Would allowing recruits to sign earlier be good or bad for UT?

[utmba93]

Link

Recruits who've made their choice shouldn't have to wait - 02.08.10 - SI Vault


The above article notes that most of the top recruits remained committed to their schools from pre-Christmas through NSD.

Coaches: Coaches, as we know, are far less loyal to their programs and jump at the opportunity to move during the off-season. And, it may well be in their own best interests to do so making it hard to fault them. It seems that if recruits signed earlier (e.g. before all the coaching switches), that could help encourage coaches to stay put and/or minimize the risks to the program for the inevitable departure of coaches, like CLK, to programs they'd rather lead.

Program: If recruits are already signed it would also protect the program from having them poached by the coaches who recruiting them in the first place.

Recruits: It also doesn't seem fair that a kid who has his mind set on where he will be attending college gets that disrupted and is stuck with only a few weeks to make a major life-impacting decision (sometimes without even knowing who will fill the position coach roles at the different programs he is considering).

Many of you are pretty close to recruiting and probably have a good idea of how this might have impacted recruiting for UT this passed year.

Would an earlier signing period have helped or hurt the Vols this year? Is this something most of you guys would like to see and would it help or hurt programs like ours who are trying to rebuild?

 

[IPorange]

It would hurt UT, as we recruit so many players from out of state, and thus are already trying to make up ground on the in-state teams.

Think of our top signees from the last few years, and how many were committed to in-state schools right up until the week of signing day.

 

[utmba93]

It would hurt UT, as we recruit so many players from out of state, and thus are already trying to make up ground on the in-state teams.

Think of our top signees from the last few years, and how many were committed to in-state schools right up until the week of signing day.

UT is clearly dependent on out-of-state recruiting. However, there were a lot of out-of-state recruits committed to the Vols who signed elsewhere after learning about X's departure. If they had already committed, they'd be Vols now.

Is it as simple as in-state versus out-of-state recruiting dependencies?

 

[LSUSIU]

Chances are it would hurt UT in the long run.

 

[Ben]

I think it might be a good idea to have a early signing period of 2 days in Dec and still not change NSD. That way, the guys who are solid can get locked up and not have to be bothered, but it doesn't not necessarily put undue pressure on guys to sign that are not ready.

 

[utmba93]

Chances are it would hurt UT in the long run.

Does that mean it would help in the short run?

LSU and UT are certainly at the extremes of the SEC, imo. Basically, you have loyal in-state talent who will play for the Tigers for whomever is hired at LSU. They'd probably sign early just as readily as they sign late.

Do you think the later signing date helps UT recruit LA talent, for example, and why?

 

[Dudleys87]

So if you make your mind up sign with that team then have a change of heart your screwed. no thanks.

 

[Ben]

So if you make your mind up sign with that team then have a change of heart your screwed. no thanks.

[Kenbrell Thompkins]Right on![/Kenbrell Thompkins]

Seriously, how is this any different than what is currently going on?

 

[utmba93]

So if you make your mind up sign with that team then have a change of heart your screwed. no thanks.

Most recruits don't have a change of heart.

Why not let them commit, so we all know who is still considering their options?

 

[LSUSIU]

Does that mean it would help in the short run?

LSU and UT are certainly at the extremes of the SEC, imo. Basically, you have loyal in-state talent who will play for the Tigers for whomever is hired at LSU. They'd probably sign early just as readily as they sign late.

Do you think the later signing date helps UT recruit LA talent, for example, and why?

Well since every year is different I said "long run" because UT generally has plenty of out of state guys.

If a kid gets a offer very early from a big in-state school his first instinct is to sign right away.

IMHO something needs to be done with this recruiting process, to much Michael Jackson drama going on. With a early signing that gives UT less time to have an impact on a player from out of state. IMHO

In the short term, meaning 2010 class UT could have saved a few more players, long-term I would think it would slightly be a disadvantage.

It could also hurt schools that identify the wrong player too early. So evaluation would be even more important because you would basically be signing juniors at that point. Of course, they need to make a lot more changes to make this happen.

 

[utmba93]

[Kenbrell Thompkins]Right on![/Kenbrell Thompkins]

Seriously, how is this any different than what is currently going on?

Exactly. It's just moving the date forward.

Coaches will continue to screw the players with their moves, but players who are committing to programs can do that earlier. Programs with stability would seem to gain favor. That favors stability--and more stability in coaching would appear to be better for players in general, right?

 

[utmba93]

Well since every year is different I said "long run" because UT generally has plenty of out of state guys.

If a kid gets a offer very early from a big in-state school his first instinct is to sign right away.

IMHO something needs to be done with this recruiting process, to much Michael Jackson drama going on. With a early signing that gives UT less time to have an impact on a player from out of state. IMHO

In the short term, meaning 2010 class UT could have saved a few more players, long-term I would think it would slightly be a disadvantage.

I totally agree with the drama issue. Some of the best players get far less attention because they spare their teams the drama.

For example, I understand why Jacques got upset, a bit, at one point, but he's All Vol. He was as stuck with whatever coaching decision UT made as the rest of us were. So, on NSD, there's little talk about the guy who could be our best player... and he's an in-state kid.

 

[Dudleys87]

Most recruits don't have a change of heart.

Why not let them commit, so we all know who is still considering their options?

If they are committing to the school then I am all for it but if they commit to the coach then im against it.

 

[LSUSIU]

I totally agree with the drama issue. Some of the best players get far less attention because they spare their teams the drama.

For example, I understand why Jacques got upset, a bit, at one point, but he's All Vol. He was as stuck with whatever coaching decision UT made as the rest of us were. So, on NSD, there's little talk about the guy who could be our best player... and he's an in-state kid.

I agree.

Jacques was not being a drama queen, he was clearly upset and I can't blame him.
I think if they let the players sign with an out clause if the HC leaves or gets fired I would be all for it.

Dudleys87,
I think the HC is very important to these recruits, I think a drop date basically if the HC hasn't left or been fired by a particular date.

The only way this stops is if you take the drama out.

 

[FalcoVol]

Chances are it would hurt UT in the long run.

I agree, with one caviat: Great coaches know how to adapt, on the field and off the field. Who knows whether or not CDD is gonna be great.

 

[Dudleys87]

I agree.

Jacques was not being a drama queen, he was clearly upset and I can't blame him.
I think if they let the players sign with an out clause if the HC leaves or gets fired I would be all for it.

Dudleys87,
I think the HC is very important to these recruits, I think a drop date basically if the HC hasn't left or been fired by a particular date.

I agree the HC is the corner stone in some cases and if he leaves they too should be able to rethink their decision..

 

[utmba93]

I agree.

Jacques was not being a drama queen, he was clearly upset and I can't blame him.

I think if they let the players sign with an out clause if the HC leaves or gets fired I would be all for it.

I like the 'out clause' idea. The rules need to protect players better than they do now.

AD's can protect their programs with contract provisions against coaching departures, but players have no recourse once they are signed.

I'm not trying to argue for yet another way to screw players.

 

[Dudleys87]

The transfer rule kills me too.
Coaches should not take a role in where you want to go. Take Marve for example there is no way a coach is going to tell me I cant transfer to to so and so. I think its wrong. If the kid does not want to play for you why take it upon yourself to pick and chose where a kid can go and where he cant?

 

[windycityvol]

I think it would probably hurt us in the long haul. You have to figure that most of the kids who would be early signees would be the kids that have grown up rooting for a school, and that would benefit schools in talent rich states like Texas, UGA, UF, etc. Tennessee has closed well with kids the last two years because of the relationships they've developed with the coaches near the end of the process. Think if there is early signing we never would have gotten guys like Janzen, Bryce, Darick or Justin Hunter.

It would however make the process as a whole less of a headache.

 

[utmba93]

The transfer rule kills me too.
Coaches should not take a role in where you want to go. Take Marve for example there is no way a coach is going to tell me I cant transfer to to so and so. I think its wrong. If the kid does not want to play for you why take it upon yourself to pick and chose where a kid can go and where he cant?

The transfer rule may be even trickier, but, in general, players who get paid with scholarships need a lot more control in taking their services wherever they prefer.

Maybe they'd have to limit the number of players a coach could take with him, but if JJ, for example, felt CLK and company offer him the best opportunity to get to the League, then so be it.

The AD's solution, again, would be to hire better coaches who give the players what they seek through their college eligibility.