Gaming earlier national signing day

[WestCoastCornhusker]

Is there any scenario that this is good for NU? What a joke.

 

[HuskerAlum92]

There has been talk of teams like Texas that fill up their class almost a year in advance, and then miss out guys that take a huge step up in their senior season. Maybe this will happen a lot more often with more of the big dogs, and we can take advantage.

Kind of a stretch, but best I could do.

 

[WestCoastCornhusker]

So If Texas leaves no room for sr. year blowouts, this could play right into hands some, offset by the summer expenses recruits incur to visit NU, vs. just gasoline cost to visit Texas and Alabama.

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

Mac pretty much all but filled up his classes well before a prospect started his senior season. Below is beginning with the 2004 class...
15 of 20 committed before senior season began (14 in July)3 of 15 committed before senior season began22 of 25 committed before senior season began (15 between February through April)19 of 24 committed before senior season began (15 between February through April)19 of 20 committed before senior season began (18 between February through April)19 of 20 committed before senior season began (19 between February through May)19 of 25 committed before senior season began (all between February and March)22 of 22 committed before senior season began (all between February through June)17 of 28 committed before senior season began (all between February through June)11 of 15 committed before senior season began (all between February through June)

Mac put major emphasis on Junior day and forced all schools to step up their recruiting, obviously starting earlier.

Of the 166 commitments before their senior season, 92 committed in the month of February, a full year before signing day.

 

[dockentwo]

Curious here; What would be wrong with allowing recruits and families to visit as early as March? This could include Spring games and practices; as well as schools in session. We could then see an early signing day at some point between July 15 - 31st. This would allow coaches to wrap some things up and start on fall preparation.
The late December early signing may have merit, but seems to have the potential for a lot more drama and more in season pressures - kids and others. The above would get the commitment out of the way before their senior seasons; they could dedicate their time to college prep, and fun and family ..... It might really shake things up in recruiting. Kids could see who had committed at their positions. I believe the over- signers and those that run kids off , partially due to current popularity; would have to clean it up. In any case, other schools should get a better look from recruits; as far as what they have to offer and playing time and such. GBR I understand the vacation and other drivel.

 

[Pennsyhusker]

I am totally clueless what it is like for a high school player to be recruited by multiple schools. I am clueless as to all of the logistical issues involved with getting kids to campus. I am clueless as to when those visits should be allowed. In short, I am clueless on this issue.

That said, you can take the following question with a grain of salt if you wish, but it strikes me as a legitimate question. What is wrong with a recruit being able to sign commitment papers binding him to a school as soon as that recruit wishes? Allowing recruits the opportunity to sign immediately allows for them to completely end the recruiting process and not be badgered by other schools trying to get them to flip. It also gives the University that is offering the scholarship and opportunity to see which recruits really are committed to coming to that school and which commits are "soft" recruits. I personally find the current system where a player "verbally" commits but with no binding force to be deeply flawed. But hey, as I said, I am clueless.

Thoughts? And even if it is a good idea it probably would never pass the NCAA.

 

[WestCoastCornhusker]

Originally posted by Pennsyhusker:
I am totally clueless what it is like for a high school player to be recruited by multiple schools. I am clueless as to all of the logistical issues involved with getting kids to campus. I am clueless as to when those visits should be allowed. In short, I am clueless on this issue.

That said, you can take the following question with a grain of salt if you wish, but it strikes me as a legitimate question. What is wrong with a recruit being able to sign commitment papers binding him to a school as soon as that recruit wishes? Allowing recruits the opportunity to sign immediately allows for them to completely end the recruiting process and not be badgered by other schools trying to get them to flip. It also gives the University that is offering the scholarship and opportunity to see which recruits really are committed to coming to that school and which commits are "soft" recruits. I personally find the current system where a player "verbally" commits but with no binding force to be deeply flawed. But hey, as I said, I am clueless.

Thoughts? And even if it is a good idea it probably would never pass the NCAA.

I like it, this would be of some advantage to NU as Texas and Alabama couldn't reneg on early signees. Probably wouldn't stop Saban from cheating and systematically oversigning and then taking away schollies later. I can't really think of any reason why a kid can't sign early if he wants to.

 

[HuskerTimOmaha]

docken, the schools with a close proximity to talent don't want earlier official visits. They have an advantage right now and will do anything to keep that advantage.
Posted from Rivals Mobile