Just heard today that Morgan Andrews has decommited from BC and is now headed to Notre Dame. I do not know the details or why? but it's too late in the process for BC to replace her certainly and not sure how ND comes up with the funds for her scholy. It seems like perhaps another consequence of how ridiculously early these young players are committing. Many will feel offended or put-off by this news I'm sure but she actually has an entire year to go before enrolling in case she changes her mind again! College coaches are the ENTIRE cause of this IMHO. There is NO reason to ask a HS sophomore for a commitment except for fear someone else will. Stop the madness already!
I see the parents EGO just as big. Sure - a little girl should not be made to make a contract with a coach. But c'mon parents - your kid makes their name playing (or maybe not) - still c'mon parents - control your 13-15 year old.
I agree but don't put 100% of the blame on the college coaches. How about the club coaches pushing the commits? How about the players who are now pushing the coaches? You also must factor in the academic requirements at some of these schools. How would Notre Dame or Stanford admissions accept a recruit with only 1 year of grades? It seems like ND is not as caught up in the early commits as everyone else and that could be because of the academic requirements. No knowledge, just brainstorming. I have heard them say many times they are trying to slow this whole process down.
How much of the scandal at BC played a part in this? Club and college coaches in New England have known for a while about the transgressions associated with the program, and Andrews is from New Hampshire.
This is all on the College coaches very little can be pushed back to the parents or club coaches on this one they have no control. The college coaches push for early commits to beat out other coaches but also to juggle their scholarship money. Smaller schools like this because a lot of talented players get overlooked or the "bigger"school just plains runs out of money. So a player can go play at a big school for little money or a smaller school for a significant if not full ride. The longer you wait the harder time you will have as a recruit unless you are a top name. Notice I did not say top players a lot of these players have more reputation than game. Either way the process sucks and something should be done. I think either the stupid contact rules need to change (inhibits the player on making an informed decision) 2. No commits or recruiting until the players senior year.
I think this is great for college soccer. The more that colleges continue to recruit other players/recruits continue to look at other schools, the less value the verbal commitment has, the more the process gets pushed back to the senior year when it should be. This is what has happened on the football side of things finally and hopefully it transfers to soccer as well. It would be a miracle if official visits finally meant something again and wasn't just a matter of who can afford to visit.
The whole process of recruiting is over the top. For the blue chippers, or however you define the truly standout players, they may have the ball in their court. For a good portion of the players the coaches play them like fiddles, and as far as I know it's been going on in diferent sports for decades. I know a lot of parents of kids who are very good players scratching their heads over the power that the coaches weild. They will fawn all over a player one week and then absolutely no contact for whatever reason. The players and parents are then left wondering until months later when the coach will pick up the ball and act interested again. Very few coaches give any reason as to why. I know of only one college coach that was pursuing a kid, who found someone else, that had the decency to let the player know why and what they recomended. That player ended up playing at another school having learned something from the coach who didn't take them. The bottom line though is that kids and their parents know the system is flawed and long and dificult, and will take a spot and then continue to look elsewhere. I don't know if there are any stats. but until the pendulum swings as far as who is taking advantage of whom, things will stay the same.
I am so pleased to see this forum develop- I have experienced the good- the bad and the ugly in the college recruitment process in the last 12 months. As a parent of an highly sought player (and totally new to the process)- some of the coaches approaches are at times unbelievable. The higher the ranking of the program the worse the behaviour I found. There is little humility- little honesty - and tons of arrogance. Used car salesmen. Firstly- if you wait till junior year or the more logical senior year- you are out of luck as pretty much in most schools -all the money has already been promised. And if you're get it those later years - someone else might lose their promised deal. I remember talking to a respected coach - and I was put on hold, on the phone- (not on mute)- and as I listened - the coach basically counciled his assistant on how to get out of a deal with a committed recruit as he had found a better option- it was totally enlightening. Then you see some of the bigger reputation schools make promises- yes we have the money left, before you go to visit as a sophomore - and along you go for the unofficial visit on the promise that money is available -you spend the money on flights, accommodations and time off work to travel and when you get there the rules have changed suddenly? Guess thats recruitment- but word travels very quickly and for those coaches that don't show integrity, it will catch up on them- they can't hide behind the prestigious school reputations for ever. Same goes for the coaches that build the "super team programs"- multiple national team players, and international players- comes a time when some of these players are going to get pretty discouraged and upset riding the pine all the time. For those high achievers - if they aren't on the pitch they are going to cope. I look forward to seeing one day soon a program that has a responsible approach come through to the top of the rankings. I hope a program will come to the top that has the balance between - star players- mainly good college level players and a fabulous coach that teaches football to be played quickly and skillfully - not power ball- and equally instills values and learning. Right now - with all the games coaches are playing- the negative recruiting and early pressure recruiting - so many great kids are getting screwed over and disillusioned. Oh and by the way - thankfully were lucky and dodged the car salesmen.
[quote="midwestfan, post: 26021421, member: 199181".... I know of only one college coach that was pursuing a kid, who found someone else, that had the decency to let the player know why and what they recommended. That player ended up playing at another school having learned something from the coach who didn't take them. ....[/quote] Any chance you're willing to identify the coach?
I would rather not. It was told me by a parent and I did not experience it myself. I'm sure that if I put up the name someone would dispute it or cite a negative opinion of them. The point was to illustrate that it rarely happens.
This is starting to change with schools outside the BCS conferences and even within them in some cases. I've seen a number of 2013s commit in the last two months and I know of several DI coaches who are still looking to add some players on money to their 2013 classes and not necessarily botton level underperforming teams either. It might take some digging and flexibility in terms of location or other factors but it's possible to be patient through the process, particularly if you stay in regular contact with the coaching staff to let them know where you stand. Guess who can change that to make it happen? Stop being lured by the big name school despite all the game playing and moving the goalposts you mention. Look for schools with coaches who value what you value in the process, even if that means perhaps choosing a school outside of the elite programs. If more players did this then parity would come quicker to college soccer the way it has in basketball and, to some extent, football. Simply walk away from coaches who negatively recruit, pile pressure on kids to make decisions earlier and earlier, play games, etc, etc. You may very well miss out on that scholarship to that dream school but that may end up being the best decision you ever made.
TDS discussed this issue in light of the recent news - link below. No solutions are presented but the NCAA needs to do something. If the coaches don't come up with a policy to promote, it's going to happen without their input. Hopefully, college soccer folks have some input before softball and volleyball coaches decide it for them. Here's an idea: allow official visits and contacts starting Jan 1 of the Jr Year and prohibit scholarship offers until July 1st after the Jr year. This allows 6 months for kids to travel and explore options and lets schools see 3 years of grades and likely an SAT score. (this would allow mid-majors more chance to compete with the big-name programs and that's why it won't happen - which is a shame) http://www.topdrawersoccer.com/college-soccer-articles/college-soccer-recruiting-debate_aid24572
Dear Lensois as you said .............Simply walk away from coaches who negatively recruit, pile pressure on kids to make decisions earlier and earlier, play games, etc, etc. You may very well miss out on that scholarship to that dream school but that may end up being the best decision you ever made. As you suggested - the changes have to come through a balancing out of the program. Some of the top players need to make decisions to go to programs other than the big historically elite programs - so in a way taking a gamble on the coach- their vision and the potential influence that top player could change the program taking, it from good to great....... I am proud to say thats exactly what my daughter did. As a family we stuck to our values - and quietly but surely we are confident she has made the right decision, as her decision now has influenced subsequent classy recruits to sign on. Morgan Andrews decision to swing to another program has created an opportunity for many to perhaps see the madness of early recruiting. I feel for her as she likely doesn't need this attention- and for that matter probably all involved including coaches would like it to die down. However if there is any positive to come out of it (apart from Morgans happiness ) one great thing may be that players and parents breath deeper and avoid the trap of clustering in so called top programs early in the process. If the top talent can get spread around to more teams- everyone is the richer especially the sport and the culture of college soccer.
A skeptical viewpoint: (Prefaced first by a disclaimer. I am a small school graduate and my son ended up turning down D-I offers and landed at a D-III program. 8 years on, looking back, everyone is happy.) Based on the competitiveness of human nature (especially as promoted in the US by our national culture) no matter what rules the NCAA comes up with things aren't going to change much in college recruiting if there remains officially sponsored college teams playing in professionally organized leagues and championships and money and prestige are involved. It's an old argument that this present discussion is loosing sight of here. Separate competitive sports from education. End all sports related scholarships and let sports organizations run their own leagues and championships. Do not hire coaching staffs at colleges. While providing basic facilities, let the students organize their own clubs/teams to have an athletic experience to combine with their college studies and age-appropriate social development. Folks, this will never happen! No Way! This ship is too big to turn around at this point in our college culture. There is no way we can turn the clock back 100+ years to intramural teams and true student-organized club teams playing nearby schools they can get to by car-pooling. So colleges will continue to hire professional coaches and athletic department staffs to support them. Both the bigger universities and organizations like the NCAA will make huge sums from commercial tie-ins. Not only coaches, but college presidents, and board members are deeply involved in their teams winning and the money involved. (See the recent flap at FSU and the whole conference realignments, for ample proof.) The result of this system is that the prized pawns (er, players) will be recruited by any means possible. So anxious will the competitive coaching staffs be to not loose out on the top prospects, they will naturally try to "pre-empt" their competition by getting to the recruit earlier and earlier. No matter what rules are put in place, the system will be gamed. We see this in all the major sports, and there is no indication that it can be curbed. Some on this thread have suggested that the top club/high school players take things into their own hands and buck the system. To be more than a "one off" exception now and then, this would take organization. Such organizations are known as unions when relatively powerless workers ban together to try to balance the power off the employer. This also won't happen (and can't happen in the US legal structure as the recruits are not employees and are children besides.) So if ANY change in this recruiting system is going to take place, it will take incredible leadership at the national level and buy-in all down the line. Although I'd love to see it, I am not holding my breath.
We recently experienced the recruitment process. Intially, I think we had idealistic expectations about coaches/programs. But based upon our experiences, and numerous other families going through the process with their own daughters, we came to the conclusion that we needed to seek out what was in our daughter's best interest, period. And so, if it is Andrew's best interest, or any other's to make a switch before official signing day, so be it. Only those completely ignorant of the competitivenes of these programs would suggest that a player or family owes loyalty to the program based upon a verbal. I have stories, boy do I have stories, of players who thought that they were the apple of a program's eye, until the program became more interested in another player. Programs want to be successful, they want to win. Yes, most in the business care about players/families, but their overriding objective is a successful team on the field-and players get bull-dozed in that process. I hope that those in the Andrew's family completely base their decisions on what is best for their kid!
I can tell you that we got in late on a player who we had not seen due to injury but was playing in a tournament near our school and stopped by my office while checking out the campus to kill time. She loved the campus, and asked me if she could come for an official visit two weekends later. She had an offer from another school but did not have a date to respond by yet. As soon as she mentioned her visit to us the coach told her he needed a decision by Thursday night. She cried on the phone when she told me that she felt like she had to take it since she did not know what I would offer her yet.
Which is what I an trying to illuminate. (See my post above.) Each party is understandably trying to look after their own interests. The trouble is that the college coaches (and their club coach buddies plus the athletic departments/universities/NCAA) represent a HUGE power advantage over the teenage player and her family. This imbalance says that the system will likely never change to make it meaningfully equal. Random actions of protest may occur, but most players will succumb to the pressures and cooperate.
I think adroit parents can go a long ways in off-setting this advantage. But that means the parent(s) has to be able to figure out what is best for the kid. The right club coach can also be of huge help. And again, the parent has to figure out who that coach is, and "most wins" is not the most important criteria. Most kids on their own I agree are at a huge disadvantage.
Dear SoccerHunter- BruBru- SCUFantastic and Lenosis Just because this is happening doesn't make it right - the direction things are going is out of control. It is plain wrong kids at 14-15- 16 are being asked to make decisions that basically their parents make for them anyways. The competitive parents see the early commitment as a badge of honour - its bulls**t . It equally is must be as stressful for coaches to have to go out so early and decided is the big strong 14 year old is going to be better than the late developing skinny 15 year old and write them a cheque for $200K - oh right verbally commit and then oh right move the goalposts later on because they think they have you. One day soon (it happens every day mind you ) - some young vulnerable girl is going to get the stuffing knocked out of her by a ruthless coach- and they self implode with possible tragic consequences- oh and then maybe something will be done ?? The whole recruiting game is pathological- sure coaches want to win - kids want to play in the best women's environment in the world and get an education- but come on this is plain wrong. Colleges can scout as early as they want- but they need to keep the playing field even for all schools to get opportunity to recruit top players. Applying the pressures early will only lead to more issues like players de committing - and players moving between programs. Interesting with Marlborough going to Santa Clara - suddenly a player is off their roster and off to dePaul - How many more players are join her ? It will be interesting to watch who is going to leave UNC, UCLA or heaven forbid Stanford in the next couple of years because they don't get to play more then 15 minutes - remember they are stars in their eyes? I would like to see limited visiting or coach contact till Junior year- only written material. Meantime write letters - dates set appropriately- shower praises through school coaches - watch them play - Then come Junior year when they are at least a little more mature (the kids not the coaches ) let the games begin - at least then the kids have had likely more exposure to schools potentially and what they want to do with education and soccer. The other thing is enough of the National coaches doing college teams - choose one or the other and remove the glaring conflict of interest- in any other world that is violating the code of ethics ? Hmmm code of ethics !!! verses NCAA rules - might have something there
And most coaches like to deal with the kid. Through all the recruiting night seminars that Iv'e sat through each time the coaches insist that it is the players they want to deal with. Iv'e heard coaches say that when parents get involved, it's a big turn off for them. My question is how involved does the parent become with the coach, and when do they get involved? I think a lot of the problems are that the players aren't mature enough to deal with the miriad of issues when dealing with the coaches.
great point - but how can a 14-16 year old negotiate a verbal contract potentially worth $100-$240 K ?- -how can they make clear decision on coach character and not get bullied by a used car sales person -every kid loves it when a coach sugar coats their ability -It is a power relationship - and again it is wrong for parents not to be involved heavily in the young unless living with the present issues is OK for most. Tell ya though - soon some kid is going to become a tragic victim of this craziness.
The "direction this is going" is where other collegiate sports already are. Some in this thread sound as though they think this is a situation unique to women's collegiate soccer. It isn't.