🏈 Pelini: No signing day, no problem; get rid of it

[BAMANEWSBOT]

Lately there have been a lot of college football coaches campaigning to get an early signing day for recruiting, but Nebraska's Bo Pelini wants to take things a bit further.

Pelini doesn't want an early signing day, he just wants to get rid of National Signing Day. Period.

"If somebody has offered a kid, let him sign, it's over," Pelini told ESPN.com. "That will stop some of the things that are happening -- people just throwing out offers, some of them with really no intention of taking a kid.

"Make [the offer] mean something. People will be like, 'Whoa, I've got to take this kid now.' It will slow things down for the kids, for the institutions. There will be less mistakes. Why does there have to be one specific day? And it will get rid of some of the stuff that goes on, kids pulling the hats and so forth."

Pelini also added that he believes players should be allowed to be released from their letters of intent should there be a coaching change.

Whether or not Pelini's, or any other coaches idea, will eventually be adopted as a new rule in recruiting, I don't know. The only thing I do know is that, no matter what any coach tells you about why they want an earlier signing period, it's not for the players.

Coaches want to be able to get kids to commit earlier so they don't have to keep recruiting them. It's about less work for the coaches, not about making life easier for the players. And that's fine, I certainly don't blame the coaches for feeling that way. I'd rather spend my time coaching football then texting high school kids all day too.

Continue reading...

 

[alabama mike]

IMO, not a bad idea after reading the link. It's nice seeing someone think outside the box for a change.

 

[rammerjammer]

@alabama mike I agree. I like the idea of that as well. I want to say that Urban Meyer used the statement of having to de-recruit a kid once he arrives on campus. As an elite athlete in HS you have all these folks kissing your end and it is getting to where kids are milking this more and more each year. You add that by 2-3 years by kids being recruited as early as 8th grade now. (I know they can't be recruited that early, but kids can't be paid either.........how well is the NCAA enforcing that?) Either way, the hype and all the crap involved with recruiting is really out of hand. Pellini's idea might not be the best, but it is certainly not the worst and I can't say I have heard much better.

 

[TerryP]

There would need to be some kind of "buyers remorse" type of guideline. There are stories where kids have been basically "forced" into commitments due to pressures and threats from coaching personnel. CyKo being one example.

I wish they'd tackle one thing at a time. Let's get the desired autonomy set up for the Big 5, then work on some of these smaller details. That autonomy could very easily translate into different scholarship numbers.

 

[mhardiman]

^You mean NCAA math where 25x4+red shirts=85 may be revised?

 

[TerryP]

@mhardiman Yes. I've seen more than a handful suggest a change in the numbers. There's a difference in divisions as it stands today.

 

[bamafan4ever]

It would make offers to Juniors and 13 year olds (see Les Miles) more risky and obviously the legal guardians for those kids would have to sign off on any acceptance letter. Also, because of the risk of injuries or academic issues, it would certainly make any early offers a huge gamble. Is that good or bad? Not sure.

 

[TerryP]

It would make offers to Juniors and 13 year olds (see Les Miles) more risky and obviously the legal guardians for those kids would have to sign off on any acceptance letter. Also, because of the risk of injuries or academic issues, it would certainly make any early offers a huge gamble. Is that good or bad? Not sure.

The more I think about this the more I'm inclined to think Pelini isn't considering every aspect of this story.

He won't be allowed to visit a kid at school during the spring for evaluation in the current set of bylaws. But, an offer given in the summer should be signed immediately and end this kids recruitment? So, if the kid gets in trouble in the summer from something that could have been found out in the spring he'd be stuck with the commitment.

Do the schools have an out clause like the one he's suggest the players will have if a coach leaves?

There are far too many moving pieces...

 

[psychojoe]

It would certainly need some contingency clause: if the kid graduates on time, for example. Or what about the kid who signs, then gets in major legal trouble. Would that give the school an out? On the other hand, it might give a little leverage to the kid who is being slow played. He can tell school that he has an offer in hand from school x, and while he prefers y, if they don't offer him he will sign with x. A lot to chew on about this. I would want a rule preventing any offers until after the end of the kid's junior year.