In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 835
Online now 755 Record: 6507 (2/14/2012)
The place for Irish fans to engage in hardcore discussion about Notre Dame athletics
Talk with Irish fans from around the globe about college football's most storied program
The spot for anything on your mind outside of Notre Dame athletics
The place for Notre Dame fans to trade and exchange tickets
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
The responses to a post that I made the other day about verbals commiting to a school and still talking to other schools started me thinking that our commited kids often say that they are "100% commited to ND, but they still intend to take all of their visits". This is even worse than verbally commiting and still talking to other schools. Charlie had it right when he tried to keep committed kids from going on visits to other schools.
The thing about ND is that because most ( many ? ) of our recruits are going to ND to get an education as well as play football, ( our recruits could certainly go elsewhere and not have to put much effort into studying while they play football), it seems that most of, but not all, of our recruits shouldn't be interested in taking visits or even talking to other schools. Of course, there are some Greenberry's on our list, but most of our recruits should have a different perspective than the recruits going to the football factories.
Speaking of ND commits, shouldn't kids who choose education and football. be able to skip a few parties and dinners that they would get when they visit a school ? Actually, we probably have two kinds of recruits. Those who really want to go to a school like ND and those who the staff has convinced to go to ND and maybe that explains it.
I wonder what would happen if a staff at ND ( or a comprable school such as BYU) took a hard line on verbals who want to take all of their visits ? Is it better to let the soft recruits visit other schools, hope that they don't decommit, or tell a kid that if you go on a visit another school, you are still wanted, but we won't consider you committed ?
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by irishm 2 years ago
If you demand your recruits not go on other visits then you must not accept visitors who are committed elsewhere. You can't play the "a verbal is a lasting commitment" card with one hand while ignoring it with the other hand.
Recruiting is what it is. Nothing is final, save for a signature on NSD. You win some and you lose some. It's the way it is.
Unlike we posters, BK and his staff apparently understand that even though
we get a "commitment", we must continue to recruit the prospect until NSD.
He has stated this more than once. The problem with Weis' position ("if you're
looking, we're looking) is that, in the 2011 recruiting cycle, such an attitude
could well have resulted in the loss of Lynch, Tuitt and quite possibly, I.
Williams. In addition, in the 2012 recruiting cycle, how would such an
attitude have helped us with Kiel (an LSU commit) and Shepard (who
visited USC after committing to ND)?
The lack of true commitment is a trend across higher education - not just elite student-athlete recruits, but with all prospective students. I've worked in enrollment management for 5 years, and I've seen a shift happen just in that short time. You can compare the verbal commitment of athletes to the enrollment deposit paid by all students. In the past, when you paid your enrollment deposit, in the vast majority of cases it meant your pledge to a given school was set. The deposit is refundable until May 1 (a national standard, with the exception of early decision rules), but it was usually only in rare circumstances that students would withdraw their deposits in favor of attending another school.
Now the trend is that families pay multiple deposits ("securing" spots at multiple institutions knowing full well that their student is only going to one of them) or they wait until the very last minute. Even 10 years ago, most colleges had a pretty secure class by the end of March, but now the national trend for most schools is that it is very close or even after that May 1 deposit date before they know what to expect for the fall. In my opinion, there's nothing wrong with waiting to make that commitment - in fact, I can't imagine in today's economy that most people would commit without having all the facts about cost and financial aid at a given school. In most cases, people are waiting for the best deal - for a non-athlete, cost is often the deciding factor. For an elite athletic recruit, the "best deal" probably looks something like the earliest playing time, the best exposure, the nicest stuff, etc. I can certainly see the argument that it's okay to wait to see all of your options and have all the facts, but the fact of the matter is, schools are still pushing students (especially athletes) to commit early or the student risks losing a spot. It's kind of a crap shoot for many of these kids, and it's hard to blame them for wavering if they felt rushed into it. This was a lengthy way of saying that it's not all on the students - the colleges (not to mention the media attention surrounding a commitment) are largely at play here, too.
At the same time, so much of this has to do with the general attitude of the youngest generation. I'm not that much older than them, but my process of selecting a college and making a commitment was very different, and that was only 13 years ago. I can't imagine treating the process with the lack of respect I see every day now. I worked hard in high school, and I feel like I earned every acceptance letter and every scholarship offer, but I certainly didn't think I was entitled to it. There were just as many smart and talented kids out there, and I felt lucky to be considered among them. I think most of my friends would agree. Many of you here had to work a whole lot harder than my generation has to succeed, so I know you understand this. But that attitude has been replaced by the "everyone deserves a trophy for showing up" crowd. It's unfortunate, because I see so many students year after year that would be so incredible if they only believed it was important to care about the opportunities they have in front of them.
I guess the point of this rather lengthy diatribe is to say it seems like this is the way of the world. If we're going to be invested in following the recruitment of college student-athletes, we have to be aware that this is what's happening and try not to be surprised when things swing another way.
Gringo Mafia: The Girl. Director of Musical Activities and Group Hugs. 3-time POTW.
CMC Quote Master and Director of Football Related Discussions
5 Time POTW & 2 Time WPOTW Winner
Kinsaih, great reply. +1 for you.
Those of us parenting kids nowadays have to break the cycle. Make kids earn what they get. No entitlements, etc.
Of course, there are so many families with only one, maybe two kids at most, they inevitably tend to get a little spoiled.
"Having the right to do something doesn't mean it's right to do it." -- Chief Justice Warren Burger
I wonder if the NCAA could, not would, pass a rule that if a kid verbals, he can't take other visits unless he renounces the verbal.
This post was edited by irishm 2 years ago
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports