|
Post by NebraskaVBfan93 on Jun 6, 2014 23:12:52 GMT -5
Nebraska football coach Bo Pelini recently suggested the elimination of National Signing Day and talked with ESPN explaining his reasoning. Now I'm not a Pelini fan, but I think his reasoning makes a lot of sense and the positives the would exist would also be present if National Signing Day would be eliminated for ALL sports, including volleyball. As Bo suggests,MIT would go along way to eliminate offers that are tendered to freshmen and sophomores with the hope the player will continue to developed their skills. Anyway, here are a couple excerpts from the article and the link to the whole thing. I'd be interested in everyone's thoughts. Good idea? What potential problems exist? Good for the schools? Good for the kids? "Pelini thinks high school players should be able to sign with teams as soon as they receive scholarship offers. If coaches choose to offer scholarships to freshmen and sophomores -- an increasingly common tactic -- they have to be prepared for those players to sign on for the distant future. And... "If somebody has offered a kid, let him sign, it's over," Pelini told ESPN.com on Wednesday. "That will stop some of the things that are happening -- people just throwing out offers, some of them with really no intention of taking a kid."" espn.go.com/college-sports/recruiting/football/story/_/id/11032021/bo-pelini-nebraska-cornhuskers-suggests-ending-national-signing-day
|
|
|
Post by network155 on Jun 6, 2014 23:31:07 GMT -5
Great idea!
|
|
|
Post by volleyballd on Jun 7, 2014 7:51:22 GMT -5
That's a fantastic idea!
|
|
|
Post by Not Me on Jun 7, 2014 9:03:46 GMT -5
Stupid idea.
You think coaches put pressure on kids now? This will allow coaches to dangle a loi infront of a kid and say "sign this now or the offer goes away in 2 minutes"
|
|
|
Post by NebraskaVBfan93 on Jun 7, 2014 9:43:41 GMT -5
Stupid idea. You think coaches put pressure on kids now? This will allow coaches to dangle a loi infront of a kid and say "sign this now or the offer goes away in 2 minutes" If a kid is wanted that badly by one coach, wouldn't if be likely they'll have other options? IMO, giving a kid an ultimatum like that would be poor recruiting strategy.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2014 9:54:33 GMT -5
Would the kid be able to get out of it, without repercussions?
|
|
|
Post by deepsouthfan on Jun 7, 2014 10:10:01 GMT -5
Would the kid be able to get out of it, without repercussions? I think there should be a clause if the kid wants out... like, you lose a year of eligibility or something like that. My reasoning behind that is that it might make kids think a little longer before signing.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Jun 7, 2014 10:39:52 GMT -5
Stupid idea. You think coaches put pressure on kids now? This will allow coaches to dangle a loi infront of a kid and say "sign this now or the offer goes away in 2 minutes" So it would work exactly like it does with verbal commitments now.
|
|
|
Post by ja on Jun 7, 2014 10:58:30 GMT -5
This is all coming from the idea of unionizing college football, which is first step to unionize the entire college sport. It's de facto that our students athletes, specifically in revenue sports, leaving life of professional athletes with some kind of studying. NBA, NHL, and MLB have farm systems to give a chance kids without masking this into study first to earn leaving and develop at the same time. I had a chance to talk to almost all our top college volleyball players and majority dreaming about playing overseas professionally! So, let's be honest and let them be professionals! Illumination of NSD will make a first step, then make them sign contract (with repercussions), pay them real money and let them decide how to pay for college from that contract! This will make process more open and honest! I would say the 16th birthday should be the day when students can sign those contract.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2014 12:30:54 GMT -5
Signing letters of intent early is better than verbals which can be retracted. You want that kid bad enough--guarantee it to them.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 7, 2014 12:31:02 GMT -5
Verbal commitments ought to carry more legal weight than a handshake between an adult and a minor. Allowing players to sign a NLI when they verbally commit has the potential to eliminate early recruiting, which could be beneficial for athletes and coaches.
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Jun 7, 2014 12:54:27 GMT -5
Would the kid be able to get out of it, without repercussions? Pellini also said that the players would be released if their is a coaching change. Which in Pellini's case would be his incentive to sign a lot of players early. "If you fire me, you'll lose all of these kids!" I'm sure he makes that argument now but they don't really have them yet so it's less powerful. JA, You need to explain how this has anything to do with a Union. I don't see your leap. Its not even apples and oranges, its like apples and winnebagos.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Jun 7, 2014 15:25:07 GMT -5
Allow a one-way NLI for athletes 16 or younger, binding on the school, but with an opt-out for the athlete up to the end of their junior year (June 6?). For athletes 17 and older, retain the traditional NLI dates and mutually binding terms.
|
|
|
Post by vbnerd on Jun 7, 2014 15:33:48 GMT -5
Allow a one-way NLI for athletes 16 or younger, binding on the school, but with an opt-out for the athlete up to the end of their junior year (June 6?). For athletes 17 and older, retain the traditional NLI dates and mutually binding terms. And how does that help? What's in it for the colleges?
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Jun 7, 2014 15:59:10 GMT -5
Let me paraphrase what I think he's saying: "The problem is people are recruiting young players and making verbal commitments, so let's allow them to sign binding contractual LOIs."
This is like thinking the invention of high explosives will make war so terrible no one will ever wage it again.
All it will do is drive coaches to recruit younger and younger, because now they will be afraid that the best players will not only commit to someone else early but also sign with someone else early.
|
|