some ideas on the theory of recruitment: 1. kids must meet and talk to a coach or a notable representative of a coach. In other words, close personal contact must be established with a coach or a star veteran player like Powell, Gait, etc. in the initial stages of recruitment. Here is where the coach's or rep's age comes in. Why does everybody talk about age when asking for change? One of the answers must be the kids relate better to young coaches than to older ones. Starsia comes to mind. Fine coach. Generations too old. Arguable I know.
2. Personal contact with the initial rep should be frequent and continuous to NLI. Here is where trust and good faith matter. Assessing the strength of commitment prime concern.
3. Generating a social network among current players, recruits, veteran players, etc. to the extent that a kid who wavers might feel the pressure from his network, albeit unstated, to remain committed.
4. Ask that the early recruit be responsible for supporting, informing, listening to, and maintaining the morale of a newer recruit.
I think this leads to the idea that the more interconnected a recruit, the less likely he is to de-commit. It also engenders a sense that the responsible recruit is invested in the team's success.
So, the theory is that the closer a recruit feels to the team members, coaches, fellow recruits, acclaimed veterans, who by the way provide key connections in the stories they can tell recruits about the history of the team, the more likely he is to want to stick around.
So, when a recruit claims he had de-commited because the coaches did not seem interested enough, I think we should take it seriously, but I think we should also take it to mean that the complicated web of connections broke down or never coalesced. Phone calls from staff are not the only elements.
I have the feeling that as important as money, current team success, school reputation, etc. are to a recruit's decisions, the interpersonal connections are more important.
2. Personal contact with the initial rep should be frequent and continuous to NLI. Here is where trust and good faith matter. Assessing the strength of commitment prime concern.
3. Generating a social network among current players, recruits, veteran players, etc. to the extent that a kid who wavers might feel the pressure from his network, albeit unstated, to remain committed.
4. Ask that the early recruit be responsible for supporting, informing, listening to, and maintaining the morale of a newer recruit.
I think this leads to the idea that the more interconnected a recruit, the less likely he is to de-commit. It also engenders a sense that the responsible recruit is invested in the team's success.
So, the theory is that the closer a recruit feels to the team members, coaches, fellow recruits, acclaimed veterans, who by the way provide key connections in the stories they can tell recruits about the history of the team, the more likely he is to want to stick around.
So, when a recruit claims he had de-commited because the coaches did not seem interested enough, I think we should take it seriously, but I think we should also take it to mean that the complicated web of connections broke down or never coalesced. Phone calls from staff are not the only elements.
I have the feeling that as important as money, current team success, school reputation, etc. are to a recruit's decisions, the interpersonal connections are more important.
