Jump to content


Get Rid of National Signing Day


Recommended Posts

 

 

I dont think that would be good. Coaches would pressure recruits to commit and sign on visits. Kids are gonna end up going to places they dont want to go to and even more transfers are going to happen.

Things need to change to make it better for the student- athlete and the coaches. The best thing that is to make an early signing period, around July/August. Sure would help those athletes not having to worry about recruiting anymore and the coaches not having to spend so much time and money on so many recruits for so long.

The other thing is allowing tuniversities to pay for at least one parent to come on official visits. Its just a no brainer.

I seriously don't see how an early signing helps recruits but a true offer and acceptance system hurts them, which is what you're saying. The pressure to sign would be there in July/August. Probably even more pressure. And you'd be losing time that both the coaches and the players could use to evaluate each other.

One of the biggest benefits of making all offers "commitable" is that recruits can't be strung along. They have a tangible way of knowing exactly where they stand with a staff.

It doesnt take a lot of thought. Sign now or else compared to please sign with us at the signing period. Make your decision now compared to think about it and hope your in on signing day. The pressure is not even close to the same. Not sure how this is so hard to understand. Its completely different.

It's completely different because no kid is required to "sign now" (unlike what you actually do have on a signing day).

 

And you're completely ignoring the lion share of the issue, which is coaches firing out a 150 offers to sophomores and juniors that aren't really "commitable" and end up stringing a kid along who could have otherwise found a good fit with a team who was ready and willing to commit to him earlier in the process.

Link to comment

 

 

 

Quiet periods aren't to help players.

They are instituted to give coaches some allowed downtime. And to insulate coaches from competition, especially by schools like Nebraksa who often need to wait until after seasons to schedule visits due to timing constraints.

The period around signing day when visits are not allowed is NOT to give the coaches time off.

In fact, they are still working their butts off.

I'm referring mainly to the dead period that lasts 4+ weeks in December and into the middle of January. That's definitely mostly designed to give some coaches dedicated downtime. I'm not saying they are all checked out, but it relieves pressure.

Anyway, you're not really getting at the heart of the issue.

Recruiting should be set up to benefit kids. Not help certain programs obtain and retain their classes.

The current system benefits no one other than the handful of "recruiting Tier 1" programs.

Its supposed to even out the recruiting field for the teams in bowl games so they arent punished in recruiting for making a bowl. Hence the time of year it happens. Thought goes a long way.

I have a bridge to sell you. Let me know where to send the info.

Link to comment

I say make it to where a kid can sign any time he wants. If he commits and wants to sign, let him. This would save lots of money cause you wouldn't have to continue to recruit the kid. If the coaches go back on the commit, then they would lose that scholarship along with another the following year. This would stop the crap like what Michigan pulled. If the kid goes back on the commitment, he will lose the 2 yrs. of playing time, his RS year and RS Fr year. This would keep the kids from skipping around like no other.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

Quiet periods aren't to help players.

They are instituted to give coaches some allowed downtime. And to insulate coaches from competition, especially by schools like Nebraksa who often need to wait until after seasons to schedule visits due to timing constraints.

The period around signing day when visits are not allowed is NOT to give the coaches time off.

In fact, they are still working their butts off.

I'm referring mainly to the dead period that lasts 4+ weeks in December and into the middle of January. That's definitely mostly designed to give some coaches dedicated downtime. I'm not saying they are all checked out, but it relieves pressure.

Anyway, you're not really getting at the heart of the issue.

Recruiting should be set up to benefit kids. Not help certain programs obtain and retain their classes.

The current system benefits no one other than the handful of "recruiting Tier 1" programs.

Its supposed to even out the recruiting field for the teams in bowl games so they arent punished in recruiting for making a bowl. Hence the time of year it happens. Thought goes a long way.

I have a bridge to sell you. Let me know where to send the info.

Wtf are you talking about? What is the reason they put the dead period at that time then? Dont just give me some stupid ass saying like im an idiot and you know everything. Explain oh purveyor of secrets.
Link to comment

 

 

 

I dont think that would be good. Coaches would pressure recruits to commit and sign on visits. Kids are gonna end up going to places they dont want to go to and even more transfers are going to happen.

Things need to change to make it better for the student- athlete and the coaches. The best thing that is to make an early signing period, around July/August. Sure would help those athletes not having to worry about recruiting anymore and the coaches not having to spend so much time and money on so many recruits for so long.

The other thing is allowing tuniversities to pay for at least one parent to come on official visits. Its just a no brainer.

I seriously don't see how an early signing helps recruits but a true offer and acceptance system hurts them, which is what you're saying. The pressure to sign would be there in July/August. Probably even more pressure. And you'd be losing time that both the coaches and the players could use to evaluate each other.

One of the biggest benefits of making all offers "commitable" is that recruits can't be strung along. They have a tangible way of knowing exactly where they stand with a staff.

It doesnt take a lot of thought. Sign now or else compared to please sign with us at the signing period. Make your decision now compared to think about it and hope your in on signing day. The pressure is not even close to the same. Not sure how this is so hard to understand. Its completely different.

It's completely different because no kid is required to "sign now" (unlike what you actually do have on a signing day).

And you're completely ignoring the lion share of the issue, which is coaches firing out a 150 offers to sophomores and juniors that aren't really "commitable" and end up stringing a kid along who could have otherwise found a good fit with a team who was ready and willing to commit to him earlier in the process.

You dont have to sign on signing day.

 

Why would a kid get strung along with an offer? Its up to them to visit schools and decide where they want to go. If they are waiting on schools to commit to them then they are doing themselves a huge disservice. If they are worried, then commit to a school and ask to sign the financial papers to get bound. Great thing there is the school is then bound to them, but the recruit doesnt have to go to that school if they decide different. There are plenty of ways for the recruit to take advantage of the process.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

 

Quiet periods aren't to help players.

They are instituted to give coaches some allowed downtime. And to insulate coaches from competition, especially by schools like Nebraksa who often need to wait until after seasons to schedule visits due to timing constraints.

The period around signing day when visits are not allowed is NOT to give the coaches time off.

In fact, they are still working their butts off.

I'm referring mainly to the dead period that lasts 4+ weeks in December and into the middle of January. That's definitely mostly designed to give some coaches dedicated downtime. I'm not saying they are all checked out, but it relieves pressure.

Anyway, you're not really getting at the heart of the issue.

Recruiting should be set up to benefit kids. Not help certain programs obtain and retain their classes.

The current system benefits no one other than the handful of "recruiting Tier 1" programs.

Its supposed to even out the recruiting field for the teams in bowl games so they arent punished in recruiting for making a bowl. Hence the time of year it happens. Thought goes a long way.
I have a bridge to sell you. Let me know where to send the info.
Wtf are you talking about? What is the reason they put the dead period at that time then? Dont just give me some stupid ass saying like im an idiot and you know everything. Explain oh purveyor of secrets.

If the NCAA was worried about advantages and disadvantages, then non-bowl teams would get an opportunity to practice during that time (or get additional time in the spring).

 

It has very little, to nothing, to do with bowl season and a perception of disadvantage.

Link to comment

I have two problems with no NSD.

 

(1) NCAA does not allow universities to play for a parent or guardian to accompany recruits on official visits. That lives a large number of recruits (not really sure the percentage) alone at a university. If a coach can sit there with a LOI and pressure the recruit (in this case an unaccompanied minor) to sign a legal document, then they are under contract and no matter what the coaching staff does (e.g., recruit 4 more players at their position, leave, etc), the recruits have no recourse. What I don't understand is how the type of situation is legal (i.e., a unaccompanied minor signed a contract).

 

(2) The culture of college football is at a state currently where players transfer and coaches leave. We see it all the time now where after NSD the coaching carousel starts, leaving recently committed players being duped thinking their position coach will be at the university when they show up (or even coordinators or the HC). If recruits sign early, this gives more time for this type of deception to occur.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quiet periods aren't to help players.

They are instituted to give coaches some allowed downtime. And to insulate coaches from competition, especially by schools like Nebraksa who often need to wait until after seasons to schedule visits due to timing constraints.

The period around signing day when visits are not allowed is NOT to give the coaches time off.

In fact, they are still working their butts off.

I'm referring mainly to the dead period that lasts 4+ weeks in December and into the middle of January. That's definitely mostly designed to give some coaches dedicated downtime. I'm not saying they are all checked out, but it relieves pressure.

Anyway, you're not really getting at the heart of the issue.

Recruiting should be set up to benefit kids. Not help certain programs obtain and retain their classes.

The current system benefits no one other than the handful of "recruiting Tier 1" programs.

Its supposed to even out the recruiting field for the teams in bowl games so they arent punished in recruiting for making a bowl. Hence the time of year it happens. Thought goes a long way.
I have a bridge to sell you. Let me know where to send the info.
Wtf are you talking about? What is the reason they put the dead period at that time then? Dont just give me some stupid ass saying like im an idiot and you know everything. Explain oh purveyor of secrets.

If the NCAA was worried about advantages and disadvantages, then non-bowl teams would get an opportunity to practice during that time (or get additional time in the spring).

It has very little, to nothing, to do with bowl season and a perception of disadvantage.

What? Non-bowl teams didnt earn a bowl. They dont deserve anything. But bowl teams should get punished for having to practice instead of being able to recruit full time like teams who didnt earn one?

 

We can argue about whats fair or not forever. But the way its set up right now is how it is. Quit trying to prove you are right.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

I dont think that would be good. Coaches would pressure recruits to commit and sign on visits. Kids are gonna end up going to places they dont want to go to and even more transfers are going to happen.

Things need to change to make it better for the student- athlete and the coaches. The best thing that is to make an early signing period, around July/August. Sure would help those athletes not having to worry about recruiting anymore and the coaches not having to spend so much time and money on so many recruits for so long.

The other thing is allowing tuniversities to pay for at least one parent to come on official visits. Its just a no brainer.

I seriously don't see how an early signing helps recruits but a true offer and acceptance system hurts them, which is what you're saying. The pressure to sign would be there in July/August. Probably even more pressure. And you'd be losing time that both the coaches and the players could use to evaluate each other.

One of the biggest benefits of making all offers "commitable" is that recruits can't be strung along. They have a tangible way of knowing exactly where they stand with a staff.

It doesnt take a lot of thought. Sign now or else compared to please sign with us at the signing period. Make your decision now compared to think about it and hope your in on signing day. The pressure is not even close to the same. Not sure how this is so hard to understand. Its completely different.

It's completely different because no kid is required to "sign now" (unlike what you actually do have on a signing day).

And you're completely ignoring the lion share of the issue, which is coaches firing out a 150 offers to sophomores and juniors that aren't really "commitable" and end up stringing a kid along who could have otherwise found a good fit with a team who was ready and willing to commit to him earlier in the process.

You dont have to sign on signing day.

 

Why would a kid get strung along with an offer? Its up to them to visit schools and decide where they want to go. If they are waiting on schools to commit to them then they are doing themselves a huge disservice. If they are worried, then commit to a school and ask to sign the financial papers to get bound. Great thing there is the school is then bound to them, but the recruit doesnt have to go to that school if they decide different. There are plenty of ways for the recruit to take advantage of the process.

 

 

As was pointed out, 99% do in fact sign on signing day. Whether they technically are required to or not, that's what NSD has come to mean. That's why NSD should be eliminated.

 

Maybe we should set up a pro and con chart... usually those are useless, but I'm seriously not seeing any cons to killing NSD. Killing NSD would be all up side for 95% of coaches and players. THat's why so many coaches, especially those outside of the SEC, would love to do away with it.

 

"Why would a kid get strung along?"

 

I can't believe you're asking this question. I would say you're likely the only one on this board that doesn't see how a "non-committable" offer (and an unenforceable acceptance for that matter) strings along the person on the receiving end. I don't think Harbaugh was unethical in his treatment of that one kid this year (based on what I've read), but that kid not being able to pin Harbaugh down on the offer definitely ended up screwing him over.

 

If you really still don't get it, or why such a "real offer/acceptance" scheme would help coaches at places like NEbraska, I'll post a more detailed explanation. But most of the arguments have been laid out (and not refuted) throughout this thread.

 

Oh, and on a technical note, you'er wrong about the financial aid stuff. That rule only allows January graduates to sign papers early. IT wouldn't benefit most HS recruits. And heck, if a school is willing to tell a kid he can't play football but eat the cost of tuition for a year, an argument could be made that it doesn't even really bind a school.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quiet periods aren't to help players.

They are instituted to give coaches some allowed downtime. And to insulate coaches from competition, especially by schools like Nebraksa who often need to wait until after seasons to schedule visits due to timing constraints.

The period around signing day when visits are not allowed is NOT to give the coaches time off.

In fact, they are still working their butts off.

I'm referring mainly to the dead period that lasts 4+ weeks in December and into the middle of January. That's definitely mostly designed to give some coaches dedicated downtime. I'm not saying they are all checked out, but it relieves pressure.

Anyway, you're not really getting at the heart of the issue.

Recruiting should be set up to benefit kids. Not help certain programs obtain and retain their classes.

The current system benefits no one other than the handful of "recruiting Tier 1" programs.

Its supposed to even out the recruiting field for the teams in bowl games so they arent punished in recruiting for making a bowl. Hence the time of year it happens. Thought goes a long way.
I have a bridge to sell you. Let me know where to send the info.
Wtf are you talking about? What is the reason they put the dead period at that time then? Dont just give me some stupid ass saying like im an idiot and you know everything. Explain oh purveyor of secrets.

If the NCAA was worried about advantages and disadvantages, then non-bowl teams would get an opportunity to practice during that time (or get additional time in the spring).

It has very little, to nothing, to do with bowl season and a perception of disadvantage.

What? Non-bowl teams didnt earn a bowl. They dont deserve anything. But bowl teams should get punished for having to practice instead of being able to recruit full time like teams who didnt earn one?

 

We can argue about whats fair or not forever. But the way its set up right now is how it is. Quit trying to prove you are right.

 

 

How about, for once, you try to prove you're right. Like post some evidence that shows the restriction/dead period was put in place to keep bowl coaches from being disadvantaged.

Link to comment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Quiet periods aren't to help players.

They are instituted to give coaches some allowed downtime. And to insulate coaches from competition, especially by schools like Nebraksa who often need to wait until after seasons to schedule visits due to timing constraints.

 

The period around signing day when visits are not allowed is NOT to give the coaches time off.

In fact, they are still working their butts off.

I'm referring mainly to the dead period that lasts 4+ weeks in December and into the middle of January. That's definitely mostly designed to give some coaches dedicated downtime. I'm not saying they are all checked out, but it relieves pressure.

Anyway, you're not really getting at the heart of the issue.

Recruiting should be set up to benefit kids. Not help certain programs obtain and retain their classes.

The current system benefits no one other than the handful of "recruiting Tier 1" programs.

Its supposed to even out the recruiting field for the teams in bowl games so they arent punished in recruiting for making a bowl. Hence the time of year it happens. Thought goes a long way.
I have a bridge to sell you. Let me know where to send the info.
Wtf are you talking about? What is the reason they put the dead period at that time then? Dont just give me some stupid ass saying like im an idiot and you know everything. Explain oh purveyor of secrets.

If the NCAA was worried about advantages and disadvantages, then non-bowl teams would get an opportunity to practice during that time (or get additional time in the spring).

It has very little, to nothing, to do with bowl season and a perception of disadvantage.

What? Non-bowl teams didnt earn a bowl. They dont deserve anything. But bowl teams should get punished for having to practice instead of being able to recruit full time like teams who didnt earn one?

We can argue about whats fair or not forever. But the way its set up right now is how it is. Quit trying to prove you are right.

How about, for once, you try to prove you're right. Like post some evidence that shows the restriction/dead period was put in place to keep bowl coaches from being disadvantaged.

Im waiting to here your explanation first since you supposedly have one.
Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...

NU needs more and earlier access to recruits and their parents/guardians before players can sign. Moving up NSD would hurt NU.

 

Agree. I wouldn't be in favor of any changes unless they allow earlier visits.

 

Though allowing them to sign financial aid papers wouldn't be the end of the world because the kid could still change his mind.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...