Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2017 13:56:21 GMT -5
Let's not forget the fact that unless you're in that top 5-10% who can make the coaches wait on you to decide, all the others are hearing offers with the comma followed by: now I need to know soon because we have offered another the same, so whoever accepts first...OR on the visit: you are here but someone else is coming next weekend. If you accept before she gets here, we will call and tell her not to visit. It's up to you. This is so common. The pressure games are real. I think this is the reason behind so many transfers or decommits. They jump so they don't get beat to it. But at what price for the athlete and or the program? Right. And hopefully people start to realize more and more that it's ok to just say no. More opportunities will become available. Even for those not in the top 5-10%. If you aren't ready, then don't commit. Unfortunately, it's not that black and white. Kids have schools they "like" that may have offered, but there are schools that they "love" and have not offered. The conundrum is do you go with what you "like" and is commitable, or do you hold out for what you "love" that may not ever offer. By waiting, your "like" schools moves on and you are stuck with nothing but hope that something better comes along as a junior or senior.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Feb 16, 2017 13:56:23 GMT -5
]agree. Plus, if the higher level program truly has an emergency opening, they will talk to club directors that have kids they are interested in regardless if that kid has a verbal commitment or not. The old, "is Suzy happy with her commitment?" Same tactic some coaches use to go after transfers. If a college calls me and asks about a committed kid on my club team in that fashion, I'll make sure every one of my kids that he's interested in in the future knows how he/she operates. I'll never tell a kid where they should/shouldn't go, but the family will certainly know my opinion of that coach.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Feb 16, 2017 13:58:04 GMT -5
Right. And hopefully people start to realize more and more that it's ok to just say no. More opportunities will become available. Even for those not in the top 5-10%. If you aren't ready, then don't commit. Unfortunately, it's not that black and white. Kids have schools they "like" that may have offered, but there are schools that they "love" and have not offered. The conundrum is do you go with what you "like" and is commitable, or do you hold out for what you "love" that may not ever offer. By waiting, your "like" schools moves on and you are stuck with nothing but hope that something better comes along as a junior or senior. Right, but that scenario has nothing to do with age and early recruiting. Forcing the process to start in the kids' junior just simply means that a 3-4 year process where all of the above happens will get squashed into a cutthroat 12-month period.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2017 14:11:37 GMT -5
]agree. Plus, if the higher level program truly has an emergency opening, they will talk to club directors that have kids they are interested in regardless if that kid has a verbal commitment or not. The old, "is Suzy happy with her commitment?" Same tactic some coaches use to go after transfers. If a college calls me and asks about a committed kid on my club team in that fashion, I'll make sure every one of my kids that he's interested in in the future knows how he/she operates. I'll never tell a kid where they should/shouldn't go, but the family will certainly know my opinion of that coach. that scenario happens in other sports all the time. It's bound to work it's way in to volleyball. Coaches tend to respect the verbal commitment at this time, but signs of that changing abound. Just look at the transfers.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2017 14:13:58 GMT -5
Unfortunately, it's not that black and white. Kids have schools they "like" that may have offered, but there are schools that they "love" and have not offered. The conundrum is do you go with what you "like" and is commitable, or do you hold out for what you "love" that may not ever offer. By waiting, your "like" schools moves on and you are stuck with nothing but hope that something better comes along as a junior or senior. Right, but that scenario has nothing to do with age and early recruiting. Forcing the process to start in the kids' junior just simply means that a 3-4 year process where all of the above happens will get squashed into a cutthroat 12-month period. it doesn't seem to hurt football and basketball where the commitments occur, for the vast majority, in their senior year. After they've taken their 5 official visits, I might add.
|
|
|
Post by uncommitted on Feb 16, 2017 15:49:11 GMT -5
Right, but that scenario has nothing to do with age and early recruiting. Forcing the process to start in the kids' junior just simply means that a 3-4 year process where all of the above happens will get squashed into a cutthroat 12-month period. it doesn't seem to hurt football and basketball where the commitments occur, for the vast majority, in their senior year. After they've taken their 5 official visits, I might add. I think the reality may be the men's football and basketball are willing to wait till their senior year because boys grow later than girls. So they don't know how big a football player really is until his senior year whereas there are lots of six foot + girls who are done growing by freshman sophomore year.
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Feb 16, 2017 16:01:23 GMT -5
Right, but that scenario has nothing to do with age and early recruiting. Forcing the process to start in the kids' junior just simply means that a 3-4 year process where all of the above happens will get squashed into a cutthroat 12-month period. it doesn't seem to hurt football and basketball where the commitments occur, for the vast majority, in their senior year. After they've taken their 5 official visits, I might add. That's true of the "hat-pickers", it seems to me, and much less so of the general run of recruits. Quite some years ago, the term "soft verbal" came into use for football commits who, regardless, continued to take official trips. Conversely, with recruiting other schools' commit lists having become much more prevalent, more football recruiters started asking their recruits to not publicly announce their commitments, causing the terms "silent verbal" or "secret verbal" to come into use.
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Feb 16, 2017 16:32:47 GMT -5
The whole thing sounds like the month before prom.
"Oh, I heard John and Sheila will be going together." "No, John's still waiting. He wants to take Deidre, but she's hoping Dillon asks her. If she goes with Dillon, *then* John will ask Sheila." "Damn, if I was Sheila, I would just go with Rob." "Girl, don't you know?! Rob is gay! He's going to go with Ryan." "What?! No way!"
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 16, 2017 16:52:35 GMT -5
it doesn't seem to hurt football and basketball where the commitments occur, for the vast majority, in their senior year. After they've taken their 5 official visits, I might add. I think the reality may be the men's football and basketball are willing to wait till their senior year because boys grow later than girls. So they don't know how big a football player really is until his senior year whereas there are lots of six foot + girls who are done growing by freshman sophomore year. I was referring to the process n00b laid out by crunching all of that decision making into a 12 month window. my point, was that process doesn't seem to hurt the football or basketball recruit. why would it hurt the volleyball recruit?
|
|
|
Post by redbeard2008 on Feb 16, 2017 17:24:00 GMT -5
Sarkisian did offer a 6th grader at UW some years ago...
Growth spurt does matter in volleyball. It is much less a factor in softball and lacrosse, where hand-eye coordination, quickness, and general athleticism are much more important than height.
|
|
|
Post by Factometer on Feb 16, 2017 19:54:17 GMT -5
Geeezshuss ... what a bunch of hand-wringing rule followers! It's what - the player and coach, acting in their on self interest - the market will bare.
|
|
|
Post by simpleton on Feb 16, 2017 23:22:00 GMT -5
Right. And hopefully people start to realize more and more that it's ok to just say no. More opportunities will become available. Even for those not in the top 5-10%. If you aren't ready, then don't commit. That's easier said than done. I said that exact same thing to my DD but with all of the pressure from peers and coaches it is hard to hold off on those commits. Amen. The pressure is real and coaches really do move on. And this is moving on from kids regarded as being in the very top of their class. IMO, the luxury of moving at your own pace and deciding on your own terms is not reality except for the rarest superstar OH and Middles. They just don't make many of those and everybody wants them, every year.
|
|
|
Post by n00b on Feb 17, 2017 10:27:01 GMT -5
I think the reality may be the men's football and basketball are willing to wait till their senior year because boys grow later than girls. So they don't know how big a football player really is until his senior year whereas there are lots of six foot + girls who are done growing by freshman sophomore year. I was referring to the process n00b laid out by crunching all of that decision making into a 12 month window. my point, was that process doesn't seem to hurt the football or basketball recruit. why would it hurt the volleyball recruit? Those football and basketball recruits are in communication with schools as freshmen and sophomores though. So that recruiting period isn't compressed like I think would happen if you further limit contact before junior year.
|
|
|
Post by 642fiddi on Feb 17, 2017 14:38:39 GMT -5
I disagree because I think this premise is simply false. The options will likely be different a year (or two) later, but sometimes they're better, sometimes they're worse. Even at the highest end of Division I there are SOOO many transfers that if a kid really is good enough to play in the Big Ten or Pac-12, there will still be scholarships open for them in the spring of their senior year. If Nebraska, Wisconsin, Penn St, etc can bring in transfers in January, they also have the capability to bring on an unsigned senior. Sure, if a recruit is good enough, there will be a place for her to play -- somewhere. But I didn't say that there would be no options. I said that there would be less-attractive options. Let's say that as a 15-yr-old she had offers from Texas, Penn State, Washington, Nebraska, etc. If she waits until she's 17, are all those offers still going to be available? Likely not. Will *any* of those offers still be available? Maybe, or maybe not. Will there be some B1G or PAC school that has an open spot? Sure. But it might be Washington or it might be Oregon State. It might be Wisconsin or it might be Maryland. See what I'm saying? Do you disagree? I agree totally.
|
|
|
Post by 642fiddi on Feb 17, 2017 14:49:17 GMT -5
If a college calls me and asks about a committed kid on my club team in that fashion, I'll make sure every one of my kids that he's interested in in the future knows how he/she operates. I'll never tell a kid where they should/shouldn't go, but the family will certainly know my opinion of that coach. that scenario happens in other sports all the time. It's bound to work it's way in to volleyball. Coaches tend to respect the verbal commitment at this time, but signs of that changing abound. Just look at the transfers. I fully expect as coaches start feeling pressure to win like the football and basketball coaches have ,we will start to see the verbal commitments ignored. Coaches will keep persuing players they like whether they are verbally committed or not. Frankly I cant wait. The meaning of an official visit will have much more meaning and commitment will truly not happen until the NLI is signed.
|
|