Many of you may have seen this, but there is a thread in Irish Envy about the ESPN article on the early signing period.

 

http://www.irishenvy.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22850

 

Not a surprise that Urban is against it. Below is a quote from him on ESPN.com http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/columns/story?columnist=schlabach_mark&id=2888210&campaign=rsssrch&source=notre+dame+football:

 

"Everybody wants to speed this thing up," Meyer said. "I'd rather have it happen later. I want to quit making mistakes. I think making a mistake in recruiting devastates a program."

 

My brother indicated on Wednesday in the St. Petersburg Times there was further elaboration from Urban and Spurrier that indicated they like to wait to get to know kids better then try to convince them to come to their school. I wonder if anyone from FLA saw that and could elaborate more. I could not find this article online, but it was apparently in the Wednesday print version.

Ask, and you shall receive:

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt=AluY0luResGwnGH74pLfOmwcvrYF?slug=ap-sec-earlysigning&prov=ap&type=lgns

 

"I'm not comfortable signing kids you don't know," Meyer said. "I'd rather move later. I want to quit making mistakes. A mistake in recruiting just devastates a program. The only way to minimize the mistake-factor is to get to know someone.

 

"I think they should all come to camp. I think we should know their families. I think they should meet my family. That's when you usually get a good deal going. If you have an early signing period, that's not going to happen.

 

Sounds to me like a warm and fuzzy sentiment, coating a load of crap. They want kids in play as long as they can. If b-ball can do it without tremendous difficulties, then football can too.

I pretty much knew Urban would be against it.

Ask, and you shall receive:

 

http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news;_ylt=AluY0luResGwnGH74pLfOmwcvrYF?slug=ap-sec-earlysigning&prov=ap&type=lgns

 

"I'm not comfortable signing kids you don't know," Meyer said. "I'd rather move later. I want to quit making mistakes. A mistake in recruiting just devastates a program. The only way to minimize the mistake-factor is to get to know someone.

 

"I think they should all come to camp. I think we should know their families. I think they should meet my family. That's when you usually get a good deal going. If you have an early signing period, that's not going to happen.

 

Sounds to me like a warm and fuzzy sentiment, coating a load of crap. They want kids in play as long as they can. If b-ball can do it without tremendous difficulties, then football can too.

 

bball is different though because when you only have classes of maybe 3 or 4 guys, each commit is vital and if someone decommits at the last second the program is totally left in limbo. In football late decommits obviously sting but no program is totally bent over if a kid decides to go elsewhere, Perriloux left UT standing at the altar and that hasn't exactly doomed their team or anything. I think an early signing period just punishes the top recruiters like Meyer and Carroll so its obvious why the lesser coaches would want it

I chose to look at it from a kid's perspective.

 

Mike Ragone committed to ND last year around the 1st of May. He knew what school he wanted, thought it through, and made the call. Yet, whether he wanted it or not, he had Pete Carrol fly all the way out to NJ and show up at his door - probably with a bag full of promises.

 

Listen to Brandon Newman talk. He says he'd sign the papers today if he could. But these kids can't. For a guy like him, that figures things out early, and is on board 100%, recruiters are like telemarketers to these kids - and they're just as annoying, only more persistent. He shouldn't have to worry about a Nick Saban, or a Jim Harbaugh disciple calling him up at this point, but he will.

 

I do believe that such a policy would need to be carefully implemented. Its critical that it be designed with careful craftsmanship, to weed out a kid who is indecisive (C. Little), or would change their mind with coaching changes (Trattau), or if a guy is in danger of not qualifying academically.

 

But I strongly believe that there is a place for an early signing period in college football, and that it can help out programs, both big and small.

 

Coach Fulmer from Tennessee talks about how much time and money is spent on "babysitting" certain recruits, so that a rival can't come knocking on their door, and smooth talk them into something that they ultimately don't want as much. But if you've got 5-6 kids that have known where they want to go since they got the offer in the mail, then you don't have to worry about them, and can focus your energy on the guys that are legitimately in fair play.

 

I don't think we'll ever see a conference implement it, 'cause its wolves guarding the hen house in this instance. But I do think its something the NCAA should look into, because it ultimately cuts down on some of the recruiting shenanigans, while letting a kid be a kid for a little while longer. It can be done IMO. Just have to put your mind to it.

So let Urban wait to sign them all later. Spend time getting to know them, their families, etc. In the mean time, Charlie will be signing up football players.

 

Here is my translation of what Urban really meant to say. "I'm a mediocre judge of talent but an expert bullshit artist. So, I need the time to see who the good judges of talent are recruiting and still have enough time to bullshit those recruits into going to Florida."

Am I getting this right?

 

The proposal is to have two signing periods, an early and what is now NSD?

 

Or

 

Is the proposal to just move up the exisiting NSD?

Am I getting this right?

 

The proposal is to have two signing periods, an early and what is now NSD?

 

Or

 

Is the proposal to just move up the exisiting NSD?

 

2 signing days

I think Meyer is a poor evaluator of talent. He extends very few offers at the beginning and only starts to after half of the country has offered a kid.

 

He is an absolute nightmare in the college world. Going hard after committed prospects.

 

He was so bad that he went after a QB(via high school coach supposedly) that had already spent a year in Austin.

Here is my translation of what Urban really meant to say. "I'm a mediocre judge of talent but an expert bullshit artist. So, I need the time to see who the good judges of talent are recruiting and still have enough time to bullshit those recruits into going to Florida."

 

Exactly what I was thinking, but you said it very well. He probably knows people like CW are very good evaluators and can lift some answers based on what CW and a few other do in terms of offers.

 

At some schools, too, I imagine their needs change quite a bit based on people dropping out / transferring too, which is quite a different dynamic than we have.

I chose to look at it from a kid's perspective.

 

fair enough

 

Mike Ragone committed to ND last year around the 1st of May. He knew what school he wanted, thought it through, and made the call. Yet, whether he wanted it or not, he had Pete Carrol fly all the way out to NJ and show up at his door - probably with a bag full of promises.

 

And he handled the "problem" without any trouble, said "Thanks but no thanks Coach, see ya" No harm there

 

 

Listen to Brandon Newman talk. He says he'd sign the papers today if he could. But these kids can't. For a guy like him, that figures things out early, and is on board 100%, recruiters are like telemarketers to these kids - and they're just as annoying, only more persistent. He shouldn't have to worry about a Nick Saban, or a Jim Harbaugh disciple calling him up at this point, but he will.

 

If he doesnt want to listen to them he can just not answer the phone when he sees "Coach Harbaugh" or "Alabama" pop up on his caller ID.

 

But I strongly believe that there is a place for an early signing period in college football, and that it can help out programs, both big and small.

 

The only "big" programs i see this benefitting are schools which lock up a majority of kids early on i.e. Texas but schools which take their time to offer kids (schools that wait until camps/senior year performances/etc) are now going to have to rush offers out to kids without really getting a chance to fully evaluate their talent.

 

Coach Fulmer from Tennessee talks about how much time and money is spent on "babysitting" certain recruits, so that a rival can't come knocking on their door, and smooth talk them into something that they ultimately don't want as much. But if you've got 5-6 kids that have known where they want to go since they got the offer in the mail, then you don't have to worry about them, and can focus your energy on the guys that are legitimately in fair play.

 

Well too bad Coach Fulmer. If a kid is that easily swayed by sweet talking then he wasn't as sold on your program as you initially thought and you're probably better off without them/him. Also, those 5-6 kids who are totally 100% yours would stay committed regardless of if their name was signed on a paper or not, so a coach wouldn't have to worry about them either way.

 

People acted like the defections of Trattou and the Littles, in addition to Benn and his "silent verbal" controversy, was this catastrophic event but it happens every year to practically every team. A TON of top stars last year (Anthony Davis, Ben Martin, Major Wright to name a few) privately committed to Ohio St but ended up elsewhere, and I dont really see Ohio St fans pushing to change any rules, same with USC (James Wilson, Donovan Warren).

 

Also an early signing period in basketball hasn't cut down on the amount of defections either, look at Brandon Jennings (USC to AZ), Eric Gordon (Illinois to Indiana), Taylor King (UCLA to Duke) etc etc

Look... when I listen to the story about how Coach Vaas hounded Arrelious Benn, even though he had made his decision, that tells me something isn't right with recruitment. Belittling a kid for choosing to "hide" at Illinois, filling his head with doubts about a kid that actually signed with ND. Thats crap - nobody deserves to be hounded like that. And if there is any way to cut down on that kind of unethical treatment of a high school kid, then I'm all for it - early signing period being one of them.

 

And with regards to the Fulmer issue of "babysitting", its not as cut and dry as, "He wasn't sold on your program I guess." If a kid has a lie planted in their head about a school they committed to, its a whole 'nother ballgame than "sweet talk".

 

I think you're looking at this with more specifics, whereas I'm looking at the big picture. Sure, Mike Ragone handled it fine, but are you going to tell me he wanted to be bothered by some offer he had no interest in? You'd be hacked off just as much as anyone would if you had half a dozen coaching staffs barking up your tree every other day, especially when you're decisive.

 

Its kind of like the phone solicitor "Do Not Call List". We instituted it because we're sick and tired of putting up with that BS as citizens. An early signing period wouldn't get rid of the problem altogether, but I'm willing to bet it would help a kid out in the same regard, of regaining some peace and quiet in their life. But its a difference of opinion I guess.

 

All I'm saying is, if it can work, its worth pursuing. But thats just my take on it, and you're entitled to yours.

Well said Calves. I agree with your view. When will no ever mean no again? No didn't stop many coaches last year it seems.

as for this coach from Florida, someone hit it right on the head , he is a loser recruiter, and only goes after the Blucher's that other coaches go after, its hard to keep someone from going to Florida as its so cold there snow up to your waste, poor town, nothing to do , the crime rate is so high there, you can go to Notre dame with all the free classes girls, discos apartments , ocean jut dow the street, it isn't hard selling a young kid and Meyer and Carroll are good at it, doesn't matter if you graduate or not but if you can play football . o well , Maybe we will be as good as Florida some day .. ha ha

I chose to look at it from a kid's perspective.

 

fair enough

 

Mike Ragone committed to ND last year around the 1st of May. He knew what school he wanted, thought it through, and made the call. Yet, whether he wanted it or not, he had Pete Carrol fly all the way out to NJ and show up at his door - probably with a bag full of promises.

 

And he handled the "problem" without any trouble, said "Thanks but no thanks Coach, see ya" No harm there

 

 

Listen to Brandon Newman talk. He says he'd sign the papers today if he could. But these kids can't. For a guy like him, that figures things out early, and is on board 100%, recruiters are like telemarketers to these kids - and they're just as annoying, only more persistent. He shouldn't have to worry about a Nick Saban, or a Jim Harbaugh disciple calling him up at this point, but he will.

 

If he doesnt want to listen to them he can just not answer the phone when he sees "Coach Harbaugh" or "Alabama" pop up on his caller ID.

 

But I strongly believe that there is a place for an early signing period in college football, and that it can help out programs, both big and small.

 

The only "big" programs i see this benefitting are schools which lock up a majority of kids early on i.e. Texas but schools which take their time to offer kids (schools that wait until camps/senior year performances/etc) are now going to have to rush offers out to kids without really getting a chance to fully evaluate their talent.

 

Coach Fulmer from Tennessee talks about how much time and money is spent on "babysitting" certain recruits, so that a rival can't come knocking on their door, and smooth talk them into something that they ultimately don't want as much. But if you've got 5-6 kids that have known where they want to go since they got the offer in the mail, then you don't have to worry about them, and can focus your energy on the guys that are legitimately in fair play.

 

Well too bad Coach Fulmer. If a kid is that easily swayed by sweet talking then he wasn't as sold on your program as you initially thought and you're probably better off without them/him. Also, those 5-6 kids who are totally 100% yours would stay committed regardless of if their name was signed on a paper or not, so a coach wouldn't have to worry about them either way.

 

People acted like the defections of Trattou and the Littles, in addition to Benn and his "silent verbal" controversy, was this catastrophic event but it happens every year to practically every team. A TON of top stars last year (Anthony Davis, Ben Martin, Major Wright to name a few) privately committed to Ohio St but ended up elsewhere, and I dont really see Ohio St fans pushing to change any rules, same with USC (James Wilson, Donovan Warren).

 

Also an early signing period in basketball hasn't cut down on the amount of defections either, look at Brandon Jennings (USC to AZ), Eric Gordon (Illinois to Indiana), Taylor King (UCLA to Duke) etc etc

 

Hesiman, you are right in principal. If a kid doesn't want to be recruited, he can just say no. The problem that is solved by an early signing period is that often times kids say no and continue to get calls, texts, etc. The early signing period would eliminate the hassle and distraction without fail.

 

Personally, I don't see where the debate is here. The current system and the new system can both accomplish the same thing but in different ways. So why the angst about a change. To this point, everyone is arguing against a change but I have yet to hear anyone bring up a reasonable point in regards to why the existing structure is better.

I've always been in favor of an early signing period in football. If a kid is sure of where he wants to play and wants to end his recruiting, he should be able to end the process without being hassled by other teams. This would allow kids that enjoy the process to continue being recruited, while those that don't can end it if they want to.