The NCAA could stop the whole de-commiting fiasco.

[TNCatfanforever]

Put in an early signing date for football on August 15th. Why not we allow basketball players to sign at the beginning of their senior season on November 15. In football you have to recruit, re-recruit, and re-re-re...etc recruit all the way until the ink goes on the paper. You have situations like a UT recruit going to Auburn and acting like a fool....you have the big 20 or so schools who load up with tier one recruits...but they have the top tier two kids as back ups....those are the ones that the UK's of this world get....when some of their kids flip they come and get ours....where do we go now...are we hoping that Marshall's and EKU's top kids DE-commit.. it s a vicious cycle that could be prevented by an early signing. It would save money and time and product the student athlete.

 

[TNCatfanforever]

Mods....I am sorry I did not see UK Eriks earlier post...please put combine with his or just delete it....sorry about that...

 

[CatsFanGG24]

Our last 3 decommitments also decommitted from other schools to pick us in the first place.

 

[TBCat]

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Our last 3 decommitments also decommitted from other schools to pick us in the first place.

Agreed. This is more the norm than not. I am also very leary about "locking" a kid in. If he doesn't want to go to a school why force him. I've always believed the rules for transferring for example should be very lenient.

 

[JasonS.]

Originally posted by TBCat:

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Our last 3 decommitments also decommitted from other schools to pick us in the first place.

Agreed. This is more the norm than not. I am also very leary about "locking" a kid in. If he doesn't want to go to a school why force him. I've always believed the rules for transferring for example should be very lenient.

+1

Of all the screwed up things about college sports, letting kids play for the program they actually want to play for isn't one of them.

 

[LouievileKat]

I'm not really in favor of the NCAA having more power over a college students freewill.

This post was edited on 1/28 2:32 PM by LouievileKat

 

[K_TIME]

Originally posted by TBCat:

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Our last 3 decommitments also decommitted from other schools to pick us in the first place.

Agreed. This is more the norm than not. I am also very leary about "locking" a kid in. If he doesn't want to go to a school why force him. I've always believed the rules for transferring for example should be very lenient.

Then tell the kids to not commit to a school they're not sure of....given this logic should schools be allowed to "cut" players off scholarship that aren't peforming...some coaches do this in subtle ways.

 

[Beavis606]

The kinds of kids who are committing to UK and then jumping ship when they get offers to powerhouses like Auburn, Alabama, OSU, etc., are not the kinds of kids who will be signing during the early period anyway. So that will change nothing. Except it might take players off the board that we can flip from lesser schools when we have late defections.

How many of our basketball recruits sign in the early period? Not that many. They are always waiting to see who is staying and who isn't. Same would apply to football.

 

[catben]

The Big Boys are the ones that benefit the most from the Feb. signing date so I doubt we ever see it moved up. What i don't get is the fact that these kids that are de-commiting from UK are the last choice of the schools they are actually committing to. Why can't these kids see that?

 

[fuzz77]

Originally posted by K_TIME:

Originally posted by TBCat:

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Our last 3 decommitments also decommitted from other schools to pick us in the first place.

Agreed. This is more the norm than not. I am also very leary about "locking" a kid in. If he doesn't want to go to a school why force him. I've always believed the rules for transferring for example should be very lenient.

Then tell the kids to not commit to a school they're not sure of....given this logic should schools be allowed to "cut" players off scholarship that aren't peforming...some coaches do this in subtle ways.

Athletic scholarships are 1 year renewable contracts. Schools CAN cut anyone who doesn't perform. Some coaches encourage kids to leave, some will revoke scholarships and make them leave. When Stoops arrived there were several kids on the team that were told to "take a hike" to make room for kids he wanted to bring in. Look at what Cal did when he took over...

Coaches encourage kids to commit and probably most often that is what the kid wants at that time. Things change.

 

[kmann0433]

Originally posted by K_TIME:

Originally posted by TBCat:

Originally posted by CatsFanGG24:

Our last 3 decommitments also decommitted from other schools to pick us in the first place.

Agreed. This is more the norm than not. I am also very leary about "locking" a kid in. If he doesn't want to go to a school why force him. I've always believed the rules for transferring for example should be very lenient.

Then tell the kids to not commit to a school they're not sure of....given this logic should schools be allowed to "cut" players off scholarship that aren't peforming...some coaches do this in subtle ways.

I can't tell you how many bad relationships I got into as a teenager because I was 100% certain at some point that I wanted to be in them. When you're that age, you absolutely can be sure of something one day and regret it the next. We say that a lot, but it's a cliche that I personally believe.

 

[mdlUK.1]

Originally posted by catben:
The Big Boys are the ones that benefit the most from the Feb. signing date so I doubt we ever see it moved up. What i don't get is the fact that these kids that are de-commiting from UK are the last choice of the schools they are actually committing to. Why can't these kids see that?

I agree with this. The best teams also benefit from being allowed to practice during the bowl season. I think everyone should be allowed to practice. That MIGHT level the field a little.

 

[KentUcKy-Kats]

Originally posted by mdlUK.1:

Originally posted by catben:
The Big Boys are the ones that benefit the most from the Feb. signing date so I doubt we ever see it moved up. What i don't get is the fact that these kids that are de-commiting from UK are the last choice of the schools they are actually committing to. Why can't these kids see that?

I agree with this. The best teams also benefit from being allowed to practice during the bowl season. I think everyone should be allowed to practice. That MIGHT level the field a little.

Posted on this in an earlier thread.

The big boys are the ones who would be up in arms over an early signing period. I just don't see the NCAA changing it anytime soon. Too much $$ and politics involved. Unlike Basketball the NCAA has no interest in trying to level the playing field and get Cinderella stories in the post season. It is more beneficial for them $$ wise to keep traditional powers in the position to win it all. And the this starts with recruiting.

I know some say that kids would just wait till the last possible signing period regardless, but that would be more risky in their regard.

 

[mrschwump]

Originally posted by mdlUK.1:

Originally posted by catben:
The Big Boys are the ones that benefit the most from the Feb. signing date so I doubt we ever see it moved up. What i don't get is the fact that these kids that are de-commiting from UK are the last choice of the schools they are actually committing to. Why can't these kids see that?

I agree with this. The best teams also benefit from being allowed to practice during the bowl season. I think everyone should be allowed to practice. That MIGHT level the field a little.

Or UK could win more games get bowl eligible and then we wouldn't have to be concerned with practice time.

 

[macd79]

Maybe you shouldn't be able to de commit but one time.

 

[TBCat]

Originally posted by macd79:
Maybe you shouldn't be able to de commit but one time.

How would that be enforced. That make a commitment as bind as an actual signing which would defeat the purpose of signing periods.

 

[porterwildcat]

Do some fans not realize that a "commitment" is a made up thing invented for recruiting purposes. To suggest legislating commitments is asinine.

 

[jhammons]

Originally posted by TBCat:

Originally posted by macd79:
Maybe you shouldn't be able to de commit but one time.

How would that be enforced. That make a commitment as bind as an actual signing which would defeat the purpose of signing periods.

Yep...sounds like the OP wants the NCAA to make recruits sign a letter of intent that says they intend to sign a letter of intent. Whatever

.

 

[Grumpyolddawg]

I am not really against an early signing day, but the month of August I want my coaching staff's full attention on getting ready for the season opener, not having to cuddle up to a HS kid. Coaches would be on the road every night doing visits, just like they are now with signing day approaching. That just isn't the time, in my opinion to have an early signing day. It also brings up another problem, what if all the top guys aren't ready to sign yet? The kids you are really wanting in your class most likely aren't ready to decide yet, and the ones who crave the attention certainly aren't. I udnerstand the want for an early signing period because we are sweating a few kids too, but none of those kids were likely to sign on an early signing day.

Just my thought, the guys who are willing to sign early and miss out on all the official visits are the kids worried about getting a D1 offer, I dont' want a class full of that type athlete.

 

[fuzz77]

Originally posted by KentUcKy-Kats:

Originally posted by mdlUK.1:

Originally posted by catben:
The Big Boys are the ones that benefit the most from the Feb. signing date so I doubt we ever see it moved up. What i don't get is the fact that these kids that are de-commiting from UK are the last choice of the schools they are actually committing to. Why can't these kids see that?

I agree with this. The best teams also benefit from being allowed to practice during the bowl season. I think everyone should be allowed to practice. That MIGHT level the field a little.

Posted on this in an earlier thread.

The big boys are the ones who would be up in arms over an early signing period. I just don't see the NCAA changing it anytime soon. Too much $$ and politics involved. Unlike Basketball the NCAA has no interest in trying to level the playing field and get Cinderella stories in the post season. It is more beneficial for them $$ wise to keep traditional powers in the position to win it all. And the this starts with recruiting.

I know some say that kids would just wait till the last possible signing period regardless, but that would be more risky in their regard.

The NCAA makes almost zero dollars from college football. To claim that the NCAA has a rooting interest in what programs win and lose is just plain silly. Besides... "the NCAA" if we're talking Mark Emmert and the people that work for the NCAA organization don't make the rules. The rules are made and voted on by the member schools...most of who are not "traditional powers". There used to be an early signing period...the NCAA membership voted to do away with it.
Coaches have historically been against the early period for football for just the reasons that Grumpy outlined above. In August they are preparing for the season and an early period would detract from that preparation.
UK has been on both sides of the "flip game". We have flipped kids from schools and had kids flip away...why you think the timing of when kids sign would change any of that is beyond me.

 

[jmalone7us]

Having an early signing period wouldn't stop all of the decommitting. Those guys that have doubts in their head just wouldn't sign. Only way to stop all of the decommitting is just to get rid of the term commitments and get rid of signing day. Just allow players to sign whenever they feel like they are sure of their college choice instead of committing. That way these recruits that are just committing to hold a spot till a bigger name comes along would be a thing of the past.
This post was edited on 1/29 1:18 PM by jmalone7us

 

[WildCard]

An early signing date would not put an end to "de-committing" but I think it would help the process overall, at least for some student-athletes and most of the schools. I agree with those that say the elite programs (maybe 15 or so 128 FBS schools) would likely be the biggest opponents of a revamped football recruiting calendar. I cited some thoughts in Erik's thread and won't repeat them here.

Peace

 

[hoss6901]

We have all heard recruiting is an ugly business and this season we are seeing it firsthand. I don't like the process any more that any of you guys, but I bet it is here to stay - at least for the foreseeable future. Win and those recruits don't jump ship nearly as often.

 

[hoss6901]

OK, maybe I could be wrong about the NCAA making changes to the signing period. I just dug up an article from May 2014 about the NCAA considering an early signing period, with a CMS quote in the article.

NCAA considering early signing period