By BRENDAN HALL
In the midst of national signing day on Feb. 3, a day where high school athletes sign a written commitment to college sports teams, the discussions surrounding college recruiting are becoming more audible and more serious. The college recruiting system is riddled with flaws and loop holes, and in order to improve it several distinct revisions should be made.
The rulebook for college recruiting is around 400 pages filled with every little thing a coach can and cannot do in trying to get prospects to sign to their college. All of the tedious rules can be simplified by establishing a few easy rules for coaches to follow. First, a coach should not be allowed to text, e-mail or contact an athlete any other way except by phone or in person. Also, a coach should only be allowed a specific amount of off-campus visits to the athlete. The National College Athletics Association can determine the number of phone calls and visits allowed during each of the athlete’s high school years that is most fair.
Also, scholarship offers to players should be written only, not verbally. A coach should not be allowed to suggest or promise a scholarship to a player either over the phone or in person unless the coach has the scholarship contract with him to hand to the athlete. More importantly, once the scholarship has been offered to the player the coach and any others connected to the school, should cease contact with the athlete until he has made a decision. There is too much pressure on players to pick the right college in hopes they can move on to the professional level. They do not need the coaches constantly chatting in their ears, persuading them to decide a certain way. Players should be able to decide which college they want to attend with the only primary outside influences being the player’s family. Coaches far too often go to the extreme to attract players to play at their school. Bribery is a common method of recruiting violations, but there are other situations that highlight just how crazy coaches can get. In 2001, the NCAA found th University of Colorado to be hosting off-campus parties for visiting football recruits where girls were expected to provide sexual favors to the high school prospects. Although situations like this are nowhere near common, it depicts how desperate some programs or coaches can become to recruit premiere athletes.
In any case where a coach violates NCAA rules, the coach should be severely punished, not the athlete or the school. It is unfair for an athlete or college program to be punished for a coach’s wrongdoing if the coach violated regulations without anyone else’s knowledge. Instead, the coach should be faced with severe punishments to protect the integrity of the game by ensuring that he follows regulations from then on. The coach should receive either a substantial fine (substantial meaning at least $250,000) and/or a suspension, depending on the severity of the violation or the number of violations committed.
Another way to improve the process of recruiting high school players is to eliminate the concept of athletes verbally “committing” to a school before signing a contract. A verbal commitment is not a commitment at all but rather a method for an athlete to express extreme interest in the school; a verbal commitment does not restrict a player in anyway from attending another school. Yet, colleges and college sports fan put tremendous stock in verbal commitments even though in
the long run it makes no difference on the athlete’s final decision. Verbal commitments are more trouble than they’re worth, which isn’t much considering they’re worth nothing. Colleges consistently get upset over athletes de-committing verbally
and going to other schools, so by eliminating verbal
commitments from college sports much of the stress and tension between colleges can be alleviated.
By simplifying the recruiting process and punishing coaches more severely, the NCAA can make the process easier for both the athlete and the colleges. Less coaches would break the rules and athletes would be able to make the right decision for themselves without the added pressure.