Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Is the college letter of intent the 'worst contract in American sports'?

Collapse
X
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    Is the college letter of intent the 'worst contract in American sports'?

    High school linebacker Roquan Smith announced Friday he was signing scholarship papers with Georgia, just a little more than a week after saying at a news conference he would play for UCLA..

    His choice changed, Smith says, when he learned he had been lied to.

    The way Smith reacted could change the way top athletes are recruited, analysts say, or be a first step in eliminating college football's national signing day — which has become something of an unofficial national holiday for the rabid fan.

    In the hours leading up to signing day last week, Smith heard rumors that the coach who was recruiting him for UCLA, defensive coordinator Jeff Ulbrich, was about to take a job with the NFL's Atlanta Falcons.

    Ulbrich was one of the big reasons Smith was leaning toward the Bruins, and the player needed assurance. He says he got it when Ulbrich told him he was staying at UCLA.

    Smith then went ahead with his announcement, saying during a news conference at his Montezuma, Ga., high school that he was heading to Westwood. But in the hours that followed, there were media reports linking Ulbrich to the Falcons, and Smith got cold feet.

    Over the course of the day, signed National Letter of Intent papers — which lock the player to the school — poured into UCLA's football office. Smith's wasn't among them.

    He had decided to delay his decision and reopen his recruitment as he waited to see if Ulbrich stayed put.

    Four days later, the Falcons announced Ulbrich was their new linebackers coach.

    Smith has said "UCLA coaches" apologized to him, but the damage was done. UCLA has not commented on the matter because school representatives are not allowed to speak publicly about players who have not signed a letter of intent.

    Smith's decision to wait saved what might have been a regrettable choice, but others weren't so lucky.

    Mike Weber, a running back from Detroit, agonized over his choice between Ohio State and rival Michigan before he signed with the Buckeyes. The next day, Ohio State running backs coach Stan Drayton took a job with the Chicago Bears.

    "I'm hurt …," Weber tweeted. "I ain't gone lie."

    Chris Rumph, Texas' defensive line coach, took a new post with Florida two days after signing day and left behind bitter feelings. "Guess I was lied to in my face," tweeted defensive end Du'Vonta Lampkin, who had just signed with the Longhorns thinking Rumph would be his position coach.

    "There were just too many coaches leaving the day after signing day," said Mike Farrell, the national recruiting director for rivals.com. "It made it so obvious, that everybody knew this was occurring and they were just waiting to lock these kids in."

    The issue isn't new, Farrell added, but this time it was a lot more transparent.

    The players who have already signed have little choice but to stay with their schools, a situation critics argue is one-sided. Sports Illustrated went so far as to call a letter of intent "the worst contract in American sports."

    After a recruit signs, the player cannot switch schools without burning a year of eligibility unless the school or NCAA grants a release. In return, recruits receive the promise of a scholarship for at least one year, but the school can revoke it if the recruit isn't admitted to the school or engages in serious misconduct.

    "No agent in his right mind representing a player would allow a player to enter into an agreement like that," said Ramogi Huma, the former UCLA football player who heads the College Athletes Players Assn.

    An NCAA spokesperson declined comment, but its website states, "The NLI is voluntary and prospective student-athletes do not have to participate to play sports or receive financial aid."

    Let's just face it, Mora is challenged when it comes to integrity. There is a reason he has been fired so many times. This was just another despicable ucla move, glad they mentioned the last one involving the bruins with Notre Dame as well...that was another Mora classless move.

    A financial-aid agreement, which Smith signed, provides more protection to the athlete. The school promises a scholarship, pending admittance and other factors, but the recruit has the freedom to go elsewhere even after he signs.

    Basketball players as far back as Ed O'Bannon and Shon Tarver in 1991 have declined to sign a letter of intent, but the practice has yet to gain widespread appeal. O'Bannon and Tarver committed to Nevada Las Vegas but worried — rightly — that NCAA investigators had the Runnin' Rebels in their scope.

    More recently, in 2010, Brandon Knight, who now plays for the Milwaukee Bucks, committed to Kentucky but was worried its coach, John Calipari, might leave for the NBA. (Calipari used to offer a clause that voided the contract if he changed jobs, but the NCAA has declared this clause a violation.) Knight signed financial-aid papers instead.

    Opting away from signing a letter of intent is, most often, only an option for the most highly rated recruits. If others balk, experts say, they run the risk of the school simply turning its attention to someone else.

    Some coaches are reevaluating the signing process as a whole. Arizona Coach Rich Rodriguez, president of the American Football Coaches Assn., has come out in favor of eliminating national signing day entirely.

    "It's become a nightmare," Farrell said.

    Other sports have early signing periods, but football has only one — which starts annually on the first Wednesday in February.

    High school football players can, however, sign early financial-aid agreements. Ventura St. Bonaventure High quarterback Ricky Town committed to USC that way. Bellflower St. John Bosco High quarterback Josh Rosen did the same with UCLA, saying he equated it to "a pinky promise" with the school.

    Town and Rosen both graduated high school early and have enrolled in college in order to participate in spring practice.

    "We don't have that fear of the kid not coming," USC Coach Steve Sarkisian said. "Could it potentially happen? Sure. But the guys we're doing it with are just so strong in their conviction that this is where they want to come, we feel confident about it."

    Whereas athletes can sign financial-aid agreements with more than one school, a player is declared off limits to other schools if a letter of intent is signed. And earning a release from that agreement can be difficult.

    UCLA defensive lineman Eddie Vanderdoes is a rare example of an athlete who was able to change his mind without penalty. He signed with Notre Dame two years ago but asked out of the contract soon after. When Notre Dame refused, he appealed to the NCAA, which eventually ruled in his favor.

    Notre Dame Coach Brian Kelly complained about the decision and stressed the "importance of protecting the integrity of the NLI program."

    At the time, Vanderdoes said that he understood he made a commitment.

    But, he added, "I think it should be a two-way thing."

    #2
    The college sports system in America is severely screwed up. The NCAA makes SO much money from these young kids and then look the other way when athletes want to have more say in what they do.

    Comment


      #3
      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
      The college sports system in America is severely screwed up. The NCAA makes SO much money from these young kids and then look the other way when athletes want to have more say in what they do.
      Don't disagree at all, but it has been this way for 50+ years.

      Comment


        #4
        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
        The college sports system in America is severely screwed up. The NCAA makes SO much money from these young kids and then look the other way when athletes want to have more say in what they do.
        NCAA's priority is looking out for the interests of college sports programs; the interests of the student-athletes are a distant second or third. Frankly, it's amazing that these guys get away with this stuff--hundreds of businesses get together and decide to pay their employees nothing. Hmmm . . . seems like anti-competitive monopolistic behavior to me.

        Comment


          #5
          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
          NCAA's priority is looking out for the interests of college sports programs; the interests of the student-athletes are a distant second or third. Frankly, it's amazing that these guys get away with this stuff--hundreds of businesses get together and decide to pay their employees nothing. Hmmm . . . seems like anti-competitive monopolistic behavior to me.
          What colleges are not paying their coaches and administration?

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
            What colleges are not paying their coaches and administration?
            I guess you missed that the NLRB has determined that D1 athletes are employees of their universities. In the case of football and men's b-ball, they are there basically to provide entertainment to the student body and alumni.

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
              I guess you missed that the NLRB has determined that D1 athletes are employees of their universities. In the case of football and men's b-ball, they are there basically to provide entertainment to the student body and alumni.
              And the fanbase and to promote the school.

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                I guess you missed that the NLRB has determined that D1 athletes are employees of their universities. In the case of football and men's b-ball, they are there basically to provide entertainment to the student body and alumni.
                Isn't NLRB a criminal enterprise? How can anyone listen to those crooks?

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                  Don't disagree at all, but it has been this way for 50+ years.
                  Just because it's been around that long doesn't make it right. And the level of money the universities make off of many of these athletes know is beyond obscene.

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Another reminder that a player better really like the school/academics and the overall soccer program. Coaches change all the time (see other thread on Bucknell coach). Players can also get cut/injured/quit - then what? If you hate the school/replacement coach/soccer it can be a very long and painful time. Transferring isn't easy and you might not end up with as good a situation in terms of academics/soccer/finances.

                    Financially - merit money is the way to go. It's usually guaranteed for four years as long as a decent GPA is maintained. Financial aid is year-to-year but renewable as long as the family's financial situation doesn't change dramatically. Athletic money is nice but as this story shows if your situation is unsettled it might be best to avoid it.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                      Another reminder that a player better really like the school/academics and the overall soccer program. Coaches change all the time (see other thread on Bucknell coach). Players can also get cut/injured/quit - then what? If you hate the school/replacement coach/soccer it can be a very long and painful time. Transferring isn't easy and you might not end up with as good a situation in terms of academics/soccer/finances.

                      Financially - merit money is the way to go. It's usually guaranteed for four years as long as a decent GPA is maintained. Financial aid is year-to-year but renewable as long as the family's financial situation doesn't change dramatically. Athletic money is nice but as this story shows if your situation is unsettled it might be best to avoid it.
                      So are you saying the best place for young women is to play at a D3 college where the money is merit, grant or need based. Where do women soccer players go after college to the job force so does it matter if they play D1, D2 or D3?

                      Comment


                        #12
                        Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                        So are you saying the best place for young women is to play at a D3 college where the money is merit, grant or need based. Where do women soccer players go after college to the job force so does it matter if they play D1, D2 or D3?
                        Not the OP but that debate is all over the board - some claim D1 is better because it's "more of a commitment." Others say D3 is still plenty of a commitment and allows more time for academics (getting more of an education). Then there's the variability within each from really great academic D1 to so-so; same with D3. In the end all that matters is that a school is a good academic and social fit, financially the student won't be hindered with too much debt, and that they are happy. If they find a major/career they love the rest will follow. Once they're in the workforce a year or two NO ONE will care that they played in college.

                        Same can be said for boys - the reality is very, very few will go on to play professionally.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                          So are you saying the best place for young women is to play at a D3 college where the money is merit, grant or need based. Where do women soccer players go after college to the job force so does it matter if they play D1, D2 or D3?
                          Also D1 schools also have merit/need/financial aid. Not everyone is getting athletic money and if they are often it's anything but a full ride.

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                            Also D1 schools also have merit/need/financial aid. Not everyone is getting athletic money and if they are often it's anything but a full ride.
                            So you are saying the only difference is the commitment to D1 and the quality of play which also varies in each division from good to so so.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              Originally posted by Unregistered View Post
                              So you are saying the only difference is the commitment to D1 and the quality of play which also varies in each division from good to so so.
                              It's not black and white but multiple shades of gray. You're talking about hundreds of schools. "Generally" D1 is a bigger commitment and better soccer but from top to bottom there's a big variation. "Generally," with the exceptions of the Duke's of the world, D1 academics aren't quite as good as top D3 schools. But there's some very weak D3 schools also.

                              "Absolutely" a player should try to find the best balance of sports and academics that works for them and their long term goals.

                              Comment

                              Previously entered content was automatically saved. Restore or Discard.
                              Auto-Saved
                              x
                              Insert: Thumbnail Small Medium Large Fullsize Remove  
                              x
                              Working...
                              X