We Need To Say No

*Originally Published on 04/07/2022

Phone Call and June 15th Prep

Buy Now

I've made it clear from the beginning of these new recruiting rules that I wasn't a fan of them. In general I feel like they are misdirected and do nothing to fix the issues they were set up to fix. Not only that, but the schools and conferences that were the biggest proponents of these new rules because they needed to, "slow down recruiting" have done little to nothing to actually slow down their recruiting processes. I think that taking away the unofficial visits for younger athletes has been one of the biggest negatives and a detriment to athletes across the country (blog coming later on this topic). All of that being said, I understand that we are still within all of the COVID eligibility craziness and have realistically yet to see these new rules applied in a consistent way and we won't, even after June 15th of this year. So, while some might say my statements about the new rules are unfair, I honestly don't see my reservations about the new rules changing EVEN when we are able to have a recruiting class without crazy outside variables.

But what does all of that have to do with the title of this blog? Nothing really, just me ranting a bit; which is why you all read this to begin with - to hear me rant.

However, with these new rules in place we are putting athletes at a HUGE disadvantage when it comes to the recruiting process and that's what I want to talk about.

Ok, so we're on track now...

College coaches need to be able to say "No" to athletes.

This is something we have never really been good at honestly. We want athletes to come to camp. We want to see how they improve. All that is fair for sure. But we watch hundreds of athletes at a qualifier. As college coaches we KNOW that we aren't really serious about recruiting the majority of them; but we send them a camp invite anyway. I talked about mixed messaging before, this is all part of it.

The rule right now (depending on your compliance) is that college coaches can express "general interest" in a student athlete. This is great and really helpful. Unfortunately many schools choose NOT to do this part at all. That's their choice of course, but it certainly doesn't help with the process. My take with this interpretation of the rule and the ability to communicate "general interest" in a specific athlete makes the converse true and acceptable as well; that college coaches are allowed, by the rule, to communicate that they are NOT generally interested in an athlete. There are only 2 colleges across the country I know of that are doing this in any level or capacity. I've talked to several college coaches across the country over the past few weeks and the response is usually that they don't know if they can or they don't think they can.

Here's why we need to make this change.

Right now athletes are doing the majority of the connecting and reaching out to college coaches; they are the ones communicating interest. I don't necessarily have an issue with this as I believe this process needs to be athlete driven. But, we run into the notion that the athlete NEEDS and is REQUIRED to communicate interest in a school and there is almost no responsibility on the other end. Plenty of college coaches operate somewhere in the "grey" and I don't usually have an issue with this because any "no" from a school just helps the athlete navigate where they need to go next. Similarly, when a coach is able to express "general interest" in a specific way outside of camp invites and questionnaires it helps at least steer the athlete in a specific direction. They might be 1 of 75 athletes that gets a t-shirt in the mail, but at least they are in the wheelhouse. They might not be at the top of a list, or in the top 10, but in the same zip code is helpful.

All of that filtering helps athletes figure out where there fit really is. It's one of the things that I've been stressing over the past 9 months. But it is frustrating for parents and athletes to be doing all of this work and get almost nothing in return. "We can contact them on June 15th" is only going to carry you so far here. Athletes have a large list. College coaches have a large list. I won't ever be an advocate for athletes to do "nothing" throughout their recruiting process, but we are getting to the point where we are asking athletes to do a lot of work and turn around and make potentially a HUGE decision that week of June 15th - especially since we're supposed to be slowing down recruiting...especially since we're supposed to be doing things to limit the amount of athletes in the transfer portal...

Now, I say all of this NOT to attack college coaches in anyway. They are all operating in a world and environment that their compliance gives them to operate. It's not necessarily due to a fault of their own doing, it's just the world we live in right now. What I am arguing for is that we have the opportunity to make something better with how we handle and even, yes, interpret the rules we are given for the BETTER of the prospective student-athlete. That's why we all are doing this right? To help athletes grow and improve on the court, in the classroom and just in general? I think making sure we aren't leading-on an athlete instead of pocketing an extra $100 from camp would be somewhere on that list. I get it, your top 5 athletes might say no. But to expect an athlete to have their top 3 schools figured out and be planning on attending their camp over the summer so that a college coach can know they are interested without a phone call is asking a lot. And that athlete has to figure that all out without knowing where the program stands and where she is on their list? That scale seems a little weighted in one direction.

"Jason, what if we say NO and then we end up liking the kid later on?"

Hopefully both sides are mature enough to handle this kind of situation. Sometimes we might not be and that's okay too. In event that either party is upset at being told "no" originally, then it's probably fair to say that athlete wouldn't have been a good fit for that coach and visa versa. I had an athlete tell me "no" twice and when she wanted to transfer after her first season she called me. I would have taken the kid too, but I didn't have a scholarship. The truth was that I didn't hold it against her that she made a decision that she thought was best for her. We all do that. College coaches and athletes both. I hope every athlete and coach is making the best decision for themselves (BLOG POST).

This is a response I've gotten a couple of times and it's totally fair. Should you be saying "hard pass" to an 8th grader or maybe even a freshmen their first year of club? Probably not. Every coach is at a different level and needs to assess their needs in that current moment. But I do think that when you can honestly look at your recruiting board and see 10-15 athletes in one position and then watch film of an athlete that wouldn't crack your 2nd or 3rd tier...you probably know whether or not that athlete is good enough to play for your program.

I think college coaches should be able to say "no" without looking like the bad guys. I think that communicating this will help significantly more in this process overall. Honest conversations are only a benefit to both sides. I think this is something we can do. I think this is something we should do.

College Recruiting Needs List

Buy Now

Streamline your recruiting efforts and use the same system that all of my athletes use for a fraction of the cost compared to other platforms. Use my link and save 15% today!

Need coffee???

Try the same coffee that powers my recruiting day! Use code - PARALLELRECRUITINGINITIATIVE and save 15% on your purchase!

*Affiliate Links - This post contains affiliate links, at no additional cost to you I am compensated if you purchase after clicking on the links.