Miechelle Willis, an associate AD for tOSU is quoted near the end. And sorry, but so are LLLoyd and Lemming.
dailynorthwestern
Recruiting Tech-niques
Technological advances have changed recruiting, but some aren't sure if that's a good thing
by Patrick Dorsey
November 04, 2005
<!-- end bylineDateBox -->
Devin Ross felt a buzzing in his pocket.
His cell phone — on vibrate — was telling him someone wanted to chat on that summer afternoon.
But when he looked at the screen, he saw that it wasn’t one of his buddies, nor was it a family member.
It was a text message, from an out-of-state sender, bearing two words.
“Call me.”
The sender: One of the many college coaches hot on the trail of Ross, a cornerback from Rancho Cucamonga High School in Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., who is listed among the top 100 high school seniors by multiple Internet recruiting services.
So Ross called the coach.
Text messages like these are frequent in today’s football recruiting process. With restrictions in place limiting the time and frequency of phone calls, coaches often send text messages — a loophole in the system.
Proliferation of text messaging isn’t the only example of technological advances bleeding into football recruiting. Recent developments — from cellular phones to e-mail to Web sites — have changed the face of recruiting, making players more accessible to coaches and the public.
“If there’s a revolution anywhere in football,” Michigan coach Lloyd Carr said, “I think it’s in the technology area.”
Coaches like Carr are specifically allowed to contact recruits by nearly any means other than telephone.
Coaches and the public also have access to Internet recruiting databases such as Rivals.com and Scout.com, which rate prospects on a five-star system. These Internet sites include nearly every college prospect in the country and frequently call players, attempting to break the news of a prospect’s commitment.
Northwestern linebackers coach and recruiting coordinator Pat Fitzgerald said a lot of the recruiting process is the same as it’s been in recent years — with letters, conversations with high school coaches and visits occupying most of his time.
Still, he said, technology has made recruiting faster and more informed, with players more accessible and more information available.
“I think it’s positive as long as the people that don’t have restrictions on them don’t take advantage of the kids,” he said. “Because ultimately it’s up to them winning, having a successful (senior) year, and then them getting to a school they feel is best for them and their family.”
TEXT ME
In April, the NCAA approved bylaw 13.4.1.2, which allows unlimited text messaging of players by coaches.
The approval of this rule, which went into effect in August, was based on the fact that e-mails, faxes and pages already were specifically allowed by the NCAA.
This rule did not lead to an immediate increase in text messaging, because it was not outlawed by the NCAA before April.
Instead the rule was put into place to specifically allow a form of communication that had been used increasingly during the past several years, as coaches scrambled to find any way to sell their school to players.
“The ability to communicate with people that you’re interested in … that’s still the fundamental issue of trying to do the best job of communicating who you are and what you’re all about,” Carr said. “So all these other ways of being able to communicate become vital to the recruiting process.”
These means are necessary to coaches with limits on telephone calls and official school visits.
Coaches aren’t allowed to call a prospect before Sept. 1 of the player’s senior year in high school, and after this date they are restricted to one call per week.
Their way around this is sending text messages like the ones Ross constantly received before the no-call date. Coaches often instruct players to call them, because NCAA rules allow prospects to contact schools by phone with no restriction.
Other text messages include information about a specific school’s football program, while some coaches send messages simply to check up on a prospect.
“As a recruiting coach you really like it, because you’re able to contact and communicate with them on a more personal basis, even more so than e-mail,” Fitzgerald said. “(But) it’s a rule that I can’t believe the NCAA passed, because it doesn’t protect the kids in any way. It makes them easily accessible.”
While the inboxes of highly recruited players like Ross often fill quickly, not all prospects receive loads of text messages from potential suiters.
Kicker Stefan Demos, an NU verbal commitment from Horizon High School in Scottsdale, Ariz., said he received some text messages from Notre Dame, but mostly received e-mails from other schools like NU.
Quarterback Andrew Brewer, an NU freshman from Tulsa, Okla., said only Tulsa sent texts, and freshman wide receiver Eric Peterman said he received none.
Brewer said he wasn’t bothered at all by the coaches’ ability to contact him at any time.
“If the coach has something he needs to talk to you about and he’s already made his call for the week, I think it’s a good idea to do that,” Brewer said.
‘THERE ARE NO SECRETS’
Years ago, Purdue coach Joe Tiller said, a school could recruit a talented player with little competition from its rivals, giving teams that did extensive research an advantage.
Now, with advances in technology and recruiting interest, “There are no secrets,” Tiller said.
These “secrets” started going away in the late 1970s, when numerous recruiting services, including Lemming’s Prep Football Weekly magazine, gained popularity. They turned into Internet recruiting databases like Rivals.com and Scout.com, which now dominate the recruiting landscape by giving information not only to coaches, but to the general public.
“Today if a young person is considering anybody, if you correspond with any recruit, the world knows about it,” Tiller said.
Rivals.com, founded in 1996, is a network of Web sites that covers everything from college basketball to Major League Baseball. But its specialty is college recruiting, especially football, which recruiting editor JC Shurburtt said it treats like ESPN treats its NFL draft coverage.
It employs a national editor and several regional editors, and most of its analysis is based on combine and camp numbers, as well as videos and in-person observation. Rivals.com, like many other sites, rates players on a five-star system and ranks them by position and overall. Its reporters also contact coaches and players to see which schools interest the players, and vice-versa.
Shurburtt said Rivals.com employs “professional reporters” and does not spread rumors. He also said the Web site only will report on a verbal commitment when Rivals.com is told by the player.
Despite Shurburtt’s assertions, several coaches said they don’t fully trust the information provided by Internet databases, which includes frequent reports on players and their feelings about certain schools.
“Way too much information gets out there on the Internet,” Tiller said. “And the reason I think that is oftentimes it’s false information.”
“It’s really amazing, maybe alarming, how many times you get off the phone after you talk to (a recruit) and you read on the Internet something exactly the opposite (of what the recruit said),” Minnesota coach Glen Mason said.
The subjectivity of these ratings also concerns some coaches.
Fitzgerald said NU purchases other recruiting services, using Internet databases as one of many sources for information.
“(Internet sites are) positive because it’s able to give us some information we might not have had without it,” Fitzgerald said. “(But) if you use it as the only source of information that you get, you’re going to … be chasing some things that don’t really exist.”
ABUSES
Though technology often benefits coaches and fans, some say it has turned recruiting into a powder keg of abuse.
Touted players like Ross, who has received scholarship offers from 22 colleges, often are exhausted by the constant contact.
“You’ve got to talk to a lot of people,” Ross said. “Sometimes you can get a little tired of it.”
Players also must deal with the viciously competitive recruiting Web sites.
When asked if he received calls from these sites, NU freshman wide receiver
Rasheed Ward quickly answered: “Yeah. All the time.”
Sometimes players get so flooded they refuse all interview requests, like Konrad Reuland, a top-100 tight end from Mission Viejo High School in Mission Viejo, Calif.
Lemming said all of these factors often lead to players committing to schools early so they can avert the attention.
Demos, who committed to NU before the season, is one of these players.
“It got extremely overwhelming,” Demos said. “That’s why I decided that I wanted to get it done before my senior season. Just so I could enjoy my season and not have to worry about it.”
Shurburtt said he and Rivals.com do everything they can to keep their reporters from calling players too often.
“There’s no cavalier calling of kids that we know (of),” Shurburtt said. “And if we do find out that that’s happening, we take appropriate action.”
Still, Shurburtt said his reporters must police themselves, and that there is no set limit on calls to prospects.
In addition to the impact on players, Lemming said some schools could be hurt by technological advances.
Because a player is so flooded with calls and text messages, only the larger, more reputable schools will receive replies to their messages, giving them an unfair advantage.
While there is no chance of NCAA restrictions of independent recruiting Web sites, the text messaging rule could be revisited, said Miechelle Willis, Ohio State associate athletic director and member of the NCAA Division I Management Council.
Willis said she doesn’t expect this to happen in the near future.
“(E-mails and text messages) are viewed as non-invasive,” Willis said, “and students can choose to read them or not to read them.”
Willis added that the legislation met almost no opposition or discussion when it was proposed in April. She also said that in the Big Ten, at least, she has not met with “a swell of displeasure” related to the allowance of text messaging.
Still, Lemming said, something likely will be done before the abuses get out of hand and taint the recruiting process.
“Where there’s a way to get an advantage, there’s a way to get even more of an advantage,” Lemming said. “And that’s why almost all the rules have to be regulated in the NCAA when you’re dealing with kids making decisions.”
dailynorthwestern
Recruiting Tech-niques
Technological advances have changed recruiting, but some aren't sure if that's a good thing
by Patrick Dorsey
November 04, 2005
<!-- end bylineDateBox -->
Devin Ross felt a buzzing in his pocket.
His cell phone — on vibrate — was telling him someone wanted to chat on that summer afternoon.
But when he looked at the screen, he saw that it wasn’t one of his buddies, nor was it a family member.
It was a text message, from an out-of-state sender, bearing two words.
“Call me.”
The sender: One of the many college coaches hot on the trail of Ross, a cornerback from Rancho Cucamonga High School in Rancho Cucamonga, Calif., who is listed among the top 100 high school seniors by multiple Internet recruiting services.
So Ross called the coach.
Text messages like these are frequent in today’s football recruiting process. With restrictions in place limiting the time and frequency of phone calls, coaches often send text messages — a loophole in the system.
Proliferation of text messaging isn’t the only example of technological advances bleeding into football recruiting. Recent developments — from cellular phones to e-mail to Web sites — have changed the face of recruiting, making players more accessible to coaches and the public.
“If there’s a revolution anywhere in football,” Michigan coach Lloyd Carr said, “I think it’s in the technology area.”
Coaches like Carr are specifically allowed to contact recruits by nearly any means other than telephone.
Coaches and the public also have access to Internet recruiting databases such as Rivals.com and Scout.com, which rate prospects on a five-star system. These Internet sites include nearly every college prospect in the country and frequently call players, attempting to break the news of a prospect’s commitment.
Northwestern linebackers coach and recruiting coordinator Pat Fitzgerald said a lot of the recruiting process is the same as it’s been in recent years — with letters, conversations with high school coaches and visits occupying most of his time.
Still, he said, technology has made recruiting faster and more informed, with players more accessible and more information available.
“I think it’s positive as long as the people that don’t have restrictions on them don’t take advantage of the kids,” he said. “Because ultimately it’s up to them winning, having a successful (senior) year, and then them getting to a school they feel is best for them and their family.”
TEXT ME
In April, the NCAA approved bylaw 13.4.1.2, which allows unlimited text messaging of players by coaches.
The approval of this rule, which went into effect in August, was based on the fact that e-mails, faxes and pages already were specifically allowed by the NCAA.
This rule did not lead to an immediate increase in text messaging, because it was not outlawed by the NCAA before April.
Instead the rule was put into place to specifically allow a form of communication that had been used increasingly during the past several years, as coaches scrambled to find any way to sell their school to players.
“The ability to communicate with people that you’re interested in … that’s still the fundamental issue of trying to do the best job of communicating who you are and what you’re all about,” Carr said. “So all these other ways of being able to communicate become vital to the recruiting process.”
These means are necessary to coaches with limits on telephone calls and official school visits.
Coaches aren’t allowed to call a prospect before Sept. 1 of the player’s senior year in high school, and after this date they are restricted to one call per week.
Their way around this is sending text messages like the ones Ross constantly received before the no-call date. Coaches often instruct players to call them, because NCAA rules allow prospects to contact schools by phone with no restriction.
Other text messages include information about a specific school’s football program, while some coaches send messages simply to check up on a prospect.
“As a recruiting coach you really like it, because you’re able to contact and communicate with them on a more personal basis, even more so than e-mail,” Fitzgerald said. “(But) it’s a rule that I can’t believe the NCAA passed, because it doesn’t protect the kids in any way. It makes them easily accessible.”
While the inboxes of highly recruited players like Ross often fill quickly, not all prospects receive loads of text messages from potential suiters.
Kicker Stefan Demos, an NU verbal commitment from Horizon High School in Scottsdale, Ariz., said he received some text messages from Notre Dame, but mostly received e-mails from other schools like NU.
Quarterback Andrew Brewer, an NU freshman from Tulsa, Okla., said only Tulsa sent texts, and freshman wide receiver Eric Peterman said he received none.
Brewer said he wasn’t bothered at all by the coaches’ ability to contact him at any time.
“If the coach has something he needs to talk to you about and he’s already made his call for the week, I think it’s a good idea to do that,” Brewer said.
‘THERE ARE NO SECRETS’
Years ago, Purdue coach Joe Tiller said, a school could recruit a talented player with little competition from its rivals, giving teams that did extensive research an advantage.
Now, with advances in technology and recruiting interest, “There are no secrets,” Tiller said.
These “secrets” started going away in the late 1970s, when numerous recruiting services, including Lemming’s Prep Football Weekly magazine, gained popularity. They turned into Internet recruiting databases like Rivals.com and Scout.com, which now dominate the recruiting landscape by giving information not only to coaches, but to the general public.
“Today if a young person is considering anybody, if you correspond with any recruit, the world knows about it,” Tiller said.
Rivals.com, founded in 1996, is a network of Web sites that covers everything from college basketball to Major League Baseball. But its specialty is college recruiting, especially football, which recruiting editor JC Shurburtt said it treats like ESPN treats its NFL draft coverage.
It employs a national editor and several regional editors, and most of its analysis is based on combine and camp numbers, as well as videos and in-person observation. Rivals.com, like many other sites, rates players on a five-star system and ranks them by position and overall. Its reporters also contact coaches and players to see which schools interest the players, and vice-versa.
Shurburtt said Rivals.com employs “professional reporters” and does not spread rumors. He also said the Web site only will report on a verbal commitment when Rivals.com is told by the player.
Despite Shurburtt’s assertions, several coaches said they don’t fully trust the information provided by Internet databases, which includes frequent reports on players and their feelings about certain schools.
“Way too much information gets out there on the Internet,” Tiller said. “And the reason I think that is oftentimes it’s false information.”
“It’s really amazing, maybe alarming, how many times you get off the phone after you talk to (a recruit) and you read on the Internet something exactly the opposite (of what the recruit said),” Minnesota coach Glen Mason said.
The subjectivity of these ratings also concerns some coaches.
Fitzgerald said NU purchases other recruiting services, using Internet databases as one of many sources for information.
“(Internet sites are) positive because it’s able to give us some information we might not have had without it,” Fitzgerald said. “(But) if you use it as the only source of information that you get, you’re going to … be chasing some things that don’t really exist.”
ABUSES
Though technology often benefits coaches and fans, some say it has turned recruiting into a powder keg of abuse.
Touted players like Ross, who has received scholarship offers from 22 colleges, often are exhausted by the constant contact.
“You’ve got to talk to a lot of people,” Ross said. “Sometimes you can get a little tired of it.”
Players also must deal with the viciously competitive recruiting Web sites.
When asked if he received calls from these sites, NU freshman wide receiver
Rasheed Ward quickly answered: “Yeah. All the time.”
Sometimes players get so flooded they refuse all interview requests, like Konrad Reuland, a top-100 tight end from Mission Viejo High School in Mission Viejo, Calif.
Lemming said all of these factors often lead to players committing to schools early so they can avert the attention.
Demos, who committed to NU before the season, is one of these players.
“It got extremely overwhelming,” Demos said. “That’s why I decided that I wanted to get it done before my senior season. Just so I could enjoy my season and not have to worry about it.”
Shurburtt said he and Rivals.com do everything they can to keep their reporters from calling players too often.
“There’s no cavalier calling of kids that we know (of),” Shurburtt said. “And if we do find out that that’s happening, we take appropriate action.”
Still, Shurburtt said his reporters must police themselves, and that there is no set limit on calls to prospects.
In addition to the impact on players, Lemming said some schools could be hurt by technological advances.
Because a player is so flooded with calls and text messages, only the larger, more reputable schools will receive replies to their messages, giving them an unfair advantage.
While there is no chance of NCAA restrictions of independent recruiting Web sites, the text messaging rule could be revisited, said Miechelle Willis, Ohio State associate athletic director and member of the NCAA Division I Management Council.
Willis said she doesn’t expect this to happen in the near future.
“(E-mails and text messages) are viewed as non-invasive,” Willis said, “and students can choose to read them or not to read them.”
Willis added that the legislation met almost no opposition or discussion when it was proposed in April. She also said that in the Big Ten, at least, she has not met with “a swell of displeasure” related to the allowance of text messaging.
Still, Lemming said, something likely will be done before the abuses get out of hand and taint the recruiting process.
“Where there’s a way to get an advantage, there’s a way to get even more of an advantage,” Lemming said. “And that’s why almost all the rules have to be regulated in the NCAA when you’re dealing with kids making decisions.”
