Flaws in the system, not good for players

[Pale Rider]

Checkwriter...Why the 'hating' on the SEC?
Its Network etc...heck...Theyre paying for it...

Its not like any PAC 12 school is poor...maybe some funky, misspending on their parts...
Biggest reason are the fans...they support their teams in the South...Unless you've experienced an SEC football game before you probably don't understand...
But give the Devil their due...they've invested in Softball...new stadiums etc...Alabama...had over 90K fans total at home games last year...Did you see ULL play AZ?...That's not SEC..The fans are there, and not just in Super Regionals...The lower end SEC programs are still struggling...Ole Miss just hired a 'Kali guy' from McNeese St, another LA school...

But I did see where Oregon is building a new stadium.

[CheckWriter]

Why is it hating?

There is no parity in sports (with the possible exception of the NFL where a small market team can still win - maybe why it is so popular?). It is driven by money:
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/01/sports/basketball/for-the-nba-no-bracket-busters-in-this-tournament.html?_r=0

Pac 8, then 10, dominated collage softball because the southwest is where softball was played. Now we have entered the network era in college sports and no network will generate as much revenue as the soon to be launched ESPN/SEC network. Those schools will have to use up a lot of money on non-revenue women's sports, including softball. SEC's turn to dominate.

I think this will only be compounded as college football goes the way of college basketball where, in a few (whatever time frame you want to insert) years, football players will start entering the draft as juniors in greater numbers, then soph and finally the studs will go as freshman. Then Nick Saban will figure out how to get the most guys drafted after one year of college sports and that is where the best of the best of the best, sir ! (MIB reference) will go. Money begets money.

Pac 8, 10, 12 dominance is over, it will all be revenue driven from here. Enjoy the SEC dominance. No hate, nothing against the SEC. It will get boring in a few years just as UCLA vs AZ every year wasn't that exciting except to UCLA & AZ fans.

JMO

[ontheblack]

PAC 12 cant complain. They have had more revenue than any other conference, including the SEC, because of their TV deals. Now the SEC get a rich TV deal AND they have the gate revenue which dwarfs that of the PAC 12.

[Pale Rider]

Well...sorta the statement about the FL gal studying tape...know for a FACT Oregon coaches did the same thing...saw folks in stands at several games videoing EVERY pitcher and batter...real incognito...on National TV using an I-phone...

For the record...I do live in the South, was not born here...am what's called a damn Yankee which means I came and stayed...am NOT a rabid football fan...

The Saban parity...I know kids who would sign on with him one the HOPE of playing...How many National Championships does he have? And...with that said...I personally know a kid who every SEC team is after...a real Straight A student...also bumping 300#s and runs like a deer......give Lord Saban (as LSU coined him) his due...the man can coach.
He will play SEC...Alabama wont be his choice...and Saban wants him bad...DD goes to school with him...since they started school...He asked me for my autograph once when he about 10...simply because I was (am) a soldier...Great kid...

[WhoMe]

On the Flaw topic, there are multiple flaws that I see at the moment on both ends:

Committing a kid early but with no true legal commitment. You are taking a kid off the market with the ability to arbitrarily change the offer. If a college is going to commit then the NCAA should allow them to be signed. This will also eliminate the de-committing on players part as well.

Once you commit players and they sign the NLI you are on a year to year contract. These kids are students who are going to school based on the scholarship provided. That it can be changed because the kid didn't end up as great as they expected is BS. (If the kid does something like fail out, break the law etc then pulling scholarship is justified). It should be a 4 year commitment.

What needs to end is the massive ambiguity allowed by the system at this time.If mommy and daddy are forced to have their DD signed some form of commitment when they verbal with legal repercussions this whole game changes. If a coach is required to live up to the agreement, even if the player has peaked (a real possibility when you are talking about 7th or 8th graders) then the whole game changes.

[jonriv]

I saw something from some law review taht suggested the following-

To allow for early commitments(bring it out in the open) but for each year prior to Senior year in HS they committment they would have to guarantee a scholarship year

ie Someone commits as a HS freshman the college would have to guarantee 3 years of $$$

The reasoning is that it would bring thins in the open, prevent some of the over-recruiting and force schools to only early commit the top, top players- would also bring it out of the shadows

[ontheblack]

I saw something from some law review taht suggested the following-

To allow for early commitments(bring it out in the open) but for each year prior to Senior year in HS they committment they would have to guarantee a scholarship year

ie Someone commits as a HS freshman the college would have to guarantee 3 years of $$$

The reasoning is that it would bring thins in the open, prevent some of the over-recruiting and force schools to only early commit the top, top players- would also bring it out of the shadows

I like it

[PDad]

I saw something from some law review taht suggested the following-

To allow for early commitments(bring it out in the open) but for each year prior to Senior year in HS they committment they would have to guarantee a scholarship year

ie Someone commits as a HS freshman the college would have to guarantee 3 years of $$$

The reasoning is that it would bring thins in the open, prevent some of the over-recruiting and force schools to only early commit the top, top players- would also bring it out of the shadows

I presume those years would be full rides, not partial scholarships. Interesting idea that the schools would never adopt.

What do you mean by over-recruiting?

[PDad]

The changes I'd like to see are:
- Change the definition of prospective student-athlete to be start of 7th grade.
- Allow coaches to reply to emails prior to the recruiting materials date (e.g. Sept 1 JR).
- Allow coaches to return calls and texts prior to the off-campus contact date (e.g. July 1 after JR).
- Allow NLI's to be offered and signed a year earlier so verbals would only be until the next NLI period.

The NCAA is under pressure from the top-5 conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, PAC and SEC) to give them more autonomy in determining their bylaws. They want to offer more benefits like full cost of attendance scholarships, extended health care and insurance coverage (e.g. pro prospects).

[fasterpitch92701]

Geeeeewhizzzz.... late to this party. Nevertheless, some generic comments:

- any 13 year old who thinks they know what school is "best" for them is...not grasping reality. And at that age they shouldn't be anyway. Any parent forcing or pushing the decision made by a 13 year old is not grasping reality either.
- “If your on a team that is "elite" talent then the mindset throughout is Top 25 college minded, why change winning competitive was right! If your on a competitive team or otherwise the hope is to have a chance"........No offense but, sorry, don't buy into that. If the ONLY objective of going to college is to play softball, ok fine. But maybe there are other reasons to go to school. DD played for Phil Mumma, who was a wonderful gentleman and great coach. He saw no stigma when DD chose a school that wasn't softball trendy or a powerhouse but, rather, a school that was a "fit" for several reasons, including education, student body size, classroom/teacher ratios, school focus, majors, athletics, commitment to excellence of the STUDENT athlete….. He congratulated her on a smart decision. I would hope other coaches would do the same.
- Follow the money. College coaches will tell you anything that will help THEM be successful. They want a longer contract and m-o-n-e-y. Most TB coaches (but NOT all, including the one noted above) will tell you anything that helps their revenue stream and self promotion. Parents feed off of all of this with Pollyanna full ride mentality because their DD is so great. Yep. That's what 10's of thousands of parents think. Reality is somewhat different. Can happen. Probably won't. It’s a statistical minority.
- Worry less about softball and more about grades.
- The NCAA will change, “improve” and adjust items that help the NCAA. That is reality.
- The quest for TV time... gawd, makes me puke. Half the players on the team never see the field and just ride the pine. And 99% of the teams never get on TV. Video tape your DD, enjoy it, move on. This is supposed to be about your DD, not you saying "hey, my DD is on TV, aren't I great!!!!”
- Ahhhh.... the quest for the top 25. Isn't that wonderful. But what if top 25 schools are not a "fit"? Do we go forward with the concept that saying you're in a top 25 school is more important that being successful in college?
- Bryant Gumbel did a great HBO segment on “TOP 25” schools and the degree scams. Lot’s of “communications” courses, “interdisciplinary studies”, “Swahili” or “organizational development” courses that have no use in the real world. Of course, when TOP25 schools produce athletes in any sport that can’t read beyond the 5th grade level…makes you kind of wonder….. Watch the HBO segment if you can. Google it. Very… ah…..revealing. Actually, scary.

The net/net of all this is fairly simple. College softball is a 4 year stint. Half the players at any level ride the pine. Virtually no one plays pro ball. A degree with substance lasts a lifetime. 4 years vs 60 years. 4 years. 60 years… hummmmm….. pondering…. Going to college to play softball is entirely different than going to college to get an education. A mix of both is very healthy but most adults…understand that the primary p-o-i-n-t of college is education. But to do that you need a “fit”. TOP25 MAY BE a fit. May not. And, in the end, expecting a 13 year old to understand this is somewhat problematic, particularly if the parents don’t understand this. (ending in a preposition, -3pts….)

Ok, I think I have managed to piss of about 81.673% of the posters. My work is done here.

Enjoy in good health.