Big Ten Opposes Recruiting Changes

Submitted by Zone Left on February 11th, 2013 at 9:36 PM


Today, the Big 10 issued a statement opposing the changes in recruiting rules scheduled to go into effect in July, reading in part:

We have serious concerns whether these proposals, as currently written, are in the best interest of high school student-athletes, their families and their coaches. We are also concerned about the adverse effect they would have on college coaches, administrators and university resources. We look forward to working with the NCAA toward improving the game, the recruiting process and the overall college football experience for all student-athletes.

Personally, I hope this provokes the NCAA to respond to increasing levels of criticism about the upcoming changes. The changes are going to do nothing but eliminate any down time for recruits and the coaches who recruit them.


Wolverine Devotee

February 11th, 2013 at 9:39 PM ^

Too much change going on. More conference games, divisions, members and this.

With all this conference changing it's so hard to remember whose with who. The Big East and C-USA are a mess. 


February 11th, 2013 at 10:04 PM ^

The potentially frightening thing, I think, is that the proposed streamlining seems to pave the way for schools to have staffs dedicated to doing more or less what the recruit from Ole Miss was reported to experience several threads below. As a parent, I don't know if I would be comfortable with having my children essentially spammed by people, especially now that they propose to remove rules on both the means and the volume of the communication. It is perhaps time someone at least raised some concerns about how having no respite from being badgered through various media will affect recruits. 


Nick Sparks

February 11th, 2013 at 10:15 PM ^

Maybe I'm missing something, but if a kid or his parents don't want to hear from a coach, can't they just say: "if you contact me again I'm pressing charges for harassment"?

It's easy to paint the kids as helpless victims, but don't they ultimately control how much or how little they're contacted by any particular coach?


February 12th, 2013 at 6:31 AM ^

Yes, the kid and his family have all of the control, prior to signing day.  They don't have to say they'll press charges.  They can tell any and all coaches - if you contact me more than once a week, we will no longer consider you or your school.  If the coach is serious about the kid, they'll stop contacting him so much.  If they're not serious about the kid, they'll move on.  

Ron Utah

February 12th, 2013 at 10:17 AM ^

We are now talking about high school juniors.  Potentially 16-year-old kids, that may love the attention and everything that goes with it, but may not understand what it means or how it impacts the people around them.

Coach Hoke made a great point about the unintended consequences, pointing out that this means kids can be getting visits at their school from recruiters on a regular basis.  That could very well interrupt their academics, and would certainly be a strain on coaches and educators that have to set-up the meetings, and often supervise them.  HS coaches that are teaching classes would have a full/part time job as recruiting coordinators...yikes.

That said, the current rules don't make a lot of sense, and aren't enforceable.  They need to find some rules that restrict the contact recruiters can make (even if it's for certain time periods), and, I believe, add an early signing period.


February 11th, 2013 at 10:44 PM ^

I so sick of this site censoring every little thing worth talking about. Isn't there a way to delete the nasty posts, and let the interesting ones go. If you must lock a topic, why cant you at least leave a majority of the posts while not allowing any more replies so people can follow some of the debate.  We cant be critical of the coaching staff, can't ever be critical of any recruit no matter how selfish they act or what they say, or if they take pics of stacks of cash or pose with bongs. You might as well just write what we should all think and forget the board, because its getting beyond ridiculous. 


February 11th, 2013 at 11:14 PM ^

being called out a bit here, I'll respond in turn, and try to address what I see as your three concerns:

  1. There was a ton of stuff in that thread that crossed the political line. I let it go because it's an issue where politics intersects sports, but the big rule on this site is "no politics". If you want to discuss politics, there are a ton of places where that's encouraged; this Michigan sports blog is not one of them. Once it deviated from the relevant portions, the thread got pulled, as it always will.
  2. Go ahead and be as critical of a player, recruit, coach, ballboy, or cheerleader as you want. If it crosses into personal territory (i.e. "Denard threw a shitty pass" v. "Fuck Denard, he's not a Michigan Man for losing to ND") it's going to have consequences. We do not tolerate personal attacks here.
  3. I'd look into that statement before making any more complaints. Both of those issues got play on the board, front page and from the official Twitter account to some extent.


February 12th, 2013 at 1:28 AM ^

To be honest, I just think it would cause more controversy. Again, I won't dismiss the possibility that I'm wrong here, but I think it would just serve to cause a bigger problem down the line, especially after 200 comments that encompass every perspective imaginable. Any positions on "should these elementary/middle/high schools keep the mascots they currently have" should be fairly obvious to anyone willing to consider the issue, and also enters territory this blog just isn't designed to handle.

I have a lot of respect for you, UMxWolverines, but I think that particular choice would be wrong. You're welcome to bring it up in the mod action sticky or email Brian with any concerns you have about the site's moderation to find an answer above my paygrade.

Miss Bolivia

February 11th, 2013 at 11:32 PM ^

What happened was, I was trying to use it as my avatar pic but it wouldn't let me upload the pic or any pic. So I thought I would use it at the bottom but I didnt know it was gonna be so huge. As for the pic itself I thought she was gorgeous and she obviously has fake breast but they are covered for the most part. I apologize for that and I didnt mean to piss anyone off.


February 11th, 2013 at 11:00 PM ^

In a lot of ways college football is beginning to resemble that 30 for 30 film that features sMU. You have big time schools promising the world and regularly breaking rules to land top notch talent. I'm sure most programs are guilty of this and it's only going to get worse for everyone involved. I wish they would do away with the star system and I also wish programs with a checkered past would be on a watch list where every move they made for a period of time would be scrutinized under a microscope. I love this game but its becoming unrelenting to a degree. The fact that every school is not on a level playing field when it comes to admissions requirements really is completely unfair. I understand we are a prestigious academic institution and finishing in the top ten in recruiting every year is a great accomplishment considering the circumstances. Schools like Bama, and ohio seem to have an edge on us based on the fact that they can essentially recruit a rock if they wanted to.

Is this really as unfair as I am making it out to be? I'm unsure if there are general requirements or not. Thanks in advance


February 11th, 2013 at 11:10 PM ^

We as fans are part of the problem. It could even be argued that fans are the root of all of the issues with college football. We follow the recruiting, we buy the merchandise, we buy the tickets, we pay for the cable subscriptions, and we hype this sport beyond any level as it has seen before. Granted we are not the only part of this problem as everyone involved shares the blame. This is not the first time it has been said but college football is just a money grab and until that culture is changed we will continue to see these problems arise.

I honestly don't see college football ever taking a step back and therefore I think people are right in the idea that college football eventually may turn into a depressing 30 for 30 story.


February 11th, 2013 at 11:45 PM ^

I completely agree about the fans. There are too many fans out there that view college football as life and death, and have no perspective whatsoever. I've seen fans hammer recruits on Facebook and twitter bc they chose a rival school, transferred, or got in trouble. These kids are exactly that, kids. I don't think I'm too far fetched in saying that I think some fans have attracted and conversely turned off a kid for particular schools. I'm absurdly positive that $ is being offered to these kids by many different outlets. It's sad, but you're right.. It's only going to get worse and I don't know if they can put a stop to it at this point it may be too far gone.


February 12th, 2013 at 1:48 PM ^

Root explanation for childs being victim to a molester at Penn State:  The football kind, JoePa, and his cronies in the administration were so beloved and empowered by football fans, that it got into their head that the success of the football program was more important than childen being raped.  If JoePa had just been hired, it would have been totally different.  But everywhere he went for 30 years, people were saying, Joe you're great, Joe you're the best, we're the best, we're above and better... Grand Experiment etc.... the fans so bought into that, and the administration and JoePa so got drunk on it, it empowered those guys to act (or, not act) the way they did.

Fans largely don't care about the wrestling or bowling teams like that.  So their coaches don't have power.  It's not always that easy of an equation, but its close.

Fan = $$$, right.  And $$$ + ??? = Profit!


February 12th, 2013 at 6:11 AM ^

Coincidence that the conference that doesn't oversign also wants limits on how much a coach can harrass a player? I think not. Score 1 for the good guys trying to do the right thing.