Flaws in the system, not good for players

[jonriv]

My fear is that as the issue gets worse with early and earlier commitments (in softball and other sports) is that if the NCAA refuses to act then congress will decide to weigh in(never good)

Parents need to be aware of what is going on and be level-headed. IMO too many parents go into the process with unrealistic expactations and stars in their eyes- this gets passed onto their kids

[PDad]

My fear is that as the issue gets worse with early and earlier commitments (in softball and other sports) is that if the NCAA refuses to act then congress will decide to weigh in(never good)

Congress isn't a viable threat. Sure, they'll take advantage of it to grab some exposure and possibly hold some hearings, but they won't actually do anything.

The only government entities that would actually intervene are regulatory and judicial. For example, the recent involvement by the NLRB and the class-action lawsuit(s) have had an effect on the NCAA and I expect they will grant more autonomy to the big-money conferences very soon. However, I don't see early recruiting getting that level of attention.

The first very early softball recruits are just entering college and how they pan out will influence what college coaches do in the future. I expect softball's early commits will devolve into softer verbals and verbals will continue to be unregulated unless change is driven by football and basketball.

[WhoMe]

Of course not all verbals are created equal:

A player going into their Junior Year- I would see this as a very firm commit from the player and college due to only being a year away from NLI

A player heading into their Sophomore Year-Still solid depending on age, grades etc but a little scarier for both since a lot can happen in two years.

A player heading into Frosh year-So much going on I don't truly understand that the kid knows what they truly want to go to school for. (STUDENT/athlete)

8th grade and below-Absolutely insane to think anyone would commit someone this young (For some reason Todd Marinovich pops into my head) Kids don't even know where their HS bathrooms are yet but they are committing to college?

Maybe they can start looking at very athletic parents and start committing their pre-offspring. Showcase maternity wards?

[jonriv]

I found the article

http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/vie ... ntext=bclr


Some interesting ideas

[PDad]

I found the article

http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/vie ... ntext=bclr

Some interesting ideas

The fallacy of the proposal is expressed in this sentence - "If, for example, an early scholarship offer to a freshman had to contain a guarantee of four years of aid, schools would offer them only to the finest prospects, and casual commitments would probably disappear."

This was written around the time multi-year commitments were passed by the NCAA and another sentence shows they didn't know about that because it's notation cites the old rule - "Under existing rules, the best deal a recruit can get is a one-year, informal deal that could evaporate at any time."

Since full rides are not the norm in softball, most offers are partial. This proposal would still leave early recruits weighing formal long-term offers vs. shorter-term informal offers with a higher percentage.

The real answer is to simply make the early commitments binding without the gimmick.

[jonriv]

[quoteThe real answer is to simply make the early commitments binding without the gimmick.][/quote]

I agree- I did like the general concept of what was proposed