Early signing period

[Pennsyhusker_rivals246774]

Just read an article interviewing Eichorst on proposed changes and reforms in recruiting. One of the reforms mentioned is establishing two early signing periods, one in June and one in December.

Thoughts? Is this good or bad for NU? Or neither?

 

[NikkiSixx_rivals269993]

I have always thought that the early signing period thing would be a net negative for Nebraska.

In my opinion, an early signing day would lead to a new gold rush to sign recruits, speeding up the process, which isn't in the best interest of the athlete either.

I can see this gold rush becoming the schools who sign full classes in June vs those that do not. Based on our prior history, we might be one of those schools that struggle to fill their early class, while other schools will have potentially signed an entire class.

We could be on the positive side of some of this, but overall, I see it as a net negative, mainly because it speeds things up for the athlete, and it's important to get the right fit.

The other effect of an early signing day is it could potentially create issues with the evaluation of recruits. So often, at least today, a large amount of offers are issued, only to be rescinded later as classes start to take shape and recruits are re-evaluated during their senior season.

I think an early signing period might also create a division among the athletes, putting a smaller number of them into a 'blue chip' pool, with the rest lumped in the non-blue chip category.

So in essence, I could see this leading to a huge frenzy, for a smaller number of players in June, while the Feb signing date, becoming the one for the scraps leftover for others to fill out their class.

 

[Nebraska Fan]

Just read an article interviewing Eichorst on proposed changes and reforms in recruiting. One of the reforms mentioned is establishing two early signing periods, one in June and one in December.

Thoughts? Is this good or bad for NU? Or neither?

Eichorst interview

There's a lot of good stuff in the proposals
-hard cap of 25 signers
-take official recruiting visits in the summer before their senior years, conceivably creating opportunities for visits to be paired with attending a camp
-regulate so-called third parties, such as seven-on-seven coaches
-adding one coach

 

[Pennsyhusker_rivals246774]

I have always thought that the early signing period thing would be a net negative for Nebraska.

In my opinion, an early signing day would lead to a new gold rush to sign recruits, speeding up the process, which isn't in the best interest of the athlete either.

I can see this gold rush becoming the schools who sign full classes in June vs those that do not. Based on our prior history, we might be one of those schools that struggle to fill their early class, while other schools will have potentially signed an entire class.

We could be on the positive side of some of this, but overall, I see it as a net negative, mainly because it speeds things up for the athlete, and it's important to get the right fit.

The other effect of an early signing day is it could potentially create issues with the evaluation of recruits. So often, at least today, a large amount of offers are issued, only to be rescinded later as classes start to take shape and recruits are re-evaluated during their senior season.

I think an early signing period might also create a division among the athletes, putting a smaller number of them into a 'blue chip' pool, with the rest lumped in the non-blue chip category.

So in essence, I could see this leading to a huge frenzy, for a smaller number of players in June, while the Feb signing date, becoming the one for the scraps leftover for others to fill out their class.

I think these are my thoughts as well

 

[Husker4life]

One of our best recruiting tools is gameday visits. Summer camps and visits will not be as useful.

 

[Pennsyhusker_rivals246774]

I also think we have to consider the well being of these very young men. Making a huge decision like this at age 16 or 17 is difficult. Young people often make decisions out of emotion and can act very impulsively. The mere fact of so many decommits should not push us to an early signing period, because it shows how emotional and impulsive the initial decisions were.
If we allow all of these early signees I predict what you will end up with are more Freshman year transfers as disgruntled and confused young men realize they made a mistake. Better to have a high school senior decommit in October rather than transfer a year later.

 

[Nebraska Fan]

I also think we have to consider the well being of these very young men. Making a huge decision like this at age 16 or 17 is difficult. Young people often make decisions out of emotion and can act very impulsively. The mere fact of so many decommits should not push us to an early signing period, because it shows how emotional and impulsive the initial decisions were.
If we allow all of these early signees I predict what you will end up with are more Freshman year transfers as disgruntled and confused young men realize they made a mistake. Better to have a high school senior decommit in October rather than transfer a year later.

Is December acceptable to you?

 

[Pennsyhusker_rivals246774]

Is December acceptable to you?

December yes. They will be done with their Senior year of football at that point. I do agree that February is too late. But June is too early I think.

Of course, there is always the Rich Rod suggestion that we just eliminate signing periods completely. But I think you would end up with too many early commitments later regretted

 

[TruHusker]

I also think we have to consider the well being of these very young men. Making a huge decision like this at age 16 or 17 is difficult. Young people often make decisions out of emotion and can act very impulsively. The mere fact of so many decommits should not push us to an early signing period, because it shows how emotional and impulsive the initial decisions were.
If we allow all of these early signees I predict what you will end up with are more Freshman year transfers as disgruntled and confused young men realize they made a mistake. Better to have a high school senior decommit in October rather than transfer a year later.

The focus seems to be on the impulsive nature of 17 year old boys which I understand. but what about stuff that happens at colleges? coaching changes, head and position, violations, scandals, etc. I am in the camp of leave it alone.

 

[CFBfan70]

I'm ok with it if the school that signs the athlete in an early signing period has to commit more than one year to the student athlete. I've never liked the fact that the athlete has to commit for four years but the school only one.

 

[nebcountry]

I'd have to see it in action, a lot of variables at play.

Advantage recruits
- If the school won't sign them early, recruit knows they're down the pecking order.
- Individuals that will not flip can sign and move on with their last year of school.
- Recruits will have a better view of class make up (i.e. are they the 3rd RB in the class).

Advantage schools
- Keep kids from looking around and flipping. Then having to fill holes maybe late in the cycle.
- Remove doubt. The number of signees at any given point of time will be known. The commitment level of desired recruits will be known (actions speak louder than words).

Unknown
- What happens if a coach leaves/fired, NCAA probation, scandals or squabbles.
- What happens if a recruit is hurt their senior year.
- Will the NLI be revised.

 

[chicolby]

I think the innovative and creative coaches/programs will evolve and make it work to their advantages. It pays off to have strong evaulators (which I believe Nebraska has) and also good relationships with highschool programs. Some programs have such strong reputations that they don't have to do much leg work early on because they will simply grab guys later in the recruiting process, so in a way, this can be an advantage to teams that do their due diligence and get the "gems" to sign before the Ohio States and Michigans of the world see the attention and then focus their efforts late.

Of course, I agree that our home games are a huge advantage for us, so that will be the negative.

The real key will be how many high school kids actually use the early signing period vs. waiting anyway. If they hold off on signing, the whole early signing period becomes a non-issue anyway.

 

[Foosball is the devil]

Would hope that Juniors be allowed official visits so that we could still showcase gameday?

 

[Husker.Wed._rivals]

"I think you need to think about it in that more broad context," Eichorst said in a phone interview Monday. "I know people want to pull pieces and talk about the pieces, but really I think to understand and explain the rationale appropriately, you've got to understand the whole process."

I can never figure out whether these kinds of statements are goobledy-gook, or I am too dense to understand them. When talking about going to the dentist somebody could say he drills your teeth with no Novocain and is excruciating, but if you look at the whole process, you have a nice smile and the bill is cheap. IMHO you HAVE to look at the parts in the whole process and if one or more of them are totally unacceptable, the whole process doesn't matter.

That being said, one would hope while trying to be a good, team-player committee member, ADSE is primarily looking out for UNL and has consulted HCMR and others to ensure what is achieved is good for Nebraska. I trust him to do that, and the fact Meyer and Sabin are against the package makes me think it is better for us.

 

[JohnRossEwing]

Sign when you want. Period.

This is not difficult.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan_rivals19671]

Under Mack Brown, Texas used to fill their classes with verbals very very early. Often times, those kids maxed out as sophomore's and juniors and Texas honored their scholly anyway, and Texas paid for it many times over and they kept doing it. If a school sitting in a talent rich state like Texas can screw it up, then most schools can and probably will as well. I don't care either way as I suspect Saban and Harbaugh and Meyer will all do quite well no matter the recruiting rules, but to teams like Nebraska that have to go get their players, this would seem like an uphill battle to get it right. I think we'd be forced to offer some kids early that we wouldn't have otherwise done, and then risk wasting a scholly if their senior season disappointed. Teams like Michigan and Texas and 'Bama and such can tell a kid, "don't commit anywhere, we want you but need to see some senior film", putting us behind the eight ball if we're interested and forcing us to offer early than we'd normally like if we want him.

 

[GBRhuskers_rivals203711]

It happens in basketball and baseball, no reason it shouldn't in football. Official visit restrictions will have to be changed; starting with when a recruit can take an official visit.

 

[nebcountry]

Having thought about it a bit more, in general it looks like a good thing. It will keep coaching staffs and recruits honest. There can be specific cases where it will be bad, but there's specific cases where the present system is bad.

If you look at the recruiting top 25, about 75% of the spots already have a committed recruit (if 25 spots per team). The bulk of these already committed recruits will go on to sign. But what about flips? I don't know the numbers, so post 'em if you have 'em. It seems like a low number of guys flip, and we don't rack up a bunch of guys that flip to us.

I would guess there'll still be recruits that want to wait. It will keep staffs from signing recruits that are only placeholders for the A-list guys. It will keep recruits from committing to teams only until something "better" comes along.

 

[studed]

december is a good idea so players cant get cut last minute. june no

 

[dockentwo]

Eichorst interview

There's a lot of good stuff in the proposals
-hard cap of 25 signers
-take official recruiting visits in the summer before their senior years, conceivably creating opportunities for visits to be paired with attending a camp
-regulate so-called third parties, such as seven-on-seven coaches
-adding one coach

Gotta like your post. This is a bold move by a very connected committee and had too have compromises. A lot of good posts here; will always be a few hissy fits by the omnipotentless.
IMO / but willing to learn :

a) Hard cap of 25 signers
- Really levels the playing field in terms of distributing talent. There will be less stockpiling on rep alone.
The redshirting could hurt you, but there is always players leaving and it will be managed better.
- Not so long ago " top" ( or SEC conferences ) teams would get way more faxed commits at 8 AM ; sort
them to their ideal and keep the most allowed and tell the others to go make due; this should kill that.
- Players will see who is at their position and this enhances ability to decipher what they are hearing.

b) Summer visits; thumbs up!!!
- Should allow for more time and less stress to see the U and meet with the departments. VS run to a
plane and rush to a game and through a gamut of sales meetings and a social rush night.
- Should allow better time for more parents to come and others of influence. Recruit being with the
party he came with through more of the process.
- Testing and camps: school gives him a better idea of his gifts and he can increase his opportunities.
Coaches know who and what talents they have the opportunity to work with .

c) Regulate 3rd parties:
- this can be beat to death; some regulation is necessary / always the loner alum or renegade coach
- Gives a framework for modifications.

d) Adding coach :

- Cant be bad; the money available is skyrocketing and kids are there to learn.
- With year round recruiting and tech; these coaches are working too much, always on call.

e) More disgruntled : LOOK how many have been run off at some top programs; and seemingly quieted
Away

- This system is more see through, in my opinion; will always be the disgruntled for good or bad reasons.
- Top of the Pecking order will have more early signees ; but some will know they can't sign and will move on to
real opportunities. Texas was Filling their class around the Spring game ( was said it cost them Rex),
with only a few spots remaining, maybe didn't get a late bloomer / but they were getting highly rated and "starred" on the first shot.