Buckzip Posted November 25, 2013 Report Share Posted November 25, 2013 Good info on Ferns, thanks. Seems like a good kid. I don't like scUM, but hope he does well. Dante Booker was being questioned, but I don't know about that one. Bill Greene is a good follow on Twitter and he posted this last week: @BillBankGreene 22 Nov Dante Booker just played the best game I've seen from a defensive player this season. St Vincent rolled over Hubbard. Looking to repeat. Bill did say that. I saw that also. However, in the past he has also questioned Bookers football ability. 1 game doesn't mean a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buckzip Posted November 25, 2013 Report Share Posted November 25, 2013 You're suggesting a coach tells a player not to accept a full-ride from a school like Michigan? As a coach you'd have a very short career. If he had better offers...Yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legendofzippy Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 He doesn't have anything in writing yet. The only offer that matters is the letter of intent. Verbals don't count. I'm suggesting he advise his players to keep their options open when they are in 10th grade. I think you're confused on this. Michigan offered him a scholarship. He accepted. He can back out, but Michigan has already made the offer. So he has the chance to play football for a "blue blood" that also offers a prestigious degree. I don't like Michigan, but being a "Michigan Man" opens a lot of doors in this world. It really doesn't matter when he accepted, that's a great offer and any kid would be a fool to turn it down. If Michigan offered the wrong kid, that's their fault, not his. Big Ten schools don't pull scholly's like the SEC does, so there's no reason for him to turn this down. Look at his 247 profile. He visited a bunch of schools, plus he's still getting offers. Alabama offered him just this year, after his commitment. There is no downside to committing that early when you're this caliber of a prospect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hilltopper Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 I think you're confused on this. Michigan offered him a scholarship. He accepted. He can back out, but Michigan has already made the offer. So he has the chance to play football for a "blue blood" that also offers a prestigious degree. I don't like Michigan, but being a "Michigan Man" opens a lot of doors in this world. It really doesn't matter when he accepted, that's a great offer and any kid would be a fool to turn it down. If Michigan offered the wrong kid, that's their fault, not his. Big Ten schools don't pull scholly's like the SEC does, so there's no reason for him to turn this down. Look at his 247 profile. He visited a bunch of schools, plus he's still getting offers. Alabama offered him just this year, after his commitment. There is no downside to committing that early when you're this caliber of a prospect. Schools cannot publicly announce scholarship offers. The player can say that UM offered him but that does not mean it's official until signing day. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP1 Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 I think you're confused on this. Michigan offered him a scholarship. He accepted. He can back out, but Michigan has already made the offer. So he has the chance to play football for a "blue blood" that also offers a prestigious degree. I don't like Michigan, but being a "Michigan Man" opens a lot of doors in this world. It really doesn't matter when he accepted, that's a great offer and any kid would be a fool to turn it down. If Michigan offered the wrong kid, that's their fault, not his. Big Ten schools don't pull scholly's like the SEC does, so there's no reason for him to turn this down. Look at his 247 profile. He visited a bunch of schools, plus he's still getting offers. Alabama offered him just this year, after his commitment. There is no downside to committing that early when you're this caliber of a prospect. Schools give out verbal offers like everyone handed out Halloween candy a few weeks ago. There is more substance to the candy. The only offers that matter are those on paper. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legendofzippy Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 Schools give out verbal offers like everyone handed out Halloween candy a few weeks ago. There is more substance to the candy. The only offers that matter are those on paper. Right. They do hand out lots of offers. That's an advantage to committing early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GP1 Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 Right. They do hand out lots of offers. That's an advantage to committing early. What if by the time a kid gets to 12th grade, he doesn't want to live by his 10th grade decision? It seems nutty to me that an 18 year old should have to live by the decision he made when he was 15. What if between the kids 10th and 12th grade season, he blows out his knee or turns into a completely bad player and the school wants out? My point is this. Schools shouldn't be making offers to 10th graders, or 11th graders for that matter. High school kids shouldn't be committing to colleges when they are 15 or 16 years old. It is one of the many things about college athletics that has gotten completely out of control. Lastly, they do hand out a lot of offers and there is zero advantage in accepting one. In almost every case, they offer more players scholarships than available scholarships. Someone almost always gets screwed and it is rarely the colleges. There is no need for early commitment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legendofzippy Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 What if by the time a kid gets to 12th grade, he doesn't want to live by his 10th grade decision? It seems nutty to me that an 18 year old should have to live by the decision he made when he was 15. What if between the kids 10th and 12th grade season, he blows out his knee or turns into a completely bad player and the school wants out? My point is this. Schools shouldn't be making offers to 10th graders, or 11th graders for that matter. High school kids shouldn't be committing to colleges when they are 15 or 16 years old. It is one of the many things about college athletics that has gotten completely out of control. Lastly, they do hand out a lot of offers and there is zero advantage in accepting one. In almost every case, they offer more players scholarships than available scholarships. Someone almost always gets screwed and it is rarely the colleges. There is no need for early commitment. You must not follow recruiting much. If you want out of your decision, you just verbally tell the school you're out. No problem. If you get hurt and the school wants out - tough luck. Make them honor the offer. Again, at worst he gets a free degree from a great school. It's a farce, but that is the point of college athletic programs. Your last paragraph just isn't true at all. If a player accepts the offer, that's it. Let's say Michigan is only taking 3 LB's in this class, they'd tell Ferns and every other LB they offer just that up front. And once three accept, all the other offers get pulled. Wait too long and you're out. A coach at a small school like St. Clairsville should be praised for landing kids at D1 schools. They're giving them a great opportunity few will get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hilltopper Posted November 26, 2013 Report Share Posted November 26, 2013 Not sure where you're getting your information regarding scholarship commitments. NCAA rules prohibit member institutions from making early offers. Some institutions skirt this rule by making informal offers to underclassmen but until the schools accepts a letter of commitment by a student athlete on or after the designated dates there is no binding contract. Verbal commitment. This phrase is used to describe a collegebound student-athlete's commitment to a school before he or she signs (or is able to sign) a National Letter of Intent. A collegebound student-athlete can announce a verbal commitment at any time. While verbal commitments have become very popular for both college-bound student-athletes and coaches, this "commitment" is NOT binding on either the college-bound student-athlete or the college or university. Only the signing of the National Letter of Intent accompanied by a financial aid agreement is binding on both parties. http://www.ncsasports.org/blog/wp-content/...11/07/CBSA1.pdf Offers of athletic scholarships to underclassmen violate the NCAA’s core values. The NCAA Constitution clearly states, Student-athletes shall be amateurs in an intercollegiate sport, and their participation should be motivated primarily by education and by the physical, mental and social benefits to be derived. Student participation in intercollegiate athletics is an avocation, and student-athletes should be protected from exploitation by professional and commercial enterprises. In practice, however, a recruiting process that permits only early informal commitment is actually worse for recruits than one allowing early binding commitment. As an initial matter, early informal commitments make early recruiting more attractive to institutions by removing the risks associated with the practice. If a school discovers that a recruit is not as good as initially thought or that a scholarship might be better used on someone else, the school can withdraw its commitment and avoid having to live with its “mistake.”14 Even worse, a recruit who understands the risk of withdrawn commitment finds him- or herself in a quandary. If he or she makes contingency plans by talking to other schools, the school to which he or she is verbally committed may ques-tion his or her loyalty and recruit other players to take his or her place.15 Of course, if the recruit does nothing, he or she risks having no scholarship should his or her original school change its mind. In short, early informal commitments are actually worse for recruits than early formal commitments because early informal commitments force recruits to experience the stress of making premature decisions about college without receiving any certainty that supposedly done deals will honored. http://www.bc.edu/content/dam/files/school...52_2/08_yen.pdf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LZIp Posted December 3, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 3, 2013 I don't think you can stress how important it is that we are building "pipeline" with St. V. The Newman and Junius commits are huge not only because they are good players, but also because of the relationships they have with other members of their team. Kids like to play football with their friends. Bickley has shown that you can come from that program even if you aren't recruited heavily and play right away for the Zips and have an impact. I can see these reasons along with other obvious ones, like continued improvement of the program, leading us to snag some recruits from there we wouldn't normally get. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zipgrad01 Posted December 3, 2013 Report Share Posted December 3, 2013 I don't think you can stress how important it is that we are building "pipeline" with St. V. The Newman and Junius commits are huge not only because they are good players, but also because of the relationships they have with other members of their team. Kids like to play football with their friends. Bickley has shown that you can come from that program even if you aren't recruited heavily and play right away for the Zips and have an impact. I can see these reasons along with other obvious ones, like continued improvement of the program, leading us to snag some recruits from there we wouldn't normally get. Agree 100% There is no better recruiter than former teammates and that is a damn good school to be pulling talent from. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LZIp Posted December 6, 2013 Author Report Share Posted December 6, 2013 Great two plays in a row for the SVSM Akron duo. Junius with an athletic tip pass/interception, then Williams follows with an 8 yd rumble for a TD. Williams has looked like the best player on the field tonight for the Irish, IMO. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue & Gold Posted December 6, 2013 Report Share Posted December 6, 2013 Williams has looked like the best player on the field tonight for the Irish, IMO. He did in last year's championship game as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
legendofzippy Posted December 6, 2013 Report Share Posted December 6, 2013 Congrats to St. Vincent-St. Mary for winning another title, and representing Akron well. There are a lot of big names on this team, but that was an enjoyable game to watch because of the total team effort. Maybe some people will think they dominated a lesser opponent since Trotwood-Madison didn't score, but those were some big, talented boys on that team. Great win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue & Gold Posted December 6, 2013 Report Share Posted December 6, 2013 Congrats to St. Vincent-St. Mary for winning another title, and representing Akron well. There are a lot of big names on this team, but that was an enjoyable game to watch because of the total team effort. Maybe some people will think they dominated a lesser opponent since Trotwood-Madison didn't score, but those were some big, talented boys on that team. Great win. In last week's semi-finals I believe Trotwood-Madison won 47-7 or something crazy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.