Get rid of National Signing Day

[WarEagle84 0]

With all the discussion of an early signing period, Bo Pelini has come up with a different take: Do away with NSD altogether. As soon as you make an offer, the kid can sign. Good idea or bad idea? How would that change recruiting? Off the top of my head it sounds like a good idea to me, but I don't know enough about the ins and outs of how recruiting works to really know the answers, so I put it out to you, the experts. (Don't let me down!)

[cooltigger21 0]

Personally, I like the idea. I guess I am just an old fuddy duddy but NSD is just too much of a circus for my taste.

[bootskii 268]

I am on the fence about this. I agree national signing day is getting ridiculous but these kids have worked hard to get some attention on one of the most important days of their lives. I am just wondering if they sign when offered and they realize they made a mistake how would another school be able to flip them without the player being penalized in having to sit out a year.?

[Slammer1 409]

Personally, I like the idea. I guess I am just an old fuddy duddy but NSD is just too much of a circus for my taste.

Roger this!!! I am so tired of the drama queens shuffling hats around, etc. Make your decision and go with it.

[1auburn1 1,148]

Bad Idea. First of all it won't stop the hat shuffle game - a 5* will just call a press conference whenever and the media will run in like lemmings to cover it. And second, do you want a quality kid to be pressured by a cheap rug salesman like wee man into signing on the spot versus a class guy like CGM who wants the kids to shop around and commit where they feel comfortable? The sharks will grow BIG teeth if they can get these kids ink a deal in the living room - I don't think we want to go there.

[Dual-Threat Rigby 9,708]

It gives you dang near no real excitement between the championship and the first day of the season

Other than a spring game.

[Dom1ni0n 51]

He makes a few solid points.

I have no qualms with NSD, I never really followed recruiting much until several years ago. I'm still no recruitnik that follows this process intently, so NSD helps me to stay abreast of who's going where per sé. I would prefer to have the theatrics get the kibosh. The parents could assist greatly in that aspect.

[doc4aday 1,887]

THis is a fantastic idea. This could do away with a lot of foolishness. This should occur between December through May of the senior's final semester of HIgh School.

[tigerman1186 537]

About 40 years ago there were 2 signing periods…In the 1st week of December you signed a letter of intent; which was recognized by most of the conferences (except Notre Dame who then begin their recruiting push)…then in March you signed your scholarship….once you signed in December you were locked in, there was no flipping…don't remember when or why this changed????

[McLoofus 35,182]

I am on the fence about this. I agree national signing day is getting ridiculous but these kids have worked hard to get some attention on one of the most important days of their lives. I am just wondering if they sign when offered and they realize they made a mistake how would another school be able to flip them without the player being penalized in having to sit out a year.?

Bingo. This would screw the kids.

And some of y'all need to quit whining about how the kids behave in recruiting. If you have a problem with what recruiting has become, then you need to point your fingers at the grown a** men who steer these kids, stick microphones in their faces and spend their workdays at their computers eating it up. (For the record, I love keeping up with recruiting, but it's not an emotional matter for me like it is for wayyyyyy too many folks.)

[gravejd 3,382]

Well they got to have a day to start allowing seniors to sign with schools on some date. So I'm not sure what would keep that day from becoming signing day. Maybe moving it up would cut some of the theatrics out.

They would definitely have to pass a rule letting players change schools if a coach leaves or is fired. Atleast players who haven't attended school yet.

[cptau 169]

if there was a way to sign with a school when a scholarship was offered, there'd need to be some rules protecting the student athlete and the school.

- The student must still qualify academically - same as today

- The student must qualify medically (no hidden or unknown medical conditions)

- The student is guaranteed a scholarship. It cannot be pulled without cause (academics, criminal activity, etc)

- The student is released if there is a head coaching change at the school prior to the student enrolling.

[cooltigger21 0]

I am on the fence about this. I agree national signing day is getting ridiculous but these kids have worked hard to get some attention on one of the most important days of their lives. I am just wondering if they sign when offered and they realize they made a mistake how would another school be able to flip them without the player being penalized in having to sit out a year.?

Bingo. This would screw the kids.

And some of y'all need to quit whining about how the kids behave in recruiting. If you have a problem with what recruiting has become, then you need to point your fingers at the grown a** men who steer these kids, stick microphones in their faces and spend their workdays at their computers eating it up. (For the record, I love keeping up with recruiting, but it's not an emotional matter for me like it is for wayyyyyy too many folks.)

This is where parenting comes in. They have to be involved but dispassionate. They have to tell their child to make damn sure of their choice. Don't let them make a spur of the moment choice based on a sales pitch. Kids are getting screwed now because they don't really evaluate things. There is no magic bullet but at least having an early period like basketball would be a good step.

[AU64 10,122]

I am on the fence about this. I agree national signing day is getting ridiculous but these kids have worked hard to get some attention on one of the most important days of their lives. I am just wondering if they sign when offered and they realize they made a mistake how would another school be able to flip them without the player being penalized in having to sit out a year.?

Bingo. This would screw the kids.

And some of y'all need to quit whining about how the kids behave in recruiting. If you have a problem with what recruiting has become, then you need to point your fingers at the grown a** men who steer these kids, stick microphones in their faces and spend their workdays at their computers eating it up. (For the record, I love keeping up with recruiting, but it's not an emotional matter for me like it is for wayyyyyy too many folks.)

This is where parenting comes in. They have to be involved but dispassionate. They have to tell their child to make damn sure of their choice. Don't let them make a spur of the moment choice based on a sales pitch. Kids are getting screwed now because they don't really evaluate things. There is no magic bullet but at least having an early period like basketball would be a good step.

Afraid you can forget that...many of the parents are as bad as the kids...and glorying in publicity their children get. JMO but no matter what signing day is selected, there will be a circus of some sort for a few players.

As for open signing....I'm against that primarily to prevent some 17 year old (or an impressionable young mom) from being high pressured by a bunch of skilled sales/coaches into signing before the "opportunity gets away".

Most of these players are not even legally old enough to enter into a legal contract and many of the parents are clueless if you've seen some of the videos that I've watched. Yet, some coaches are suggesting they sign a binding agreement with no way to get out of it if they have second thoughts. Shoot, you buy a house, buy a car or whatever and there is a 3 day opportunity to change your mind.

I would be good with an earlier date but I expect the Feb date is there to allow coaches and players to get beyond their seasons and bowl games before they get out and "close the sale". IF coaches are good with an earlier date, IMO, there is no reason for the HS kids to object to it. ...but I'm not in favor of open season on players until they have had a chance to see what opportunities are out there for them.

[bigbird 61,090]

what if they could sign, but had a month before it became permanent. That gives them a month to think about it and it allows other schools to present their offers. If they want to change they have a month to do so. If they miss that deadline, then its is official.

[triangletiger 1,599]

At this point, I'm not sure the TV networks would go for it. Not that they necessarily get to make the call. In any case, you have to have some sort of backstop for signing. Are you going to let 8th and 9th graders sign LOIs?

[AUloggerhead 2,840]

An early signing date would benefit the universities more so than the student-athlete. I'm not in favor of letting unscrupulous recruiters get the upper hand over 17-18 year olds when they have such a big life decision to make. Carnell Williams initially committed to Tennessee then had second thoughts about it before eventually signing with AU. That's just one example and I know AU has also lost some recruits at the 11th hour too. So what? One NSD is plenty. For those of you who hate the hat-trick-press-conference, why in the world would you want two NSDs to double your discomfort?

[AURex 2,403]

I'm opposed to any signing day that occurs before the student completes his senior season. Too many things can occur during the senior year -- not just on the field, but off the field, that can change the situation -- both for the player and the university.

Personally, I would prefer that no university can officially accept a letter of intent and offer a scholarship until the player actually graduates from high school and proves that he meets all academic standards for admission. That would mean that players who graduate early could sign and start as an EE, but most other players would sign in June, and some not until the end of summer school.

I think the PAC12, Big10 and ACC would go for that. But I expect the SEC and probably the Big12 would block it.

[AU64 10,122]

Rex..agree 100% with the opening para.

Re para 2: Personally, I would prefer that no university can officially accept a letter of intent and offer a scholarship until the player actually graduates from high school and proves that he meets all academic standards for admission. That would mean that players who graduate early could sign and start as an EE, but most other players would sign in June, and some not until the end of summer school.

Not a bad idea I guess buy not practical in this world where the top kids are planning/hoping to play as freshmen. If we wait until late May or June (my grandkids in NC are still in school) to sign with a school,.... by the time the kid graduates and their records/grades confirmed, most would not be on campus until mid or late summer. Might also consider returning to the freshmen not eligible practice of many years ago but can't see that flying.

Otherwise, I have not seen any justification for a change in practice that has explained why or how a HS player would benefit from an early or open signing date. To me...it's all about the coaches and schools. Most sports writers and coaches alike look at these young players as chattel to be obtained by any means necessary...and very little concern has been expressed as to why this could be bad for the players.

[auburn4ever 1,266]

IMO, cutting out signing in Feb would not work very well.

[WarEagle84 0]

After thinking on this a while and hearing other opinions, I still think getting rid of NSD is a good idea. Here is my plan (in part stolen from others):

• An offer cannot be made, and the student-athlete cannot sign a NLI before he has completed his junior year. Given the differing ending dates for the school year, there is no de facto NSD; there would instead be a national signing period that would last 3-4 weeks. This also eliminates the nonsense of offering scholarships to 12-year-olds (which LSU seems to do quite regularly).
  
• The student-athlete cannot sign with a school within 30 days of visiting that school. This allows time for the emotional high of a good visit to die down before committing. (I could also live with bird's idea of a 30-day period where he could change his mind.)
  
• The student-athlete can be released from his commitment if there is a coaching change (either head coach or his position coach/primary recruiter).
  
• The student-athlete can request to be put on a "do not call" list at any time during his recruitment. Coaches calling or texting him while he is on the list would be an NCAA violation. Once he signs the NLI, he would automatically be placed on this list. No more flipping.
  

I think these provisions would cut down on a lot of the nonsense that goes on in today's recruiting world.

[Rednilla 5,469]

• The student-athlete can request to be put on a "do not call" list at any time during his recruitment. Coaches calling or texting him while he is on the list would be an NCAA violation. Once he signs the NLI, he would automatically be placed on this list. No more flipping.
  

That's one I would definitely like to see.

Regarding the topic of a signing period vs. a signing day, it's a moot point. There is already a signing period; NSD is simply the beginning of that period. There have been players through the years who have waited a month or more before actually signing.

So far as doing away with signing day altogether, that is a very bad idea unless there are stipulations connected to it, such as the 30 day periods suggested by WE84 and bigbird, and I'm not so sure that wouldn't just create more confusion. For instance, in BB's scenario, what if a kid signs with one school, but 15 days later changes his mind? Does the 30 day period start over, allowing him to keep changing his mind over and over? Do you put a cap on the number of times the kid can change his mind? Or in WE84's scenario, will it just be official visits, or does this include unofficial visits as well? If it's just official visits, then a player's father (or uncle, or whatever) could drive him to one school immediately after he gets back from another school that had swayed him away from the first school, opening the door to all kinds of corruption. If it is official and unofficial visits, then a player can't drive himself to a game and watch from the stands with a ticket he purchased for himself without pushing back the time frame in which he can sign with that school.

It's just a complicated situation, and I don't know that there is any way to make it much better for either the schools or the players without detracting from the other.

[Mikey 16,781]

I vote for plan "C"....leave it alone. We can construct any number of complicated systems that seem to solve one perceived problem or the other, but the current setup is well understood by all concerned and I see no breakthrough type of solutions offered.

Leave it alone.

[WarEagle84 0]

So it seems Rich Rod is on board with the idea now:

“I’ve been thinking about that ever since I read Bo’s comments,” he told SiriusXM College Sports Network. “I’m thinking, boy, that’s really way out there, and then after I started thinking about it, I thought, you know what? That makes a whole lot more sense than anything I’ve heard of. You say, ‘What happens if you offer freshmen or sophomores?’ That’s on both sides, whether it’s the school offering or the kid and his family deciding to take it. I’ve got to look at all the scenarios and ramifications, but when you think, what’s different than a kid talented in music or arts and he signs a recording contract, or he’s an actor and he signs a contract with an agency when he’s a 15-year-old kid?

“It’s whenever he gets offered and whenever he chooses to sign. If you think about it, it probably makes a whole lot more sense than anything else we’re doing. You could make a rule where maybe you can’t offer until he’s completed his junior year or sophomore year. The more I think about it, the more it makes a lot more sense than some of this other stuff we’re doing.”

[WarEagle84 0]

Paul Johnson of Georgia Tech is on board with it, too.

“Personally, with what Bo Pelini came out with, that’s what I’ve been talking about for years,” Johnson told the AJC. “That’s the way I would do it. You don’t even have a signing date. Once they commit, you give them a scholarship and they sign. You get 25 signees per year, and 85 spots overall. I think they have to be in their senior year of high school (to be able to sign), or maybe complete their junior year.”

...

“It would cut all the (crap) out of it,” Johnson again told the AJC. “All those people who think they have offers would find out that they really don’t have offers. You know, if somebody walked in your school and said ‘You have an offer,’ the kid could say ‘OK, where is it? I’m ready to sign it.’ This would stop all this foolishness.”