CB Terrence Alexander
- Thread starter nebraskafaninwi
- Start date
ADS
New member
blessed2bahusker
New member
I don't think it is that unreasonable. It is instilling a team first mentality in his players, and that is something that is sorely lacking in a whole lot of high profile recruits these days.
desertshox
New member
Danimal
New member
I'd say not having the option of seeing a potential home on a game weekend is pretty significant.
Thanks_Tom RR
New member
And the fact that the recruiting process has sped up, waiting until December and January to take visits means (1) the recruit may commit somewhere as a place holder or without being able to fully evaluate the staff and university leading to decommitments later and (2) recruiting classes will be nearly full and the recruit may miss out on some significant opportunities. I would take a more holistic approach to this and say that the student's future trumps the coach's football centric views.
Last edited by a moderator:
desertshox
New member
if (1) is true then for the benefit of the student athlete shouldn't the process be slowed down so they can make well informed judgements?
(2) pretty sure the vast majority of college coaches hold spots back for circumstances like this and for the can't miss prospects.
still dont see how it is bad for the student. given the number of scholarships available at every level of competition, they are still receiving the opportunity to play football and have their education paid for.
Thanks_Tom RR
New member
Slowing down the process may be the best policy, but it is not the reality. Thus, for kids like Alexander, who have coaches who are unwilling to allow them to take visits, they are left at a disadvantage.
You are right about the fact that a free education is a good situation, but not every school is equal. I could speculate that with Phillip's situation, he chose Stanford over Duke, Princeton, or Yale because he can get a great education AND have the opportunity to play for a winning program that has been winning bowl games recently.
Last edited by a moderator:
RedDenver
New member
How do you propose doing (1)? The NCAA has no control over when players "commit" since it's an unofficial designation.
(2) only applies to the best of the best players. Coaches don't hold spots for the rest. Not letting a player take visits could be the difference between a 1A offer and a 1AA offer. Not letting players take visits is ridiculous since the high school coach is dictating what the players can do on their own time. Imagine the outcry if a math teacher declared his students couldn't go on college visits during the semester.
PaulCrewe
New member
With summer camps and getting video out to schools, college coaches can easily know and evaluate prospects. Spots in recruiting classes are not that big of an issue when the staff of schools know about the kid. So a late boomer recruit it can be a tough situation, but for a bunch of targets nit so much.
The biggest advantage for recruits in this situation, and do late visits, is they get more face time with the staff . Yes they miss a game day environment, but as far as time with the staff and players these visits are fat better.
The biggest advantage for recruits in this situation, and do late visits, is they get more face time with the staff . Yes they miss a game day environment, but as far as time with the staff and players these visits are fat better.
desertshox
New member
set the date schools can offer after they begin their senior year. that was easy. but that truly doesn't begin to solve anything.
given the relationships between college coaches and high school coaches still fairly certain they will save some spots. and they probably hold some back for late bloomers as well. or even players who were held back because there was someone as good or better ahead of them.
is an FCS education worse than an FBS education? because if he is good enough to play in the NFL they will find him regardless the level he plays. sure you get a larger margin of error the higher up you go but if you are relying on that margin you most likely won't be in the NFL very long.
RedDenver
New member
You're right, that solves nothing. NCAA can only set what the date is for "official" offers - which is currently the beginning of the player's junior year. Coaches can extended "unofficial" offers at any time. There's no way to regulate that.
So your argument against my saying the HS coach is overly restrictive to his players is to give that coach even more power? And what about players who want to go to schools that their coach doesn't have a relationship with? And you expect schools to hold offers for guys just because? What if Stoltenberg's coach wouldn't let him visit NU until after the season? Could NU really hold a spot for him until Dec or Jan? That's a case where a player could miss out on a dream school because of that situation.
It isn't all about the NFL or the education. It's about limiting a kid's opportunities. Would you be okay with my example of the math teacher that wouldn't let students take college visits?
The King
New member
This seems pretty straight forward to me.
If a kid wants to take a visit, let him take a visit. He is making the next step in his life and he needs to do what he can to find the best possible fit for himself.
If you limit when/if a player can take a visit, with how fast recruiting is nowadays, a school may fill up *excluding HIGH 4 stars and 5 stars* and not be able to allow you on the team. For instance, say X is your average 3* prospect. He gets an offer from Nebraska and Illinois. Say he is from Illinois but is really interested in Nebraska. Say he can't take an OV until December/January. He is probably "lower" on our target list than he would be for Illinois. So we probably fill up his spot in Dec/Jan as opposed to Illinois, who is more likely to have an open scholly for that caliber recruit at that point in the process.
If a kid wants to take a visit, let him take a visit. He is making the next step in his life and he needs to do what he can to find the best possible fit for himself.
If you limit when/if a player can take a visit, with how fast recruiting is nowadays, a school may fill up *excluding HIGH 4 stars and 5 stars* and not be able to allow you on the team. For instance, say X is your average 3* prospect. He gets an offer from Nebraska and Illinois. Say he is from Illinois but is really interested in Nebraska. Say he can't take an OV until December/January. He is probably "lower" on our target list than he would be for Illinois. So we probably fill up his spot in Dec/Jan as opposed to Illinois, who is more likely to have an open scholly for that caliber recruit at that point in the process.
blessed2bahusker
New member
I have to admit you might be right. I would say though that I don't think it is necessarily a case of a HS coach being selfish and just putting winning above the concerns of his players. I'm sure the coach is doing it for the "right" reasons most of the time. That being said, in this day and age that mentality may very well cost a kid an opportunity now and again. I think most of us agree that the best situation would be for the NCAA to allow official visits during the summer before a students senior year.
desertshox
New member
i didn't give a high school coach any more power. i stated a fact that college coaches and high school coaches have a personal relationship. and given this fact, college coaches probably know and respect a high school coach's wishes.
it isn't limiting anyone's opportunities. the opportunities will be there if the opportunities are there to begin with.
as far as the math teacher limiting when a student can visit colleges, i wont even entertain the ridiculous notion of it beyond the adults in any child's life needs to have his or her best interests in their actions, that includes every coach and/or teacher.