VT Decommit

For crissake, most of the comments on this damn board has to do with somebody else's business with multidimensional sides to every story!

Once again, these things bother me.  I actually got a call from a coach of one of the nations top programs asking me about this pItcher.  My first response was, why is he decommitting?  Coach said he probably felt he could go anywhere now. Personally I thought he would have reached all his goals at VATech.  But no matter what, I hope he does great wherever he ends up. I know I will be pulling for him.

In our business we always favor the player in these situations.  I'm sure he is doing what he thinks is in his best interest.  But those two players VTech lost both played in our All American Game.  Both are potential high draft picks either next year or later out of college.  What a big loss for that program that recruited them in the first place.  Great job of recruiting with nothing to show for it.  It's sort of a rich get richer thing... One school striving to reach the top... Losing players they recruited to those at the top.

I don't hold it against the players and can't hold it against the college they end up at.  However, this was devastating to VATech.  Sure, it is one thing to lose your top recruits to the draft, but it hurts even more losing them before the draft. Who do you blame?

Can't blame the players, they are doing what they think is best.

Can't blame the college they end up at. These are impact players at any college.

Can't blame VATech they did their job and got two of the best players in the nation to commit, yet they are the only one to get hurt.

Maybe there is something wrong with the system!

I mentioned in another thread that I wish there was a way that LOI's were signed during early recruitment.  It won't happen, but it sure would solve many of the issues for both the colleges and the recruits.  Colleges would be less likely to take as many chances on younger players.  But when they see one they are really sold on, we sign a letter, no verbal.  Many players would benefit, because they will know that the college offer is really there.

It won't solve all the issues.  Whenever that college coach tells a player he is not wanted,  most players will get a release and look elsewhere.  It would just cause colleges to think twice before making lots of offers and cleaning things up later.  It would also make recruits think twice before committing, knowing they might have a difficult time if they change their mind.

Don't know why I bring all that up, it ain't going to happen!  And it ain't going to stop!

Was at a showcase game yesterday talking to a mom of one of my son's teammates.  Her son committed to a Top 10 program when he was 15 years old.  I was curious what other schools were recruiting him at the time he committed to the Top 10 school.  Chiefly, I was most curious as to how his home state universities let him slip away and go to neighboring state university?  Mom said, when son had offer in hand of school in neighboring state,  and before he committed to it, son went and visited his local state university (ACC) and a major program in the SEC.  Not so much to use any leverage but just to see some other schools to compare to.  Mom said both the ACC school and the SEC school were VERY interested in her son, and both said they would love to have him come and play at their schools but due to his age (15, at the time) he was just too young for them to offer him at that time. 

Not sure if they had a policy or it was just their philosophy, or simply a case by case basis, but they were not going to offer him due to his youth.  And wished him well with the school that had offered.  Sounds to me like both these schools stuck to their guns and passed only out of principal.  This kid is the real deal.  Will be drafted out of HS.  Either school would have taken him down the road I bet, but they felt he was just too young.

PGStaff,

I agree.  This is the cost of doing business at that high level of baseball in the most competitive conferences.  It is an extremely fine line for a college coach knowing the talent in front of him could be a home run to his program or the recruit could end up as a high draft pick and opt for professional baseball out of high school.  

What is that fine line?  What round is the difference between college and the draft? Most everybody who has been around HSBBWeb knows or has heard of a highly recruited top pick opting for college or the 20th rounder opting to turn pro....you just never know. These are the hard decisions and best guesses these college coaches make with this type of talent, and I can certainly see by the results.....it isn't easy....I'd expect it takes a very experienced recruiter to read people, situations, and their motivations for college or the draft with this level of talent.  JMO.

My thought is if you make a "commitment" as a player....you keep it....it's very simple.  My son committed to the first D! school that offered him.  Before he called the coach, we were fairly sure an offer was coming....though he was still having some contact with some bigger schools.  He said "if they offer, I'm taking it".  We discussed the fact that there is NO WAY he is backing out and he was fine with it.  His comment was "why would I....I want to go there".   The only way I would have allowed him to back out was if 1) there was a coaching change....or 2) he decided to go to a D2 or D3 school...or 3) he quit baseball altogether.  I guess different people have different beliefs.  Hopefully the kids end up happy and do well wherever they end up.

I agree. If you make an agreement stick with it or if you think that you might change your mind dont do it.

JMO

No doubt, that should be the way it works.  Problem is, people change their mind. It can be the player or it can be the college.

Not sure how to look at this other than to think about wild situations.  Kid gives the local DIII coach his word he is going to that school.  Now a year later he has improved so much that he is one of the nations top prospects. The biggest and best DI programs in the country are offering him a great big scholarship.  How many would keep their word to the local DIII?

We all like to keep our word, we are taught that from day one.    Problem is, sometimes things change.  

Do players actually commit that early to D3 programs?     

PG has it right - People Change jobs, spouses (till Death do us part), houses, where we live, cars and 1,000 other things every day.  Thinking a 15 year old won't have reasons to change their mind 2 years later seems like a pretty sandy foundation for anything.

If you are a big time college coach and don't think that some percentage of these handshakes will not happen then the water coolers must get a pretty good workout. 

FWIW - this is a tough break for Va. Tech.  Their baseball status has been also ran mostly forever.  The fact that they are getting looks from these kinds of players could foreshadow a change in fortune if they can actually get some of these kids to Blacksburg.  

I will agree with PG Staff....of course a kid who had a chance to move from a D3 to a D1 would likely move.  I didn't mention that scenario because my son originally committed to a D1.  Though that brings up another question.  Why are kids so jumpy to commit so early....especially in PG's scenario.  Why in the world would you commit 2 years out to a D3 if your goal was to play D1?  I really get the feeling some kids just want the prestige of saying "Hey, I committed to play in college"....even if it's not the spot they really want to end up.  Maybe I'm wrong...but it sure seems to happen...not just in baseball....but in basketball and football also.   Take your time...figure out where you want to be and then commit there and be done with it.

I have known one player who just didn't want to mess with the recruiting and feel like it was hanging over him his entire Junior year of high school. There are a lot of texts, emails and phone calls to deal with and committing ended all of that for him. One of the consequences of having kids exclusively deal with the coaches is they take the barrage of contact. The whole thing is a bit screwy. He kept his commitment. The player ended up playing his freshman year and transferring because he didn't like the school environment. Which he likely would not have known till he got there anyway.

A lot of folks are asking why would a person commit so early.  To me it is easy.  There are no guarantees in life, and what if no other offers come?  By not taking the "Bird in Hand", the opportunity may fly by.  I don't have a problem with players changing their mind.  (I must disclose that my son did.)  Coaches change their minds all the time.  They may not prior to the kid arriving on campus, but plenty change their minds after fall practices, first year, second year, etc. 

The player should do what is best for him.  If the kid has a change of heart about his commitment, he isn't doing the coach any good by reluctantly honoring his commitment.  If I was coaching a team, I wouldn't want a kid that doesn't want to be there.

To answer the question, Why commit so early?  Here is one reason:

My story about the 15 year old who committed to the Top-10 school and the other ACC/SEC schools who passed by saying he was too young for them to also offer, but wished him well.  Mom said son accepted the one offer then because "he wanted it to be over."   As in the recruiting process.  She said he didn't like having to call coaches, and "that whole thing."  He just wanted it all to be over. 

I've heard this before from kids who are in summer before Senior year and I can understand that as they are on year 3 or so of the process.  But summer before sophomore year? Poor kid must have really been getting some interest, I guess.  Such a good player, I wouldn't be surprised!

Most offers are time sensitive, meaning the recruiter will give the player 7-10 days to make a decision and if they pass, the offer never seems to return or has a reduced scholarship amount at a later date. If an athlete has an offer from his dream school, committing is never an issue. 

It has been my experience that most recruiters will ask a coach if the player is ready to receive an offer before they offer (in other words do they think the athlete will commit if they offer), otherwise they will hold off offering, till the timing is right. 

While there are many reasons that a 15-16 year old kid should wait and not commit early, there are some valid reasons for doing it.

One of the main reasons has been brought up here... He wants to get it over with!  The very best players end up having a part time job dealing with recruiting.  They see a college they truly like, make a commitment and end much of the recruiting rat race.

I have never liked the theory of committing early to insure you have something.  If it is only that one college you committed to that still wants you a couple years later, chances are that same college also no longer wants you.  On the other hand, most often when you are talented enough to be recruited by a top school as a sophomore, there are a ton of schools that will want you.  Including that school that offered you in the first place.

My example of a DIII college was more about giving your word, than any actual verbal commitment.  Also tried to explain it was a wild scenario.  Just saying that a kid could easily tell the local coach he is coming to that college, only to find out later he is a top DI prospect.  After all, that is what a verbal commitment is,  just your word that you plan to attend a certain college.  It's also the colleges word they will honor whatever the offer is.

Everyone understands the honorable thing is to keep your word.  I think everyone actually plans on keeping their word when they verbally commit.  But things can drastically change in a couple of years.  Once a person realizes that they have made a mistake, should they be forced to continue on with that mistake or try to better their situation? Guess we would all look at that differently.

I would like to have seen the pitcher in question, stay at VATech because he is a great kid and I like him.  In my mind VT was an ideal situation for him.  Great coaching, important role immediately, and good pitchers can go anywhere and be a first round pick.  He is what you would say is very uncomfortable to hit against and throws mid 90s. Then again, that 1st round thing might happen anyway for him, no matter where he goes, and I hope it does.  It still speaks highly of the VATech program, being able to recruit these type players, in the first place.  They might end up getting hurt in this case, but it sure looks like they are headed in the right direction.  Problem is, the conference they are in is a real bitch.

My question would be why not?  There is a lot of discussion on here about de-emphasizing the "number" on the back of the D and focusing on education.  I think we can all agree from an educational standpoint there are a lot of benefits with attending a DIII school from a classroom perspective as well as from a playing one. I understand the elite player isn't probably going to do this but for others it could be the right path to take. 

Redsdad,

You are correct, but a 15-16 year old committing to a DIII is meaningless.  He doesn't have a good enough academic record yet.  So the offer, if there was one, would be what?  There is no athletic scholarship and there can't be any academic money to offer that early.  Even financial aid situation could change before admission. So the offer has to be pretty much zero.

My example was based on someone giving their word more than an actual offer being made and verbally agreed on.  Did that because of the importance people put on giving your word and sticking to it.  I'm not sold on "your word" is everything in every case.  Especially when we all know how many mistakes we make.  That is why we have signed contracts in life.  And I've even made plenty of big mistakes on those that I wish could have been changed.

It seems to me that VT has taken a calculated risk in their recruiting practices. I don’t have time to do all the research but if I recall they signed a good half a dozen kids (top end talent) about a year or even a year and a half ago, several of them in the summer before sophomore year or in September of that year. Also if memory serves me correct I am thinking that quite a few of them were northern kids, I believe I recall at least 4 or 5 that were. It is possible it was more or less but I am pretty sure it was a substantial amount.

I believe that the plan was to take as much top end northern talent off the market before the competition had a chance to catch up. Remember 2 years ago Virginia had 2 kids from PA, one from New Jersey and one from NY in the starting lineup in Omaha…I also recall at least one but maybe more kids from PA and NJ on that years Vandy roster.

What I am assuming is they got in a new RC, he was extremely aggressive in his new role, he was obviously very good at it and he had a plan and he was able to pick-up some great talent early. He was smart enough to know he wasn’t going to win a heads up battle for the current class top players so he went to an age where he was the first major University to contact these kids…kind of like puppy love. The problem with getting great talent early is much like being a VC or angel investor things don’t always go the direction you expect.

I think this problem is created by the universities, it allowed / ignored by the NCAA and ultimately the schools that are most active in it will get screwed the hardest by it. If the NCAA and the school administrators allow coaches to chase 8^th and 9^th graders and the coaches themselves still feel it is the best way for them to get talent it will continue. The process either has to be eliminated or it has to fail miserably for the Universities, I don’t believe the recruits will ever, in mass numbers, be the ones to say no.

Can see lots of reasons why one would commit early and why one would hold off.  Personal and player specific decision in almost every case.

I can only reflect on how it worked for my 2016 son who committed two days before starting his junior year.

His offer came from his dream school and nothing has changed about that since he committed.  Team has had lots of success lately so lots of positive buzz around the school.  He did not like the mechanics of the recruiting process.  Emails, phone calls, etc.  He was ready to build a lasting relationship with his future coaches.

From a parent's perspective it has allowed us to be much more selective about where he plays and against whom.  No more 4-5 hour trips to play one game at a mid major D1 hoping and wishing that someone likes him there.  We just don't go and his team has plenty of other guys who want and need that opportunity.  Able to shut him down from pitching as no pressure to be in front of college coaches 12 months a year.  The positives in my mind go on and on...  

With that said the most stressful part for player and parent was when HC at future school was offered a Power 5 job and ultimately turned it down.  As we sat at the ball fields that week I was glued to Twitter for sure.

Old School,

Good thoughts.

Before anything will ever be done about it, early recruiting will have to be defined as a problem.  While we can come up with cases that create problems for individuals or the colleges, I'm not sure those that have power see it as an actual problem.

As far as VT recruiting early, I see it more like competition.  Many of the top programs in college baseball are doing it.  Programs that don't are at a disadvantage.  How are you going to beat the best when they are out there recruiting the best talent available from 9th graders to seniors?  It's almost like you have to go out and get them early and hope you can keep most of them.

Of course, there is current talent and there is development.  Some coaching staffs are so good at development that they don't require the same amount of current talent.  Then again, even those programs want the most possible talent.  These days one of the best ways to secure talent is to do it early. There is risk involved, but the rewards can be great.

As the mom of a HS Sophomore, all this talk about pros vs cons of early commitment makes my head spin. It's not a problem we have to deal with, but it still makes me confused about when is the optimal time to commit and when it is a little late. From everything I'm reading, I think next summer is a very important time (summer before junior year) and verbally committing during junior year or summer before senior year is a pretty good time point. Does that sound about right? Right now, we are just focusing on making sure he is on the right team for next summer to be seen by the coaches he wants to get in front of. After those games, we'll fill in with showcases as needed or wanted.

Yes, that timing is about right / the norm.  You are on the right track.  If something happens sooner, let it happen and play it out.

just went through this with 2017 son- sounds like your going about it the right way.  Don't get in too much of a hurry, just make sure he's going to be playing in front of the schools that he is targeting for next summer.  As far as showcases- we didn't do any, not saying that's the right thing for everyone.  our son was fortunate to play for a coach that promotes the kids, and was able to get our team in to tournaments that coincided with my son's targeted schools.  He went to a couple of camps on those campuses as well- but they knew who he was before he got there thanks to our coach- my opinion is that this was extremely helpful.  PM me if you'd like, I don't have all the answers by a long shot, but was in your shoes a year ago.

kandkfunk-

Of all the things in this process to stress promise me you won't stress about when your son commits.  There is not a "right" time.  I think he and you will know when the right time is if you are fortunate enough to get to that point.

Son's travel teammates were all over the board.  He was probably the 3rd or 4th to commit and then there was a large gap of time to this summer.  This summer after Atlanta the dominos started to fall and several landed in great spots most committing in July or August as rising seniors.  

I know this isn't all that helpful but each player's time is what it is and my son's right time won't be your son's right time.  Try to enjoy it.  Seems just yesterday I was excited about my son's prospects of being on varsity as a HS freshman.  We are now at most 4 months from his last season of HS baseball ending.  It will go faster than you think.

Re: 2 Many high level HC dont go out and recruit. They pay people to do that. So if there RC comes back talking about a guy he wants, how do you suppose the HC will know who is talking about? 

I am refering to high level programs. Not that they dont read emails or look at video, but pg is right, they know who they want as their top recruits, now they may need to fill in the holes. 

Since early offers are in no way binding, the Risk, on the part of colleges, appears minimal, if non-existent.   If the kid you "offered" as a 9th grader doesn't develop as expected/hoped, just tell him to get lost.  It happens.  I know one prominent D1 school that cut a kid loose with a letter.  You would think they would have at least had the courtesy/guts to do it in person, or by phone call.  I guess you could argue that the risk to colleges is that they get a bad reputation.  But, kids are desperate to play for Big State U.  Plus, they think it will never happen to them.  All of which makes the risk to the college minimal. 

 But what value is there in securing talent if its not binding?

all of this is very true, the bolded is huge.

The value is they have an excellent chance at getting that player.  The vast majority of early signs end up at the school they verbally committed to. The early commits to UCLA, Florida, Vanderbilt, South Carolina, LSU, Virginia, etc., usually want to stay with them.

Now if your competing at that level, your best chance to get that extra talented kid, is to get him early.  Chances of getting him later are extremely slim, because someone else (the competition) will already have his commitment.

Given that the data is fascinating, there are a couple of things:

1) The draft/college decision for POs v. position players is very different, as are the results. There's one study that shows a slight draft pick uplift for pitchers when opting for college vs. pros out of HS, but a dramatic fall for position players if they opt to go to college. There are exceptions, but the probability is against the position player especially during the middle rounds (starting around 5th).

2) The probability of long term success drops dramatically with each round. Off the top of my head, I seem to recall around a 60-70% chance of success for 1st rounders, a 50-50 chance for 2nd rounders, a 35% chance for third rounders, then it falls off the table.

3) Then overlay that with the degree of success that an organization has regarding bringing their prospects along and into the highest levels of competition. There are some that are exceedingly good, and there are some that are exceedingly bad, per a study I came across.

One other factor is the FV of a signing bonus + the LTV of a degree received around 5 years later than age peers (assuming the player gives the pros 5 years before deciding to hang them up), vs. the LTV of a degree (less 5 years) with the FV of the signing bonus received 3 years later, vs. a LTV of a degree without any pro toe-dipping. 

So what round is the difference? Quantitatively, it depends!

For reasons that ought to be obvious to most, I have chosen to remain quiet here; and I shall continue to do so, generally. However, there's one point that I'd like to make before ducking out.

Virginia Tech's current coaching staff is intent upon building a program that consistently contends for its highly challenging conference's championship. Those teams that do so, tend to go on to loftier post-season pursuits. Historically, that hasn't been where Virginia Tech has tended to compete, but that's not to say that it can't and shouldn't be done there in the future.

In order to accomplish the coaching staff's objective, it's imperative that they compete for the same elite level of talent that their principal competitors aspire to sign. It's only through that effort, along with the establishment of a track record of developing players who come through the program, that they have a chance to reach that objective.

So, the point is this: Virginia Tech's recruiting process mirrors exactly that of its principal competitors in terms of the age of the players it recruits. Since elite players are being courted principally in the summer following their 9th grade year, that's where a good bit of attention tends to be given.

Last month, we saw a rash of commitment announcements involving the Class of 2018. Virginia Tech's name appeared on that list, as did the name of virtually every major program in the country. Any suggestion that Virginia Tech's recruiting timeline or approach differs in any material way from its competitors is simply a mistaken notion; and I would tend to think the same of any such suggestion involving any other major baseball program. 

It's a highly competitive process, and all of those who have chosen to compete do so using highly comparable approaches.

Prepster: it's difficult to respond given your level of vested interest and your distinct knowledge.

I completely agree with your assessment that VT's recruiting process is on par with its principal competitors (and better than in-state rivals). And I can attest that VT's RC level of effort and process is beyond competitive. And, oh by the way, the RC is of excellent character.

Something's amiss. Something is happening where the recruiting class is not as strong as its competitors. If the RC is doing his job correctly...and he is...then why doesn't it show in the results?

When comparing PG's recruiting class value, VT's 2016s are ranked #75 and the 2017s are ranked #42. VT lost 2 recruited 2016 PG AA's

When does the gap start to appear vis-a-vis VT's competitors? Why does the gap form? You are what your record says you are. The RC is bringing the goods to the table, so why is the recruiting record what it is?

We can agree it's not the RC. I can tell you what the Chatty Cathy Dads and Moms think, but that is just an opinion. The facts be what they be.

Prepster - you said what I was trying to say much better.  Tech looks to be making the effort to upgrade the talent level and is playing the game the way it is supposed to be played under today's rules.

They are definitely getting looks from players that previously probably would have passed.  That is a good sign for them.  Reeling them in and getting them to Blacksburg will allow them close the gap that traditionally has existed. 

Getting some top end Northern talent and nabbing a few of the top 10 VA guys every year will do the job right quick. 

VT is already competitive in one of the toughest conferences In college baseball.  They just aren't satisfied with being competitive.  Interesting note... last year in a three game series they swept the eventual National Champions.

Nobody out there is going to outwork them when it comes to recruiting, we see that at our events.  I think they are very close, that is why it must really hurt losing those two recruits. Both of those guys are potential front line impact players in any highest level program. Then again they could both be drafted high enough that they won't play college ball.  Their draft potential went way up, but that mostly happened after they had already committed to VT.

College recruiting is very difficult..  Only the very best, most recognized programs, have an advantage.  You find a player you like, you get him to commit before the world knows about him and then... You hope he doesn't turn into what you expect until he gets to your campus.  I remember years ago when Clemson was losing 2 or 3 recruits every year because they became first round picks.  So now days you have to hope the kid you recruited is not an early draft pick.  But how do you know for sure when you are actively recruiting a player?  You can't ignore talent, and then watch that player beat you later on because he wasn't an early pick.  LSU successfully recruited Alex Bregman who we thought was a first round type Out of high school. This year he was the second pick in the first round out of LSU.  You never know for sure what is going to happen and the earlier you get a verbal commitment that longer there is to wait and see what develops.  Then again, there's not much choice the way things are going these days. The early bird finds the worm.

A lot of what have been said is about what is good for the College.  But we are still talking about kids here, many who can't even sign a legally binding contract due to their age.  When do we watch out what is best for the kids? 

That would be the job of the parents...you know the ones that nobody wants to talk to!!

"But we are still talking about kids here, many who can't even sign a legally binding contract due to their age.  When do we watch out what is best for the kids?" 

Generally, we're talking about players who are at least 16.  Nearly all of them are looking at getting only partial scholarships, so any commitment to any college entails a commitment to finances as well.  Between the maturity level a player of 16+ should have, and the parental involvement at least for purposes of discussing the money aspects of things, I think the idea that we're dealing with "just kids" who should be indulged is not the reality at all.

Bear in mind that even their non-athlete classmates are making life-altering decisions every day -- choice of college, whether or not to use alcohol or drugs, how responsibly they drive their cars, sex, you name it.  While some may have to learn hard lessons from having made decisions that they later regret, this too is a life experience that we all have to undergo and learn from.  As my father used to say, "You're not going to learn any younger!"

But then, a generation ago this was not a problem at all.  We now live in the helicopter parent era, with prolonged adolescence, but college-bound players would be well advised to model themselves after the expectations that prevailed for their parents' generation and not their own.  All the helicopter children run smack into the real world at some point.  One great thing about competitive athletics is, you get there sooner than your peers, and that gives you a giant head start in the competitive adult world you're heading into.

   Yep, understand completely.    And, you throw in the human element to an unpredictable situation....and voila it becomes even more unpredictable.   A potential high draft choice with family money may opt for college, or possible first generation college student promises his parents to get an education or a recruit from a low income family that needs the money to live....what is normal?.   There are all kinds of recruiting situaitons & stories out there.  

It's not easy to convince these top kids to take a chance on an upcoming college program in lieu of professional baseball.  It is alot easier to convince them to take less risk on an established college program.  There may be some top high school recruits out there that never considered going pro.  No doubt this is probably the hardest part of a RC's job....he has to read people and understand motivations. Never easy in any profession.

Rolling the dice and hoping for a 7.  As always, JMO.

I am sorry for not defining competitive better than I did and not trying to disparage Tech's direction at all.  In fact I think it is a positive that top players are now paying attention to them. 

Nevertheless, they have made 2 NCAA tourney's in the last 15 years with both since 2010.  That essentially puts them on par with the Radford's, ODU's and William and Mary's in baseball although they get the nod being in the ACC. 

UVA has more tournament appearances in the last decade than Tech has tourney wins in its history.  Despite the sweep last year it is hard to say they are truly on that level.

They play in a tough league so they have higher hurdles to get over.  Living with what is happening in Charlottesville has to be a tough pill and I think that is the stick they prefer to measure by.  I'd say the level they are trying to reach now is a regular in the top 25 or 40 year in and year out. 

Getting some top flight players that they haven't gotten in the past must happen if Tech is going to make that jump.