• 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
edbuck51 said:
IMO, this whole thread is trying to make Carroll look like something he is not, which I believe comes from the Davis situation.
Click to expand...
I think the first few posts were sour grapes regarding PC, but then the discussion turned into general thoughts about silent verbals. I think that was Mililani's point.

What's unethical about it ?
Click to expand...
I was referring to the suggestion that a coach would actually encourage silent verbals to mislead other recruits. I would find that unethical and doubt than any coach would use that strategy.
 
Upvote 0
What's "good" about a silent verbal?

I'm hard pressed to find anything laudable about a silent verbal -- on either end, from the coach or the recruit.

If the coach is asking the recruit to keep it quiet, he's obviously trying to manipulate someone somewhere. If the player insists on it, he wants to take his visits and his commitment means about as much as a politician's election year promise -- "Read ...My ...Lips".

It's a BS way of doing business from any perspective. I don't now whether Petey does it, or if JT does it for that matter. I just know that when 45-year olds and 17-year olds conspire to keep something quiet, it's probably not something either should be proud of.

A great man once said "Let your Yes mean Yes, and your No mean No. Anything else is from the devil."
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
What's "good" about a silent verbal?
Click to expand...

I split this thread off of the Ashley thread. I thought the discussion about silents was warranted, just not on the Ashley thread. I couldn't really come up with a good title and obviously the one I decided on wasn't "good"

I'll change the title.
 
Upvote 0
I just know that when 45-year olds and 17-year olds conspire to keep something quiet, it's probably not something either should be proud of.
Click to expand...

Does this include 45 year old men and 17 (Let's say 18 for arguments sake) teenage pretties?
 
Upvote 0
Bucknutty: I wasn't even thinking about your title. I was just considering the larger question. So many were trying to say why it might not be "wrong", so I took the view of "How can it possibly be 'good'?"

Akak: Sure does! Kids is kids and grown ups is grown ups. You can't expect a kid to act like a grown up and it's embarrassing to see grown ups act like kids.
 
Upvote 0
What would be really bad is if a coach got a commitment form a player then encouraged them to give a verbal to a rival and renege on signing day. Maybe I should delete this post before Pete gets a hold of it.
 
Upvote 0
exhawg said:
What would be really bad is if a coach got a commitment form a player then encouraged them to give a verbal to a rival and renege on signing day. Maybe I should delete this post before Pete gets a hold of it.
Click to expand...

If that were to happen and it was proved, there would be some serious sanctions handed out by the NCAA...
 
Upvote 0
Oh8ch said:
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.
Click to expand...
Here's the part I don't get. Let's say you're an 18-year-old HS senior, and you're a 5* RB.

You let the coaches at one school know that you're going to give them your commitment. The head coach asks you to keep it quiet.

Should you keep it quiet? You know that this fictional coach is asking you to keep it quiet so he can recruit 1 or 2 other highly rated RBs to compete against you for playing time.

So, you can keep quiet and possibly end up in a logjam at your position, fighting for playing time, or you can announce your commitment, and maybe there's less competition at RB for you.

Less competition = a higher chance you'll be playing on Saturdays = a higher chance you'll get a chance to play on Sundays later.

So what does the recruit get for agreeing to be a "silent verbal"? Why would a recruit do this?

The only answer I can think of is that the recruit is doing it so that he can play the "hat game" on NLOI day...and that's thinking really short-term.
 
Upvote 0
One thing I noticed reading the comments from RS's mom as realyed on the Ozone, is that these big time recruits are getting the sh*t bugged out of them by recruiters. Making your commitment public would probably get you a little peace and quiet, which sounds like a good trade-off for the stupid hat game on NLOID. So, unless you like all the attention, a 'silent verbal' sounds pretty dumb.
 
Upvote 0
"One thing I noticed reading the comments from RS's mom as realyed on the Ozone, is that these big time recruits are getting the sh*t bugged out of them by recruiters."

I wonder who bugs the shit out of them more, recruitors, or media types who are satisfying fans who are bugging the sh*t out of them to tell them when so-and-so is going to commit?
 
Upvote 0
As others have mentioned, a "silent verbal" is an intent to deceive another recruit, and is unethical; so is telling a recruit that he is "my number one guy", that he'll play a certain position, that he'll start as a freshman, etc. Unfortunately, it's all legal, and would be nearly impossible to enforce even if it were illegal.

With so many kids committing early these days, maybe the NCAA should have an early signing period for football (say August 1st); it seems to work for basketball, and would eliminate a lot of recruiting crap (silent verbals, official visit shenanigans, last minute payola, signing day switcheroos, etc.).
 
Upvote 0
"One thing I noticed reading the comments from RS's mom as realyed on the Ozone, is that these big time recruits are getting the sh*t bugged out of them by recruiters."

This, I can tell you is absolutely true. A long time ago, when I was 17, I was dating a girl who was being recruited to run track for ND, Stanford, etc. She would get calls from coaches all hours of the day and night. Let me reiterate, this was for WOMEN'S TRACK! I would assume you could multiply the amount of phone calls by 1000 for a football stud.

"I wonder who bugs the shit out of them more, recruitors, or media types who are satisfying fans who are bugging the sh*t out of them to tell them when so-and-so is going to commit?"

That's a very good question, and sadly, I would assume the media are the worst offenders. How many recruiting "gurus" are there these days?
 
Upvote 0
'Silent' verbals

Just read the transcript of the BN chat w/ Bill Conley. Someone asked whether 'silent verbals' existed, where a recruit lets a program know he'll be commit, but won't go public in order to take advantage of other visits/hype. He replied along the lines of 'it happens a lot' or 'more than you'd think' or something like that.

Anyway, I thought that was interesting.
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top