Started By
Message
re: Football early signing periods in the very near future?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 10:45 pm to Crowknowsbest
Posted on 5/27/14 at 10:45 pm to Crowknowsbest
Both parties are still protected. The kids are not forced to sign if kids A is good enough to play at Georgia then he will wait to sign with the smaller school. Also this will protect kids like Darius Phillon or whatever the kids name was that was asked to grey shirt a couple of weeks prior to signing day that ended up at arkansas.
2
Posted on 5/27/14 at 11:37 pm to labamafan
There's really not a down side to this. I don't understand the opposition to it. If a kid is solid why shouldn't he be able to sign early?
Posted on 5/27/14 at 11:50 pm to Alahunter
That will be interesting. I think if there had been early signing periods last two years both Foster and Evans sign with Auburn.
Posted on 5/27/14 at 11:53 pm to Pavoloco83
You can't prove that
Posted on 5/28/14 at 12:18 am to labamafan
I'm not sure how an early signing period prevents greyshirting.
The commitment/LOI doesn't guarantee the kid a spot on the 85 man scholarship.
How does this hurt a kid?
If coaches leave, the kid has no rights.
If the kid changes his mind, he has no rights (but as was said, a LOI has no guarantee that the kid is even on the 85 man).
This helps the athlete (a minor) zero and only locks him into possibly a rash decision.
Have you met a 17 year old recently? they change their mind about as often as they change underwear.
The commitment/LOI doesn't guarantee the kid a spot on the 85 man scholarship.
How does this hurt a kid?
If coaches leave, the kid has no rights.
If the kid changes his mind, he has no rights (but as was said, a LOI has no guarantee that the kid is even on the 85 man).
This helps the athlete (a minor) zero and only locks him into possibly a rash decision.
Have you met a 17 year old recently? they change their mind about as often as they change underwear.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 4:03 am to Gradual_Stroke
quote:
Les is pissed about Speedy
Act like you've been there before. I'd be more concerned about LsU, Bama, and Boise State taking every good DB out of Texas while you have a defensive backfield made up entirely of slow midget retards with no coverage skills.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 6:32 am to TideSaint
quote:
There's really not a down side to this. I don't understand the opposition to it. If a kid is solid why shouldn't he be able to sign early?
There's a big downside that I've expressed a few times already. The problem isn't the kids that are solid. It's the kids that aren't solid or ready to decide that are pressured to sign under threat of losing their spot. This is just another pressure point for coaches to use. Nothing about this potential change is about protecting the kids.
I understand why fans and coaches want it, but I have a serious problem with locking kids into a decision any earlier than is necessary.
The current system works reasonably well. Why change it?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 7:19 am to gatordmb89
quote:
I'm all for an early signing period. The only kids that will sign are the ones that are 100% convinced they are going to that school, and the coaches are 100% alright with the "take". Honestly, there won't be a ton of early "signees".
All of this. Nobody poopoos an early signing period in basketball, why should this be any different?
If a kid is tired of getting hassled 15 times a day by schools all over the country and just wants to shut it down, he can do that. If he's a legacy or something and knows 100% certain where he wants to go, he can do it. It's not like you'd have 15 kids do the early signing, it'd probably be just a few at most, and it'd be the ones that are dead set on going there.
This would be a good thing.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 7:24 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
Crowknowsbest
You're the lone voice of reason in a sea of selfishness.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 7:44 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
All of this. Nobody poopoos an early signing period in basketball, why should this be any different?
Yes they do. All aspects of basketball recruiting suck. Why would football want to duplicate it in any way?
quote:
If a kid is tired of getting hassled 15 times a day by schools all over the country and just wants to shut it down, he can do that. If he's a legacy or something and knows 100% certain where he wants to go, he can do it. It's not like you'd have 15 kids do the early signing, it'd probably be just a few at most, and it'd be the ones that are dead set on going there.
If a coach wants to cut a commitment who is unsure about signing and replace him with another prospect, he can do that. If a 45 year old man wants to threaten to take a scholarship away from an indecisive 18-year old, he can do that. If a coach wants to manipulate a teenager into signing with him earlier, this gives him an avenue to do that.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 7:50 am to Crowknowsbest
quote:
If a 45 year old man wants to threaten to take a scholarship away from an indecisive 18-year old, he can do that.
How would an early signing period be any different than the regular one in this regard? If a kid is wavering, or is a "soft" commit, or commits and decommits, or whatever...coaches currently can and likely do say "look, we've offered 10 kids at your position. We're taking 2. So make a decision". That happens all the time now. An early signing period wouldnt' change that.
quote:
If a coach wants to manipulate a teenager into signing with him earlier, this gives him an avenue to do that
manipulate! It's already been pointed out that the early signers would most likely be the kids that are already rock solid. How would there be manipulation, I'm assuming you mean a coach saying "look, if you don't sign in November you're in danger of losing your spot"? Well that already happens now.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 7:59 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
How would an early signing period be any different than the regular one in this regard? If a kid is wavering, or is a "soft" commit, or commits and decommits, or whatever...coaches currently can and likely do say "look, we've offered 10 kids at your position. We're taking 2. So make a decision". That happens all the time now. An early signing period wouldnt' change that.
Because now a kid has some recourse against this by telling the coach he is solid. Both sides can play the game. Under an early signing period, the kid either signs or he doesn't. You take away their only leverage. They're basically entering a negotiation with a much bigger entity with both hand tied behind their back.
quote:
manipulate! It's already been pointed out that the early signers would most likely be the kids that are already rock solid.
This is an assumption, and a ridiculous one IMO based on my statement above. I tend to think that an earlier signing date would just become the main signing day with the exception of a few prospects. Coaches have a lot on the line and won't leave much to chance in the final period, just like basketball.
quote:
"look, if you don't sign in November you're in danger of losing your spot"? Well that already happens now.
Not nearly as much as it would.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:09 am to Alahunter
This will be great. Kids can commit immediately after the iron bowl and send in their LOI's the next morning.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:12 am to Alahunter
quote:
quote:
Jeremy Fowler ?@JFowlerCBS · 2m
LSU's Les Miles says coaches unanimously in favor of early signing period, expects stance to be passed to "next judicial issue."
Les must not've talked to Steve Spurrier...
quote:
“I like what we’re doing now,” Spurrier said of holding one signing day, the first Wednesday in February. “They don’t have an NFL draft before a guy’s third year. Let them play through high school, is what I think. But some schools like the early signing period. Some would sign guys after their sophomore year.”
Several coaches quoted on their position...
Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:15 am to Crowknowsbest
The last person I'm worried bout in college recruiting is the one being recruited. For the most part, that person holds all the cards. And many abuse the shite out of it; i.e. it gives them more time to "collect more offers". As for those who are pressured, that goes on now. An unpleasant fact of recruiting but it does happen everywhere all the time. What do you think goes on at LSU's camps, UGA's, Bama's?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:15 am to dallasga6
quote:
But some schools like the early signing period. Some would sign guys after their sophomore year.”
I'm not sure that's how it'd work steve..
Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:18 am to TideSaint
the downside is if you're a new coaching staff trying to piece together your first class... it will make rebuilding more difficult b/c all the good players will likely be locked up before you ever get to campus.
from an auburn perspective, gus and the staff closed well in their first class... but if there was an early NSD, would guys like Monty Adams, Peyton Barber, or Elijah Daniel have even been available when the new guys were hired?
from an auburn perspective, gus and the staff closed well in their first class... but if there was an early NSD, would guys like Monty Adams, Peyton Barber, or Elijah Daniel have even been available when the new guys were hired?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:20 am to Keltic Tiger
quote:
The last person I'm worried bout in college recruiting is the one being recruited. For the most part, that person holds all the cards.
Are you shitting me?
I'm not talking about the 5*. I'm talking about the 3* (you know, the vast majority of players being signed by major schools) who is totally replaceable from a program's perspective. That recruit has pretty much zero leverage in the current system and even less in an early signing system.
quote:
As for those who are pressured, that goes on now. An unpleasant fact of recruiting but it does happen everywhere all the time. What do you think goes on at LSU's camps, UGA's, Bama's?
It absolutely does happen. Does that mean we shouldn't try to limit it?
Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:22 am to Crowknowsbest
it won't work that cleanly... and I could see this november NSD eventually replacing the February NSD... where basically everybody signs during the early period and the later NSD is all but forgotten.
Posted on 5/28/14 at 8:25 am to lowspark12
quote:
it won't work that cleanly... and I could see this november NSD eventually replacing the February NSD... where basically everybody signs during the early period and the later NSD is all but forgotten.
Yep. You're just accelerating the timeline.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News