View Single Post
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 01-06-2007, 12:06 AM
Tresselbeliever's Avatar
Tresselbeliever Tresselbeliever is offline
The one who believes in Tressel
 

Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,864
Points: 499.35
Bank: 0.00
Total Points: 499.35
Tresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is Tresselesque
Tresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is TresselesqueTresselbeliever is Tresselesque
Actually, I think the current system gives both the coaches and players for flexibility and freedom. Implementing an early signing day would force coaches to make more imcomplete evaluations much sooner, and thus decrease the number of hiding gems that they might undercover late in the game. Also, any decisions that recruits make are of their own volition. If a kid signs too soon and discovers that the coach is no longer there at the end of the season, what happens to the kid?

Edit: But to answer the original question, as long as there are negative recruiters out there, you can't completely negate negative recruiting. And as cbf stated, those who are susceptible to negative recruiting are usually the ones who verbal late in the game anyway.
Reply With Quote
 
Page generated in 0.14322 seconds with 9 queries