Examining The Recent Proposals

On Nov. 1, the NCAA released a proposal to tweak some of the recruiting scenarios for the next two years. With that said, we have some preliminary questions about the proposal.

NCAA Recruiting Proposals

Point 1: "Strengthen the process for certifying summer basketball events, including a requirement for comprehensive educational and mentoring activities as well as disclosure of financial information about the sources of funds for the events and how they are allocated (01-51)."

  • Someone is going to have to explain to me exactly what this means. If it entails getting the shoe companies to disclose their sponsorship monies then 1) why would they want to do that and 2) who is going to monitor such an unbelievably daunting task?

Point 2: "Alter the Division I men's basketball recruiting calendar to reflect a summer evaluation period of two 10-day periods separated by a four-day dead period (July 8 to 17 and July 22 to 31); to permit one telephone call to a prospect during the month of March of the junior year; to permit one recruiting contact with a prospect during the April contact period of this junior year, to be included in the five permissible recruiting opportunities; to allow official visits beginning January 1 of the junior year; to establish 40 as the number of evaluation days during the academic year; and to eliminate evaluations during the fall contact period except for activities at the prospect's educational institution (01-52, as amended)."

  • Ok, I think the NCAA is saying that juniors can make official visits after January 1. BUT, at the same time they are saying schools can only make one call to prospects during the month of March. Won't that be tough to set up official visits in January without the benefit of a call to the kid?
  • Is an April "contact" defined as an in-home visit?
  • What happens if you are able to get a kid on campus post-January and are fortunate enough to get a commitment? Under the current structure, schools would then have to sweat out a signing until November. If we are going to speed up the recruiting calendar, then why not move up a signing date?
  • Alright, so the way I understand this is that schools won't be able to evaluate kids at fall AAU events and have to rely on the school workouts to make evaluations. To me, this isn't enough time to evaluate a prospect. There will now be added pressure to make evaluations on kids without the benefit of seeing them in fall events. That seems to be counter-productive and may lead to poor evaluations, which in turn could drive up the transfer rate.

Point 3: "Prohibit university staff members who are attending certified summer events from having contact with a prospect's coach or other individuals associated with the prospect. The proposal also prohibits unofficial visits during July (01-53)."

  • Is a cell phone call to an AAU coach a "contact?" If it's not, the scene is going to look kinda strange when everyone in the gym is on a cell phone call but can't physically walk over to the guy and have a conversation.
  • This amendment would end the "handshake line" at the close of AAU games. That's not such a bad thing but part of recruiting is about forming and sustaining relationships. That's the essence of the game, the nature of the beast, and this rule handcuffs some guys who are good at their jobs.

Point 4: "Require Division I colleges and universities to publicly disclose information about the financial relationships among institutions, corporations and coaches of prospects. Institutions that do not disclose the information will not be permitted to participate in the July evaluation period (01-54)."

  • Again, who is going to monitor such a daunting task and does this mean AAU teams must disclose their financial packages from the shoe companies or does it mean that high school coaches who speak at camps have to disclose what they are being paid?

Point 5: "Allow the restricted coach in men's and women's basketball to participate in off-campus recruiting during the summer evaluation period and academic year, without increasing the number of coaches who can recruit off campus at any one time (01-55)."

  • The way this reads is that the restricted coach can be on the road but as a staff, only three coaches can be on the road at the same time. Translation: more vacation time for head coaches?
  • Supposedly, this rule won't take effect until April.

Point 6: In regards to the "5/8" Rule: "The Board approved the Council's modification that would allow institutions to award up to a total of nine initial grants for student-athletes who enrolled during this academic year and 2002-03, with no more than five initial grants in one year. The Board also asked the Administrative Review Subcommittee, which can set aside application of the rule, to develop criteria under which relief from the rule can be granted when reasonably necessary."

  • This means if you signed four guys last year, instead of bringing in four in this current class, a school could bring in five kids provided they have the available scholarships. I agree with Dick Vitale on this one, regardless of the rule, coaches should have the right to use all 13 of their scholarships no matter when or how they choose to fill that quota.

Anyway, some of the changes seem reasonable, but it looks like there are some unanswered questions remaining.

Scout Hoops Top Stories