My Suggestion For A Change In Recruiting Regulations

[Alasippi]

I may be in the minority but I think the NCAA should make some major changes in the way recruiting is now done.

I do not like the fact that high school players can de-commit without penalty. I fully realize that these young men are very young, under extreme pressure, and that their college choice is one of the biggest decisions they'll ever make.
They should indeed have every right to go where they choose to go.

At the same time it's also a fact that they can wait until national signing day before they make any choice at all, and even longer if they choose to take the time. So why is it necessary for them to commit if it means absolutely nothing, and I mean NOTHING.

It isn't and they don't have to. So if a young man is committed to by a university who offers him a scholarship and he in turn commits to that university to accept that scholarship before national signing day, then I think he should forfeit a year of eligibility if he switches commitments.

I know a rule like this would cost TJ Yeldon, Calloway, and Cyrus a year of eligibility. So be it.

It's really not fair to coaches to have the rug pulled out from under them when they are trying to fill needs and they have been assured by a prospect that those needs are met only to find out last minute that they aren't because of a sudden change of mind.

The way rules are now it's also a fact that an opposing coach such as Chiznik could know he was going to get say a Reuben Foster so he could truly tell Reuben...."Commit to Bama, then switch, but wait until the other good linebackers have committed elsewhere, that'll screw up their defensive player recruiting real good". Not saying it happens but it easily could...HOWEVER it wouldn't, or would be less likely if there was a penalty for switching commitments.

Again, I emphasize....these guys do NOT have to give their word or sign anything until national signing day. They do so early because they freely choose to do so and I think if they knew there was a penalty for switching that they would be less inclined to commit early and then switch.

I don't have any or all the answers concerning recruiting but I do believe that something needs to be addressed about this issue. If you think about it the recruiting of a prospect now doesn't really even heat up until he commits to another school.

That's not fair to the kid and it's not fair to the school he's committed to.

Just my two cents and I'd view all opinions with interest..

Thanks and Roll Tide!

sip

 

[SeattleBama]

I may be in the minority but I think the NCAA should make some major changes in the way recruiting is now done.

I do not like the fact that high school players can de-commit without penalty. I fully realize that these young men are very young, under extreme pressure, and that their college choice is one of the biggest decisions they'll ever make.
They should indeed have every right to go where they choose to go.

At the same time it's also a fact that they can wait until national signing day before they make any choice at all, and even longer if they choose to take the time. So why is it necessary for them to commit if it means absolutely nothing, and I mean NOTHING.

It isn't and they don't have to. So if a young man is committed to by a university who offers him a scholarship and he in turn commits to that university to accept that scholarship before national signing day, then I think he should forfeit a year of eligibility if he switches commitments.

I know a rule like this would cost TJ Yeldon, Calloway, and Cyrus a year of eligibility. So be it.

It's really not fair to coaches to have the rug pulled out from under them when they are trying to fill needs and they have been assured by a prospect that those needs are met only to find out last minute that they aren't because of a sudden change of mind.

The way rules are now it's also a fact that an opposing coach such as Chiznik could know he was going to get say a Reuben Foster so he could truly tell Reuben...."Commit to Bama, then switch, but wait until the other good linebackers have committed elsewhere, that'll screw up their defensive player recruiting real good". Not saying it happens but it easily could...HOWEVER it wouldn't, or would be less likely if there was a penalty for switching commitments.

Again, I emphasize....these guys do NOT have to give their word or sign anything until national signing day. They do so early because they freely choose to do so and I think if they knew there was a penalty for switching that they would be less inclined to commit early and then switch.

I don't have any or all the answers concerning recruiting but I do believe that something needs to be addressed about this issue. If you think about it the recruiting of a prospect now doesn't really even heat up until he commits to another school.

That's not fair to the kid and it's not fair to the school he's committed to.

Just my two cents and I'd view all opinions with interest..

Thanks and Roll Tide!

sip

Although I do agree with you on some facts in your post, and I do agree that the state of recruiting needs to change (and will change eventually), I think your post smells of sour grapes.
Were you as vocal about this issue when TJ dropped the bomb on the barn? Or when Cyrus decided to switch back?

CNS walks the fine line in recruiting as well, probably with each and every recruit. It has brought success for us. The Barn, on the other hand, has most assuredly BOUGHT their way into national prominence through job offers, business deals, and yes, $100 handshakes. However, karma is an ugly dog, and the TJ situation is now reversed. This situation will most certainly cost us more recruits in the long run too, unless the barn gets caught red-handed.

Bottom-line, we will be fine as long as we do it classy and above-board. The recruiting practices will change eventually, but there is so much money tied-up with it now. It will be hard to change it drastically. Money loves drama, and the state of recruiting offers plenty of it.

 

[colbysullivan]

Just let them sign when they're seniors in high school. This would be binding until they graduate. If they decide to switch schools, they face the same restrictions that any other transfer would.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[jps1983]

Just let them sign when they're seniors in high school. This would be binding until they graduate. If they decide to switch schools, they face the same restrictions that any other transfer would.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I'd be in favor of an earlier signing period, kind of college bball. If a kid knows where he wants to go and doesn't want to deal with the hassle of turning other schools down, let him sign early (like EE can already sign early; let the seniors not EE do the same in Nov/Dec timeframe). If the college they signed with fires the coach or the HC leaves the position, that player can then sign with a different school in February without penalty. If a coach gets some sigs in the fall, he can focus his effort on the rest of the class for February. If a high profile guy "commits" early but doesn't sign in the fall, the coach knows he can't count that as an egg in the basket.

 

[CullmanTide]

Well Sip it kinda goes both ways. Coaches change their minds on recruits fairly often. You win some you lose some. IMHO the system in place is fair to schools and recruits. The real problem is us fans tend to get too caught up in the hype and forget these young people are making decisions that will effect the rest of their life.

 

[buzzincuzzin]

I'm gonna side with the kids. 17-18 year-olds bombarded by budgets running in the millions?
This is not a fair fight. I don't know what to do but it just ain't right. Rah-rah for my team and the championships that go along with all the seedy stuff. I'm just not in favor of weighting the scales even more for the big machinery against people one false step from a GED making the biggest decision of their life.

That said. Hurry up and bring on championship #17!!!

 

[NoNC4Tubs]

I think the glaring thing here is that a portion of the au fanbase posting on their boards believes that we buy our recruits while they do things "the right way". The basic problem with that is how do you explain flipping a 5-star recruit that has been committed to us for a year. Do they seriously believe that there are no shenanigans going on? Really?

We have the best combination of facilities, tradition, campus and coaching staff in all of College Football. If we were paying players on top of all that, there is absolutely no way that au could flip a 5-star recruit from us.

Now if we were not paying recruits, then it would be obvious that someone else did in order to make the flip. I think the answer is very obvious here. The only thing that we haven't heard yet is the "figure".

It came out with Scam and it will probably come out with this other one.........:cool2:

 

[BamaMoon]

While I agree that it is frustrating Sip, I just don't think you can penalize a kid for backing out of a "verbal" but non-binding agreement.

Perhaps if a commitment could be made a binding agreement and signing could take place at the time then yes, but as long as "commitment" and "signing" are different I just don't see how too much can change.

It's like an engagement and marriage. It's not cool to break off an engagement, but there aren't any legal effects. But walk away from a marriage and it's quite a bit different.

And yes, as long as a coach can take an "offer" away, I guess it is only fair that a recruit can walk away.

 

[russtang]

An early signing period would stop a lot of the "flipping".

Something I can't understand is why does a kid LET other teams recruit them if they truly are commited? Ask them not to call. If they persist, file a restraining order or harassment charge.

 

[subherbanite]

An early signing period would stop a lot of the "flipping".

Something I can't understand is why does a kid LET other teams recruit them if they truly are commited? Ask them not to call. If they persist, file a restraining order or harassment charge.

IMO, very recruits are ever "committed". Some of them really want to go to a school but I think they love all of the attention that the other schools will give them. I think that's why, at least lately, it seems like the kids that commit early are the ones that start flipping.I wonder how many of these kids commit early and then start thinking that the school just isn't kissing their butts like they ought to? I wouldn't even mind if the NCAA said you CAN'T commit until your senior year starts.

 

[LCN]

I've not been happy with recruiting trends for what is now closing in on 15 years . When I was a part of the scene things were pretty bad and have only gotten worse in recent years .

Bad ...
1 - Committing early .
2 - Services who now cover recruiting in reverse - through the kids instead of coaches . It's an easier route for the services , but often leads to even more over hyping in hope of gaining the scoop of the day .
3 - 7 on 7's and service combines are little more than brown-nosing sessions for analysts which , again , leads to even more needless hype .
4 - Handlers selfishly steering and using kids for their own gains .
5 - The numbered systems in place at ESPN and 24/7 . Star ratings are hard enough to do well and the 103's , etc. are yet another hype contest .


Good ....
Nothing that I know of , other than the availability of more film which is at times equally as dangerous as it is helpful .


During my time , mid/late 80's though the end of the 90's , recruiting was always fun and often brought a lot of excitement to fans of every decent program . In large part this was due to the fact that no commitments were ever public until mid to late Summer and those were few and far between . Schools never entered the season with more than 4-5 publicly committed prospects . This would eventually rise to as many as 8-10-12 . What this meant was that November through NSD was a whirlwind . It also meant late bloomers and those who buckled down in the classroom were not left behind because their school of choice had already filled most of their needs 4-5 months earlier . Incentive killer for those kids ? Absolutely . Much of the blame for this lies with those who initiated the trends we see today . As far back as '97 or '98 , Penn St. and Texas were the first schools to load up early .

I'm afraid that things are becoming a lot more shady than they once were . Don't get me wrong , there have always been illegal inducements . I've personally witnessed or had direct first-hand knowledge of 7 players being "bought" back in the day . Would I ever be dumb enough to think things have gotten better or have been cleaned up to any meaningful extent ? Not a chance .


What would help ? Here are a few quick ideas to consider ...
1 - No committing until a player has taken their official visits . Something like November 1st for prospects who choose not to take any visits . Make it 5 or none . Also , allow early enrollees to sign by no later than mid-November . Both would benefit the coaches and prospects as well as bringing meaning back to December evaluations . This would also keep a few doors open for those late bloomers and guys who hit their books late that I had mentioned earlier .
2 - Allow for any player with a significant injury to grayshirt without any effect on class or roster totals during the year they sit out .
3 - Can every service orchestrated combine .
4 - Nuke the 7 on 7's .
5 - Eliminate the national all-star games .

I know fans would enjoy the late rush that once was - 12-15 open slots with 3-6 weeks until NSD .

There's much more I could add , but my patient is showing her tail Out .

 

[CrimsonEyeshade]

I may be in the minority but I think the NCAA should make some major changes in the way recruiting is now done.

I do not like the fact that high school players can de-commit without penalty. I fully realize that these young men are very young, under extreme pressure, and that their college choice is one of the biggest decisions they'll ever make.
They should indeed have every right to go where they choose to go.

At the same time it's also a fact that they can wait until national signing day before they make any choice at all, and even longer if they choose to take the time. So why is it necessary for them to commit if it means absolutely nothing, and I mean NOTHING.

It isn't and they don't have to. So if a young man is committed to by a university who offers him a scholarship and he in turn commits to that university to accept that scholarship before national signing day, then I think he should forfeit a year of eligibility if he switches commitments.

I know a rule like this would cost TJ Yeldon, Calloway, and Cyrus a year of eligibility. So be it.

It's really not fair to coaches to have the rug pulled out from under them when they are trying to fill needs and they have been assured by a prospect that those needs are met only to find out last minute that they aren't because of a sudden change of mind.

The way rules are now it's also a fact that an opposing coach such as Chiznik could know he was going to get say a Reuben Foster so he could truly tell Reuben...."Commit to Bama, then switch, but wait until the other good linebackers have committed elsewhere, that'll screw up their defensive player recruiting real good". Not saying it happens but it easily could...HOWEVER it wouldn't, or would be less likely if there was a penalty for switching commitments.

Again, I emphasize....these guys do NOT have to give their word or sign anything until national signing day. They do so early because they freely choose to do so and I think if they knew there was a penalty for switching that they would be less inclined to commit early and then switch.

I don't have any or all the answers concerning recruiting but I do believe that something needs to be addressed about this issue. If you think about it the recruiting of a prospect now doesn't really even heat up until he commits to another school.

That's not fair to the kid and it's not fair to the school he's committed to.

Just my two cents and I'd view all opinions with interest..

Thanks and Roll Tide!

sip

---------------------
Sip, way too punitive. That said, I've never understood the apparent opposition to an early signing date for football. Might it be that i would force coaches into an early decision they​ might regret?

 

[Tidetwin]

I've not been happy with recruiting trends for what is now closing in on 15 years . When I was a part of the scene things were pretty bad and have only gotten worse in recent years .

Bad ...
1 - Committing early .
2 - Services who now cover recruiting in reverse - through the kids instead of coaches . It's an easier route for the services , but often leads to even more over hyping in hope of gaining the scoop of the day .
3 - 7 on 7's and service combines are little more than brown-nosing sessions for analysts which , again , leads to even more needless hype .
4 - Handlers selfishly steering and using kids for their own gains .
5 - The numbered systems in place at ESPN and 24/7 . Star ratings are hard enough to do well and the 103's , etc. are yet another hype contest .


Good ....
Nothing that I know of , other than the availability of more film which is at times equally as dangerous as it is helpful .


During my time , mid/late 80's though the end of the 90's , recruiting was always fun and often brought a lot of excitement to fans of every decent program . In large part this was due to the fact that no commitments were ever public until mid to late Summer and those were few and far between . Schools never entered the season with more than 4-5 publicly committed prospects . This would eventually rise to as many as 8-10-12 . What this meant was that November through NSD was a whirlwind . It also meant late bloomers and those who buckled down in the classroom were not left behind because their school of choice had already filled most of their needs 4-5 months earlier . Incentive killer for those kids ? Absolutely . Much of the blame for this lies with those who initiated the trends we see today . As far back as '97 or '98 , Penn St. and Texas were the first schools to load up early .

I'm afraid that things are becoming a lot more shady than they once were . Don't get me wrong , there have always been illegal inducements . I've personally witnessed or had direct first-hand knowledge of 7 players being "bought" back in the day . Would I ever be dumb enough to think things have gotten better or have been cleaned up to any meaningful extent ? Not a chance .


What would help ? Here are a few quick ideas to consider ...
1 - No committing until a player has taken their official visits . Something like November 1st for prospects who choose not to take any visits . Make it 5 or none . Also , allow early enrollees to sign by no later than mid-November . Both would benefit the coaches and prospects as well as bringing meaning back to December evaluations . This would also keep a few doors open for those late bloomers and guys who hit their books late that I had mentioned earlier .
2 - Allow for any player with a significant injury to grayshirt without any effect on class or roster totals during the year they sit out .
3 - Can every service orchestrated combine .
4 - Nuke the 7 on 7's .
5 - Eliminate the national all-star games .

I know fans would enjoy the late rush that once was - 12-15 open slots with 3-6 weeks until NSD .

There's much more I could add , but my patient is showing her tail Out .

Ditto,ditto, ditto

 

[RTRforever14]

An early signing period just moves the date from February to say August. I like it where it is.

 

[Alasippi]

There's no sour grapes. Personally I don't want any kid who's unsure of where he wants to be to run on our field wearing crimson. I've been posting my opinion on this for years even when we were the beneficiary. If you'll notice I wrote "I realize a rule like this would cost TJ, Calloway, and Cyrus a year of eligibility".....And then I wrote "So be it".
I totally agree with one poster who wrote "Wait until there senior year and then get them to sign a scholarship".
I also agree strongly that there should be an early signing period.
There's no easy answer but I truly think something needs to change.
Thanks for the post
Sip

Although I do agree with you on some facts in your post, and I do agree that the state of recruiting needs to change (and will change eventually), I think your post smells of sour grapes.
Were you as vocal about this issue when TJ dropped the bomb on the barn? Or when Cyrus decided to switch back?

CNS walks the fine line in recruiting as well, probably with each and every recruit. It has brought success for us. The Barn, on the other hand, has most assuredly BOUGHT their way into national prominence through job offers, business deals, and yes, $100 handshakes. However, karma is an ugly dog, and the TJ situation is now reversed. This situation will most certainly cost us more recruits in the long run too, unless the barn gets caught red-handed.

Bottom-line, we will be fine as long as we do it classy and above-board. The recruiting practices will change eventually, but there is so much money tied-up with it now. It will be hard to change it drastically. Money loves drama, and the state of recruiting offers plenty of it.

 

[CrimsonEyeshade]

An early signing period just moves the date from February to say August. I like it where it is.

Not at all, RTR. Basketball has two signing periods. Kids who know where they want to go and want to get it out of the way can sign early. Those still trying to make up their minds or who want to go through the experience/circus can sign later.

That's what I envision: 2 periods. Not a perfect solution, but it already works with enough basketball recruits/schools that it should be considered. It might end a few of these year-plus preening dances we now have.

 

[MOAN]

Well I was a recruiting fan back in the day when LCN was in the business. I got my recruiting info from Forrest Davis and Jeff Whitakers recruiting mags and the sports section of the Huntsville Times. Every once in a while you would see something on the local TV news about a recruit committing but mostly on signing day. Didn't have the internet or a computer at the time so it was really a lonely hobby of mine, didn't have all you great guys and gals to discuss recruiting with!

I agree with you about how recruiting has gotten worse and in fact I see how these recruiting services and their made for internet/TV carnival fairs have turned recruiting into a sport! Thats the problem with the whole thing. Recruiting should not be seen as a sport! It is not a sport! Fans should not feel like they lost anything when a recruit decommits or commits to another school other than their own. These kids have yet to complete their highschool careers much less sign a contract to go to college somewhere.

Of course its the recruiting services who are inciting the masses and they do it out of greed as LCN pointed out. Auburn beats Bama for recruit XXXX, Georgia beats Florida for recruit OOOO. Its absolutely ridicules to me to think a kid should be held accountable for saying he is going to play football for team X 2 years before he can even sign a contract and be held accountable if he were to change his mind. You can't do that, no way!

Its not the kids fault they are getting blown up like rock stars by greedy unethical people as well as every teams fan bases sitting on pins and needles hoping the kid chooses their team and getting upset or mad if they don't. Who is the adults here? Whats the solution? Other than just shutting down the recruiting services I don't know. And that ain't gonna happen!

And telling the fans to ignore recruiting and to park their emotions to just focus on the season and signing day afterwards is an exercise of insanity!
So carry on my fellow Bama brothers and sisters!

 

[Alasippi]

Well I was a recruiting fan back in the day when LCN was in the business. I got my recruiting info from Forrest Davis and Jeff Whitakers recruiting mags and the sports section of the Huntsville Times. Every once in a while you would see something on the local TV news about a recruit committing but mostly on signing day. Didn't have the internet or a computer at the time so it was really a lonely hobby of mine, didn't have all you great guys and gals to discuss recruiting with!

I agree with you about how recruiting has gotten worse and in fact I see how these recruiting services and their made for internet/TV carnival fairs have turned recruiting into a sport! Thats the problem with the whole thing. Recruiting should not be seen as a sport! It is not a sport! Fans should not feel like they lost anything when a recruit decommits or commits to another school other than their own. These kids have yet to complete their highschool careers much less sign a contract to go to college somewhere.

Of course its the recruiting services who are inciting the masses and they do it out of greed as LCN pointed out. Auburn beats Bama for recruit XXXX, Georgia beats Florida for recruit OOOO. Its absolutely ridicules to me to think a kid should be held accountable for saying he is going to play football for team X 2 years before he can even sign a contract and be held accountable if he were to change his mind. You can't do that, no way!

Its not the kids fault they are getting blown up like rock stars by greedy unethical people as well as every teams fan bases sitting on pins and needles hoping the kid chooses their team and getting upset or mad if they don't. Who is the adults here? Whats the solution? Other than just shutting down the recruiting services I don't know. And that ain't gonna happen!

And telling the fans to ignore recruiting and to park their emotions to just focus on the season and signing day afterwards is an exercise of insanity!
So carry on my fellow Bama brothers and sisters!

bunch of good points....

 

[CullmanTide]

Well I was a recruiting fan back in the day when LCN was in the business. I got my recruiting info from Forrest Davis and Jeff Whitakers recruiting mags and the sports section of the Huntsville Times. Every once in a while you would see something on the local TV news about a recruit committing but mostly on signing day. Didn't have the internet or a computer at the time so it was really a lonely hobby of mine, didn't have all you great guys and gals to discuss recruiting with!

I agree with you about how recruiting has gotten worse and in fact I see how these recruiting services and their made for internet/TV carnival fairs have turned recruiting into a sport! Thats the problem with the whole thing. Recruiting should not be seen as a sport! It is not a sport! Fans should not feel like they lost anything when a recruit decommits or commits to another school other than their own. These kids have yet to complete their highschool careers much less sign a contract to go to college somewhere.

Of course its the recruiting services who are inciting the masses and they do it out of greed as LCN pointed out. Auburn beats Bama for recruit XXXX, Georgia beats Florida for recruit OOOO. Its absolutely ridicules to me to think a kid should be held accountable for saying he is going to play football for team X 2 years before he can even sign a contract and be held accountable if he were to change his mind. You can't do that, no way!

Its not the kids fault they are getting blown up like rock stars by greedy unethical people as well as every teams fan bases sitting on pins and needles hoping the kid chooses their team and getting upset or mad if they don't. Who is the adults here? Whats the solution? Other than just shutting down the recruiting services I don't know. And that ain't gonna happen!

And telling the fans to ignore recruiting and to park their emotions to just focus on the season and signing day afterwards is an exercise of insanity!
So carry on my fellow Bama brothers and sisters!

It's not the recruiting services at all. The problem starts with us as fans getting so obsessed with our programs wanting to know every little detail. It's our money that fuels the recruiting services. Without the interest from us recruits wouldn't be demanding so much attention.

 

[MOAN]

It's not the recruiting services at all. The problem starts with us as fans getting so obsessed with our programs wanting to know every little detail. It's our money that fuels the recruiting services. Without the interest from us recruits wouldn't be demanding so much attention.

Well when I see a headline that says, "Auburn beats Bama", then I click on it to see what it is and its for the commitment of a recruit, I blame the recruiting services for stirring the pot. You are right that its the fans money powering the services but these services are making mountains out of molehills. The services are the ones who are making these highschool kids into stars and blowing them up, heads and all, with these made for TV openings. They created this "sport" and the fans are eating it up as they knew they would.

I used to buy the magazines so I guess I am partially responsible for the recruiting market and what it has become today. As long as people don't take it personally and just enjoy the show, I have no problem with it. But its becoming more and more a circus with these services pitting one fan base against another. Its marketing gone mad if you ask me. I haven't spent a dime on any services or magazines in years though, I just come here to get my info.