Discussion about an Early Signing Period

[OSUBucks22]

Could an early signing period negate negative recruiting?

I know it's probably a pipe-dream, but does anyone else believe that this would be good for college football? Recruiting in football has gotten out of control... No one seems to be honest anymore, and there is way too much time for a staff to have to keep a kid's interest before they can sign on the dotted line...
I think this is one thing that could ease the craziness of recruiting... It could help cure some of the negative recruiting that goes on, and cut down on the circus and media feeding frenzy that it has become... The warm-weather schools have a decided advantage over the colder schools come December and January, and they always play that up... That could (for the most part) be eliminated with an early signing period IMO... I think it would make things easier on the staffs as well., since they could bank on a certain number of kids halfway through, effectively splitting up the recruiting season...
What do you guys think?

 

[crazybuckfan40]

It is a good point, but honestly most of the recruits that verbal early are the ones that stick to them. The guys that go all the way with the period and make it crazy are the ones that wait till the end anyway.

 

[OSUBucks22]

It is a good point, but honestly most of the recruits that verbal early are the ones that stick to them. The guys that go all the way with the period and make it crazy are the ones that wait till the end anyway.

True, but with the trend of "silent verbals" nowadays, some of those guys would be well served with an early signing period IMO... I know that most "silents" occur because a recruit wants to take other visits, but I'd be willing to bet that some would sign on early if they had the chance...

 

[buckiprof]

I almost posted this exact same thought in the Barksdale thread less than 5 minutes ago!

I have wondered for a few years now why football doesn't have an early signing period like basketball does.

Now we know that the NCAA always has the best interest of the kid in mind. (Isn't that one of the main reasons why a playoff isn't feasible?) As such, it seems logical that having an early signing period would be in the best interest of the kids. Maybe they wouldn't be subjected to the media circus quite as much, which has to be good for the kids. Let them make their decision, make it official, and then move on and enjoy the rest of their high school career.

But you are correct. It is a pipe dream. And there are many people (recruiting services) who make big bucks off of the current system who like it just the way it is.

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

Actually, I think the current system gives both the coaches and players for flexibility and freedom. Implementing an early signing day would force coaches to make more imcomplete evaluations much sooner, and thus decrease the number of hiding gems that they might undercover late in the game. Also, any decisions that recruits make are of their own volition. If a kid signs too soon and discovers that the coach is no longer there at the end of the season, what happens to the kid?

Edit: But to answer the original question, as long as there are negative recruiters out there, you can't completely negate negative recruiting. And as cbf stated, those who are susceptible to negative recruiting are usually the ones who verbal late in the game anyway.

 

[OSUBucks22]

Actually, I think the current system gives both the coaches and players for flexibility and freedom. Implementing an early signing day would force coaches to make more imcomplete evaluations much sooner, and thus decrease the number of hiding gems that they might undercover late in the game. Also, any decisions that recruits make are of their own volition. If a kid signs too soon and discovers that the coach is no longer there at the end of the season, what happens to the kid?

Schools usually grant exceptions for athletes under those circumstances, allowing them to sign with other schools with no penalty...

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

Schools usually grant exceptions for athletes under those circumstances, allowing them to sign with other schools with no penalty...

That's true, but what if a kid recants for other reasons, such as discovering that the culture of the program isn't really for him? Or maybe if the depth chart is a much bigger concern than anticipated? Or maybe if something happens in the family that demands the kid to stay choser to home? Kids who verbal early are the ones who generally stick it out anyway, especially instate kids. There's very little we can do about OOS prospects and negative recruiting that goes on except being exceptional recruiters.

 

[OSUBucks22]

That's true, but what if a kid recants for other reasons, such as discovering that the culture of the program isn't really for him? Or maybe if the depth chart is a much bigger concern than anticipated? Or maybe if something happens in the family that demands the kid to stay choser to home? Kids who verbal early are the ones who generally stick it out anyway, especially instate kids. There's very little we can do about OOS prospects and negative recruiting that goes on except being exceptional recruiters.

I see what you are saying, but that stuff can happen just as easily after the first week of February as well...

 

[bukIpower]

Well I guess if you put it that way then yeah I do believe we should move the date closer to the summer or something. Before the football season would be even nicer. That way the northern states do have a chance to compete with the Southern Schools. (I never thought of it that way).

On the other hand though I don't really care... I mean we lose out every year to atleast 2-4 five star players in the end, and it's becoming a trend which sucks. However I dont' question Tressel because all the guy does is find kids who fit the system and kids who know what they want in a school. I'd take a kid like Pitcock who wanted to be a buckeye over a kid who gets a kick out of spreading rumors.

On a personal rant and this might not be aloud but just delete my response if this crosses the line.. Its a shame what these kids do in the process these days. With all the gimmicks, the changing of the hats and jerseys, the spreading rumors on purpose to create drama around your committment is ignorant and plane stupid. Which is why I don't really care if we lose out on martin, davis,mccoy, Jarrett, and especially barksdale. If they don't want to be buckeyes then good luck at your schools, and we'll find someone to fill your slot.

I mean don't these kids have their schools they root for when they're young?? I couldn't imagine having an offer from Ohio State and turning it down?? Which is why I'm always happy with the kids we get because they're kids who WANT to be BUCKEYES... not kids who want to be tailored to on their visits and treated like P-diddy or some other rock star. They're still kids, who haven't proved themselves at the college level so why treat them like stars? Which is why I think Zook, and Carrol are poor examples when it comes to recruiting. Sure Tressel should probably be more "hip" when it comes to visiting players and the sort, but I'd rather him be himself and sell our school, the tradition, the stadium, and how to become a better person. Than some lame sales job on how they could be impact players if they just sign... I never really care who our committments are until they sign Feb. 8th.... END RANTS... GO BUCKS

 

[Deety]

Not sure... Would kids then feel such pressure to commit early (possibly to ensure they have a spot) that they don't adequately explore their options or let their senior season improve their offers?

I have concerns about throwing these kids into the recruiting process as it is right now. They have to learn on the fly, not always with great advisors, and as a result some of these recruitments are, well, less than graceful, and sometimes bad decisions are made. It would be nice to shorten the window of time they spend under intense media scrutiny, but I'm not sure moving that window back, when they are even less prepared and months less mature (time flies in HS) would be wise.

 

[OSUBucks22]

Not sure... Would kids then feel such pressure to commit early (possibly to ensure they have a spot) that they don't adequately explore their options or let their senior season improve their offers?

I have concerns about throwing these kids into the recruiting process as it is right now. They have to learn on the fly, not always with great advisors, and as a result some of these recruitments are, well, less than graceful, and sometimes bad decisions are made. It would be nice to shorten the window of time they spend under intense media scrutiny, but I'm not sure moving that window back, when they are even less prepared and months less mature (time flies in HS) would be wise.

Very good points Deety...

 

[WaitingforKickoff]

I see what you are saying, but that stuff can happen just as easily after the first week of February as well...

True. Another point that we need to keep in mind as well is that a lot of offers are contingent upon the kids making the grades. That could play into the hands of schools with less stringent academic standards...

 

[OSUBucks22]

True. Another point that we need to keep in mind as well is that a lot of offers are contingent upon the kids making the grades. That could play into the hands of schools with less stringent academic standards...

This is true... But those kids could still be late signees... They usually have to be anyways if they want to get their stuff in line...

 

[808 Buck]

This is true... But those kids could still be late signees... They usually have to be anyways if they want to get their stuff in line...

Or, how about this? You have to be a qualifier to sign during the early period. For the record, I am in favor of an early signing period, with the stipulation that if the coach leaves, voluntarily or fired, the LOI is rescinded with no penalty to the student-athlete. Of course, this means that the recruiting "services" will increase their rates to reflect their bonus coverage of the early signing period.

 

[OSUBucks22]

Or, how about this? You have to be a qualifier to sign during the early period. For the record, I am in favor of an early signing period, with the stipulation that if the coach leaves, voluntarily or fired, the LOI is rescinded with no penalty to the student-athlete. Of course, this means that the recruiting "services" will increase their rates to reflect their bonus coverage of the early signing period.

Sounds very reasonable to me...