Recruiting - Are Times Changing?

The title of this thread is "Recruiting-are time changing?"
Another section of the article:

" Over the past couple years we have noticed an increasing number of underclassmen making verbal commitments to top programs. During this past fall, we have noticed more and more questions coming much earlier from top programs about who the top 07s are.



While there is a lot of great and helpful recruiting information available (My favorite as mentioned is the HSBBW) it's important to stay up to snuff on the changing climate involving college recruiting. Just in our time with Perfect Game, we have seen many changes from rules and regulations to the way top colleges operate and recruit.



We all know that things change... College recruiting is not exempt from making changes. Where there is competition, there will always be change!



While we agree with all those who talk about getting noticed in that all important time between the junior and senior year. It would be wise to understand... Times are changing and there has been a big increase in interest shown towards talented underclassmen. Could it be that the sophomore year is getting much more important? Could it be the sooner a player is recognized the more opportunities that become available?"

My impression is the thread was to discuss the changes observed and commented above. Would not have posted if the article merely asked about the current NLI process. IMO, you missed something.
Where is PGStaff when you need him?

quote:

IFDad, the commitment of ONE soph is not a TREND

Thank you for that helpful observation. What about the observations of PGStaff? Do they suggest a "trend?" or is he missing something too?

IMO - There is no question that the players are being followed at earlier ages.

I would think that is indisputable - IMO.

Bee>...It IS a trend. Something I started hearing more and more about a year or so ago. One particular Pac-10 school is getting very aggressive at this...multiple Junior commits over the past two years. Actually I don't even blame them for trying (and succeeding)...but a parent must realize the advantage is on the coach's side in the coach/prospect relationship for this scenario.

PG's statement & summary

"I personally have told many parents, that it is really not necessary to sign early, sometimes the very best deals will come later. While this is still true to a certain extent, we believe "the times are a changing"!

and

"We talk to many recruiters from these top programs. This year, more than ever before, we have been told "We are done recruiting the 06 class"

if you care to review what we've ALWAYS emphasised here at HSBBWEB, it's the importance of sophmore summer promotion & exposure -
otherwise, how could a player receive college recruiting info Sept 1 of Jr yr - nobody would know who he is, correct?



JBB, care to let us know which PAC 10 school, so we can critique it's effectiveness, or was it Alumni "legacies" as is the usuall case.


.

No one is disputing PG's advice...he was complimented many times early in this thread.

Just 3 years ago when our son was going through all of this, it mattered not at all who sent him a letter on September 1st of his Junior year. Everything was determined and decided in the summer before his Senior year. In just 3 years, this has begun to change dramatically.

JBB, while your experience is a valid observation - mine was different

5 yrs ago in Ohio it was the Soph summer that really got the ball rolling

I do understand there is a "time change", but - could Cal be 3 yrs behind??


.

I think the most relevant issue/question is - how - as a parent - do you interpret these changes and how do you counsel your son/daughter.

It is a toughie IMO.

And - IMO - It will make for some great risk/reward case studies as it continues to evolve.

quote:

Originally posted by Bee>:
I do understand there is a "time change", but - could Cal be 3 yrs behind??.

Being from Ohio myself, I might like to think so...but not usually.

itsinthegame - You are absolutely correct IMO.

(Is this thread a candidate for the new "Golden Threads" Forum?).

No - not if I am in it. LOL

I know there has been a little haggling in this thread but already it seems a good candidate for Golden Threads. I must admit, there was some ambiguity in my mind with PG's orignal article i.e., exactly what ages were being spoken of. That said, I don't think it is possible to get Bee to cry uncle

quote:

Originally posted by ClevelandDad:
I don't think it is possible to get Bee to cry uncle

Ohioans UNITE!

Just,

Seriously - I think that given the trend - which has been occurring for many years now - the parent really does need to understand as best they can - where their kid stacks up - academically and athletically.

I think the onus is increasingly being put on the parents and the player. Early commits have benefits - but they can also be disastrous. Through no fault of the player - or their parents efforts.

As the time line moves up - the risks get bigger - and so do the rewards.

Fun stuff IMO.

Uncle Morgan?


re: could Cal be 3 yrs behind??

were not known as "The Heartland" for nuthin

.

I can't believe I'm spending my week "off" sitting by the laptop waiting for the next post on this thread?!?!

What a great life I lead.

Hey, you and Fungo posting some pretty funny stuff today

quote:

Originally posted by justbaseball:
I can't believe I'm spending my week "off" sitting by the laptop waiting for the next post on this thread?!?!

What a great life I lead.

LOL - It could be worse.

sad, very sad indeed





later:

holy smoke, I go split a half cord of wood & the topic dies

just a few further observations -

I can't speak for PG's intent, but "my read" -
if PG's purpose was to emphasize a trend of soph's committing by citing a few isolated cases (that's about 1 1/2 yrs early)

it would be irrelevant to mention the trend of many schools eliminating "late period" recruiting? (that only knocks about 4 months off)

I also agree with It's in that very early committments to be a disadvantage, as they are
ONE WAY only, you take yourself off the market - with the school not afirming their committment until NLI early signing Nov of Sr yr -

and, keeping in mind that most all very early commits historicly have been
1) a very high profile guy commiting to his dream school, and looking for publicity
2) the kid(s) of a "died in the wool" Alumni, committing to the colors he wore in his crib, and looking for publicity

and as a few high profile basketball players admitted recently, they verbally committed WITHOUT having EVER been offered (a baseball player comes to mind as well)


JMO


.

adding to the dead thread:

I gotta be honest, on a good day - I couldn't tell ya the dif between
linear or rotational -
BUT - I had 3 guys (1 pro) who learned the dif between
a "target" for the axe

"on top of the log"

and a target

"through the log"



whew, we'll see how it plays out?? (power-wise)


ps - maybe I can get them to paint when (if) it warms up!!


.

quote:

I also agree with It's in that very early committments to be a disadvantage, as they are
ONE WAY only, you take yourself off the market - with the school not afirming their committment until NLI early signing Nov of Sr yr -

CD, that's close enough to some "uncle" for me! : Might be a long lost uncle, but it is still in the "family."

IFDad, just wondering -

is it really against the law (per MSNBC news) to burn your fireplace "at will" in Cal??



ps - where is "gotwood" when we need him??

pps - got advil??


.

I disagree with statement that early verbal committment is a one way deal. I think that all colleges coaches honor those deals regardless of circumstances. If a coach was to pull plug on deal word of that would spread quickly and really damage the coaches ability to recruit.

I am surprised no one has brought up topic of coaches over recruiting, much like airlines over booking seats, and the results of over committing scholarships. This is when the immediate impact player evolves into the probably will never get to play here at all or we really recommend a year at JC. But than maybe this never happens ........

Rsctt83 -
There was a whole thread here recently on over-recruiting. There was quite a discussion about it. Maybe it should be moved to the Golden Threads?

First you say....

quote:

I disagree with statement that early verbal committment is a one way deal. I think that all colleges coaches honor those deals regardless of circumstances. If a coach was to pull plug on deal word of that would spread quickly and really damage the coaches ability to recruit.

...then you give your own counterexample with this statement.

quote:

I am surprised no one has brought up topic of coaches over recruiting, much like airlines over booking seats, and the results of over committing scholarships. This is when the immediate impact player evolves into the probably will never get to play here at all or we really recommend a year at JC. But than maybe this never happens ........

Then there's the coach who pulls the plug due to injury...or moves onto a "better" job (where's his commitment?)...or fires the position coach that you loved...or fill in the blank.

Advantage is most definitely to the university...not the student athlete. Just remember who has more experience in the deal.

.

Question...and this may have been discussed earlier....but what are the legalities of a verbal? Is it binding to either side? Will it stop other recruiters?

.

That's a great question observer. I don't know if it has ever been litigated or not, but one could argue that an o-r-a-l contract has been formed that is binding on both sides when the verbal has been made. The school can always say that nothing was offered but then, why make the commitment in the first place if some form of a "promise" was not made?

We need a HSBBW lawyer... gratis of course. I DON’T know but I think the general consensus is that the verbal agreement is not binding. I would even be surprised if the NLI is a legally binding document. The wording used (Letter of Intent) seems to indicate they plan to give you a scholarship, not promise to give you a scholarship.

Man, there has been some serious latin used on the site today. It started with Orlando using loco parentis in another thread and now gratis

Just to be clear, was not offering any type of legal advice. Just musing on what might be able to be considered an agreement or contract. If you had deep enough pockets and wanted to push the issue, you can always make an argument. I don't disagree with what you are saying however Fungo. One man's plan is another's promise I guess

Even if you were a player - and had to "force" the college to honor the verbal committment - the damage would already be done.

Your career would be over after the 1st year at that school.

Fungo

Where I come from verbal agreements are worth more than written agreements

I guess handshakes are no longer a good thing either

quote:

Where I come from verbal agreements are worth more than written agreements

I bet you have mild winters too

With all the latin and handshakes, there has to be a collection plate coming around pretty soon, yes?

.

Here are the follow up questions...

What's to stop a Junior high player who has "verballed to verbal" from continuing to shop?

What's to stop another program from continuing to recruit a player who has "verballed to verbal?"

What's to stop a program from not honoring that "verbal to verbal" once they get to the actual Verbal Date?

What's to stop a program from honoring that verbal and then cutting or weeding out that player when he gets to his first fall?

.

Fungo

Actually are winters have been mild

Have you ever been to Brooklyn where handshakes are contracts ?

I do not believe any reputable coach of a D1 program would fail to honor a verbal committment. That would be the equivelent of recruiting suicide. You have to remember that it is a small world out there, especially with chat rooms that discuss these issues. If head coach did that, word would spread quickly and it would seriously damage credibilty, would you give verbal if coach had a history of not honoring committment?

In response to a previously posted comment, I do not believe the issue of over recruiting is directly tied into early verbal committments. Rather it is a function of recruiting in general whether junior verbal or NLI. What I am getting at or trying to say is that even if there were no verbal committments of underclass kids some schools still over recruit.

Not exactly his own commitment, but the new Texas A&M coach just released some solid players, including an outstanding freshman on scholarship....on December 15th!

Sox is that happening in Arkasas ?

.

RS88...

While I would idealistically like to think so, I am realistically not so sure...

To oversimplify...and to overstate...and to go out on a limb..

There are some top programs doing some very interesting legal but IMO very immoral things with their recruting, and they continue to do so continue year after year and yet they still recruit incredibly well. How does this happen?

First, I see a "voluntary blindness factor." By this I mean that for a great many, when that top 30 college coach calls all reality goes out the window. Critical thinking is difficult when your eyes are full of stars.

Second I see the "not me" factor. "Hey, I am really that good they would never pull that stuff on me because I was all this and all that and so I will be above the problem...."

Third, I am not sure that the word gets out like it should. It has been my experience that the level of awareness of what is really going on at some school is more limited than most of us know. For example While I believe that the HSBBWS is the best place for info don't think that it will serving up a list of the top 10 worst recruitng offenders soon, nor do I think it should.

So...While that knowledge is indeed out there it is not as easy to acess as it might seem. And I don't feel that it is taken as seriously as it should be.

.

Observer,

Very very true!

IMO

Great post.

quote:

Originally posted by observer44:
Third, I am not sure that the word gets out like it should. It has been my experience that the level of awareness of what is really going on at some school is more limited than most of us know. For example While I believe that the HSBBWS is the best place for info don't think that it will serving up a list of the top 10 worst recruitng offenders soon, nor do I think it should.

Correct-a-mundo Observer!

Rsctt83 - Want examples of very high D1s backing out of commitments? I've got one due to injury. Thats all I'm gonna say about it though.

Over-recruiting not part of this? I don't agree with that. If I'm a SS and you ask me to give you an early verbal to build your infield around...and then another better SS and 2 JC SSs becomes available that you didn't think you'd get...and you take them then I say you've broken your commitment to me.

By and large, coaches are good people who will keep their word. The original point was that the clear advantage is to the school, not the athlete in these situations. Just understand that...thats all.