NCAA Oversight Committee Looking into

[awbuzz]

Link
... elimination of signing periods

"Division I football oversight committee chairman Bob Bowlsby acknowledged in an interview with the AJC last week – that the committee is looking into it."

About time to make it official and pull the trigger.

 

[awbuzz]

You know that the "factories" are NOT in favor of this.

 

[Boomergump]

This is great news. It is long overdue.

 

[Supersizethatorder-mutt]

Read the ignorant posts made by a mutt fan on that blog. Pathetic.

 

[dressedcheeseside]

Other than option 2, an early signing period, the article doesn't say anything about the earliest a recruit could sign an LOI. All this might end up doing is just pushing the whole process up a year and not really ending the practice of "commitments" at all. We could just end up with high school sophs making commitments and then the effective NSD (first day signing is allowed) being the spring following their junior year. Same drama, younger kids.

 

[awbuzz]

Force folks (both sides) to make bound commitments. Once signed then you you know the validity of offer/commitment.

 

[IronJacket7]

Over-Signing and Wavering from commitment is over!!!

 

[deeeznutz]

Other than option 2, an early signing period, the article doesn't say anything about the earliest a recruit could sign an LOI. All this might end up doing is just pushing the whole process up a year and not really ending the practice of "commitments" at all. We could just end up with high school sophs making commitments and then the effective NSD (first day signing is allowed) being the spring following their junior year. Same drama, younger kids.

This is exactly what I fear is going to happen. You change the rule to "sign any time during senior year" and then you have a bunch of schools just up the recruiting pressure in junior year to get those early commits. On the plus side (for us, at least) you'd have a whole lot of late-bloomers who blow up senior year out there on the market with less openings at the factory schools. I guess I just like the idea of an available early signing period for those kids who just want to be done with it all, just like in hoops.
Edit: I would be in favor of allowing any early signers to rescind their commitment in case of coach being fired (a school's own decision), but if the coach leaves the school has the choice to release or not.

 

[RonJohn]

Other than option 2, an early signing period, the article doesn't say anything about the earliest a recruit could sign an LOI. All this might end up doing is just pushing the whole process up a year and not really ending the practice of "commitments" at all. We could just end up with high school sophs making commitments and then the effective NSD (first day signing is allowed) being the spring following their junior year. Same drama, younger kids.

I am not a lawyer. As such I don't understand how LOIs are enforceable. Many if not most of the kids that sign them are underage. In most states, people under 18 cannot sign legally binding contracts. If kids are allowed to sign at any time, you could have 13 year old 8th graders signing LOIs.(As some have reported that they received offers) I would find it hard to believe that courts would allow a contract signed by a 13 year old to be enforced.

 

[ESPNjacket]

I am not a lawyer. As such I don't understand how LOIs are enforceable. Many if not most of the kids that sign them are underage. In most states, people under 18 cannot sign legally binding contracts. If kids are allowed to sign at any time, you could have 13 year old 8th graders signing LOIs.(As some have reported that they received offers) I would find it hard to believe that courts would allow a contract signed by a 13 year old to be enforced.

An NCAA LOI requires the signature of a parent or guardian.

 

[GTHomer]

Edit: I would be in favor of allowing any early signers to rescind their commitment in case of coach being fired (a school's own decision), but if the coach leaves the school has the choice to release or not.

Would you limit this to the head coach or also the position coach that may have been involved in the recruitment?

 

[FrostedOrange]

IIRC, signing periods were initially created for that reason because kids were getting pressured to sign earlier and earlier in high school

 

[orientalnc]

When my daughter was looking at colleges, she had her list narrowed down by the end of 11th grade. I think she could have made a decision in the summer if there had been a reason to. The NCAA could put football players on a similar timetable. No LOI signature until the end of their 11th grade football season (and coaches should have no contact or make offers during football season), then sign at any time after that. I doubt many football coaches will make commitable offers to kids with two years remaining in HS. Actually, the whole idea of a commitable offer would disappear. In that new world the coach makes an offer by handing the kid an LOI to sign.

The impact of this rule would be the factory schools would be all over the kids who have outstanding potential after the 11th grade. Late bloomers and kids whose potential was not quite as obvious until their senior season would be left off the factory school offer lists and get picked up by schools like GT, Duke and Wake Forest.

 

[awbuzz]

And when the factory is out of scholarships... Too bad.

 

[GTNavyNuke]

Link
... elimination of signing periods

"Division I football oversight committee chairman Bob Bowlsby acknowledged in an interview with the AJC last week – that the committee is looking into it."

About time to make it official and pull the trigger.

"Looking int it." Almost as good as referring to a committee to kill an idea. I'll believe it when I see it.

This would not be good for the money schools so it probably (<10%) won't happen. The money schools just got uncontrolled stipends put in place so they can buy the best. Why buy early when you can wait to buy the best later?

 

[TheSilasSonRising]

Unintended consequences? Hard to say.

Could see, somehow, that what some are afraid of that is now happening will only be moved to an earlier point. IDK

Could also see some coaches, those that do not eat / sleep / and die with recruiting will use it as an excuse not to work as hard.

Competition is not always for those that enjoy lazy boy recliners.

 

[DvilleJacket]

I would love this to happen. No more guys getting there spot pulled when someone better wants to jump on board. Recruits couldn't waver anymore if suddenly a better school comes calling.

 

[AE 87]

IIRC, signing periods were initially created for that reason because kids were getting pressured to sign earlier and earlier in high school

I googled around and didn't see that. It seems Conference LOIs with 1yr commitment came first, 60's, in the SEC and ACC to stop poaching by other conference coaches, which apparently happened even after kids were enrolled. That signing period was December.

Eventually, the NLI was introduced, and in 1981, the Conf LOI with earlier signing period was eliminated.

 

[g0lftime]

Schools like Alabama would sign top kids early and then late bloomers would be recruited to replace the kids they did not want to keep on scholarship. They would just not renew those that were not up to their standards or run them off. They already do that more than most schools anyway. It would create more stability in recruiiting overall. It would stop the anchor committment that lasts until something better comes along. I do like the idea of getting it over for those kids that are sure of where they want to go especially at GT where we tend to have smaller recruiting class sizes. Our problem will be whether they can meet the entrance requiirements if they sign early and then don't do the necessary course work.

 

[91Wreck]

Other than option 2, an early signing period, the article doesn't say anything about the earliest a recruit could sign an LOI. All this might end up doing is just pushing the whole process up a year and not really ending the practice of "commitments" at all. We could just end up with high school sophs making commitments and then the effective NSD (first day signing is allowed) being the spring following their junior year. Same drama, younger kids.

I was thinking the exact same thing. Ultimately I believe this won't fix anything and there will be unforeseen problems that might actually make the recruiting process worse. Personally I believe that DRob has shown us the future of recruiting. The best players are going to wait to get the best deals for themselves. The NSD won't mean anything to them.