- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: A new trend? Roquan Smith won't sign LOI...only financial aid paperwork
Posted on 2/10/15 at 9:57 am to Rouge
Posted on 2/10/15 at 9:57 am to Rouge
Why would a coach not just move on? Can the coach depend on such a player to be a team player and not put himself above the rest team? If the does player not get is way he can just leave.
1
Posted on 2/10/15 at 10:05 am to kennymorgan
quote:
Why would a coach not just move on? Can the coach depend on such a player to be a team player and not put himself above the rest team? If the does player not get is way he can just leave.
because a coach isn't going to "move on" with kids like Leonard Fournette.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 10:07 am to Duckie
Just like the playing in Europe or China for a year thing for basketball, this strategy would only help the very elite kids.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 11:49 am to Duckie
If schools have to recruit thru the spring,I see recruiting cost going thru the roof.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 12:48 pm to Duckie
This is great. Kids need to have some way to protect themselves from coaching changes, life changes, etc. If you committed to Bama, Saban left, and Kiffin became new head coach? No way in hell you should be forced to go to Bama.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 12:50 pm to Duckie
So if there was an early signing period would the kid be able to decommit if the coach got fired or left?
Posted on 2/10/15 at 1:20 pm to tke857
I don't get it. What is this suppose to fix? Whatever happens whenever something is binding for one party it should be also binding on the other.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 2:01 pm to omegaman66
quote:
I don't get it. What is this suppose to fix? Whatever happens whenever something is binding for one party it should be also binding on the other.
It's an attempt to fix a issues that can arise between a recruit and school when agreed upon (material) terms can, and may, change before the contract expires/terminates.
It puts some power back into the kids hands. In exchange, the school can have unlimited contact with a recruit who signs financial aid paperwork.
This post was edited on 2/10/15 at 2:03 pm
Posted on 2/10/15 at 2:06 pm to Duckie
I also say that is a shitty system. More room for both parties to be shoddy. If its not broke dont fix it.
Posted on 2/10/15 at 9:33 pm to CajunTiger_225
wouldn't another benefit of an early signing period be that the kids who know where they want to go can commit so they can stop being hounded by other schools?
Posted on 2/10/15 at 9:46 pm to Duckie
Should be LOI or nothing. This isn't about the kids at all as much as it is about the parents/handlers. None of these kids are going to a school to win a Nobel Prize.
Its always better to commit to a school rather than a staff anyway. Commitment should work both ways, both sides half to honor regardless.
Its always better to commit to a school rather than a staff anyway. Commitment should work both ways, both sides half to honor regardless.
Posted on 2/11/15 at 2:33 pm to RollTigers
quote:Ultimately the kid should be signing to play for the SCHOOL, not the coach. I agree that players should be protected if the head coach leaves after LOI is signed and before the kid enrolls in school, the player should have options.....but not for a position coach.
This is great. Kids need to have some way to protect themselves from coaching changes, life changes, etc. If you committed to Bama, Saban left, and Kiffin became new head coach? No way in hell you should be forced to go to Bama.
Posted on 2/12/15 at 2:58 am to dante
The position coach has hands on instruction with the player, not the head coach. If a position coaches leaves after the LOI is signed, the player should have an out clause.
Posted on 2/12/15 at 10:30 am to Tiger F@g
If I were a 5 star and all the big schools were after me, I would commit to my school, and sign the financials, but I wouldn't sign my LOI until I was positive thtas where I wanted to go and all the coaches were in place.
THink about it, I'm a db and have been recruited for years by the assistant. The DC has never come recruit me and I have a not so close relationship with him as I do the asst......then LOI day comes around and I find the asst is leaving and now I'm supposed to like and become close with the DC? frick that.
I then would switch to my second choice if I felt more comfortable with the coaches there
THink about it, I'm a db and have been recruited for years by the assistant. The DC has never come recruit me and I have a not so close relationship with him as I do the asst......then LOI day comes around and I find the asst is leaving and now I'm supposed to like and become close with the DC? frick that.
I then would switch to my second choice if I felt more comfortable with the coaches there
Page 2 of 2
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News