Committed?

**VeloClone** · 01-30-2013, 03:07 PM

I think the problem with signing LOI's whenever they want would be programs pressuring kids to sign on the dotted line during their recruiting trip. It would be very easy for a kid to have stars in their eyes without time to think the decision through.

**Cyclonic1** · 01-30-2013, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by ISUCubswin

I think if an athlete is a verbal, soft or hard, they should be forced to have a tattoo that takes up their entire chest of that team. That way they can switch but they'll look stupid.

I believe we should do like Michigan and if a verbal commit makes a visit to another school then we pull the offer. It will take a good player or 2 staying home for an extra year to teach these kids that their word has to mean something. If my word wasn't good in business dealings I would be broke. The kids might as well learn that at 18.

**isufbcurt** · 01-30-2013, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclonic1

I believe we should do like Michigan and if a verbal commit makes a visit to another school then we pull the offer. It will take a good player or 2 staying home for an extra year to teach these kids that their word has to mean something. If my word wasn't good in business dealings I would be broke. The kids might as well learn that at 18.

Note sure how this helps. If I committed to ISU early and then say Miami offered, I took a visit and ISU pulled my offer it wouldn't be a big deal to me because I could still go to Miami. So ISU would lose out not me.

**Blandboy** · 01-31-2013, 10:56 PM

Originally Posted by ISUCubswin

I think if an athlete is a verbal, soft or hard, they should be forced to have a tattoo that takes up their entire chest of that team. That way they can switch but they'll look stupid.

Oh, kind of like a former Wisconsin coach who has a Sqawkeye tattoo on his leg? Does seem dumb once you move on ...

**Stormin** · 01-31-2013, 11:43 PM

Originally Posted by Cyclonic1

I believe we should do like Michigan and if a verbal commit makes a visit to another school then we pull the offer. It will take a good player or 2 staying home for an extra year to teach these kids that their word has to mean something. If my word wasn't good in business dealings I would be broke. The kids might as well learn that at 18.

That is the Chizik policy. "Your word has to mean something." Chizik said. Sort of rings hollow doesn't it?

**00clone** · 02-01-2013, 01:43 AM

Originally Posted by Stormin

That is the Chizik policy. "Your word has to mean something." Chizik said. Sort of rings hollow doesn't it?

In the case of Gene, his words do mean something. It's not specified that this 'something' is 'don't trust a gawddammed word I say'

**Stormin** · 02-01-2013, 07:05 AM

Originally Posted by 00clone

In the case of Gene, his words do mean something. It's not specified that this 'something' is 'don't trust a gawddammed word I say'

I don't have a real problem with the way things are. These are "Verbals". And everyone knows they are non-binding. Plus these are 18 year old kids. I would rather that a verbal commitment gets changed before signing day rather than have the kid sign and then transfer somewhere else because they did not like it.

**Doc** · 02-02-2013, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by cyingreen

With all the de-commits, both for and against us this year, somebody needs to come up with a better term to describe the 'verbal acceptance of a scholarship offer.' Committed just doesn't reflect the flexibility that athletes seem to want in this day and age.

These HS kids do a better job of staying committed than married people...