|
|
Post by newhope on Dec 15, 2021 6:37:32 GMT -6
Of course they do. The depth of that role depends on the situation, but coaches still play a role in recruiting. If I got the Manning kid, recruiters may not care about what I think, but for most kids they do--and some will care about a high profile kid as well. I had a kid who had offers from everybody. They all asked the same questions about him. When he was going into the professional baseball draft, I got calls from lots of scouts and GMs of major league teams asking those same questions we get about our players. I wasn't even his baseball coach and I got calls about him from those guys. I had 3 kids who received some amount of money to play college football in my career. I was never contacted about any of them by a recruiter. I asked around in my area and other coaches said they'd had similar experiences. The common theme was that with social media and Hudl colleges just didn't need to talk to the coaches anymore. We have a steady stream every year. In years in which we have studs we have a bigger stream. Most players who go on to play at the next level go to smaller schools, but we have several every year. I don't think I've ever had one recruited that didn't come through me in some manner. It's not just that I coach in a large school. I coached in small schools for over half of my career---still had a steady stream of coaches. |
|
|
|
Post by CoachMikeJudy on Dec 15, 2021 7:04:21 GMT -6
About the OP:
I don't like it. I've been down a similar road before as a young HC and it didn't read well to my intentions (I posted a "point system" in the offseason based on grades, attendance to events, playing other sports etc) and got raked over the coals because a particular kid was not pulling his weight and it was posted. I learned that if my priority was to get the kids moving in the right direction then calling them out only pushed the fringe players farther away. And we weren't good enough to be without the fringe players.
To the recruiting aspect:
Yes, I am seeing an increase in recruiting happening between kid and coach without the "middle man" aka ME. I don't know what to make of it- I have a kid signing today and the coaches never directly contacted me. After following up, it's 100% real and commitible, and the program and the kid are both reputable and trusted. I'm not an ego guy nor a control-freak, but I worry that this trend could lead to some major miscommunications in the future.
|
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Dec 15, 2021 7:11:07 GMT -6
I had an upstate div 3 school recruit a kid with no contact with me. Kid dropped out with a major drinking problem and no real academic skills. The coach then called me. I told him if he had contacted me I could have given him the heads up on this kid.
|
|
|
|
Post by silkyice on Dec 15, 2021 9:09:51 GMT -6
Just a few thoughts.
1) Tell the truth when asked.
2) But I would try and paint my kids in the best light possible. Not going to lie for them , but also not going to tattle-tell on them.
3) If a kid really is a problem, why do you think it is ok for him to play for you, but not play for another person?
4) I hear ya about, "What happens when I do have a dude that is a great kid?" Honestly, the recruiter you talked with previously isn't going to still be there. I have been coaching for years with multiple d1 dudes. And if that exact recruiter is still there (he won't be), guess what, if the kid is good enough, he will still take him. And also, last time I looked, there is more the one school that recruits kids.
5) I have not coached a d1 kid that wouldn't work hard. I am sure they exist. Those are called freaks. Guess what, unless the kid committed murder (twice), some d1 school is offering him no matter what you say anyways.
|
|
|
|
Post by agap on Dec 15, 2021 9:10:34 GMT -6
I didn't read the article from Football Scoop but we would definitely tell the truth to recruiters. Nobody benefits from trying to hide anything.
|
|
|
|
Post by carookie on Dec 15, 2021 11:21:34 GMT -6
Just a few thoughts. 1) Tell the truth when asked. 2) But I would try and paint my kids in the best light possible. Not going to lie for them , but also not going to tattle-tell on them. 3) If a kid really is a problem, why do you think it is ok for him to play for you, but not play for another person?
4) I hear ya about, "What happens when I do have a dude that is a great kid?" Honestly, the recruiter you talked with previously isn't going to still be there. I have been coaching for years with multiple d1 dudes. And if that exact recruiter is still there (he won't be), guess what, if the kid is good enough, he will still take him. And also, last time I looked, there is more the one school that recruits kids. 5) I have not coached a d1 kid that wouldn't work hard. I am sure they exist. Those are called freaks. Guess what, unless the kid committed murder (twice), some d1 school is offering him no matter what you say anyways. I get what you are writing in point #4 about the specific recruiter not being there anymore, but I do know of incidences where a few certain colleges (talking big Power 5) would NOT recruit from a specific high school because they had been burned in the past by players from that school- specifically off the field type stuff. This HS was a dominant program for a while, putting out multiple FBS kids yearly, but these colleges were not touching those kids. Now as you wrote if they were good enough they got offered elsewhere, and my single anecdote isn't glaring evidence to the contrary of your point. But limiting the possible pool does happen due to past incidences, and it would be unfair to a kid who was maybe borderline to lose out on options due to their coach not being forthright in the past. In regards to point #3, I think there is a material difference between a trouble maker playing for his HS team opposed to a college team, and that is recruitment. I play a kid who ends up getting in trouble on campus or with the law, while I feel bad and wish I couldve taught him otherwise, I am less culpable because HS is compulsory and the kid was coming to school as is. But in college, the player is recruited to the school by the team/coach. So if a player causes trouble on that level, then the team/coach is blamed for being the one who brought him there- and ergo are responsible for any of his actions. Agree or not, our society is drifting moreso in the direction where individual responsibility is reducing and blame is being placed on those with more power and authority. Its a risky business. |
|
|
|
Post by mrjvi on Dec 16, 2021 9:31:27 GMT -6
We are trying to change negative players through football if we can. They are some of the ones we have that football may help them more than they help us. Colleges want to know what they are getting.
Bob Ford who was the long time Albany, NY coach asked me about a kid I had. I told him the kid could definitely play at his level but was abrasive and had issues with many coaches and teachers at our HS. I was able, fortunately, to have a good rapport with him. He thanked me and said it was always refreshing to recruit my players because he always knew what they were really like because I didn't try to "snow" him. This particular kid he said he has had great success with-those kids with some issues. Kid did very well until he broke his wrist senior year.
Also had another kid who's father was furious for me not saying unbelievable things about his kid to get into the Coast guard academy. I told the father they would never believe me again. The father insisted it's my job to get the kid in no matter what. I also told him his kid's arrest record will prevent him getting in. He couldn't fathom why that would matter. He didn't get in and I had developed an enemy parent. The kid who did get into coact guard 2 years prior was an exceptional person. They want the truth.
|
|
