(04-20-2016 02:35 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:29 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  The answer is that there are plenty of private camps (Nike Sparq) that coaches can attend. There will certainly be more as a result of the rule change.

You just make stuff up for the fun of it?
The rule says no one on staff at a school can participate in any camp other than the ones held on campus.

There will be more private camps and coaches will have access to the same data they would get at their own camps. 40yrd, shuttle, broad jump etc.

Review the data, pick up the phone and call the coach, parents and recruit. If the interest is mutual then meet each other and go from there.

(04-20-2016 04:13 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:35 PM)arkstfan Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:29 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  The answer is that there are plenty of private camps (Nike Sparq) that coaches can attend. There will certainly be more as a result of the rule change.

You just make stuff up for the fun of it?
The rule says no one on staff at a school can participate in any camp other than the ones held on campus.

There will be more private camps and coaches will have access to the same data they would get at their own camps. 40yrd, shuttle, broad jump etc.

Review the data, pick up the phone and call the coach, parents and recruit. If the interest is mutual then meet each other and go from there.

Access to data isn't the real benefit of satellite camps.
And you get bet your granny's fanny that the private camps will charge more and will promote themselves as the insider way to get a scholarship even though some of them won't be sending the info to anyone. Others will be run by boosters or people wanting to get an "in" with a coaching staff and try to gain influence over kids to steer them to the coach of their liking.

Why do I say that? Because that's exactly what happened before when we didn't have satellite camps.

(04-20-2016 02:34 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:27 PM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:23 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:16 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:06 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  None of that works well. State political borders bear absolutely no relation to college football recruiting. Neither does mileage. Might as well just arbitrarily make it based on average rainfall.

Frankly, the NCAA should hold a specified number of regulated and supervised regional camps based on student and college interest for having them...and then have them.

Now that may freak out some. Too bad...the goal should be to match up potential FBS athletes with potential FBS slots. That probably means multiple camps in Texas and zero camps in Idaho.

In the end it is what you he 129 FBS schools will agree to. The above makes sense in theory but is too complicated. The state line is probably the default.

If eveyone were focused on the athlete, they'd come up with a system that works. There are probably a hundred different ways to go about it. But nobody is.

I've thought about unlimited camps but only for athletes with no FBS offers. That would probably give a whole lot of athletes FBS looks from G5 schools but Harbaugh probably wouldn't want to waste his time.

Problem with that is that you'd probably have to have new rules on offers and commitments and have a centralized clearing house to manage it. But maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing either.

In any event, nobody who can do stuff actually cares enough to lead so its all fantasy anyway.

Since when do college athletics have anything to do with the recruits wellfare? They basically use each other. The kid gets a mostly paid for (if not entirely free) higher education and the school kids an athlete that will hopefully help the team win games and championships.

Just because it doesn't doesn't mean it shouldn't.

And as a practical matter...the status quo cannot stand forever. Athletes are getting fed up and public opinion is headed that way too. And there is a fair chance that, sooner or later, the courts will pop the bubble suddenly and sharply.

Self-regulate, or have regulation imposed from outside. Abuse brings control.

Why not drop athletic scholarship altogether. We are talking about institutions of higher learning right? Offer sports but simply as a recreational activity. If someone is serious then may be have sports academies. That way they can truly focus on what's important to them and not be bothered with all the useless classes.
Actually this is big in soccer. If a player is serious about the sport and they have the talent the don't go to school they go to that team or leagues academy. Colleges should just get out of this whole sports thing and stop being farm teams for the pros. That way we aren't wasting all this effort and money on silly sports that is just entertainment anyway.

(04-21-2016 10:34 AM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:34 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:27 PM)trueeagle98 Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:23 PM)ark30inf Wrote:  

(04-20-2016 02:16 PM)GSU Eagles Wrote:  In the end it is what you he 129 FBS schools will agree to. The above makes sense in theory but is too complicated. The state line is probably the default.

If eveyone were focused on the athlete, they'd come up with a system that works. There are probably a hundred different ways to go about it. But nobody is.

I've thought about unlimited camps but only for athletes with no FBS offers. That would probably give a whole lot of athletes FBS looks from G5 schools but Harbaugh probably wouldn't want to waste his time.

Problem with that is that you'd probably have to have new rules on offers and commitments and have a centralized clearing house to manage it. But maybe that wouldn't be a bad thing either.

In any event, nobody who can do stuff actually cares enough to lead so its all fantasy anyway.

Since when do college athletics have anything to do with the recruits wellfare? They basically use each other. The kid gets a mostly paid for (if not entirely free) higher education and the school kids an athlete that will hopefully help the team win games and championships.

Just because it doesn't doesn't mean it shouldn't.

And as a practical matter...the status quo cannot stand forever. Athletes are getting fed up and public opinion is headed that way too. And there is a fair chance that, sooner or later, the courts will pop the bubble suddenly and sharply.

Self-regulate, or have regulation imposed from outside. Abuse brings control.

Why not drop athletic scholarship altogether. We are talking about institutions of higher learning right? Offer sports but simply as a recreational activity. If someone is serious then may be have sports academies. That way they can truly focus on what's important to them and not be bothered with all the useless classes.
Actually this is big in soccer. If a player is serious about the sport and they have the talent the don't go to school they go to that team or leagues academy. Colleges should just get out of this whole sports thing and stop being farm teams for the pros. That way we aren't wasting all this effort and money on silly sports that is just entertainment anyway.

A return to more of an amateur model in college football, with traditions, and reasonable geographic conferences and athletes as much interested in degrees as sports has a lot of appeal.

But let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.