Recruiting changes are coming

[Orijinal]

Me likey.

 

[CuseLegacy]

Though Swofford didn't want to take a firm stand on where the ACC stands with the current recruiting reforms package, he did say most coaches are against official visits in the spring and want legislation adding a 10th assistant coach separated from the current proposal.

 

[CuseLegacy]

The NCAA’s Division I Council on Friday voted to allow an early signing period and to restrict the period camps can occur.

The early signing period would be in December — when junior college players are currently permitted to sign — but would still need final approval from the Conference Commissioners Association in June. The CCA manages the National Letter of Intent program.

 

[CuseLegacy]

 

[Chip]

I try to ignore anyone who states that 6 games into a coaching regime, 'the honeymoon is officially over'.

I hate this cliche. We never go anywhere nice for our honeymoons.

 

[TexanMark]

Another article (take out extra o in Scoout)

scoout.com

 

[CuseLegacy]

 

[CuseLegacy]

Jeremy Crabtree‏Verified account @jeremycrabtree 3m3 minutes ago
72-hour early signing period beginning Dec. 20, 2017, passing wasn't a surprise. Surprise came in timing of vote. Vote was set for mid-June.

First heard the words "early signing period" mentioned by coaches in 2002. 15 years later, it's reality after today's surprise vote by CCA.

But one conference commissioner told me after NCAA recruiting reform passed this spring "there was no need to wait until June, so we voted."

And before you ask, there is not a waiver for kids that sign early and a coaching change happens. Have to go thru normal NLI appeal process.

 

[texascpa]

Anyone else find it weird that they start the early signing 5 days before Christmas?

 

[CuseLegacy]

 

[CuseLegacy]

 

[CuseLegacy]

 

[CuseLegacy]

Transfers
Both the forum and the board members discussed the work of the Division I Transfer Working Group. That group is working toward legislation that would improve the transfer environment for college athletes, coaches and teams.

The presidential leaders supported adding “tampering” to the Division I Manual’s list of Level II violations, which are considered significant breaches of conduct.

The board and forum members also supported a notification-of-transfer model to replace the permission-to-contact system. Under current rules, Division I college athletes who wish to transfer must first receive permission from their current school to discuss transfer opportunities with another school. If the school denies permission, the student-athlete can’t receive athletics aid for the first year after transferring.

The working group is considering a model that would allow a student to notify a school that he or she will transfer. The student could then pursue transfer opportunities and accept scholarships at other schools.

The presidents also indicated initial support for pursuing concepts to increase accountability for schools who take transfer student-athletes and to create uniform transfer eligibility rules, concepts being considered by both the Division I Committee on Academics and the Transfer Working Group. Neither concept is expected to be put to a vote in 2017-18.