Coaching Community Ready for Early Signing Period

Submitted by tjl7386 on

Jeremy CrabtreeRecruitingNation 

AFCA executive director Todd Berry said the coaching community is ready to take a step toward multiple early signing days, and FBS coaches are "unanimously in favor of a mid-December signing period." The current proposal calls for June and December signing periods.

 

Hopefully this is something that gets passed along with the one caviat that if a coach leaves at the end of the year the player has the option to open up his recruitment, but otherwise this sounds like a great idea.

Stay.Classy.An…

January 11th, 2017 at 12:04 PM ^

I think this can also eliminate "bag men" or other nogoodniks from coming in and swiping a player from another school. If the kid is sure in June, let him sign! If they want to wait until December or February, they can! I think it's good for everyone involved. 

mGrowOld

January 11th, 2017 at 12:14 PM ^

You think so?  I don't.

I think it will just move up the payment process to earlier in the recruitment cycle.  So maybe instead of high school Juniors driving cars they couldnt afford otherwise we'll see Sophomores riding really sweet bikes to school.

Stay.Classy.An…

January 11th, 2017 at 12:18 PM ^

I guess I just meant from the stand point of a recruit being "committed" then all of a sudden flips at the last minute for what seems to be no reason. If the kid was already signed, there would be nothing the other schools could do. I guess they could still slip the kid some money, but then wait for him to sit out a year because he is transferring? Seems like a bit much, but the SEC knows no bounds.

Stay.Classy.An…

January 11th, 2017 at 12:14 PM ^

the only "issue" I could see happening is a player trying to get out of the letter after signing it. I don't think that happens too often. But it would be very interesting to see that play out in the court of public opinion or the court of law. Player signs in June, wants to commit somewhere else in December....

Can a recruit take anymore visits to a school after signing an LOI? Also, can coaches still contact said recruits after they sign LOI's? That would probably eliminate any drama from occurring, especially if NCAA sanctions were involved with the coaches contacting the recruits. 

I Like Burgers

January 11th, 2017 at 1:01 PM ^

I think that's why there is only going to be a December early signing period.  The June one makes no sense and just has too many problems attached to it (coaches getting fired, recruits not qualifying, etc).  Plus, what do you do if a Joe Recruit commits and signs with a school in June, and then just doesn't give a shit on the field or in the classroom the entirety of his senior season?

December makes sense though.  By then (unless you're Cal or Minnesota) most coaches have been fired, so a recruit would know who they are committing too.  It would also give coaches an idea of who is actually solid and who isn't heading into February.  Its win-win to me.

Taco Panda

January 11th, 2017 at 12:25 PM ^

I could also see early signees getting tweaked after signing if they get less attention from the coaching staff, which would seem inevitable given priorities shifting to unsigned targets. Seems like that could result in some cooling from signed recruits that could lead to what you're referencing here. I don't know...if coaches are in favor and have key recruits ready to commit have at it.  

chrisu

January 11th, 2017 at 1:04 PM ^

I think the only way there is less drama is purely for the recruit choosing to commit earlier, provided that a signed LOI means no other schools can contact said recruit. For a kid that hates the constant hounding, it's a great way to nip that right away and chill until school starts. 

The other aspect - more drama - I see no real change. Technology makes information too readily available to quell the waves of drama. The other aspect is that I think the top recruits may actually hold out for the bagmen. If a kid is one of the top DL's, and a few others near his rating commit early, he may want to hold out for the schools left to start up a bit of a bidding war. Bagmen are here to stay until the kids receive renumeration other than their current degree and peripheral bennies.

LSAClassOf2000

January 11th, 2017 at 1:15 PM ^

I am pretty sure that a signed LOI is the official end of the line when it comes to being able to change your mind without taking any sort of hit to eligibility or whatnot, although I am more a fan of kids signing the grant-in-aid and not the LOI. 

I do agree with the main point though - I like the idea of having an early signing period available, particularly for kids who are fairly certain where they wish to go and want to escape the drama, much of which seems to come from things like social media and overzealous boosters and the like. 

Steeveebr

January 11th, 2017 at 12:09 PM ^

I really think this will benefit the schools much more than it benefits the players.  The only caveat to that will be what happens when a kid commits early and then blows out his knee during his senior season or under performs.  What happens then?

Chiwolve

January 11th, 2017 at 12:26 PM ^

Agreed, at first glance this seems to be like a no-brainer for coaches to be on board. In theory this could benefit a borderline player who may otherwise lose his spot if he waits until signing day -- but to me that benefit is marginal. If you're good enough to sign early with a major college program, then even if you lose your spot in one program's class (say UM, Bama, OSU, etc.) then chances are very high that you will still have a chance to obtain a scholarship from another school. If I'm a high-level recruit or recruit's parent, then there is no real incentive to sign early and I'm not doing it unless I feel like the recruiting process is that burdensome.

I Like Burgers

January 11th, 2017 at 12:27 PM ^

The December date had unanimous support from the coaches.  The June date had the opposite, as well it should.  It makes no damn sense to have a recruit formally committed to your school before he's even played his senior season, let alone started his senior year of classes.  Zero benefit to the coaches and schools in that situation.

Steeveebr

January 11th, 2017 at 12:37 PM ^

Yeah, and that pretty much removes all the benefit to the player.  Why as a player would you not wait 2 more months to make 100% sure the coaching staff you are committing to is firm?  Well, because now you can be told to sign now or move on.  I just don't get how that helps anyone but the coaches.

As far as marginal recruits securing their spot, don't you think coaches will protect themselves from that by not accepting a marginal recruit's signature early, but still telling them they want them in February?

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

January 11th, 2017 at 3:13 PM ^

I completely agree with you.  Coaches want this because it makes their jobs easier.  There's no other reason.  It will make things worse for recruits.  There is only one benefit to recruits - slightly earlier ability to end the recruiting madness if they want to.  That can be fixed other ways.  It's like opening up the patient and whacking the appendix with a mallet til it falls off, instead of something slightly more surgical.

The recruit that wants to leave because his coach did.....the recruit that wants to commit to a late offer from a coach who just got hired at a new school....these guys are getting fucked, yet again, by the NCAA, because coaches want their jobs to be easier.

lilpenny1316

January 11th, 2017 at 12:10 PM ^

Let the kids sign on the dotted line in September so they can focus on their senior year of football.  You hopefully avoid an Erik Swenson situation which would be good for all parties involved.

BlueinOK

January 11th, 2017 at 12:23 PM ^

I saw set it up where they can sign whatever they want from June on. Why does it have to be on a certain date? Maybe there will be less pressure for kids because they can decide on their own time instead of getting the full court press when it comes close to Feb. 

Kevin13

January 11th, 2017 at 12:40 PM ^

If a kid knows where he wants to go and is tired of the process, sign and get it over with. Then coaches stop bugging you and even the school your committed to doesn't need to continue to recruit you.  I think it just gives kids a chance who know where they want to go the ability to get the process over. If your still undecided you can continue to go through the process. Don't see any downside to it.

lhglrkwg

January 11th, 2017 at 12:52 PM ^

I think this should be really good overall. Kids lock in their spots in December so if someone pulls the rug out from them, they still have till February to land at another school, and for coaches they should be able to lock down the majority of their class in December and know what positions they really need to focus on for the home stretch instead of wondering if the one OLB they recruited is going to flip on signing day

True Blue Grit

January 11th, 2017 at 12:59 PM ^

Historically, Michigan has not fared well with down to the wire in February recruitments.  Granted, things have changed for the better in that area under Harbaugh so far.  But, the kids who can't make up their mind early enough and wait until the end get besieged with recruiting pitches that are meant to push them into a decision.  By that I mean schools get more and more desperate to fill their classes and tell recruits almost anything to convince them to go to their program.   The early signing period(s) won't eliminate this from happening, but it is likely to enable some recruits to make more rational decisions when the whole process isn't in the February Frenzy period.  

goblue224

January 11th, 2017 at 1:08 PM ^

Assuming they move forward with the plan, it will be interesting to see how many recruits actually take a advantage of the early signing period and how coaches go about distributing "signable" offers. If I'm a lower tier recruit with an offer to a major program, then I'd sign early to lock up my spot. On the flip side, the higher rated recruits will probably hold out for the more traditional signing period.

jcpdog

January 11th, 2017 at 1:17 PM ^

Well those higher rated recruits that wait may get squeezed out if the numbers don't work out or their school that they want to go may run out of scholarships. Or... you'll have a lot more schools oversign which could result on a bigger spotlight on that issue. 

MaizeAndBlueWahoo

January 11th, 2017 at 3:16 PM ^

With basketball and every other sport that has an "early" signing period, the "early signing period" has basically become "the signing period."  Almost nobody waits until the theoretically regular one.

What will be interesting, except not really, is how many coaches tell a recruit "sign now or we're not holding your spot."  Probably all of them.  Then those coaches will fuck along to a better program and the recruit is hosed.

It's amazing to me how nobody has managed to link basketball's early signing period with the proliferation of transfers.  You want to cut down on transfers, stop locking recruits into decisions they start having second thoughts about even before they start school.

jcpdog

January 11th, 2017 at 1:13 PM ^

One thing is.....how will the NCAA deal with position coaches leaving after an early signing period? A lot of kids are closer to their position coaches that will coach them and by and large part recruit them. How will that be dealt with because once they leave...kids may have a change of heart/mind....

Second thing is.....this is really going to have coaching staffs being a bit more strategic in how many kids they can accept in the early signing period. You only have space for two-three kids after early signing period...limits you in who you can go after on the final signing day. Will be interesting to see how some kids will be slow played and others priorotized....

M-GO-Beek

January 11th, 2017 at 1:35 PM ^

Agreed the early signing period should happen, but should also coniced with players being able to take the official visits prior to there senior year.  Having so much talent in the south without a paid trip to the north heavily favors the southern schools kids can drive to and see, then committ without the northern schools getting a similarly fair shake.

Sharuck

January 11th, 2017 at 1:37 PM ^

OSU fan here.  I know Urban has opposed a June signing period, as it deprives OSU of chance to evaluate player during senior year.  Player who might be OSU caliber could be pressured to sign with MSU caliber team in June, and then have big senior year so that OSU would have offerred late.  I would think taht UM coaches would have the same perspective on that.