• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Negative Recruiting Tactics and Silent Verbals (split then merged)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes

OSU Rob

Senior
Split Thread: Silent Verbals

Its well known that Slick Petey's strategy is to make sure that commits stay "silent" as long as possible so other schools waste their time recruiting them which prevents them from going after the actual "open" recruits. I hope the OSU coaches know if anything that is going on, b/c SC might want him to waste our time by taking the official visit and making it seem that he has serious interest.
 
The reason for the silent verbals in Pete's case isn't to encourage other schools to waste their time on recruits that are committed, it's to prevent other recruits from being scared off by top ranked guys already in the recruiting class at their position. For instance, if Maurice Wells knew that Marlon Lucky was already committed to USC he might not look at them as hard.
 
Upvote 0
it's to prevent other recruits from being scared off by top ranked guys already in the recruiting class at their position. For instance, if Maurice Wells knew that Marlon Lucky was already committed to USC he might not look at them as hard.

Silent verbals are pure bullshit and should be a violation of NCAA rules. A prospective recruit should know who else is committed at a school for just the reason sighted above. It's purposely deceptive.
 
Upvote 0
It is no doubt a sleazy way to approach recruiting, but to make it a violation would be difficult. It is one of those loopholes that can't be pulled tight, since verbals don't really mean much. Sleazy Petey is all about the silent but deadly verbalage.
 
Upvote 0
jrandosu said:
It is no doubt a sleazy way to approach recruiting, but to make it a violation would be difficult. It is one of those loopholes that can't be pulled tight, since verbals don't really mean much. Sleazy Petey is all about the silent but deadly verbalage.
Click to expand...
Is there actually proof that Pete C asks recruits to remain "silent" so that he can disguise potential depth charts? I know some of their own fans claim that he does that, but I always thought they were just being ignorant. I can not envision a coach, especially high profile coach like Pete, being that unethical. Maybe I am naive.
 
Upvote 0
What's unethical about it ? Nothing's final until Feb. Until you sign your loi you are free to say or not say whatever you want to whomever you want. If a recruit knew in June where he was going but didn't announce it until Feb., is that unethical ? If a kid tells Pete "Just between you and me I'm coming to SC" and Pete says " lets keep it between us until signing day " is it really anybody else's business ?
 
Upvote 0
crazybuckeye said:
What's unethical about it ? Nothing's final until Feb. Until you sign your loi you are free to say or not say whatever you want to whomever you want. If a recruit knew in June where he was going but didn't announce it until Feb., is that unethical ? If a kid tells Pete "Just between you and me I'm coming to SC" and Pete says " lets keep it between us until signing day " is it really anybody else's business ?
Click to expand...

First, the vast majority of verbal commits do indeed sign to where they commit...the switcheroo is quite rare, thus any verbal commitment is a solid indicator of what will materialize. So, the "nothing is final until NLOID" argument doesn't hold a whole lot of water. There's also a big difference between being able to "say whatever you want to whomever you want" and being ethical. Do you think it was ethical when Richard Washington pulled the NLOID switch job on us last year? Didn't think so. As far as whose business it is, I think it is indeed everyone's business if a kid commits to take up a scholarship position at a school of which many other prospects are considering. Other prospects have a right to know whether or not a position is available at a school they're considering.
 
Upvote 0
What's unethical about it
Click to expand...

If a coach and player are having a discussion about how to handle a commitment with the intent to deceive other recruits (read teenagers) I would call that unethical.

That said, it can be a two edged sword. I think last season OSU had strong indications that a certain running back was coming here and may have backed off of other recruits as a result. He went in another direction and we were left scrambling.
 
Upvote 0
Sanchez verbaled two weeks ago. Last year Byers verbaled real early, as did many others. I think some folks are still upset that Fred Davis snubbed us. Pete Carroll didn't do anything unethical to get Fred there, Davis made that decision. Just because there is some jealousy regarding USC's success in recruiting last year, that is no reason to degrade Pete Carroll.
 
Upvote 0
edbuck51 said:
Sanchez verbaled two weeks ago. Last year Byers verbaled real early, as did many others. I think some folks are still upset that Fred Davis snubbed us. Pete Carroll didn't do anything unethical to get Fred there, Davis made that decision. Just because there is some jealousy regarding USC's success in recruiting last year, that is no reason to degrade Pete Carroll.
Click to expand...

What do Sanchez, Byers, and Davis have to do with silent verbals? Sanchez and Byers comitted publicly, and IIRC Davis did, too. We're talking about intentionally "hiding" commitments, not the fact that Davis or anyone else picked USC over us.
 
Upvote 0
My point was that these guys did not "remain silent as long as possible" per Petey's well know strategy. Making those remarks about Carroll is ridiculous. Recruiting the top rated class is hard enough, let alone convincing all these guys to come to your school, but then to jerk all the other top programs around until signing day.

" We're talking about intentionally "hiding" commitments, not the fact that Davis or anyone else picked USC over us."

IMO, this whole thread is trying to make Carroll look like something he is not, which I believe comes from the Davis situation.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Amen edbuck-I smell the stench of bucknuts drifting over. I have never heard anything negative about Carroll in terms of recruiting-besides the fact that he signed Fred Davis. Unless you are talking about the SEC, I think a lot of recruiting gripes are just sour grapes. I think a lot of the silent verbal stuff is BS- a college coach would be an idiot to actually trust an 18 year old kid w/ a "silent" verbal.
 
Upvote 0
Fact is that by rule the coach must remain silent on ALL verbals. It is the kid who has to decide what he is going to tell the 'public'.

Since no kid has ever said Carrol encouraged them to remain silent there is no basis to suggest he has. However, I have little doubt that form time coaches do encourage a player to keep it mum. I find that unethical.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top