Your Thoughts on Taking Scholarship Money Away??

[Sftbll4ever]

So, a friend of mines daughter just found out that the New coach that just started this last season is taking all but a fraction of her money away. She did this to about 4 girls. Then come to find out she had actually recruited 12 new players to the program.

My thought is, wouldn't have been nice for the coach to give the girls a heads up? I know when my dd's coach came into a new program, she kept all the other coaches kids. They are phased out now and the program is getting a little better every year (well for that school). She kept the promise of the other coach.

These girls have no money and now it is (I think) a little to late to try and transfer.

Am I being a little naive?

[NumeroUno]

Coaches that do things like that should be exposed.

But on the other hand they hired the new coach to make the team better and that is his job. If he doesn't think the old recruits are cutting it then he has to make a decision.

[Blind Squirrel]

Welcome to D1 ball. I hear of scholarship reductions all over the place and it is often even worse when a new coach comes in. New coaches want THEIR players. They want the best players possible and reducing existing player's scholarship amount enables them to offer more $$ to recruits or get more recruits. Make no mistake: D1 ball rarely goes the way people think it will go for their kid. Getting 10 at bats per year, scholarship reductions - sometimes to $0, not making the travel squad, etc. Why do you see some big programs have kids transfer year after year? And people outside the programs have less than 1% knowledge of what is really going on with a team. So yeah, you're naive. I was too. Probably 99% of parents who haven't been through it yet as well. I hate to say it but based on what I've seen over the last 3 years, the chances are that most of you will be disappointed with what your kid does in college softball.

Chicken Little Squirrel

[Trophy Hunter]

With the new rule allowing 4year scholarship offers does that take the reduction off the table or can they still reduce the amount?

The ryan80 link is spam, btw.

The whole point of the change is to ensure the players education gets paid for, at least to the extent of the offer and agreement. Everything should be in writing and lawyer should review the terms prior to any deal being signed, to ensure the money is guaranteed over the course of the agreement. Just like with any deal, or business transaction.

Schools will be reluctant to make 4 year offers. It is a bargaining chip for the top heavily recruited players, and it is encumbent on the players to ask for multi-year deals. The top players are the only ones with any bargaining power in this regard. In time it will hopefully become the norm at the top and trickle down to other players.

If a player is being recruited by multiple PAC-12 and / SEC type schools, they should absolutely be getting 4 year deals. Most of these players are in the top organizations, and not yet juniors in HS, so they rely heavily on their travel coaches for advice and communication with the schools during the recruiting process. In that sense a good travel coach will already be taking a lead role in securing multi year deals, and they should be getting them now. Once the process moves to the family directly, you should still ask for multi years even if it hasn't been offered yet, and stand your ground.

Mind you, the schools will load the agreement with "outs," or ways they can renege on the deal. These will be buried in the fine print, which is why you should get a lawyer to review the contract, and let the lawyer address any concerns with the schools directly so the negotiations don't impact the player/ coach relationship. I can guarantee you that some families will be so excited with a four year deal they will sign off on it without consulting a lawyer,and then scream bloody murder when the deal is reduced or cut altogether because Suzy got hurt, or gained 20 pounds, or didnt get 120 at bats or hit over .400.

The schools may even unofficially collude to avoid making multi-year offers. The players parents and travel coaches will need to take a strong stance and refuse to accept single year offers. Eventually someone will make you the offer you want and the others will have to fall in line or turn to recruiting lesser talent.

If you already have a one year deal, when it comes up for renewal you should be seeking a multi year renewal, particularly if your daughter was an impact player her freshman year.

You have a lot invested in your daughters softball career. This is the only payoff you will ever get. Get it in writing, get a lawyer, get it right.

[Fredegar]

Softball4Ever -- In your opinion, did the play of these 4 girls warrant a scholarship reduction? Or were they 4 solid contributors to whom this came as a complete shock?

The general question is: With most scholarships being year-to-year, do folks believe it's okay to reduce them based on performance? Or do people feel that the coach should honor the scholarship as long as the player does what they're told, keeps out of trouble, etc?

My view is that scholarships are year-to-year for a reason. Coaches may need to bring in new recruits ASAP if some kids don't pan out the way they thought. Waiting for kids to be phased out could take too long and cost the coach a job.

BTW, allowing 4-year guarantees is risky. It can really handcuff teams which make a mistake on a kid who doesn't pan out. And there WILL be mistakes. Obviously, the 4-year guarantee is good for the player, but it's not good for the coach, or the teammates who ARE playing well and ARE deserving of more money, yet all money is tied up in guarantees. I just don't feel a team should be saddled with an under-performer for 4 years because the kid had a great sophomore year in High School.

[93players]

The market for information like this is pretty imperfect because parents and players rarely want to announce their scholarship has been reduced or taken away. There are some coaches who pretty well honor scholarships as long as players continue to be committed even if they have not turned out the way everyone expected. The new coach is always a wild card as they may try to undo what a prior coach has promised. The transfer and play rules are pretty liberal in softball so there is a lot of moving around. Some players who do really well are sometimes contacted by other teams trying to urge a player to consider a transfer. I know the 4 year deal is there now but I doubt many big D1 programs will use it except for an elite pitcher or hitter.

[ontheblack]

With coaches recruiting at more and more at the younger ages, this is bound to happen more, not less.

I wonder how many parents will screw their kids out of what should be considered reasonable offers in line with the caliber of player because they think DD is All World and worth nothing less than a 4 year full ride.

[Fredegar]

Still waiting on an answer from the OP. Did the play of those 4 girls warrant a scholarship reduction, in your opinion?

I'm still curious if HB members think scholarships SHOULD be adjusted if players are clearly not panning out. Or should the coach honor it and live with the mistake until that player graduates?

[Fredegar]

Right Spazsdad, I've heard similar comments about coaches choosing NOT to reduce based on performance. That may very well be more common than coaches who reduce them. But remember that it's not just the coach who has to live with a bust of a recruit. How about the teammates who wish they were getting more support from a scholarship athlete? How about the over-achieving teammates who probably deserve another 10-20% for playing above and beyond all expectations. That 10-20% needs to come from somewhere.

I realize it may not be politically correct here to be okay with reducing scholarships, but some situations warrant it, if the team hopes to improve sooner than later. Guess we may never hear from the OP about those specific players.

[Sftbll4ever]

Softball4Ever -- In your opinion, did the play of these 4 girls warrant a scholarship reduction? Or were they 4 solid contributors to whom this came as a complete shock?

Sorry, real life got in the way. Honestly, one of them was a shock to me. She did exactly what the coaches wanted and she did more for the program than the year before.

The others, I can see. I think they proved that they are working towards the coaches goals and needs, but the new players have yet to prove that. Oh, well, like Blind Rodent said, this is DI softball!!!

I'm not sure, but on the 4 year scholarships, you still risk the chance of losing some of your money if you don't pan out the way the coach wanted. I'll have to go back and look at my DD.