|
Post by dc on Jan 22, 2018 17:10:47 GMT -5
I am a parent of a (summer of 9th grade going into 10th) verbal scholarship commit. Here’s why we allowed our daughter to commit at that age: after her unofficial visit and camp, she said she felt like she was “home,” even though it was not a school on her original list. She had other schools knocking on the door at that time, had done other unofficials and camps, so we played devil’s advocate for weeks by asking her how she would feel if this or that Really Great University came calling later. She was never even slightly deterred (even now), so from start to finish it was about four months. The positives of making this early decision: the pressure is off for recruiting during a really important time of emotional and skills growth. She (and her coaches) believe she’s actually more able to focus on her volleyball progress rather than stressing over the process. (A process that she really, really disliked, by the way. It was aggressive and difficult because each coach had a different philosophy about early recruiting and when they might offer; but, I’m not sure it would have felt any less so the older she got as she has a gentle nature off the court.) Now, however, she’s been able to cultivate a very nice relationship with her future coach, who she actually looks forward to calling to check in with every so often. The negatives: She’s locked in because she’s made a verbal commitment to this coach. As great as that is for the reasons above, we know it can also easily change with a coaching resignation or firing, which would mean the process could need to start all over again. So we’ve essentially closed all the doors to recruiting which we would have to figure out how to reopen, if that was the case. Lastly, her future coach is all for restructuring the recruiting process and is working with other coaches to affect that change with the NCAA. Start all recruiting communication September 1 of Junior year. No earlier loopholes, just all lines of communication open both ways at that time. The onus is then on the coaches/their staff to locate the talent needed for their programs within a year or two, not four or five, get them on campus for a visit, so all concerned are much more confident and informed about offers and commitments. Mostly coaches speak negative about early recruiting. Developing a relationship over time before the player gets to campus is a positive I have heard a coach mention. Removing the stress of the process is clearly a big positive for lots of the kids. Some posters seem to imply a coach would glibly renege on a verbal if an early commit doesn't "develop" as they hope. I don't think that's true for most coaches. I think coaches and players take the verbal seriously in women's sports. I don't think early recruiting benefits the best programs. They always lead the way in early recruiting but deciding later reduces the chances for mistakes.
|
|
|
Post by Northern lights on Jan 22, 2018 18:23:48 GMT -5
I like the idea of no recruiting of any kind done before Sophomore season in High School. You get caught, you get sanctioned. Also change the official visits to grade 11, schools should be paying for the kid to visit. If a school is not willing to pay for your visit you are not high on their list. Once you commit, you are committed or their is a sanction for the athlete. I also think all scholarships should be 4 years guaranteed. A Coach should be willing to develop his bad decisions as well as his good ones.
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Feb 8, 2018 19:00:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by oldmanred on Feb 8, 2018 20:53:32 GMT -5
Damn legacy commits are ruining the game. It's time for the NCAA to step in and take some action! Yaa! Way to go new born; making Mom and Dad proud!!! GO HUSKERS
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Feb 8, 2018 21:17:42 GMT -5
I like the idea of no recruiting of any kind done before Sophomore season in High School. You get caught, you get sanctioned. Also change the official visits to grade 11, schools should be paying for the kid to visit. If a school is not willing to pay for your visit you are not high on their list. Once you commit, you are committed or their is a sanction for the athlete. I also think all scholarships should be 4 years guaranteed. A Coach should be willing to develop his bad decisions as well as his good ones. you act like volleyball programs MAKE money.... also, what does "no recruiting" even mean? can you not even attend a court featuring younger players? ban anyone playing up above 15's? watch a game that has 8th grader or freshmen on it? Can there be no communication about these players between club coaches and colleges?....If you aren't going to ban all of that, then they will be "recruiting". If John Cook shows his face at a 14's court, you don't think the star player will see that she's being recruited?
|
|
|
Post by BuckysHeat on Feb 9, 2018 8:54:18 GMT -5
I like the idea of no recruiting of any kind done before Sophomore season in High School. You get caught, you get sanctioned. Also change the official visits to grade 11, schools should be paying for the kid to visit. If a school is not willing to pay for your visit you are not high on their list. Once you commit, you are committed or their is a sanction for the athlete. I also think all scholarships should be 4 years guaranteed. A Coach should be willing to develop his bad decisions as well as his good ones. you act like volleyball programs MAKE money.... also, what does "no recruiting" even mean? can you not even attend a court featuring younger players? ban anyone playing up above 15's? watch a game that has 8th grader or freshmen on it? Can there be no communication about these players between club coaches and colleges?....If you aren't going to ban all of that, then they will be "recruiting". If John Cook shows his face at a 14's court, you don't think the star player will see that she's being recruited? Here's a novel idea, let the kids commit when THEY are ready, stop trying to lump everybody into a single category, stop worrying about how it will affect YOUR kid (not yours ay!). The percentage of kids actually and actively being recruited as a freshman or younger is very very low, there are currently 8 2021's who have verballed and one 2022. If coaches don't like doing it, don't. As Tawa pointed out in his run up to the frosh 59 a day or two ago, being listed on the frosh 59 does not guarantee anything - in the current class of 2018, 24 of the senior aces were named to the frosh 59 (2014), 3 of which ended up being top 24, 10 25-50, 7 51-75 and then 4 to fill out the top 100. Going down to the next 58 (Highest honorable mention) adds another 12. So out of 100 senior aces, 36 were listed as freshman.
|
|
|
Post by bigjohn043 on Feb 9, 2018 12:40:14 GMT -5
I am a parent of a (summer of 9th grade going into 10th) verbal scholarship commit. Here’s why we allowed our daughter to commit at that age: after her unofficial visit and camp, she said she felt like she was “home,” even though it was not a school on her original list. She had other schools knocking on the door at that time, had done other unofficials and camps, so we played devil’s advocate for weeks by asking her how she would feel if this or that Really Great University came calling later. She was never even slightly deterred (even now), so from start to finish it was about four months. The positives of making this early decision: the pressure is off for recruiting during a really important time of emotional and skills growth. She (and her coaches) believe she’s actually more able to focus on her volleyball progress rather than stressing over the process. (A process that she really, really disliked, by the way. It was aggressive and difficult because each coach had a different philosophy about early recruiting and when they might offer; but, I’m not sure it would have felt any less so the older she got as she has a gentle nature off the court.) Now, however, she’s been able to cultivate a very nice relationship with her future coach, who she actually looks forward to calling to check in with every so often. The negatives: She’s locked in because she’s made a verbal commitment to this coach. As great as that is for the reasons above, we know it can also easily change with a coaching resignation or firing, which would mean the process could need to start all over again. So we’ve essentially closed all the doors to recruiting which we would have to figure out how to reopen, if that was the case. Lastly, her future coach is all for restructuring the recruiting process and is working with other coaches to affect that change with the NCAA. Start all recruiting communication September 1 of Junior year. No earlier loopholes, just all lines of communication open both ways at that time. The onus is then on the coaches/their staff to locate the talent needed for their programs within a year or two, not four or five, get them on campus for a visit, so all concerned are much more confident and informed about offers and commitments. Mostly coaches speak negative about early recruiting. Developing a relationship over time before the player gets to campus is a positive I have heard a coach mention. Removing the stress of the process is clearly a big positive for lots of the kids. Some posters seem to imply a coach would glibly renege on a verbal if an early commit doesn't "develop" as they hope. I don't think that's true for most coaches. I think coaches and players take the verbal seriously in women's sports. I don't think early recruiting benefits the best programs. They always lead the way in early recruiting but deciding later reduces the chances for mistakes. Wouldn't delaying the start of the process also remove the stress? Wouldn't it also delay that stress until the athletes are bit older, more mature and able to deal with the process? It strikes me that there are no downsides (to the athlete) to delaying the start of the process until the beginning of junior year.
|
|
|
Post by maɡˈnōlēə on Feb 9, 2018 13:06:28 GMT -5
It’s like the arms race. If you don’t keep up you get left behind. It’s incredibly tough on coaching staffs because now you have to recruit 5 classes I would love to see the (likely nonexistent) stats about how many "early stars" end up fizzling and not developing as players as initially anticipated. And if those stats existed and could be looked at would it make a difference in the way coaches seem to recruit?? Or is it because this game at that level is mostly height driven? IDK With one of my own daughters I am seeing TREMENDOUS growth in the past year and a half, as if she's a totally different player, granted most of the growth I saw in her happened during her 16's season and maybe she's leveling off now in her 17's but still… My oldest seemed to develop as a player earlier on (8th to freshman year) and ended up giving up volleyball for another sport during her hs years. The character traits of stick with-it-edness may have more to do with my example more than anything. Save
|
|
|
Post by dc on Feb 9, 2018 14:37:19 GMT -5
Mostly coaches speak negative about early recruiting. Developing a relationship over time before the player gets to campus is a positive I have heard a coach mention. Removing the stress of the process is clearly a big positive for lots of the kids. Some posters seem to imply a coach would glibly renege on a verbal if an early commit doesn't "develop" as they hope. I don't think that's true for most coaches. I think coaches and players take the verbal seriously in women's sports. I don't think early recruiting benefits the best programs. They always lead the way in early recruiting but deciding later reduces the chances for mistakes. Wouldn't delaying the start of the process also remove the stress? Wouldn't it also delay that stress until the athletes are bit older, more mature and able to deal with the process? It strikes me that there are no downsides (to the athlete) to delaying the start of the process until the beginning of junior year. Sure, I certainly didn't mean to imply early recruiting nets out to a positive simply because it gives 9th graders a chance to be done with it I only meant, in the current environment, being done with it reduces stress for some of the kids. New recruiting legislation just started in LaCrosse last year and hopefully it will be successful and a guide for other sports to learn from and use. With the new legislation student-athletes will not be able to be in contact with a college coach until Sept 1st of their junior year. One thing is this change seems to put power in the hands of club/high school coaches. And how much power is it good for club coaches to have? Seems potentially pretty fraught. I think early recruiting is bad for kids and college coaches. You just hope fixing it doesn't make it worse instead of better! If it was my vote, my vote would be wait and get some information from LaCrosse before deciding how to change the other sports.
|
|
|
Post by labtec1 on Feb 9, 2018 16:24:53 GMT -5
What my husband and I know now that we didn't know then....had a daughter who committed to top Pac 12 program at end of freshman year/beginning of soph year, trusted the coach, and as one knows, when you verbally commit, you take your name off of the recruiting sites. Big club tourneys listed kids who had committed already, including our daughter. Then, fast forward over 2 years later, senior year, one month prior to signing, coach calls and says, changed my mind, and am going with your position the following year instead of our daughter that year. To say she was devastated was an understatement. How do you build confidence after that one? Then we said, now what, when all programs who offered her over 2 years ago now had those slots filled. All those programs did not need her position anymore. It was a nightmare. She did get picked up by another D1 program, but her confidence was never the same. My advice would be to not commit early and keep options open! You think you can trust the coach or that coaches would not do that but some of them do. We are living proof.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 9, 2018 16:36:33 GMT -5
The LAX rules significantly restrict the amount of information recruits and coaches can learn about each other. Recruiting is relationship-building and I fail to see how limiting relationship-building is good for anyone.
|
|
|
Post by mervinswerved on Feb 9, 2018 16:58:45 GMT -5
Every time someone bemoans the ten kids a year who commit as freshmen, it comes off as nothing but hand-wringing. Why should we tell a student when they can start their recruiting process?
|
|
|
Post by trainermch on Feb 9, 2018 17:01:19 GMT -5
How does what should be just a rhetorical question get 5 pages of comments/opines?
|
|
|
Post by dc on Feb 9, 2018 17:06:15 GMT -5
How does what should be just a rhetorical question get 5 pages of comments/opines? Why does the sun go on shining? Why does the sea rush to shore? Why do the birds go on singing? Why do the stars glow above? Why does my heart go on beating? Why do these eyes of mine cry?
|
|
|
Post by trainermch on Feb 9, 2018 17:07:37 GMT -5
How does what should be just a rhetorical question get 5 pages of comments/opines? Why does the sun go on shining? Why does the sea rush to shore? Why do the birds go on singing? Why do the stars glow above? Why does my heart go on beating? Why do these eyes of mine cry? That’s a whole nuther thread.
|
|