Recruiting challenges for D1's

Good post and lots of thought provocking questions. Although one thing that comes to mind is how in reverse of waiting as you state colleges are already getting verbally committed kids 2 years down the road. I have heard of several D1 verbal committs from 2010. Now if these players are that good there is a very good chance they could get drafted.
I think you may see more position players coming from the JC routes. That way your not committed to 4 years of scholarships being given out and they will focus on tying up good pitching and catchers.With the condensed schedules multi postion players will be a good thing. Kids who pitch and can play a position.
I am hoping we dont see over recruiting and kids being cut in the fall after they are settled in school. The NCAA doesnt seem to have that idea figured out. But as you said with draft, and limited roster size you will see coaches scrambling. But there are a lot of JC guys waiting to get picked up .

There will be over recruiting because of the potential to lose players through the draft and other things.
I don't believe the NCAA has any intention of stopping OR.

I will tell you my thoughts from some info I have gathered over the years.

College recruiting is a business, if you treat it as such, you can make things work. This includes getting to know your recruits and players, having prior discussions with them about the draft possibility up front. This also includes spending your off season finding what you need, not sitting at your desk waiting for the calls or videos to come in or taking exclusively from your camp. I learned this from Sully years ago, told they get hundreds and hundreds of inquiries per year for their program, yet he spends every waking moment for months recruiting when he never really had to. Same thing at UF, good players in Florida, yet he is all over the country looking for players and then watching them, even for one or two.
The programs that over recruit, IMO, usually are the ones that don't spend a whole lot of time searching, it's a philsophy, "we don't have to recruit, we have the best asking to come play here". They will bring in more than enough and choose who will best get the job done. They make no preparation for who might be drafted from their program or who might be drafted from their recruits. They don't develop players who should be developed for draft potential their junior year. It's not that they don't care, they just don't know how to do it. You can be teh best coach in teh world, you might not be a good recruiter.

In 2007 Clemson lost on both ends, they knew they would lose their players, they also lost their recruits. That fall, only 30 players showed up to play, did they go around inviting players to fill in the gaps, no. Same thing with UNC, they got hit hard this year, did Coach Fox over recruit for fall, no.

Leave the recruiting challenges to the coaches, do your homework, watch fall rosters. Know that if you are asked to walk on at those programs that over recruit you are taking a big chance of not seeing spring, no matter how well you do in the fall.

Good comments by all.

I finally found the info about Orel Roberts' recruiting dilemma. It was on a Baseball America blog. Here's what it said:

********************************************

Posted Aug. 27, 2008 5:43 pm by Aaron Fitt
Filed under: Around The Nation

Last week, we discussed how hard Tulane and North Carolina were hit by the Aug. 15 signing deadline. Green Wave coach Rick Jones advocated for an earlier signing deadline, which would at least give teams a month to look for substitute players in the post-transfer era.

**** Roberts coach Rob Walton feels similarly. The Golden Eagles were utterly ravaged by the deadline, losing nine of the 11 drafted players they expected to show up on campus, either as returning players or recruits. Five of the players signed just before the deadline, and none signed for more than $50,000.

"I feel like I’ve been robbed," Walton said. "You work seven months recruiting, and it’s completely washed away in an hour. It’s brutal.

"You completely outwork everybody and get your club–I had to beat people on guys. I spent 12 straight days in California myself, 12 straight days in Arizona myself, I’m away from my family, I beat everybody on these guys, and the next thing you know, they’re gone."

Worst of all was the loss of star catcher Ben Petralli, who actually arrived on campus and attended class for two days before signing at the deadline as a 33rd-round pick. Not long ago, **** Roberts would have been safe as soon as Petralli showed up in class (South Carolina coach Ray Tanner likes to tell a story of his days at North Carolina State, when he walked Trot Nixon to his first class, only to have a representative of the Red Sox cut Nixon off at the door with a contract in hand). Now, going to class makes no difference.

"He was plucked out of school," Walton said. "There’s no transfer rule or anything, so you’ve got no chance to recover. So for a mid-major like me that’s playing on a national level and has a chance to go to the World Series, it’s devastating."

Petralli was on a big scholarship, and now there is no time to reallocate that money to recruit another impact player. Instead, Petralli’s scholarship money becomes essentially unusable. For ORU, which only has 18 players on scholarship to begin with, that number now drops to 17.

Petralli’s replacement is another problem.

"We’ve got a catcher we think has a chance to be good, but he’s never caught," Walton said. "He’s an outfielder that we’re converting. Now he’s our No. 1."

This will be a major test for Walton and his staff–he even said the Golden Eagles will have to use a pitcher who hasn’t swung the bat since high school as a hitter. There’s little he can do but coach his players up the best he can, but the product won’t always be pretty.

A July 15 signing deadline would make last-minute losses much more manageable.

"I think there has to be something that changes," Walton said. "It’s not benefiting the student athletes’ welfare, and it’s creating as much problems as you could possibly create for a coach."

*********************************************

Interestingly, ORU must have scrambled quite a bit after finding out it was losing so many players. Currently, its online roster for 2009 lists 42 players, meaning at least 7 will have to be cut in the next 2-3 months. Of course, the blog article states that as of late August, ORU had only 17 players on athletic money, so most likely the school will be fine with its new max 27 athletic scholarship limit.

I think the key for the programs are to recruit players they have a very high confidence level that they will be able to get on campus, TCU just received a commitment from a possible top 5 draft pick, there is a very small possibility to get him on campus, so why bother, other than it makes the program look good for future recruits that they may not be able to get on campus?

Programs will still over recruit to hedge their bet as BBH stated but I also think NCAA should put a cap on the number in the fall program to reduce the over recruiting, with the players being shed during the fall, it does not effect their APR, but it does hurt the players that are under the impression that they actually have a chance to make a program to come to find out that the program may be over recruiting and actually have a very minimal chance of making the spring roster but was a live body so the program can have a good player for fall scrimmages and a back up just in case others get drafted, hurt, academically ineligible, do something stupid, or quit/transfer because there are 40-50 or so other players.

It's about time for diligence, ain't it?

quote:

Originally posted by Homerun04:
I think the key for the programs are to recruit players they have a very high confidence level that they will be able to get on campus, TCU just received a commitment from a possible top 5 draft pick, there is a very small possibility to get him on campus, so why bother, other than it makes the program look good for future recruits that they may not be able to get on campus?

Programs will still over recruit to hedge their bet as BBH stated but I also think NCAA should put a cap on the number on in the fall program to reduce the over recruiting, with the players being shed during the fall, it does not effect their APR, but it does hurt the players that are under the impression that they actually have a chance to make a program to come to find out that the program may be over recruiting and actually have a very minimal chance of making the spring roster but was a live body so the program can have good player for fall scrimmages and a back up just in case others get drafted, hurt, academically ineligible, do something stupid, or quit/transfer because there are 40-50 or so other players.

Coaches will always sign high prospects, sometimes not even figuring their scholarship into the equation. Signing high picks is good for business.

The 8 players not on scholarship are supposed to make up for the ones who may be lost in the draft, hurt or become ineligible. You don't need more than 35 for fall.

As for the OR coach, after the draft what did he do? Did he talk to the players in the program about staying or leaving? There's not much you can do with a player who never stepped foot on campus, but you can deal with your current players, most coaches avoid the discussion and most players avoid it as well, that is the problem. At sons school day after draft (if not playing post season) there is a discussion to follow immediately because if you are going they need to find players asap.

So what did the OR coach do after crying the blues that he gets ravaged, brings in 42 for the fall, how many was he bringing in to begin with?

I don't get that.

What happens to the roster when you have the high profile player that the school gave an 80% ride but the kid shows up and is a bust? Say the kid was a projected draft pick but chooses school and shows up and is throwing 8-10 mph below what he threw in hs. If you cut him he still counts so you keep him. What about the player that counts but just doesn't have good work ethic? You still are forced to keep him and hope he gets his act together. What about the HS star that shows up with a messed up arm? They count don't they? I can see both sides. You have to protect the kids that sign scholarships and commit to play for a school. But on the other side what about the school that committed to the kid and gets nothing in return? It is a two way street and basically if you can't perform at the caliber that is expected the players should be released and the school should not have to count that player. It is just like work, if you can't do the job your gone. Personally I wonder if this 35 man roster with the counters etc will do nothing more but lower the quality of the teams. It only helps those players that didn't really perform. It is a total waste to give 80% to players that never plays an inning in college but you have to keep them because they count.

Only a few freshman actually are impact players (depends on the program) so if someone comes hurt, they have time to get it together. This now opens an opportunity for another player to step up, and several times it happens that the guys with the less scholarship comes though in a big way.

We recently had a post here regarding a player that was hurt in HS and the coach took back his NLI.

It's important to understand, everyone is replaceable.

Coaches will cut players (or run players off) who don't perform, follow team rules or can't get their act together, they did it before the new rules and will continue to do so.

quote:

It is a total waste to give 80% to players that never plays an inning in college but you have to keep them because they count.

Agreed - but you don't have to keep them for more than a year, as the NLI is only a one-year deal. Like TPM said, college coaches cut players who don't perform. I know of certain programs that say they will never cut a player apart from academic or off-the-field issues, but when I mentioned this to a knowledgeable college dad last year, he wisely informed me that college coaches have their ways of running off players without having to actually cut them. Since he told me that, I have become aware of a couple of situations where this was done and the players were "helped" to realize it would be in their best interest to leave. One player decided to leave by the end of the first semester and I'm guessing that this freed up money for someone else during the last half of the school year.

University of Louisiana of Lafayette, a perennial DI baseball power, has a 40 man roster with 5 new freshmen and 6 Redshirt freshmen. 5 of the 40 will have to be cut. The coach's son, a junior will not be cut. There are 6 JC transfers. Seems to me there will be 5 really disappointed players, and some will possibly freshmen, redshirt freshmen and seniors. 6 JC transfers does not make a good impression on your upperclassmen.

I have often marveled at how the best coaches manage it. Handling the budgeting of the 11.7 is the biggest thing; it must seem like a jigsaw puzzle with pieces that keep changing shape like amoebas. But I don't think the new rules really change the roster size management of things.

The big challenges are seniors who red shirted once, maybe due to injury, and thus may or may not leave when they graduate, plus the wild cards thrown in by the potential draft of HS recruits and juniors.

Most of roster management at this point is handled with the recruited walk-ons, guys with no signed NLI's. Since only 27 can get money, you have at least 8 available walk-on slots in your 35-man roster. What I'm seeing is, a school says we'd like to have you as a walk-on, but it'll be August before we can tell you for sure, so we'll understand if you do what you have to do.

quote:

What I'm seeing is, a school says we'd like to have you as a walk-on, but it'll be August before we can tell you for sure, so we'll understand if you do what you have to do.

I sure feel for the players and their parents who are told this. It's awfully hard to plan your future when things are up in the air. (Of course, the college coaches are probably feeling the same way!)

Regarding the 27 max athletic slots, I guess the thing I've been trying to figure out is how D1's will be able to recruit new players while trying to honor the scholarships their upperclassmen have. I know that TPM has said that Clemson oftentimes honored schollies only through junior year, but there are many other programs that provide scholarships for all 4 years.

For instance, in the past, probably close to all players on a D1 roster had some sort of athletic scholarship, even if it was only 10 or 15%. If these schollies were raised to the minimum 25% when the new NCAA rules took effect, teams may have close to 27 already on athletic scholarship, and yet they still need to throw money at pitchers and needed position players. I doubt that highly-coveted players will settle for non-athletic money, so this presents a real quandary, IMHO.

Infield08,
Clarification. No school offers scholarships for 4 years, they are renewable each year. What we all do is send our players off hoping that the coaches are honest and true to their word, it doesn't always happen.
My son was given a large scholarship to attend with expectations that he would be drafted in 3 years. I doubt whether they would have tied up 90% for 4 years. He was told to work hard, take extra classes to get it done in 3. That was what happened with him. If by chance he had not been drafted, we were fully aware his money could have been reduced. It was a total up front and honest conversation.
Most coaches have discussions with their players expected to be drafted after 3 years, just ask Fungo.
FWIW, some coaches (not counting the ones that do not offer NLI or fully fund or don't give money to those who can afford the tuition)) don't even count the walk ons into their equation, those are extra players in case of emergency. Coaches are finding it hard for players to committ with no $$ when they have opportunities to go play for some $$.
I hear rumors that coaches are going to ask once more for higher max scholarship for more players. It's very difficult to play 5 games a week and compete for post season with 27.
As far as managing, most have been doing it for years. Remember it can be a blend and minimum is 25%.
In defense of some coaches, some take on extras in the fall for fall practice, with the players knowing full wll that they will not make the spring roster.

quote:

Clarification. No school offers scholarships for 4 years, they are renewable each year. What we all do is send our players off hoping that the coaches are honest and true to their word, it doesn't always happen.

Yes, you are absolutely right, and that is why I used the phrase "honor the scholarships." Basically, when colleges assure a player that they will not reduce their scholarship any of the 4 years, it's a gentleman's agreement and you have to take them at their word. Hopefully, the ones making the promises are trustworthy.

quote:

Coaches are finding it hard for players to committ with no $$ when they have opportunities to go play for some $$. I hear rumors that coaches are going to ask once more for higher max scholarship for more players. It's very difficult to play 5 games a week and compete for post season with 27.

It'll be very interesting to see if the NCAA eventually reverses its ruling, but even if that happens, I would venture to guess it's at least two years away. I would think the NCAA will monitor and observe things from afar to see how the new ruling plays out before tinkering with things again.

Infield08,
The 25% minimum only applies to players who entered after Aug 2008.
I suspect that coaches typically did not increase existing players scholarships to 25%, for two reasons.
1. Probably a lot of players, maybe more than 30 or 27, had book money. If so, they couldn't all be increased, even with no money given to new players.
2. The coaches looked ahead and decided to avoid your quandry.