Early signing day - yay or nay?

[Buffnik]

I was in favor of it, but I think I was wrong.

Seems like it has caused a lot of turmoil and challenges with recruits pressured to decide while coaching changes are happening. For the schools, it seems to be forcing craziness on the carousel when there's an impetus on having next year's staff decided before mid December. I'm now a "nay" and want to get rid of it. Not sure what the positive has been.

 

[Alfred91]

I was in favor of it, but I think I was wrong.

Seems like it has caused a lot of turmoil and challenges with recruits pressured to decide while coaching changes are happening. For the schools, it seems to be forcing craziness on the carousel when there's an impetus on having next year's staff decided before mid December. I'm now a "nay" and want to get rid of it. Not sure what the positive has been.

My first thought was yes, because it allowed kids to sign and get on with their lives without being bothered by everyone and their dog, but when you're being asked to sign in prime coaching staff reshuffling time, that's pretty unfair.

 

[Darth Snow]

Needs to be smaller and earlier. Like 10 spots in July. Otherwise better gone completely

 

[Daaah]

 

[MtnBuff]

Needs to be smaller and earlier. Like 10 spots in July. Otherwise better gone completely

This

I like having it and I think the timing is right but it needs to have a limited number, 10 or 15, 10 is probably better.

I think if they did that it would result in a better distribution of talent.

Under the current system every recruit gets told by schools "You are our number one WR" or even "You are our most important recruit of the year and kids want to believe that.

Let each school sign their 10 early signees or 15. Then let the rest of the kids realize that the school included two guys at their position in the 10 they signed, a little hard to believe they were really the number one target.

What does a kid do when say USC offers him but not to sign early and say Washington offers to sign him early ahead of their other prospects at the position?

 

[RollTad21]

I'd actually be in favor for a later signing period and Feb being the "early". Would benefit teams who had coaching changes, players who were committed to a school that had a coaching change, and players who maybe needed to do some work their last semester in school.

 

[Buffnik]

The old way of just having transfers & early enrollees in December worked. You can't go away from that.

But the rest? I think another negative is that it takes away a prime "event day" from the sport. NSD has quickly gone from a media thing like the Draft to being kind of lame.

 

[manhattanbuff]

I prefer one day with a 48 hour window. Since everyone can go into the portal without consequence, make NSD a big deal and move on.

 

[patebuff]

Needs to be smaller and earlier. Like 10 spots in July. Otherwise better gone completely

This. I’d like to see a summer signing period and January/February. Having two so close together has killed the whole thing.

 

[FM-Buff]

I loved the idea originally but so much has changed the past few years. The transfer portal makes an early signing day unnecessary. Have one in February again.

 

[skibum]

I'd actually be in favor for a later signing period and Feb being the "early". Would benefit teams who had coaching changes, players who were committed to a school that had a coaching change, and players who maybe needed to do some work their last semester in school.

This.

What I remember (granted it's been a long time so a. things may have changed since then, and b. I my memory might not be so good), is that most HS students weren't making their decisions until March/April - allowing the athletes to have as close to "normal" of an experience I think is a good idea.

But that's not the main point. Nor is allowing them one more semester to get admitted to a better school, although this is a very good point too.

The main point is that I believe, for a variety of reasons, that the early signing day has been a net negative for CU, and that is primary lens through which I judge these things.

 

[bigbang2]

Yay, the change I will like to see is if there is a major change like coach leaving or major life changing event and etc. The student should be able to get out of signing the letter of intent without having to seat out a year.

 

[Not Sure]

I’d like a universal signing day for all scholarship sports. Football, basketball, hockey, track, water polo - you name it. I’d like for it to be at the same time regular students have to make up their minds on their college choices. Last year, that was May 1. I don’t know if this is realistic or not, but it would be preferable.

 

[LongHaulBuff]

For the schools, it seems to be forcing craziness on the carousel when there's an impetus on having next year's staff decided before mid December.

If your carousel is rusted and in a state of disrepair it's a huge problem (CU). Not even a squirt of WD-40 since it was new over a decade ago. As a coach I wouldn't get on the CU carousel because either it will jam or break loose and I may be thrown to my death. Either way not much fun at all.

 

[DBT]

For me, the February signing day was always a day to look forward to and enjoy. It was a day that helped fill the void between the bowl season and spring practice. It was the one day during the off season that local media paid attention. Now early signing day is barely noticed.

 

[BuffUp]

Voted nay. This is driving these coaches to bail on their teams before playoff and bowl games. One more nail that takes loyalty and commitment away from schools and coaches.
Early signing, NIL, the has vs has nots will be what kills a once great sport and tradition.

 

[DBT]

Voted nay. This is driving these coaches to bail on their teams before playoff and bowl games. One more nail that takes loyalty and commitment away from schools and coaches.
Early signing, NIL, the has vs has nots will be what kills a once great sport and tradition.

On the bright side, CU coaches don’t have to bail on the team before a bowl game.