit.

The last set of NCAA rule changes will do nothing to this chart.  Do your own research for your situation.  Use all the disagreements above to stimulate your own thoughts about your family's situation.

 

So, many of those schools are over-recruiting and the majority of those commits won't make the spring roster?  Certainly, Arkansas doesn't have 25 roster openings for their 2018 class.  Or am I reading that wrong?  Thanks.

CTbballDad posted:

Go44dad posted:

Here are commits by a collection of D1 schools as of November, 2017.   This was the guide I used to give my son the green light (along with budget, fit, other attributes).  I took from this chart that 90% of the budget for the top P5 schools is spent by November of kids Junior years.  The 2019 kids were HS Juniors in November of last year.  If the right offer was given, he was free to commit.

The last set of NCAA rule changes will do nothing to this chart.  Do your own research for your situation.  Use all the disagreements above to stimulate your own thoughts about your family's situation.

 

So, many of those schools are over-recruiting and the majority of those commits won't make the spring roster?  Certainly, Arkansas doesn't have 25 roster openings for their 2018 class.  Or am I reading that wrong?  Thanks.

You are not reading that wrong. Go on PG now and Arkansas has 23 commits listed for the 2018 class (not sure about the other 2) -- 1 of the 23 was drafted (and signed), so that leaves 22 planning to play for the Razorbacks next spring.

CTbballDad posted:

Go44dad posted:

Here are commits by a collection of D1 schools as of November, 2017.   This was the guide I used to give my son the green light (along with budget, fit, other attributes).  I took from this chart that 90% of the budget for the top P5 schools is spent by November of kids Junior years.  The 2019 kids were HS Juniors in November of last year.  If the right offer was given, he was free to commit.

The last set of NCAA rule changes will do nothing to this chart.  Do your own research for your situation.  Use all the disagreements above to stimulate your own thoughts about your family's situation.

 

So, many of those schools are over-recruiting and the majority of those commits won't make the spring roster?  Certainly, Arkansas doesn't have 25 roster openings for their 2018 class.  Or am I reading that wrong?  Thanks.

take those PG reported commitments with a grain of salt...they aren't 100% accurate and are self reported by the owner of the profile.

95% percent of these commitments on PG are accurate.. 

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

bacdorslider posted:

95% percent of these commitments on PG are accurate.. 

Which also means "they aren't 100% accurate"

GaryMe posted:

bacdorslider posted:

95% percent of these commitments on PG are accurate.. 

Which also means "they aren't 100% accurate"

true.

Qhead posted:

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

I don't have first hand knowledge of this, but a fair number of kids "commit" knowing they are going to be walk-ons without the benefit of a scholarship (and the attactched NLI). I would wager a guess that up to 20% of announced commitments do not include athletic aid, just my guess. If 27 players on the D1 roster are on scholarship (that's the maximum amount and not a mandated number) and rosters are filled at 35 players across the board, then around 22% of those guys on the roster either committed knowing they weren't going to get athletic aid or lost their scholarships along the way and decided "whatever, I just want to play at XXX."

So is it unscrupulous coaches over-recruiting and hosing the players, or is it players who are deciding (for whatever reason) that they want to commit to XXX, walk-on or not, and will see what happens.

GaryMe posted

I don't have first hand knowledge of this, but a fair number of kids "commit" knowing they are going to be walk-ons without the benefit of a scholarship (and the attactched NLI). I would wager a guess that up to 20% of announced commitments do not include athletic aid, just my guess. If 27 players on the D1 roster are on scholarship (that's the maximum amount and not a mandated number) and rosters are filled at 35 players across the board, then around 22% of those guys on the roster either committed knowing they weren't going to get athletic aid or lost their scholarships along the way and decided "whatever, I just want to play at XXX."

If you are right, then do the walk-ons get any benefit with admissions (or would that vary by school)?  If my "commitment" to Arkansas means the coach will let show up at fall practices and try to make the team, do I have any assurance I will even be admitted?  And if not, then committing in some cases just means "if you get in, then you can come to try outs"?  Admission at state flagship universities isn't a given, even for in-state applicants.  

Now the good questions are coming in. 

Qhead posted:

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks....al-of-arms-for-2019/

20 signed NLIs. One of those was drafted and signed.

bacdorslider posted:

Now the good questions are coming in. 

Ummm... thanks, I guess.  

my guess is that if you have say 42 players coming in for the fall...... 2 injury, 2 grades, 2 transfers 1 quits.... that's about normal. so then the number is 35..... 26-27 travel team depending on conference .... which will be 14 pitchers 2-3 catchers,  4 outfielders, 6 infielders.   

1.) committ......  2.) sign NLI.......  3.) make team ....... 4.) make ncaa roster....  5.) make travel team.......  6.) get to play....     7.) get to start .......

2019Dad posted:

Qhead posted:

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks....al-of-arms-for-2019/

20 signed NLIs. One of those was drafted and signed.

Wow that means only 15 guys (at most) stayed from the 2018 team and will get baseball money for 2019, right?  You can only have 35 max on the roster, correct?

Qhead posted:

2019Dad posted:

Qhead posted:

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks....al-of-arms-for-2019/

20 signed NLIs. One of those was drafted and signed.

Wow that means only 15 guys (at most) stayed from the 2018 team and will get baseball money for 2019, right?  You can only have 35 max on the roster, correct?

You can have a max of 27 getting baseball money. You can have a max of 35 on the roster.

Qhead posted:

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

I don't know any particulars about Arkansas, but here's what I observed from over a decade of watching players get recruited to big programs...

1. Most of the problem takes care of itself - players get drafted, don't make grades, get into trouble, change their minds...

2. Sometimes players offers are pulled at the buzzer and sometimes even after signing players are advised to not show up - "You will never see the field here, so you oughta looks somewhere else."  (BTW, this happens across ALL NCAA sports, including football, basketball, and others).

3. There is never a shortage of players willing to commit and sign with programs with higher reputations for doing this.  Everyone assumes it won't be them.  Sometimes it is...  True, it may discourage your son or mine, but the supply of good-enough players is greater than the slots on college teams.  Many nationally ranked programs "over-recruit."  It hasn't hurt them in the big picture.

^^^To add,

There are only  11.7 scholarships for baseball, IF the school is fully funded.

The minimum scholarship:  25%

Therefore......

Maximum on athletic scholarship: 27

Maximum on roster: 35.

So, if you hear of the school giving 30%, 50% 75% scholarships....the total number players on athletic scholarships  MAY NOT BE  27.   Mathematically, it can be a nightmare for the coaches.   Coaches love players that get academic money.  There are many players playing for free, and glad to do so.

Don't worry about baseball money, there's not much of it.... get some academic  FA  money....most of the 27 with likely get 25% ... some will get 40%.. some private schools with the slush fund will get 95%

In essence, 9 guys per class or 6.8 per class getting money.  When you look at it, you look at who is also being recruited in that class for what positions.  I think it is vital to know where you fit.  When my son was deciding on Tennessee, we looked at school, coaches, competition that will be in program (those in years before him) and those in his class.  There are four other LHP for sure in his recruiting class and 8 others that will be there when he gets there unless they add juco or some leave.  Will you be able to play or is the water to full was a major question.  Some P5 schools showed interest that were too full already with LHP that it would be a battle just to compete for playing time much less starting.  Again, what are you looking for?  You will never fully know until you are there and get a feel for it. 

I say recruiting is like dating.  YOu have to trust the other person.  Once you find the one you like then commit.  Until then.  Keep going out until you find the right one.  Just know that until you say I do (NLI) the other person can break your heart by breaking up with you.  And divorce is always an option for some.  Even if it is not your fault.  The Bible says God hates divorce.  I say because of what it does to the people He loves.  It is the same in recruiting.  When a school lets a player go it hurts everyone or when a player transfers, it hurts everyone.

justbaseball posted:

3. There is never a shortage of players willing to commit and sign with programs with higher reputations for doing this.  Everyone assumes it won't be them.  Sometimes it is...  True, it may discourage your son or mine, but the supply of good-enough players is greater than the slots on college teams.  Many nationally ranked programs "over-recruit."  It hasn't hurt them in the big picture.

THIS!

I never understood the problem with committing early. I completely understand why many are opposed to it, but I don't know why the NCAA and coaches need to combat it. 

Sure, plenty of kids don't end up at the school they committed to, but how much of that has to do with players and parents not doing their research? There is a school that commits 15-19 kids every single year and only have 1 to 3 players drafted from their program each season. If your son is the 15th player to commit to this class, as a parent how do you not step in?  They already offered 14 other players before you. It isn't going to work. 

We know a player who committed to a mid major over the likes of plenty of ACC and Big 12 schools. Why? They already had 12 kids committed and more offers out. Even if he progresses as expected, is the money going to be there, is the roster space going to be there, etc? This is a family that did their research and about 40% the recruiting class at the Big 12 school never set foot on campus. 

I don't have a problem with kids committing early if it makes sense. If you are a stud freshman/soph, you will most likely be a stud junior who is more mature and ready to commit. If you didn't pan out/progress as expected, it was never meant to be in the first place. I think fall of junior year is the time to really start looking into schools and committing if the offer is there. Frosh/Sophs can wait. 

Chico Escuela posted:

One other thought: If I were a D1 coach, I'd hire a couple of film school students for this summer to make an extensive interactive video tour of my athletic facilities, maybe add a couple of interviews with players and coaches.  Then I'd post the finished product to my program's web site.

One program has put together an infographic which is similar to your concept, except no video. 

Chico Escuela posted:

GaryMe posted

I don't have first hand knowledge of this, but a fair number of kids "commit" knowing they are going to be walk-ons without the benefit of a scholarship (and the attactched NLI). I would wager a guess that up to 20% of announced commitments do not include athletic aid, just my guess. If 27 players on the D1 roster are on scholarship (that's the maximum amount and not a mandated number) and rosters are filled at 35 players across the board, then around 22% of those guys on the roster either committed knowing they weren't going to get athletic aid or lost their scholarships along the way and decided "whatever, I just want to play at XXX."

If you are right, then do the walk-ons get any benefit with admissions (or would that vary by school)?  If my "commitment" to Arkansas means the coach will let show up at fall practices and try to make the team, do I have any assurance I will even be admitted?  And if not, then committing in some cases just means "if you get in, then you can come to try outs"?  Admission at state flagship universities isn't a given, even for in-state applicants.  

Sometimes admission is tougher at state schools for in-state kids...schools like those out of state tuition dollars.

GaryMe posted:

Chico Escuela posted:

GaryMe posted

I don't have first hand knowledge of this, but a fair number of kids "commit" knowing they are going to be walk-ons without the benefit of a scholarship (and the attactched NLI). I would wager a guess that up to 20% of announced commitments do not include athletic aid, just my guess. If 27 players on the D1 roster are on scholarship (that's the maximum amount and not a mandated number) and rosters are filled at 35 players across the board, then around 22% of those guys on the roster either committed knowing they weren't going to get athletic aid or lost their scholarships along the way and decided "whatever, I just want to play at XXX."

If you are right, then do the walk-ons get any benefit with admissions (or would that vary by school)?  If my "commitment" to Arkansas means the coach will let show up at fall practices and try to make the team, do I have any assurance I will even be admitted?  And if not, then committing in some cases just means "if you get in, then you can come to try outs"?  Admission at state flagship universities isn't a given, even for in-state applicants.  

Sometimes admission is tougher at state schools for in-state kids...schools like those out of state tuition dollars.

I find that surprising as those schools are generously supported by state funds. I would imagine a lot of angry constituents demanding their state reps to vote down or cut support to these high ed institutes as their precious child is being unfairly slighted.

2019Dad posted:

Qhead posted:

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks....al-of-arms-for-2019/

20 signed NLIs. One of those was drafted and signed.

I dont believe that the use of  the word "Signees" is actually how many kids signed NLI, but on kids committing to come to school and have a roster spot in the fall to try and make team.  The article lists 12 pitchers alone in the class.  There are also an existing 17 or so non-senior pitchers on the current roster.  Only 3 seniors total are listed on current roster and there are 17 current freshmen listed.  The numbers just dont work out.  There will have to be a decent amount of turnover from current roster and I think a fairly high percentage of those "signees" are not going to show up to campus in the fall IMHO... Parents should really look at how the numbers breakdown and discuss with your son so that everyone has a real feel for committing early and what the odds of making the team are

FriarFred posted:

2019Dad posted:

Qhead posted:

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks....al-of-arms-for-2019/

20 signed NLIs. One of those was drafted and signed.

I dont believe that the use of  the word "Signees" is actually how many kids signed NLI, but on kids committing to come to school and have a roster spot in the fall to try and make team.  The article lists 12 pitchers alone in the class.  There are also an existing 17 or so non-senior pitchers on the current roster.  Only 3 seniors total are listed on current roster and there are 17 current freshmen listed.  The numbers just dont work out.  There will have to be a decent amount of turnover from current roster and I think a fairly high percentage of those "signees" are not going to show up to campus in the fall IMHO... Parents should really look at how the numbers breakdown and discuss with your son so that everyone has a real feel for committing early and what the odds of making the team are

There were also five or six juniors who signed after the draft and several players will transfer out because of a lack of playing time and there will be a handful of injuries and players who will red shirt. The numbers always seem to work out. 

keewart posted:

^^^To add,

There are only  11.7 scholarships for baseball, IF the school is fully funded.

The minimum scholarship:  25%

Therefore......

Maximum on athletic scholarship: 27

Maximum on roster: 35.

So, if you hear of the school giving 30%, 50% 75% scholarships....the total number players on athletic scholarships  MAY NOT BE  27.   Mathematically, it can be a nightmare for the coaches.   Coaches love players that get academic money.  There are many players playing for free, and glad to do so.

 

I agree, coaches like players who qualify for academics, as well as need based grants. 

FYI, coaches use programs so they know at anytime how much they have to spend, who gets what, so it really isn't a nightmare.

FriarFred posted:

2019Dad posted:

Qhead posted:

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks....al-of-arms-for-2019/

20 signed NLIs. One of those was drafted and signed.

I dont believe that the use of  the word "Signees" is actually how many kids signed NLI, but on kids committing to come to school and have a roster spot in the fall to try and make team.  The article lists 12 pitchers alone in the class.  There are also an existing 17 or so non-senior pitchers on the current roster.  Only 3 seniors total are listed on current roster and there are 17 current freshmen listed.  The numbers just dont work out.  There will have to be a decent amount of turnover from current roster and I think a fairly high percentage of those "signees" are not going to show up to campus in the fall IMHO... Parents should really look at how the numbers breakdown and discuss with your son so that everyone has a real feel for committing early and what the odds of making the team are

Well, the first sentence of the article says: "The Razorback baseball program and head coach Dave Van Horn announced the signing of 20 student-athletes to National Letters of Intent for the 2019 season this week." I took that to mean that 20 signed NLIs.

Has anybody updated my chart?

MidAtlanticDad posted:

Chico Escuela posted:

One other thought: If I were a D1 coach, I'd hire a couple of film school students for this summer to make an extensive interactive video tour of my athletic facilities, maybe add a couple of interviews with players and coaches.  Then I'd post the finished product to my program's web site.

You mean like this?  

https://youtu.be/uwYzZrBbxyk

OMG!  Can tell I'm a D3 guy.  I was thinking more along the lines of this:

http://athletics.uchicago.edu/...orts/bsb/video/index

Go44dad posted:

Has anybody updated my chart?

Haven't updated it, but encouraged my son to use the same info from PG when he was doing his research.

I would encourage any parent to look at those numbers and any other data that they can get.  For my son's recruitment we kept a similar chart and also kept track of the active online rosters at schools where he had interest.  We compared them to the list of PG commits from corresponding years, it was enlightening at times.

roothog66 posted:

There were also five or six juniors who signed after the draft and several players will transfer out because of a lack of playing time and there will be a handful of injuries and players who will red shirt. The numbers always seem to work out. 

Red shirt players are included in the 35 man roster.  

GaryMe posted:

Sometimes admission is tougher at state schools for in-state kids...schools like those out of state tuition dollars.

This is not correct.  Can you show supporting information on your statement?

TPM posted:

GaryMe posted:

Sometimes admission is tougher at state schools for in-state kids...schools like those out of state tuition dollars.

This is not correct.  Can you show supporting information on your statement?

TPM - This has been a problem and criticism of some of the Virginia schools as state/federal funding has gone down.   Universities turned to research $$, athletics $$, and out of state students $$ for new revenue streams to offset the funding problem.  My understanding is there was legistlation and admission policy changes to accept a prescriptive number (minimum) of in-state students...as they should.   We are paying taxes for that purpose.  This happened at three state schools that I know of William & Mary, UVA and Virginia Tech.  I don't know about other states (I suspect there are more), but it is/was most definitely an issue in Virginia.

fenwaysouth posted:

TPM posted:

GaryMe posted:

Sometimes admission is tougher at state schools for in-state kids...schools like those out of state tuition dollars.

This is not correct.  Can you show supporting information on your statement?

TPM - This has been a problem and criticism of some of the Virginia schools as state/federal funding has gone down.   Universities turned to research $$, athletics $$, and out of state students $$ for new revenue streams to offset the funding problem.  My understanding is there was legistlation and admission policy changes to accept a prescriptive number (minimum) of in-state students...as they should.   We are paying taxes for that purpose.  This happened at three state schools that I know of William & Mary, UVA and Virginia Tech.  I don't know about other states (I suspect there are more), but it is/was most definitely an issue in Virginia.

Sorry I meant for athletes. Here in FL, especially for non revenue sports like baseball, they want in state students.

2019Dad posted:

FriarFred posted:

2019Dad posted:

Qhead posted:

Assuming 22 players verbally committed is correct, how did the Arkansas coach pare that down by the NLI signing date?  He had to go back to some of those players and say sorry I changed my mind, we can't give you an NLI?  Wouldn't word start to spread about a particular program over-committing, which would discourage future potential recruits from verbally "committing" to them?  Not picking on Ark - just using them as an example.  I don't understand how a program can get away with this without damaging their reputation?

http://www.arkansasrazorbacks....al-of-arms-for-2019/

20 signed NLIs. One of those was drafted and signed.

I dont believe that the use of  the word "Signees" is actually how many kids signed NLI, but on kids committing to come to school and have a roster spot in the fall to try and make team.  The article lists 12 pitchers alone in the class.  There are also an existing 17 or so non-senior pitchers on the current roster.  Only 3 seniors total are listed on current roster and there are 17 current freshmen listed.  The numbers just dont work out.  There will have to be a decent amount of turnover from current roster and I think a fairly high percentage of those "signees" are not going to show up to campus in the fall IMHO... Parents should really look at how the numbers breakdown and discuss with your son so that everyone has a real feel for committing early and what the odds of making the team are

Well, the first sentence of the article says: "The Razorback baseball program and head coach Dave Van Horn announced the signing of 20 student-athletes to National Letters of Intent for the 2019 season this week." I took that to mean that 20 signed NLIs.

That could be but if 20 actually signed a NLI (see below), that would mean at a minimum he used 5 scholarships out of his 11.7 for the Freshman class (25% scholly minimum x 20 kids) which is possible, just seems unlikely with all the other talent on that team that 43% of available $ would go to one class and that if he had 20 kids on scholarship in Freshman class that only leaves room for 7 more (27 max players on scholly).   Disclosure:  Just a dad trying to figure out how those kind of numbers work when you see these size of signing class and I could be 100% wrong in my interpretation.  Of course, several kids will most likely never step foot on campus and go JUCO.  Again, as GoDad pointed out earlier, this large of a class would seem to be a potential red flag on committing to that particular school. 

 Here is definition from NLI FAQ site:  

When I sign an NLI what do I agree to do?

When you sign an NLI, you agree to attend the institution listed on the NLI for one academic year in exchange for that institution awarding athletics financial aid for one academic year.

Here is GA with the HOPE scholarships for in state kids with 3.0 GPAs, they get tuition paid for if they can maintain the GPA and class load. That helps baseball. Clemson had ACM and that helps OOS student athletes. Regarding the 20 NLIs at Arkansas, that feels like what Perno used to do at UGA and ended up cutting kids after the fall. Now with the P5 scholarship being 4 years, not sure that would happen again. Perno won but slowly destroyed the program afterwards. I have no idea how it will impact Arkansas.

I think a common practice for many of these programs that over recruit is telling players that they would benefit more from attending the local Juco and get in more playing time rather than sitting on the bench.  

TPM posted:

roothog66 posted:

There were also five or six juniors who signed after the draft and several players will transfer out because of a lack of playing time and there will be a handful of injuries and players who will red shirt. The numbers always seem to work out. 

Red shirt players are included in the 35 man roster.  

 

 

True and I knew that - my bad. 

As to Arkansas, you see a LOT of transfers out every year and, if you look at there signing classes, they are almost all on the roster their freshman years PLUS a decent number of JC transfers into the program that aren't even accounted for in the above numbers. They always seem to make it work somehow. 

roothog66 posted:

TPM posted:

roothog66 posted:

There were also five or six juniors who signed after the draft and several players will transfer out because of a lack of playing time and there will be a handful of injuries and players who will red shirt. The numbers always seem to work out. 

Red shirt players are included in the 35 man roster.  

 

 

True and I knew that - my bad. 

As to Arkansas, you see a LOT of transfers out every year and, if you look at there signing classes, they are almost all on the roster their freshman years PLUS a decent number of JC transfers into the program that aren't even accounted for in the above numbers. They always seem to make it work somehow. 

Not to quibble too much, Root, but the two underlined parts are what people worry about -- sure, it "works" in that the NCAA rules are adhered to, and they have a great team . . . but the first underlined part is I think what most people mean when they talk about over-recruiting.

2019Dad posted:

roothog66 posted:

TPM posted:

roothog66 posted:

There were also five or six juniors who signed after the draft and several players will transfer out because of a lack of playing time and there will be a handful of injuries and players who will red shirt. The numbers always seem to work out. 

Red shirt players are included in the 35 man roster.  

 

 

True and I knew that - my bad. 

As to Arkansas, you see a LOT of transfers out every year and, if you look at there signing classes, they are almost all on the roster their freshman years PLUS a decent number of JC transfers into the program that aren't even accounted for in the above numbers. They always seem to make it work somehow. 

Not to quibble too much, Root, but the two underlined parts are what people worry about -- sure, it "works" in that the NCAA rules are adhered to, and they have a great team . . . but the first underlined part is I think what most people mean when they talk about over-recruiting.

Sure, but if you sign onto a P5 school or even a very good mid-major and DON'T realize that you are in heavy competition for playing time, then you either haven't done your homework or your ego is a big problem. I guess the question is, do the programs like Arkansas or Vandy over-recruit with the idea that they are going to push guys out or do they over-recruit because they know they will lose guys to transfer who aren't getting the PT they'd like?

TPM posted:

GaryMe posted:

Sometimes admission is tougher at state schools for in-state kids...schools like those out of state tuition dollars.

This is not correct.  Can you show supporting information on your statement?

Prove it's wrong before saying it is. I posit that a fair number of qualified students who would be paying in-state rate are not admitted to state schools in the name of "diversity," which means that they really like to bring students in from out of state for the increased revenue and being able to say they have a student body that is represented by kids from X number of states, countries, etc. Not that those students aren't qualified for admission, I'm just saying you're a fool if you don't think the financial aspect of it doesn't play a factor in the overall make up of not only the student body, but the funding of state schools in general.

If it didn't matter, why would they charge a different tuition rate for kids who live out of state or country?

Vandy is in a difficult spot.  5 sr's want to return for their sr season.  3-4 they thought might go in the draft showed up.   They started out with 43, after the draftees left and the freshman came in.  I understand 1 transferred and one may have a medical redshirt  so that number goes to 42..... a far cry from 35  . I guess the fall will decide who stays and who goes.

bacdorslider posted:

Vandy is in a difficult spot.  5 sr's want to return for their sr season.  3-4 they thought might go in the draft showed up.   They started out with 43, after the draftees left and the freshman came in.  I understand 1 transferred and one may have a medical redshirt  so that number goes to 42..... a far cry from 35  . I guess the fall will decide who stays and who goes.

Out with the old...in with the new. If you weren't playing prior to this fall and they have new blood coming in, the writing is on the wall unless you start doing something they haven't seen in the past years.

agreed 

bacdorslider posted:

Vandy is in a difficult spot.  5 sr's want to return for their sr season.  3-4 they thought might go in the draft showed up.   They started out with 43, after the draftees left and the freshman came in.  I understand 1 transferred and one may have a medical redshirt  so that number goes to 42..... a far cry from 35  . I guess the fall will decide who stays and who goes.

I don't think that Vandy is a in a difficult spot, or Arkansas, or any other school.  It's the guys who are in danger of not making the team who are in the difficult spot.

Well if you have 41-42 and you have to get to 35  that's not good for a jr. - sr. that cannot or did not contribute.

bacdorslider posted:

Well if you have 41-42 and you have to get to 35  that's not good for a jr. - sr. that cannot or did not contribute.

and perhaps they didn't contribute because they were behind someone who was raking. Team batting average was .269 and you had guys batting below the Mendoza line getting 161 ABs...so who knows what the criteria is at Vandy

Curious because I do not know the answer. 

What happens if all these kids who signed their NLI show up in the fall. The returning juniors and seniors, who were cut, choose to remain at the school without baseball, but still on their scholarship? 

A senior getting cut from a team might not want to transfer at that point. Friends, classes, housing, etc.

The players would still count against the 11.7 and the 35 man roster. 

How does their tuition get paid for and how do coaches go about this? I would assume this is very rare but you can't tell kids they can't attend school there anymore. 

PABaseball posted:

Curious because I do not know the answer. 

What happens if all these kids who signed their NLI show up in the fall. The returning juniors and seniors, who were cut, choose to remain at the school without baseball, but still on their scholarship? 

A senior getting cut from a team might not want to transfer at that point. Friends, classes, housing, etc.

The players would still count against the 11.7 and the 35 man roster. 

How does their tuition get paid for and how do coaches go about this? I would assume this is very rare but you can't tell kids they can't attend school there anymore. 

 

That is a great question, and I would love to see what happens when a senior returns to a P5 school and isn't exactly welcomed back by the team, and they are obligated to pay scholarship $$$ to him. Would one of those new NLI guys get cut? That would really be an interesting scenario.

GaryMe posted:

PABaseball posted:

Curious because I do not know the answer. 

What happens if all these kids who signed their NLI show up in the fall. The returning juniors and seniors, who were cut, choose to remain at the school without baseball, but still on their scholarship? 

A senior getting cut from a team might not want to transfer at that point. Friends, classes, housing, etc.

The players would still count against the 11.7 and the 35 man roster. 

How does their tuition get paid for and how do coaches go about this? I would assume this is very rare but you can't tell kids they can't attend school there anymore. 

 

That is a great question, and I would love to see what happens when a senior returns to a P5 school and isn't exactly welcomed back by the team, and they are obligated to pay scholarship $$$ to him. Would one of those new NLI guys get cut? That would really be an interesting scenario.

 

I’m thinking the senior gets assigned to run foul poles all practice, every practice, is ordered to report for special 5 am workouts, and that coaches will be on the lookout for the slightest rule infractions as an excuse to kick him off the team.

Chico Escuela posted:

GaryMe posted:

PABaseball posted:

Curious because I do not know the answer. 

What happens if all these kids who signed their NLI show up in the fall. The returning juniors and seniors, who were cut, choose to remain at the school without baseball, but still on their scholarship? 

A senior getting cut from a team might not want to transfer at that point. Friends, classes, housing, etc.

The players would still count against the 11.7 and the 35 man roster. 

How does their tuition get paid for and how do coaches go about this? I would assume this is very rare but you can't tell kids they can't attend school there anymore. 

 

That is a great question, and I would love to see what happens when a senior returns to a P5 school and isn't exactly welcomed back by the team, and they are obligated to pay scholarship $$$ to him. Would one of those new NLI guys get cut? That would really be an interesting scenario.

 

I’m thinking the senior gets assigned to run foul poles all practice, every practice, is ordered to report for special 5 am workouts, and that coaches will be on the lookout for the slightest rule infractions as an excuse to kick him off the team.

And that behavior probably stops or coach is likely fired after the kid and his family threaten to report him to the NCAA and sue him for harassment. That would never fly, IMO. It wasn't the kid's idea to promise a 4-year guaranteed scholarship. It was the school/coach.

And do you really think a coach would take it out on another human being with corporal punishment because he couldn't do basic math and project the probability of over committing his funds? If so, that is the saddest thing I've heard all day.

And this is why i dont think that all "signees" actually sign a binding NLI as I wouldnt think you could actually over commit the number of available scholarships.  I think many kids "commit/sign" to walk on with no athletic money and thus no actual NLI or financial arrangement between player and school.  

FriarFred posted:

And this is why i dont think that all "signees" actually sign a binding NLI as I wouldnt think you could actually over commit the number of available scholarships.  I think many kids "commit/sign" to walk on with no athletic money and thus no actual NLI or financial arrangement between player and school.  

Agreed

FriarFred posted:

And this is why i dont think that all "signees" actually sign a binding NLI as I wouldnt think you could actually over commit the number of available scholarships.  I think many kids "commit/sign" to walk on with no athletic money and thus no actual NLI or financial arrangement between player and school.  

I “think” over committing started when scholarships weren’t guaranteed for four years. Coaches could make the numbers work based on who they wouldn’t keep.

I also “think” some schools have certain advantages with endowments, needs-based aid, common merit money, etc. so they don’t always have to tap into the money allocated specifically for baseball. 

Lastly, the recent trend, until this year, was that top ten round draft picks were signing at a very high clip so I do think that schools sometimes over commit expecting/hoping that they will lose a few kids to the draft. 

hshuler posted:

FriarFred posted:

And this is why i dont think that all "signees" actually sign a binding NLI as I wouldnt think you could actually over commit the number of available scholarships.  I think many kids "commit/sign" to walk on with no athletic money and thus no actual NLI or financial arrangement between player and school.  

I “think” over committing started when scholarships weren’t guaranteed for four years. Coaches could make the numbers work based on who they wouldn’t keep.

I also “think” some schools have certain advantages with endowments, needs-based aid, common merit money, etc. so they don’t always have to tap into the money allocated specifically for baseball. 

Lastly, the recent trend, until this year, was that top ten round draft picks were signing at a very high clip so I do think that schools sometimes over commit expecting/hoping that they will lose a few kids to the draft. 

Hshuler, if they aren't using athletic aid, then an NLI is not in play, right? So the fact that some schools have larger endowments, need-based aid and common merit money doesn't factor in to the number of kids that Arkansas claimed they signed to NLIs.

If they claimed to sign 20 guys to NLIs, then they are saying they are committing a minimum of 5 complete scholarships (assuming all 20 get the minimum 25%) for those players, and since it's a power 5 they are making that commitment for 4-years. Assuming full funding, that leaves 6.7 scholarships to divvy up among the remaining 7 scholarship eligible players on the roster (again, assuming minimum offers to newbies). If you have 7 returners who are getting full rides, them some happy players. I can see where this might actually be a good strategy to use the scholarships in this manner, and then use the incentive of increasing to a full ride in years 2 and beyond based on performance.

I can't imagine any school WANTS their signees to be lost to the draft, so you completely lost me there. Unless you are referring to currently rostered guys