Possible Early Signing Period

Donate To GopherHole

I can't help but think that this is a good thing. I love the quote - "Is it a reservation or a commitment? "

Are there really any drawbacks to an early signing period for football?
 

Zales04 said:
I can't help but think that this is a good thing. I love the quote - "Is it a reservation or a commitment? "

Are there really any drawbacks to an early signing period for football?
Click to expand...

Some of the drawbacks that I have seen raised by others are. I will leave it to you if they are valid or not.

1. It commits a kid to a school early, what happens when that schools coach leaves as many of the staff changes occur after the season. Is it fair to hold the kid there for the following year when he has never even set foot on campus.

2. The early signing period will hurt the smaller programs as the larger more influential BCS schools will already know which core commits they have locked up and therefore will no longer need to devote recruiting resources to these recruits and can focus their staff then on the remaining under the radar kids that might have went to a smaller school prior because they received no attention from these bcs schools.
 

I'm all for an early signing day, but the one they propose is during the 3rd week of December, which is only about 6 weeks before the current signing day. That doesn't seem to be much of an advantage for anyone. How about an August early signing day so kids that have been recruited since the last signing day, attended camps, and know where they want to go can sign before their senior season of football.
 

WAGopher, good thinking and my original gut reaction, but I don't think so. Too many injuries before the HS season is over. A team could end up with 3 or 4 scholarships committed would be for kids who become not be available maybe ever. If they did that, it would have to be accompanied by something giving the school replacement scholarships and that would be too expensive.

I think this is mostly intended primarily as a budgetary fix. The early signing eliminates a lot of expensive travel after the bowl season.
 


With an early signing period, I think there will still be the option for the commits not to sign if they so chose, or if there are changes, such as coaches which could be included in an opt out. I think they need those caveats if they do an early signing.

To me, besides locking down the recruit, the obvious advantage is that other schools are not to keep bugging them after they have committed.
 

calminnfan said:
With an early signing period, I think there will still be the option for the commits not to sign if they so chose, or if there are changes, such as coaches which could be included in an opt out. I think they need those caveats if they do an early signing.

To me, besides locking down the recruit, the obvious advantage is that other schools are not to keep bugging them after they have committed.
Click to expand...

Correct calminnfan. Recruits are not held to their letter of intent if the head coach changes after they have signed in the sports that already have an early signing period. I would assume the same would be true for an early signing period in football.
 

GopherGod said:
1. It commits a kid to a school early, what happens when that schools coach leaves as many of the staff changes occur after the season. Is it fair to hold the kid there for the following year when he has never even set foot on campus.
Click to expand...

Kids who sign early in every other sport have to deal with this too. That is the risk you take by signing early and it's why student-athletes should choose a school for reasons other than a coach.
 

Schlic Daddy said:
Kids who sign early in every other sport have to deal with this too. That is the risk you take by signing early and it's why student-athletes should choose a school for reasons other than a coach.
Click to expand...

I agree with you but the fact of the matter is kids sign with the coach the overwhelming majority of the time and not the school as much as universities and us want it to be different it is just not the reality.
 



If it's really important for a recruit to play with a certain coach, then they shouldn't sign early. Everyone knows that in today's college game, coaches are coming and going all the time.

I think the early signing period should be for guys who know what school they want to go to, no matter who the coach is. Just my opinion.
 

This is a no brainer.

I cant find a single negative thing about this on both the schools and the players side.

I know its going to be argued that the players pick a school because of the coach but the players that are going to be using the early signing period are going to be the players that hold loyalty to the school, want to end the recruiting process, and have no fear the coach will be leaving. Its a positive for the player because if they sign early they can have a senior year free of recruiting letters and constant calls from coaches. Some players love the process but not all care to be bothered when they are trying to focus on their high school season.

For the schools it will save money to a degree. If you can lock up a player early you dont need to continue to drop letters, calls, and continue to recruit the player so he doesnt change his mind. It also would help teams balance their rosters if the coaches know they have 2 WRs signed in the early signing period they can pull offers to other WRs and focus their recruiting on another position. In the current system teams can never feel comfortable with a recruit until he has signed on the dotted line with an early signing period the coaches would have the ability to relax on the early signers.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom