HuskerBoard

View attachment 12568

I wonder how big some of the classes are at other schools?  

@NUance I think I saw Wisconsin signed 19 of their 20 commits today.

@ColoradoHuskWinning does have that effect and really makes recruiting easier.

Will this change how the services rank the classes from here until February?  Do "signed" recruits carry any more weight?  Always excited for new kids (I'll try to read up on them when they commit or seem to create a very popular thread), but don't follow recruiting rankings and services much at all.

@HuskerInLostWages: 

Or you could be Texas and be 6 - 6. I heard they (or anyone else in Texas) didn’t get any of the Top 10 in their own state last year.  

It'll be interesting study to see how schools handle verbal commits that don't sign.  Exciting times!

Who else heard this about Ferentz (sp?) of Iowa: if you commit to Iowa then you have make a permanent commitment.  Iowa holds that place for the player.  That commit has to immediately call all the other coaches that have been trying to recruit them and tell them that they are committed to Iowa.  If they don't do that then Ferentz can give their spot to someone else.  

  After I heard that I thought, "Wow! You better be sure that you want to play for Iowa when you commit to them because your commitment is permanent!"

Well @ladyhawke that is what the word commitment is supposed to mean. Unfortunately in most cases players just use it like asking somebody to save their seat for them, not really sure if they’re coming back or not. They should change the wording from commitment to lightly contemplated temporary intention that may change if some perceived better situation should come up.

I agree with you Comfortably Numb. It's too bad that many of these young players don't understand what commitment means. That's why I don't put too much value on a kid who says he's committed to Nebraska but is still visiting other schools. I say, visit all the schools THEN make your decision.  

I agree ladyh but I guess it does give us all stuff to hope and talk about this time of year. I sure don’t fault Ferentz for trying to make it mean something and I agree with that approach.  If the player’s going to keep their options open then it’s only fair that the school also keeps theirs open. Not sure Iowa is the place to make that stand but I respect it.

I side with the recruits in this. It's much worse for an 17-18 year old kid to be left high and dry than an athletic department. It's also one of the biggest decisions of their lives and situations change.

Moiraine, I know what you mean about the recruit being left 'high and dry' but if this is one of the most important decisions in their lives then I would think it would be smart for them to take more time to make it.  Take those visits then sit down and weigh the pros and cons-the biggest pro, I would think, being whether or not you would get to play right away.  

The sportscaster did say that Ferentz has lost some really good recruits by having this clause in his signing agreement.

But what if there's not room for them after they wait?

@Moiraine You can't have your cake and eat it too. Well I guess they can the way it currently works but I think it would improve the whole process if these commitments actually meant something. I suppose like everything, the better the player is the more options they have. When a player doesn't honor their commitment that also adversely affects other players and not just the school. If we're holding a spot for player X, how many others does that prevent the opportunity for? IDK, maybe the way it is, is as good as it gets.

I really like the idea of not being able to offer a kid until the Spring of his Junior year and make it possible to sign as soon as the offer is made.  It will never happen, but I liked the way Bo was thinking.  

I think the big, exploitative business of CFB can survive somehow even if recruits get more power and choice and don't essentially have to sign binding contracts earlier and earlier.

But recruits don't have the power. And so they will have to work with the hand they're dealt, until that changes. If it changes.

On of the sportscasters suggested that we do away with the signing day altogether. He also suggested that high schoolers not be allowed to sign until their sophomore year in high school. What do you all think about that?  

High schoolers can't sign until their senior years currently.  Not sure what that sportscaster is referencing.