July Recruitment Period in Jeopardy

[campbest]

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/news/story?id=5709358

Discuss.

 

[boksooner]

Based on the article, I do not understand why the conference commission unanimously voted to eliminate the July recruiting period. Do they think that the best way to clean up recruiting is to make coaches more dependent on handlers? Because that is exactly what will happen with this change. I understand that interaction between college coaches and AAU is a problem, but trying to eliminate summer recruiting is not the way to fix it.

 

[SoonerDAZE]

I'm sure what I'm going to say is going to be controversial and not without detractors, but as a former athlete who was recruited under, and has played under the NCAA and its guidelines, I have very strong opinions on that organization.

I think this would be a HUGE mistake, if adopted, by the NCAA. The money it takes to recruit at a high level is a hurdle many schools simply cannot traverse. ANY change in rules that exacerbates that chasm between the have-s and the have-nots, is unwelcome in my opinion.

The NCAA should be about two things and two things only - serving the student's best interests and leveling the playing field between programs as much as possible. Policing outside these areas of focus is a waste of resources and, quite frankly, could be viewed as a possible abuse of authority.

There are two distinct parts to recruiting from a program's perspective - assessment and sales. This proposed rule change won't affect the sales side very much, but it will dramatically affect the assessment part - resulting in at the very least, late decisions; and at the worst, bad decisions, when deciding which players fit a program's needs and the subsequent decision to offer a scholarship.

This is from the "about us" page of the NCAA's site: "THE NCAA's CORE PURPOSE IS TO govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount."

A change like this will only further tip the balance in the favor of the schools with the largest recruiting budgets. Not equitable in the least. When the NCAA took away the April eval period, it started the dangerous slide down the proverbial slippery slope; but taking away the July period, and as a result, ALL summer evaluation, would be horrible. It forces lower budget programs to take the limited dollars they were spending in the summer to see many multiple prospects, and try to take that money and spread it out over the academic year to see a handful of prospects. Yeah, good luck with that.

Ultimately, who's caught in the middle??? The student-athlete! There will be offers that aren't made because programs simply cannot get out to see a player; and there will be offers made that shouldn't be, because a program simply won't have enough eval time, and will be forced to rely on services and opinions that are many times influenced by external forces. Not a very pretty picture. Result is a student-athlete who is not given as many options to make quality decisions about their future.

Is that what these people are after

 

[NorthCarolinaSooner]

As a coach (having coached both high school and college) I have conflicting opinions on this but....I DON'T think this is bad. There has been WAYYYY too much influence on recruiting by AAU guys over the last 10-15 years. It is bad for basketball and has been bad for the NCAA. You see it over and over and I think this actually LESSENS the influence of AAU guys and doesn't increase it. I could be wrong but I just perceive it as giving them less influence.


I DO however think that some of these summer events have been positive for a lot of athletes who may not have been seen otherwise....so, basically I can see it from both perspectives.

As a current high school coach, I have lost two DI kids the last 2 years due to recruiting going on at AAU events by other coaches. One of the reasons I could do without AAU. There are way too many sleazy guys involved in it.


Ultimately though, I couldn't care less either way. It is what it is.

 

[Sam]

Based on the article, I do not understand why the conference commission unanimously voted to eliminate the July recruiting period. Do they think that the best way to clean up recruiting is to make coaches more dependent on handlers? Because that is exactly what will happen with this change. I understand that interaction between college coaches and AAU is a problem, but trying to eliminate summer recruiting is not the way to fix it.

It also cuts down on the time the coaches can actually watch the recruits and see if they fit personality and skill wise into their program. The time they do get to go scout if this passes actually takes away from time with the current players too as well. This is a lose lose situation imo.

NCAA continues to be out of touch.

 

[Seymore Cox]

The summer circuit is a circus. Coaches know what guys they want from the summer circuit already. It's alot of deal breaking between assistants, aau coaches and families. I'm not as opposed to this rule bcause of this issue. It hurts the borderline recruit though. The guy who is between a mid major and high major.

 

[campbest]

Played on the summer circuit from the eight grade through graduation, so naturally I have strong opinion on this, mainly due to where I grew up. As an athlete from a small town in an obscure state for recruiting (almost 3 hours from Albuquerque, NM) taking away the July evaluation period would have been detrimental to any exposure I received. The NCAA initiated the AAU restriction rule (think it was you had to play on a team from your home state or a certain mile radius from you hometown) when I was a junior, so instead of playing on a team out of Denver which I had for a couple years, I was forced to play on a less recognizable team from NM. Anyone who has played AAU knows the difference between a shoe sponsored organization and a local AAU team made up of HS players.

How is a kid supposed to get recruited if they cannot be seen? You can only send out so many tapes to different schools, these coaches want as sure of a thing as possible because their jobs are on the line. I'm not saying college basketball recruiting is fine the way it is (because we know it's not) but taking away evalution periods is not the way to go.

 

[MsProudSooner]

How is a kid supposed to get recruited if they cannot be seen? You can only send out so many tapes to different schools, these coaches want as sure of a thing as possible because their jobs are on the line. I'm not saying college basketball recruiting is fine the way it is (because we know it's not) but taking away evalution periods is not the way to go.

If the coaches aren't allowed to go out to the AAU tournaments, something will fill the void. For instance, I can foresee websites where coaches can pull up the highlights of players.

I have no idea whether keeping the coaches home in July is a good or a bad thing. I do think the coaches need more opportunity to evaluate the character of the players and the 'handlers' need to be kept at arm;s distance.

 

[DFWHoopster]

I'm sure what I'm going to say is going to be controversial and not without detractors, but as a former athlete who was recruited under, and has played under the NCAA and its guidelines, I have very strong opinions on that organization.

I think this would be a HUGE mistake, if adopted, by the NCAA. The money it takes to recruit at a high level is a hurdle many schools simply cannot traverse. ANY change in rules that exacerbates that chasm between the have-s and the have-nots, is unwelcome in my opinion.

The NCAA should be about two things and two things only - serving the student's best interests and leveling the playing field between programs as much as possible. Policing outside these areas of focus is a waste of resources and, quite frankly, could be viewed as a possible abuse of authority.

There are two distinct parts to recruiting from a program's perspective - assessment and sales. This proposed rule change won't affect the sales side very much, but it will dramatically affect the assessment part - resulting in at the very least, late decisions; and at the worst, bad decisions, when deciding which players fit a program's needs and the subsequent decision to offer a scholarship.

This is from the "about us" page of the NCAA's site: "THE NCAA's CORE PURPOSE IS TO govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount."

A change like this will only further tip the balance in the favor of the schools with the largest recruiting budgets. Not equitable in the least. When the NCAA took away the April eval period, it started the dangerous slide down the proverbial slippery slope; but taking away the July period, and as a result, ALL summer evaluation, would be horrible. It forces lower budget programs to take the limited dollars they were spending in the summer to see many multiple prospects, and try to take that money and spread it out over the academic year to see a handful of prospects. Yeah, good luck with that.

Ultimately, who's caught in the middle??? The student-athlete! There will be offers that aren't made because programs simply cannot get out to see a player; and there will be offers made that shouldn't be, because a program simply won't have enough eval time, and will be forced to rely on services and opinions that are many times influenced by external forces. Not a very pretty picture. Result is a student-athlete who is not given as many options to make quality decisions about their future.

Is that what these people are after

great post- agree 100%.

 

[campbest]

If the coaches aren't allowed to go out to the AAU tournaments, something will fill the void. For instance, I can foresee websites where coaches can pull up the highlights of players.

I have no idea whether keeping the coaches home in July is a good or a bad thing. I do think the coaches need more opportunity to evaluate the character of the players and the 'handlers' need to be kept at arm;s distance.

Entrepreneurial business model is already spinning in my head.

 

[sys]

agree with soonerdaze. just a horrible, horrible idea. hopefully the coaches can kill it.

 

[SoonerDAZE]

Entrepreneurial business model is already spinning in my head.

After seeing the quick reaction of Tom Izzo on behalf of the NABC, I highly doubt this gains enough traction with the NCAA for there to be any such changes in the immediate future. We should have sufficient time to come up with a few nice business plans to take advantage of any leverage vacated by the demise of the summer travel circuit

In all seriousness, the more info that comes out, I don't think anything will come of this - at least in the "kill everything" stance proposed by the Conference Commissioners Association. Like with anything, time will tell.

 

[campbest]

After seeing the quick reaction of Tom Izzo on behalf of the NABC, I highly doubt this gains enough traction with the NCAA for there to be any such changes in the immediate future. We should have sufficient time to come up with a few nice business plans to take advantage of any leverage vacated by the demise of the summer travel circuit

Love where your head is at DAZE, gives us time to raise sufficient capital.

In all seriousness, the more info that comes out, I don't think anything will come of this - at least in the "kill everything" stance proposed by the Conference Commissioners Association. Like with anything, time will tell.

Agreed, the more this proposed policy changes hits mainstream, the more opposition it will garner. The vote itself wasn't public until released by the NABC, think that gives an insight of how the commissioners wanted the policy change to transpire (i.e. on the down low).