| Football Recruiting OSU football recruiting, moderated. Post responsibly and with respect for players and coaches. Rumors and speculation should be clearly labeled as such. |

01-05-2007, 11:36 PM
|
 |
<<foo-koo-DOUGH-may
Moderator
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,957
Points: 17,486.72
Bank: 45,030.57
Total Points: 62,517.29
|
|
|
Could an early signing period negate negative recruiting?
I know it's probably a pipe-dream, but does anyone else believe that this would be good for college football? Recruiting in football has gotten out of control... No one seems to be honest anymore, and there is way too much time for a staff to have to keep a kid's interest before they can sign on the dotted line...
I think this is one thing that could ease the craziness of recruiting... It could help cure some of the negative recruiting that goes on, and cut down on the circus and media feeding frenzy that it has become... The warm-weather schools have a decided advantage over the colder schools come December and January, and they always play that up... That could (for the most part) be eliminated with an early signing period IMO... I think it would make things easier on the staffs as well., since they could bank on a certain number of kids halfway through, effectively splitting up the recruiting season...
What do you guys think?
__________________

Last edited by OSUBucks22; 01-05-2007 at 11:46 PM.
|

01-05-2007, 11:48 PM
|
 |
Head Coach
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 14,579
Points: 310,517.39
Bank: 0.43
Total Points: 310,517.81
|
|
|
It is a good point, but honestly most of the recruits that verbal early are the ones that stick to them. The guys that go all the way with the period and make it crazy are the ones that wait till the end anyway.
|

01-05-2007, 11:54 PM
|
 |
<<foo-koo-DOUGH-may
Moderator
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,957
Points: 17,486.72
Bank: 45,030.57
Total Points: 62,517.29
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazybuckfan40
It is a good point, but honestly most of the recruits that verbal early are the ones that stick to them. The guys that go all the way with the period and make it crazy are the ones that wait till the end anyway.
|
True, but with the trend of "silent verbals" nowadays, some of those guys would be well served with an early signing period IMO... I know that most "silents" occur because a recruit wants to take other visits, but I'd be willing to bet that some would sign on early if they had the chance...
__________________

|

01-05-2007, 11:58 PM
|
 |
21st Century Buckeye Man
Senior Moderator
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 2,368
Points: 3,606,037.55
Bank: 1,496.29
Total Points: 3,607,533.84
|
|
|
I almost posted this exact same thought in the Barksdale thread less than 5 minutes ago!
I have wondered for a few years now why football doesn't have an early signing period like basketball does.
Now we know that the NCAA always has the best interest of the kid in mind. (Isn't that one of the main reasons why a playoff isn't feasible?) As such, it seems logical that having an early signing period would be in the best interest of the kids. Maybe they wouldn't be subjected to the media circus quite as much, which has to be good for the kids. Let them make their decision, make it official, and then move on and enjoy the rest of their high school career.
But you are correct. It is a pipe dream. And there are many people (recruiting services) who make big bucks off of the current system who like it just the way it is.
|

01-06-2007, 12:06 AM
|
 |
The one who believes in Tressel
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,394
Points: 1,487.72
Bank: 0.00
Total Points: 1,487.72
|
|
|
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.
|

01-06-2007, 12:10 AM
|
 |
<<foo-koo-DOUGH-may
Moderator
|
|
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 3,957
Points: 17,486.72
Bank: 45,030.57
Total Points: 62,517.29
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tresselbeliever
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?
|
Schools usually grant exceptions for athletes under those circumstances, allowing them to sign with other schools with no penalty...
__________________

|

01-06-2007, 12:17 AM
|
 |
The one who believes in Tressel
|
|
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 1,394
Points: 1,487.72
Bank: 0.00
Total Points: 1,487.72
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by OSUBucks22
Schools usually grant exceptions for athletes under those circumstances, allowing them to sign with other schools with no penalty...
|
That's true, but what if a kid recants for other reasons, such as discovering that the culture of the program isn't really for him? Or maybe if the depth chart is a much bigger concern than anticipated? Or maybe if something happens in the family that demands the kid to stay choser to home? Kids who verbal early are the ones who generally stick it out anyway, especially instate kids. There's very little we can do about OOS prospects and negative recruiting that goes on except being exceptional recruiters.
|
|