>
> Walsh and Standbrook pointed out that some schools put time constraints
> on their recruits, asking them to make a decision within an allotted
> amount of time.
>
> "When one school puts a time constraint on a recruit and you aren't in a
> position to make a final decision, you're likely to lose that player,"
> said Standbrook.  "A scholarship in hand is worth more than a promise."
>
> "Recruiting deadlines should be illegal," stated Walsh.  "It isn't fair
> to the kids."
 
Let me get this straight.... Walsh expects a school like Lowell, for example, to
 offer a kid a scholarship and then wait an extended period of time to see if he
 will sign with Maine instead.  What kind of deadline does he think is fair?
 What happens to Lowell if that kid does decide to go with Maine?  Is it fair to
 Lowell if they lose months in their recruiting efforts on a kid who was really
 just looking for a better offer (note: I'm just using Lowell as an example....I
 don't know if they use this particular recruiting practice).  Is it fair to the
 next kid on Lowell's list who has to sit around waiting to see if a scholarship
 is available?
 
I think it is perfectly reasonable to offer a kid a scholarship and say you have
 xx weeks to decide whether to accept it.  That's the way life works.  When I
 came to work for DG they weren't going to wait while I held out for a better
 offer from IBM.
 
I think Walsh wants it both ways....  He wants to sign top of the line pro
 and/or Olympic prospects and yet still cover himself in case they leave (note:
 even if they can't go to the Olympics there is no guarantee the players in
 question won't leave in the Spring of one of their undergraduate years to play
 professionally).  Fine...but don't expect everybody else to wait for him.
 
Jon
[log in to unmask]