Legal & Practical Aspects of Recruiting

Submitted by LKLIII on

I'm relatively new to the boards and have only recently gotten sucked into the world of college football recruiting.  As a result, I have some very simple questions that I'm helping the board can help me out with.  I've tried searching on the internet, but thus far I haven't found a page that answers my questions.  I'm hoping the folks here could either:

1) Post links that answer my questions; or

2) Kindly answer my questions directly here.

I also don't think my quesitons necessarily pertain to over-signing, as my questions are assuming that the school is ethical and is trying to play by the normal rules.  I'm asking what most schools should/could/actually do under the following circumstances:

Here goes...

For obvious reasons, programs map out what their needs & goals are for a particular recruiting class.  And for obvious reasons teams send out more offers than actual slots available.    Some schools strategize and perhaps pursue a ton of kids but will have less time to spend on each one.  Other schools cast their nets not as wide but try to shower a smaller number with more attention and TLC.  But ultimately, schools are sending out more offers than they have slots on the team.

1)  What happens when those slots get occupied (at least preliminarily) by verbal committments, particularly at a faster or greater matriculation rate than anticipated?

 Example:  Team X wants to take 2-3 offensive linemen in a class.  They give offers to 25, sensibly thinking that they won't get them all.  But what happens if in a matter of a week or two, some number much higher than 2-3 decide to committ?  I could see one extra OL sliding in there no big deal.  But if you're trying to be as efficient as possible, especially with a small recruiting class, you don't want to have 4 or 5 OLs on board when you really wanted 2-3.  Does this ever happen?  Or are the teams much more on top of the current state of affairs?  Do the kids self police and eyeball each other such that highly ranked guys won't enter a school's recruiting class if it's perceived that the class will be too stacked at that position in that class?  Or is it first come first served?  Schools give 25 offers, but tell each kid 'we are only taking 2-3 so wait at your own risk'?  Can a school revoke the offers once a class gets it's desired quota filled for that position?

Which brings me to.....

2)  What happens if a somewhat less desireable target to fill a needed position verbally committs when there is a more highly desired target that is still uncommitted for that same position?  

Example:  The class only has room for 3 O-Linemen.  Five star OT Bob is given an offer but keeps it cool and doesn't commit right away becasue a ton of other options.  Three star OT Joe is given an offer one month later and takes about a nanosecond to commit because he's just happy to be there.  Is Bob out of luck? Is the team obligated to take Joe, and if they want Bob do they need to "find room" by not taking a WR or CB in that same class?  And even so, once the class fills up towards the end of the year, even if a team WANTED to just forego getting a WR or CB that year and take Bob, if things get jam packed, the team would basically have to turn away Bob in favor of Joe at that point, no?  Or do we now get into the murky world of over-signing & having coaches tell a kid "look, you can sign your LOI and block Bob from coming here, but if you do, you won't see a minute of playing time so you may as well look for another home"?  Or do certain schools just make damned sure that if they only have one slot for a certain position type, that every single offer they send out, they are OK and at peace with the fact that any given kid could accept the offer, shut down the rest of the position group from that class, even if the rest of the position group has more highly coveted players?

 

Thank you in advance.

 

 

 

 

Michigan248

June 20th, 2014 at 8:08 PM ^

Verbal commitment really doesn't mean anything until the letter of intent is signed in February, so theoretically you could have 100 o line verbally committed

MGoChippewa

June 20th, 2014 at 8:21 PM ^

and I'll take a stab at your first question the best I can.  A verbal offer of  a scholarship really doesn't officially mean a whole lot.  The things that will matter are the National Letter of Intent (NLI), the aid agreement and/or scholarship agreement.  When you hear of a recruit sending in an NLI, it originally was faxed/e-mailed to them by the school that wants them.  So maybe University X "verbally offers" 10 OL and all 10 accept, but if they only want 3, they'll send those 3 the NLI to sign.  

This could all very well be wrong, but here's my source: LINK

samdrussBLUE

June 20th, 2014 at 8:34 PM ^

Except legit schools would take the first 3 that verbally committed and didn't waiver. Not just pick the 3 best. The verbal offers are extended because you want a kid. If we are only taking 3 but 5 guys verbally commit. I expect us to give the NLI to those first 3 commits so long as they haven't wavered and have been committed.

bdsisme

June 20th, 2014 at 8:45 PM ^

Yes, but in actuality, samdruss' point is also true.  The University will keep the 10 offered Offense Linemen informed of the situation -- i.e. that we are only taking 3.  When 2 commit, they'll touch base with the ones they really want the most and tell them "there's only 1 spot left".  

While it may seem like we offer a ton of kids, a lot of those offers are made to the super-elite recruits that we offer just in hopes of getting them to visit campus.  So, while we may have 10 offers out to OL recruits, the coaches may expect only 3-4 to really be "considering" Michigan.  So, while Michigan offers 100+ recruits a year, those aren't all happening at the same time.  Some offers go out to top recruits to convince them to visit, then as recruits start to drop off our interest list, more go out, and the cycle continues.

Sac Fly

June 20th, 2014 at 8:47 PM ^

Offers can become non-committable. If Michigan is only going to take 3 linemen, when they get 3 linemen the coaching staff can tell players they can't commit.

MGoGrendel

June 20th, 2014 at 9:21 PM ^

"Sorry, we are now full at the position".

I think we've heard reports that the Michigan staff has said that. We recruit two (or more) kids for one position and see who commits first. Most recently, our QB and TE.

AZBlue

June 20th, 2014 at 8:48 PM ^

still give out much higher numbers of offers than spaces, but are open with the recruits that "we are only taking X DTs this year - first come - first served".  This leads to rare occurences like 2-3 years ago when we had 5 OL commit in a very short span because we only had 5 spaces and once a few were filled the prospects had better verbally commit or lose their spot.  Due to the limited spots like the past 2 M classes, Coaches tend to only offer top-tier kids early or kids they believe will take their time.  Case this year was with A. Malzone.  It was pretty clear that he would jump at an M offer as soon as it came so they slow-played him a bit and looked closely at the other options before deciding to extend an offer.

As a result of the above - you see the "no visits" rules for verbal M commits ala S. Crawford.  Once a recruit re-opens his options - M opens the spot and it is again first-come/first-served.

 

As for question #2 - for an ethical program you either slow-play the lower-ranked kids (lower ranked by the coaches not the services) and wait to offer or risk turning away a better player.  Often in a larger class a spot or 2 will be set aside for the "best player available" just in case a D Hand or J. Peppers decides late.

 

LKLIII

June 21st, 2014 at 12:51 AM ^

Thanks guys. I know I'm probably just over thinking this but I'm just trying to get a handle on this. It really sounds like the answer to the above questions are: 1) Offers can be legally withdrawn if the class simply fills up, but the staff will give the courtesy of a head's up, at least to their very coveted recruits. Don't offer a too large amount of kids, and certainly not more than your staff can keep close tabs on. And some of those large offer numbers are illusory because we might have thrown out 10-12 offers to pie in the sky kids, it becomes clear that 8-9 won't even take the bait, and then we work our way down our priority list accordingly. 2) If you're a honorable program, don't give an offer unless you are truly prepared for the kid to commit on the spot. You could play games and offer a less coveted kid you *think* will take awhile to commit, all in the hopes of grabbing his interest and yet still holding out hope that a more coveted kid commits before he does. But you're really rolling the dice in that situation. Better to assume an insta-commit, and if you're not OK with that outcome, don't offer the kid. I understand that the LOI is the formal binding comtract, and that verbal offers are really not enforceable. But that does bring up another issue--what happens if an offered kid or two were to fax in an LOI unexpectedly late in the game? Again, is it first come first serve? Can schools enforce a 14 person class and refuse a non expected LOI that comes in via fax? Or could kids #15-17 basically jump the line, and whatever poor SOBs in the original 14 that are asleep at the switch and don't fax their letters in right away basically get shut out of the class? Unless the school has an emergency open scholarship for just that situation, is it simply "you snooze you lose?"

I dumped the Dope

June 21st, 2014 at 6:50 AM ^

totally understood how it works either, and probably never will.  You're trying to stack the best team with guys who won't waver.

I think a lot of it may be trying to gauge interest from the player too.  Geography counts.  Obviously California kids don't come all the way to Michigan that often unless they're really sold.  We offer guys from all over the country and I'd suspect you can draw a bullseye around Ann Arbor which corresponds orderly with the number of guys recruited from each area.

I can see its a game from both sides, especially for a solid middle talent, if you hold out for too long deciding then a coaching staff can decide to fill with someone else.  Sort of like a game of musical chairs in some respects.  Eventually the music stops.

I suppose for a top recruit (not sure how to quantify that, but a Peppers or Hand type recruit) a program would find a way to make room no matter what time of the year.  They probably have to have an open scholarship at most times just in case "lightning strikes".

Michigan is sort of at a crossroads in my opinion.  Can we return to blue chip status by being lights out against most opponents, I think the coaches jobs will get easier.  If the struggles continue, I think it will continue to get harder. 

SECcashnassadvantage

June 21st, 2014 at 8:36 AM ^

Then as signing day looms and nobody has flip flopped you let the lesser kids privately know that you made a mathematical error. -SEC

Danwillhor

June 21st, 2014 at 6:13 PM ^

strict numbers, not so strict laws and personal relationships. There is no real "legality"outside if rarely enforced mentioned laws. Even then it's just the NCAA (who changes rules by the year). Recruiting is literally having a guy/team/outside company keep tabs on kids everywhere. They follow every rumor or lead they hear about (this tiny school in New Mexico has a 6-3 300 kid that returns punts!, etc). Then it's contacting the school/family. Creepy in that many schools go family first and "cold call". Phone rings and it's "coach x" telling feeling you out for a vibe. Recruiting starts there and it starts at light speed. When it comes to WHO a school wants or can take, NOTHING is binding for either side until all paperwork is filled out. Until then it's ethics for both sides. No legality. Some programs cover their ass by knowingly oversigning and giving a shit less about a recruit they hurt or current player they cut because he stubbed his toe as a freshman 3 years ago. Other schools do their best to do the opposite. Only legality in it is NCAA based and, obviously, enforced on a "wtfwut?" basis. Recruiting can be creepy. I'd advise not getting too deep, lol. "Meat Market" is stilla good read and will make the most seasoned recruit veteran feel like a nice, long shower.

LKLIII

June 21st, 2014 at 8:11 PM ^

Thanks for the input. I suppose by "legality" what I mean is NCAA rules violations. I agree that recruiting can get creepy. I personally get the willies whenever anybody starts talking about recruits younger than the 2016 recruiting class. And I think my interest is (sadly) just a function of our team sucking right now. I keep looking for the cavalry, but hopefully the cavalry isn't really in the 2014-2016 classes. Hopefully the cavalry was in 2012 and 2013, but it just takes a few years on campus for the impact to be felt. I don't find myself closely following the recruiting of our basketball team for obvious reasons. I think whoever described it as a giant game of musical chairs had it right. I was just looking at it from the school's perspective but kids obviously self-police as well. They want to be surrounded by great players in their class but also don't want too much roster competition so they can see the field. They also don't want to get too cute by half and find themselves shut out of their first choice school if they take too long to commit just because they like their egos being stroked or want a free plane trip to another part of the country. So I assume some of the cat & mouse games are self limiting to an extent. Semi-ordered marketplace, but then occasionally absolute chaos.

Danwillhor

June 22nd, 2014 at 3:08 PM ^

and I get your interest while also agreeing with the rest. Recruiting, sadly, is dirty and odd but the lifeblood of any program. A necessary evil, IMO. As far as NCAA legality goes, again, it's very bipolar. Rules are both obvious and obscure, watched and neglected. One school gets probation for giving an unofficial visitor a soda while another school gets away with 436 "self reported secondary violations" that range from giving the same kid a soda to calling him during the dead period to having your female "fun squad" met up and escort him somewhere after his HS game. "Oops, my bad!" is a valid excuse to the NCAA most cases. Just don't NOT tell them about the Pepsi he didn't pay for on tour. Etc. The rest is, as stated, mostly ethics on each side and not at all binding during 99% of the process.