These two would love to sign anytime.It blows my mind that it is June 12th and Tressel has 17 verbal commitments for the 2009 season. I know his recruiting machine is well oiled right now and kids are jumping at the chance to play for him, but should they have to wait until February to sign their LOI's?
The early signing day argument is picking up steam and I have always thought there should be one. High school recruiting is at everyone's fingertips and kids are sending their Pop Warner highlight films to colleges (remember the White Reggie Bush) and those players can research their college choices from the comfort of their homes.
It seems as if being a highly recruited player is becoming a pain in the ass; college coaches, reporters, entourage members and of course the bitches want to know your every move. Can you imagine getting over a hundred text messages and phone calls per day, similar to what Terrelle Pryor went through?
Andy Staples of SI.com thinks there shouldn't be a signing day or early signing period at all, simply let kids sign their LOI's when they want.
Eliminate Signing Day entirely. Let coaches sign players whenever they want. The idea may sound irresponsible, but in practice, it would force coaches to exercise more caution lest they gamble away an entire recruiting class.
He has some valid points. Nowadays, coaches like Ron Zook and Nick Saban put their scholarships offers next to the rolls and butter on the buffet line when a recruit comes to visit and they may have 50-60 offers when it is all said and done. This type of rule would force them to have better judgment.
This would also benefit the athlete. If a student doesn't want to be bothered with the recruiting process, knows what school he wants to attend and is ready to sign, let him. Once an offer is extended, have a mandatory "think about it" couple of weeks and let the kid sign.
This would eliminate coaches from pulling scholarship from kids last minute and also eliminates letting the players string coaches along, only to change their mind on signing day.
Staples goes on to lay out some ground rules, including a required official visit and meeting with the compliance office before signing with that school.
Keep the current contact limitations in place, with a few exceptions. Allow prospects to use their five official visits whenever they choose instead of only during their senior year, and don't just allow but require that schools pay for one parent or guardian to visit with the prospect. Also, prospects would be required to take an official visit to their chosen school before signing a Letter of Intent. During that visit, the school's compliance office would be required to spend at least two hours explaining the Letter of Intent. That way, they prospect can't plead ignorance if he changes his mind.
I personally think this is a great idea, but it probably has as good of a chance of happening as a playoff does. What are your thoughts? Should athletes have to wait? Would no signing day benefit the kids or open up new ways of sleaziness amongst college coaches?
NFL News: LeCharles Bentley passed his physical, practiced Tuesday and then asked for and was granted his release from the Browns. Meanwhile, Will Smith became one of the richest defensive players yesterday, by inking a six year, seventy million dollar deal to stay in the Big Easy.
Comments
I'm a little skeptical, if only for the fact that if the SEC and its coaches are vocal about it, it must be (by definition) bad for college football and probably bad for America.
It would be wonderful for recruits like Jordan Whiting to sign early. By every account I've read, he's never been more sure of his decision to attend Ohio State and rip people's heads off for the Buckeyes, but is tired of being hassled by Notre Dame, Louisville and Alabama about it.
But with that said, I think a significant problem, on par with the creepy and chaotic nature of recruiting (see: Tennessee's staff following Keith Wells around at his HS like they were his parents), is the coercive stance that many college football coaches use in recruiting players (see: the SEC, and hence my skepticism). How does a sign-as-you-will policy not play into the hands of people like Nick Saban, Charlie Weis, Bob Stoops and Mack Brown? But instead of just a verbal, these coaches would have a binding contract for their efforts. Hell, if this policy was in place at the moment, Melvin Fellows is likely contractually obligated to play for the Illini right now. Keith Wells would likely have signed with Florida State in August and would have been forced to endure the very same anarchy in Florida State's football program that caused him to decommit. Buckeyes are blessed to have an honest, if not particularly media-friendly, coach in Jim Tressel, whose policy is to eschew on-the-spot verbals in favor of a kid thinking about his visit for a week or two and committing when he's 100 percent certain of his choice (see: Darrell Givens). However, Tressel appears to be the exception, and not the norm. Tressel and staff text a recruit and ask him how his week is going; most everyone else texts a recruit and asks him to text back what schools are in his Top 5.
Andy Staples' proposal is neat in many regards, but I don't see in his article how his proposal wouldn't create subsidiary problems in recruiting. He is right in saying that the nature of the game would change in many ways, but I think the aggressive and pushy nature of most college football coaches/assistants would remain a constant. Verbals may be somewhat of a nuisance, but their non-binding nature protects recruits.
I with you on that, Vico. If there's a potential for abuse, it will be fulfilled. Zealous recruiters are always looking for ways to exploit the system. This particular proposal looks very "exploitable".
I knew when I was writing this last night, Vico would be a bit skeptical, the south has tainted him!
I see your points though. It just amazes me how recruiting has blown up and the constant pestering of these 16 and 17 year olds, but that is the price for getting a free college education. I just think these kids should be allowed to sign early if they want. Too bad we already know there are coaches that would exploit it. It makes me that much more appreciative of Jim Tressel.
From the 3rd paragraph, what do you mean by bitches?
@ Chris:
High school girls fighting for their services too, or any Cougars that may want to persuade a young athlete.
bah, I have yet to become a knuckledragging mouthbreathing Bamer (or whatever they're called down here). For the record: my teeth are nice and white (and I have them too!), I don't eat stuffed squirrel for Thanksgiving, I don't have a bowl cut (or whatever that bangs-ish moptop monstrosity is called down here) and my car gets over 8 miles a gallon. In fact, I like to think I'm a crusader, leading a glorious insurrection down here, however subtly, to detach Alabama and rechristen it as a satellite of the great state of Ohio. Or at least, I tell myself that's what I'm doing down here as I make myself unavailable to my coworkers, get yelled at by single moms and ultimately realize that I left Ohio for Alabama. Sigh..
Anywho, I'm not totally against Staples' idea. As much as I'm guilty as the next recruiting-oriented blog for following the decision-making processes of 17yr old kids with keen interest, it can be a little much... actually a lot much. My only objection is that in all things business (and the NCAA is definitely a business), there is a very real inclination for people to identify a system that's not working or has numerous flaws and jump headlong into a new idea without fully examining what new problems would follow from it. Can you imagine what on-the-spot LOIs would do for the Sooners' program? With how aggressive Stoops is, he would make out like a bandit from this. I don't deny that the creepiness/stalking part of CFB recruiting is a huge nuisance (and indeed, I cringe when I read recruiting updates of coaches sending out text messages demanding a prompt response of what schools are in the recruits' top 5). However, part of me is curious whether or not it is the underlying root cause of the problems of recruiting, or if it's the aggressive recruiters and their coercive tactics that's exogenous to it. In other words: I think Staples' proposal wouldn't change the nature of the beast, just the rules of the game.
my biggest problem with eliminating signing day is that i get the feeling that this would just cause coaches to recruit earlier and earlier, making the whole exploitation thing even worse. added to that is the kind of drama that might be created by kids signing too early and then having some buyer's remorse about it.
i dunno. i'd allow students to sign once they start their senior year of high school (as that's when the shitstorm of attention really beings to ramp up), but probably no earlier.
as a side note, i love the fact that a major reason why Tressel is so good at recruiting is that his secret is to simply not act like an asshole.
Let's hope Will is investing wisely and doesn't end bankrupt by his 40th birthday.
Coaches would recruit and thus offer earlier and earlier, but there's some risks involved in offering too early as well. Stud sophomore signs and then blows out his knee -- twice -- before he is out of high school. Now what?
Coaches would have to be cautious with how often and to whom they extend their early offers to.
would they have to, though? I think football teams can move injury-raddled commitments off their athletic scholarship and on to another scholarship against the athletic department or university's purse. Either way, they wouldn't count against the 85 for very long. I believe that's precisely what happened to Ron Stoops (Michigan State class of 2004), before he eventually decided to leave MSU. I'm sure there are other Buckeyes I could list, but Ron Stoops immediately came to mind.
I don't see that issue prohibiting coaches from early offers.
This really needs to be what is best for the kids. If they know they are ready to commit they should be able to anytime after the completion of their Junior year. There should be a broad set of criteria that the player meets and they can petition the NCAA for early signing. Otherwise they have to wait until signing day or later (TP reference).
Whatever the set-up is the coaches will adjust. I don't think kids should be able to sign too early.
Vico - As a resident of Georgia, I'm fighting the good fight with you.
They should get to sign whenever they want and then sign up for the national "Do Not Call" list to keep Nick Saban and Ron Zook out of their voicemails.
Would this new proposal prohibit coaches from yanking someone's scholarship before they step on the campus? If so, is a coach locked into taking someone who became an academic risk during his last year?
On another topic, if I were the Steelers, and had the kind of problems along the offensive line that they're having, I'd certainly take a flyer on LeCharles Bentley.
It's a gamble, and no one is likely to give LeCharles as much money as he'd like to command, but he can flat-out play. I'd sign him just to thank him for the Tyson Walter flap.