Early signing period
- Thread starter BigBlueManSouthCentralKY
- Start date
A summer signing period would be best for programs like ours, doing their legwork and trying to catch up. Until we actually get into New Years weekend bowl games, our recruiting advantages will be most appealing during the summer. Naturally, losing games during the conference schedule erodes our recruiting pull and tests or weakens our coaches' relationships with some of our commits. The big programs will always be against an early signing period because they use their New Years weekend bowl appearance as a talking point to flip recruits from other schools in January. Different points of view. If-when Stoops starts winning 8-9 games, we may come to look at this differently.
Won't change anything with the highly recruited kids, and likely not many of the mid level 4* and higher 3* guys. These kids love the attention plus they have all the power, once they sign the attention is on someone else and they have zero power.
Teams that are playing in bowls will be penalized, either get ready for the bowl or recruit at Christmas time. How anxious do you think kids are going to be to sign early with a team who isn't getting ready for a bowl? Waste of time and resources
I would like to see an August signing period for those kids that know where they want to go and want to sign and not be hassled during their senior season. A lot of kids would sign because they would be afraid that they would lose their spot if they didn't sign and then wouldn't get to go to their first choice.
It is true that the very highest rated kids might not have to sign but they might consider signing if they though that they might lose their spot. The big boys usually have more than one player of similar ability and they will take the one that is willing to sign early. A bird in hand is better than a bird in the bush. I think even some five stars and high four stars would sign early. It is true that there is some that just love playing the game and think they are just so great that they can go where they want regardless but some might be fooled. If I am a coach Like I said I take the bird in hand if he is similar in ability.
It is true that the very highest rated kids might not have to sign but they might consider signing if they though that they might lose their spot. The big boys usually have more than one player of similar ability and they will take the one that is willing to sign early. A bird in hand is better than a bird in the bush. I think even some five stars and high four stars would sign early. It is true that there is some that just love playing the game and think they are just so great that they can go where they want regardless but some might be fooled. If I am a coach Like I said I take the bird in hand if he is similar in ability.
Like you said, the kids who will sign early are the kids who are afraid of not having a spot on the traditional signing day. Is that who you really want to be making up your team? The kids who are entering in Jan. will certainly sign early and there will be lots of 5* and high 4* doing that. But the kids who love to commit at the all star games, want to wait till signing day to announce will far outnumber the highly regarded kids who sign in Dec. The vast majority will be guys like you say are the ones who are afraid of losing their spots if they don't. Dec is the worst possible time for the coaches of bowl teams, which I know UK wants to be come Dec. Coaches have their plates full enough, in August they are preparing for the season, all summer they are holding camps, handing out offers for the next couple of years and mid to late spring they have spring practice. When something has worked well for decades, trying to improve it usually ends up being a mess and this has the makings of that.
I know UK was hurt by kids flipping, UGA had nine flip, Carolina had a large number, so did Bama, so to say its only affecting teams trying to build is not true. Everyone fill the spot, many times with kids better than the one who left. One of the highest kids on our board is going to announce signing day, but is, or may already have told the coaches where he is going. I don't care if he signs in March as long as it is with us and not UT. Heck we got one for 15 who didn't sign at all, but enrolled last week, thats the one I really don't want to get popular.
I don't think the coaches are dufuses. I actually think the coaches are smart enough to send out LOI's in December only to those that want to sign & whom they are sure they want regardless of what happens into Feb. Then the coaches can move on to the remaining slots. If UK thinks it can do better later, they won't send out the LOI. I mean many offers are conditional, right?
Grumpy Lets get down to the truth of the situation. The schools like your University of Georgia want to keep the option of stealing players from teams lower on the totem pole at the last minute when that prized recruit they thought was going to sign with them decides to go to Alabama, Auburn, LSU, or UT instead. Never mind that said player has been committed to said lesser team for months and they are counting on him coming and likely have turned down other players to give him a spot. He then flips at the last minute and leaves said lesser team holding the bag like some kid in a snipe hunt.
I say the early signing period gives coaches a good idea where they really stand with recruits, they will be better able to identify those possible last minute flippers, and plan a strategy for if they flip.
I say if a committed kid doesn't sign with you in the early period you better not be counting on him as a commit that isn't likely to flip. If I was a coach I would be trying hard to recruit over him and drop him.
There has never been an early signing period for football, so we can't be sure what the outcome would be. If they establish an early signing period now, I think we have to see how it works out over the next couple of years. You might be right, but I'm not as sure as you about certainty of what you say here. One other thing. While you are exactly right that ranked programs, like Georgia and Alabama, like to swoop in during January and flip kids who committed somewhere else, this is having more of a negative impact on a Kentucky now than it might have several years from now. If Stoops is successful, if Kentucky makes it to some New Years weekend bowls, we might look at this issue differently several years from now.
August would be a silly time to have an early signing period I actually like December a lot. In August you'd have very few guys willing to sign that early so what is the point of having one at all? The only guys that would sign that early would be those that were very unlikely to flip in the first place.
December is late enough that you could pretty well get every committed player to sign. If they aren't willing to sign at that point then you've probably uncovered their intention of fishing for bigger offers late and you could spend the last two months recruiting their potential replacement. December is also early enough that all of the highly rated guys that hold out til near signing day could make their choice and programs like ours would be protected from poaching. Stoops has said that December would be the ideal time for the early signing period and I agree
December is late enough that you could pretty well get every committed player to sign. If they aren't willing to sign at that point then you've probably uncovered their intention of fishing for bigger offers late and you could spend the last two months recruiting their potential replacement. December is also early enough that all of the highly rated guys that hold out til near signing day could make their choice and programs like ours would be protected from poaching. Stoops has said that December would be the ideal time for the early signing period and I agree
Exactly why August isn't silly. You'd find out where you truly stand - EARLY.
Take the 2016 class. I don't think there's a current commit UK thinks they would ever replace; i.e., retract their offer to take someone better. If that's close to true, wouldn't you & the coaches like to know for certain in two months which of those commits mean what they've already said vs. using UK as a holding/landing spot? And visa versa if UK didn't tender them a LOI? Both sides would learn the true situation & have time to react. But JMO.
Last edited:
Actually there was an early signing period for football years ago, the '60s I think. But it was conference only, players could sign with other schools but not another SEC school if they signed early. That was a much different time of course. Schools signed maybe 40 guys or more a year then, then weeded out the culls. But there was an early SEC signing period at one time.
You think UGA doesn't lose guys? We lost 9 last season, I don't know if thats more or less than UK did, but its a pretty large number. Do you think that said player is going to sign early if he is waiting on a particular offer and thinks there is a chance it will come? I am sure there is the chance he could because he feels that other offer will be there in Feb. I am much more concerned and want my team's staff preparing for the bowl game in Dec than being out trying to recruit a kid who may or may not come to your school. I know coaches are well paid, but do you not think they deserve a day or two to spend time with their family at Christmas? Or had you rather all of them be like Petrino and not give a crap about their family? If you want to fill your roster with the few kids like Jackson and Young signing early alone with 6-10 MAC level kids who are thrilled to get a P5 offer thats fine, and if it happens I hope UGA doesn't sign a kid in December with offers from Georgia State and South Alabama and no one else and those are the ones who are far more likely going to sign in December than the kids you want to make your program. UK's troubles in football has much more to do with the football program being the stepchild to the basketball program over the last few decades than it has with not having an early signing period and you know that's true.
Totally agree. Have to see the details, but, IMO, a move from the second week of February to sometime in December really doesn't change a lot. A December date probably means they do not have to re-write other related rules regarding test scores, OVs, etc. IMO, an early date (late August or early September) and a late period (sometime in the spring) would offer enough "separation" to have a meaningful impact on the recruiting process.
Peace
August is way too early. How many kids will change their mind in 6 months? Then you have to deal with the negative PR that comes with holding a kid hostage contractually. It would be a bad deal all around. The number of coaches that get fired every year alone would create a ton of those situations. At least in December you know which coaches are gone or staying. 2 months is all you need to recruit a replacement if you need one and it serves the purpose of protecting schools from being poached. Recruits are far less likely to change their mind in the last two months because less changes with the situation they committed to. The season needs to play out before recruits should be expected to sign
Yeah, I'd say so. Really don't recall all the details about that early signing period in the '60s, not sure other conferences participated. Do know SEC schools were signing 40+/year and at some point the SEC decided to limit their scholarships. That lead to Ga Tech leaving and becoming an Independent. If I remember, Indies signed unlimited numbers. That was a Notre Dame thing. I have mixed feelings about an early signing period. Taking on face value, it could help UK but could hurt too.
Whether it is in August or December IMO the early signing period will be a good tool for coaches to discover if a recruit is serious about coming to your program or just using you for a landing spot if they do not get that offer from big time U or their home state University that they want. I am not saying that you don't still recruit those higher ranked players but you can do so knowing that you will need a good to great back up plan if they get that offer and flip on you at the last minute.
I am going to restate what I said in my earlier post. IMO if you have a player committed to you and he doesn't sign in the early period I do not see how a coaching staff can still consider that player a committed player.
I am going to restate what I said in my earlier post. IMO if you have a player committed to you and he doesn't sign in the early period I do not see how a coaching staff can still consider that player a committed player.
If he is committed to you and a player you really want but he doesn't sign early, what do you do next, keep recruiting him or cut him loose? For coaches to have any type of family life, regardless of what they make I think they deserve that, during the Christmas season December is the absolute worse possible time. Getting ready for bowl game, if you are in the playoffs getting ready for that and then being on the road trying to convince committments to sign early, trying to get commitments so they will sign early. If they want to have an early signing period, shut the season down for everyone in Oct. for 2 weeks and have it because that's basically what you are doing when you put it between the end of the season and bowl season with roughly 2/3s of the teams playing in bowls now.
I understand everyone isn't going to agree on things and minds won't change, but the NCAA has done nothing in the last 20 years that can convince me they can change signing day which has worked well for 40+ years to something that is better. Its an organization that has gone from a ruling body to a for profit organization. Look at the academic mess at NC, the party boats Miami had for recruits. So I just don't have faith in anything they can come up with working better than what we have now.
- Those that sign can't change their minds whether August, Feb, or the following August. It's a done deal. Besides, why sign early if you're unsure?
- LOL on the PR angle
- Fine to allow August signees to renege if coach leaves. Also, schools can allow signees loose on their own if the coach leaves.
- Funny that other sports have early signing periods before the season plays out.
I wouldn't expect any fan or coach of any big time football U to feel any different than the way you feel. Things are going just fine for them so why would they want to change anything. They recruit their high ranked players and when they fall short they just poach a few players that those lesser schools were counting on. IMO it is not a health situation for college football in general and pretty much assures that the same old teams remain on top year after year and get their extra practice sessions to build their programs because they are in bowls while the teams that needs those extra practice sessions the most sit at home.
Oh Heck now you have me on a rant about how I feel about Bowl teams getting all of that extra practice to build their teams when like I said the teams that need the most help just sit at home and fume. The rich then just continue to get richer and the poor just continue to get poorer. There is no parity in college football and it seems that the ones on top want to keep it that way.
You will pardon me if I wouldn't feel sorry for those poor coaches of those bowl teams that might not have as much time to recruit as those poor coaches that didn't get bowl practice for their teams.
Than again those coaches being able to bring in recruits to their bowl practices would seem to me to be enough compensation for any little less time they might be able too spend on the road recruiting.
Last edited:
There are arguements for both sides of the decision, Baylor and TCU were lower than UK has ever been, USC had a 21 game losing streak going not too far back.. Getting the right coach, which those programs obviously did, is much more important than an early signing peroid. TCU and Baylor had basically leftovers for their signees not 4 years ago, USC has had a couple of decent classes but for the most part bottom third in the SEC. But they all made a hire that turned them 180 degrees. Baylor and TCU could have won the championship but neither got a shot.
The issue of having kids in for bowl practice is if you play by the rules, and I believe UK does, is getting kids to campus. It isn't hard for UGA, there are 75-100 kids who will sign P5 scholarships that live within 45 min of Athens, UK doesn't have that. Unless its an official kids have to pay their own way, UGA had 20 kids come up for spring practice everyday, the location is much more of an advantage than the signing day, IMO. So many kids in the metro Atlanta area who will sign college scholarships, some schools have 20+ who sign at different levels. Almost all of them are o 5 or 6 teams that kids somehow end up moving into their district during the offseason. Thats an advantage that 4 signing days wouldn't overcome. I mentioned earlier that UK's poor football showing over the last few decades is because the people who control the purse strings were BB only fans. They wanted to keep football on the back burner. That appears to be changing and it will help UK in more ways that having better facilities. Kids want to feel important, it was hard for a football player to feel that way at UK 5 years ago.
So you think an early signing period will remove pressure from kids to flip? Do you not think that pressure can and will be applied before an early signing period? Its going to happen regardless of how many signing days there are. When UK makes a bowl this season, and I think they will, do you want the coaches preparing for the bowl game or trying to convince kids to sign? UK, because of lack of statewide population, will alway have a tough time recruiting at the level of some of the other SEC teams do. Alabama produces quite a bit of top level talent for its size, more than anyone per population, but like UK BB, they recruit with the help of tradition, it has nothing to do with an early signing period. IMO, thats an excuse.
An august signing period would help the players too. The kid that got cut loose by Petrino just a day before signing day would happen a lot less. And that does happen more than a few times each year. I agree that Dec is a bad time for it but just before fall camp starts would take a lot of pressure off the staff and kids.
Now I could get on board with one at the beginning of Aug, or end of July. NCAA could say no practice until after the signing day in Aug or July, and it would be almost exactly 6 months after the regular signing day. I don't think many of the high level kids would sign then because they want to officials and I really can't blame them, all expense trip cross country many times and getting treated like a king. But I still think its a shaky road, you won't be able to had out offers as quickly as you are now because what happens if you have 25 mid level guys who sign? Coaches will have to be very selective in who gets the paperwork and if you are committed and don't get paperwork, what does that mean?.
It's a done deal until a player wants out of it because you went 0-6 the second half of the season. What do you do then? PR is important if you haven't figured that out yet. How much of our current momentum is based on PR? It's not a laughing matter you are whatever the perception of you is in the recruiting world. 17 year old kids are going to change their minds it's not a matter of if but when. How many kids that age do you know that are steady in their beliefs and decisions? Very few at best.. If you believe for a second that an August signing period wouldn't create a ton of situations where schools were trying to hold kids hostage that changed their mind then you're thinking crazy. Look at the number of flips there are today and apply those numbers to that environment. It would be a situation that every school would struggle with. How many kids will sign when they get the impression that if they sign with you then they are stuck and you won't let them out?? It would get to a point that no one would sign in December and render the early signing period useless as I've said
Then why does the kid sign in the first place if he wants to leave when his team goes 0-6? Senseless hypothetical.
PR is important. But you've made no case for how it comes into play here.
You ignore the point that other sports have early signing periods before the SR season was played. Given that's the case, why isn't there an outcry over early signing in those sports because kids change their minds? Answer: It's rare & not he problem you're overhyping.
Get a grip.
It's a lot of pressure on a coach like Stoops that have schools like Alabama and Ohio State ready to pounce on a recruit the last minute that they know they can flip if they lose one of theirs to another big program. This at least wraps up a good portion of their recruiting a little early and as vital as a bowl game is recruiting is always the lifeblood of a program. September or August would be ideal but that takes a lot of kids off the table early for the big boys to prey on till the last minute. the more kids they have to go after till the end the better for the big programs to be able to steal a couple of recruits they wouldn't have gotten otherwise.
Basketball has an early signing period before the start of the kids senior year and it doesn't seem to be a problem. I do not seem to remember a lot of those basketball kids trying to get out of the LOI that they signed early.
I see football being just like basketball. The coaches get their early signees and then know what they need to concentrate on for the later signing period. They will not have to ride herd on those early signees so they can then concentrate on a much smaller bunch of players.
Players that know where they want to go will sign early with the team of their choice. Undecideds and those that just are overjoyed with their power and ability to push those powerful coaches around will continue to play their game.
I see football being just like basketball. The coaches get their early signees and then know what they need to concentrate on for the later signing period. They will not have to ride herd on those early signees so they can then concentrate on a much smaller bunch of players.
Players that know where they want to go will sign early with the team of their choice. Undecideds and those that just are overjoyed with their power and ability to push those powerful coaches around will continue to play their game.
PR comes into play when a kid wants out of his LOI and you try to hold onto the recruit. His family, his high school coach, and everyone else runs to the newspaper and social media blasting the school and the coaching staff. Then schools that you recruit at wants to keep you out of their school in the future. The trust that high school coaches and recruits have in the college staffs start to erode. I'm not saying it would be commonplace every year with every school but it's a problem that would exist
You can't compare football recruiting to other sports. Football recruiting (for whatever reason) is completely different than any other sport.
I've yet to hear a good argument from anyone why December wouldn't work. You'd get far more people signed in December (more commits and more people ready to completely shut down their recruitment) and protected from poaching. Say you did it in August but you only had 10 commits. Now 15 of them are fair game for poaching near NSD. You do it in December when you have 20 commits and your class is much more protected
I thought Grumpy laid it out perfectly. If you are preparing for a bowl game or the playoffs, you can't prepare properly and be trying to recruit full-bore at the same time. One or both would suffer.
If you're just trying to get signatures from guys that've already committed I'm not sure how much effort that would take from the staff. I don't know that any of us truly do. The staff never stops recruiting though. Even during bowl preparation staffs are working the phones and trying to get recruits on campus to visit bowl practices. It's not like the staff takes a few weeks off from recruiting before the bowl game. In the last two months before NSD every staff is going full-bore trying to close out their class.
Stoops has said on multiple occasions that he thinks December is ideal. A summer date would be ideal if you're Georgia and you want a shot at flipping anyone that committed to UK after August. Grumpy is one of my favorite posters but I question that logic
Grumpy it is BS that having bowl practice would put your team at a disadvantage in its recruiting. If any thing IMO your having bowl practice makes recruiting easier on your coaching staff because they can bring in the recruits on visits to watch your practice sessions
You can't bring them in for bowl practice unless its an official, any other way they have to pay their own way. There is a quite period during that time or was. When UK makes a bowl this season and Stoops has to take time away from prep ask him how much he likes doing that to entertain kids. Early signing period will do nothing, you think kids won't flip, it will just be a few weeks earlier because the same programs will come in making their pitch just before the early signing period that they have been making on the traditional signing days. How many people are on UK's football staff counting on the field coaches which there are 9 plus the support staff? Bama has almost 50, 37 of them do nothing but recruit, supposely, but all are former college coaches or coaches with ties to the super high school teams. My guess is UK probably has less than 20 total, pretty near the same as UGA.
But vote is coming up today or tomorrow and we will soon know, but when kids flip on you in Dec. don't be surprised. When something has worked pretty well for nearly 50 years there isn't much reason to change it and I expect this change will creat more problems than it solves. Its an excuse being used by teams who don't recruit as well as others, Baylor and TCU were awful programs, didn't recruit well and built their program with kids with zero P5 offers, and might have been the 2 best teams in the country last year, they were certainly in the top 5. In 2011, TCU's class was ranked 26 with 2 4*, Baylor was ranked 46 with 1 4*, 2012 TCU was 37 with 3 4* and Baylor was 45 with 3 4*. 2013 TCU was 30 and Baylor was 31 both with 2 4*, in 14 Baylor was 30 with 2 4* and TCU was 50 with 1 4* BS
Wait until UK plays their bowl game this year and see if Stoops had rather be preparing for the bowl or entertaining kids. But let's take a look at recruiting over the last 5 years, Bama has had the number 1 class every year, but they were hardly the best team this year, Baylor and TCU may have been the 2 best teams in the country last year but neither got a chance to prove it, but they both were certainly top 5. Look at their recruiting the last 5 years,
2011 TCU 26 2 4* Baylor 46 2 4*, ,
2012 TCU 37 3 4* Baylor 45 3 4*
2013 TCU 30 2 4* Baylor 31 3 4*
2014 TCU 50 2 4* Baylor 35 2 4*
2015 TCU 34 2 4* Baylor 50 3 4*
The last 3 years UK has out recruited them. They weren't complaining and making excuses about bigger programs stealing their kids, they got the right coaches in, signed the kids who wanted to go there and kicked butt. Don't give me they weren't in the SEC, TCU beat Ole Miss like a rented mule in the bowl game and Ole Miss kicked a field goal in the last few minutes to get the 0 off the board. Big programs stealing our commits is an excuse, make your program more attractive so they won't flip. UGA's BB program sucked pre early signing period and it still sucks after an early signing period come into effect, made zero difference, this won't either, kids considering flipping won't sign and the ones who are solid will. What will be the next change force the teams that recruit better to play with 10?
Similar threads
