For those who may not have seen this elsewhere:
http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/champion/diii-student-athletes-want-sign-too
Picture a suburban high school. See swaths of white cinderblock painted black and gold or blue and yellow. See the students gather in the cafeteria, crowding around a long table where a handful of their peers sit and sign National Letters of Intent, officially declaring that they will soon be playing basketball or soccer or football at Division I or Division II schools. See the photographer from the local newspaper snapping photos. Hear the reporter asking them how excited they are to finally be a Buckeye or a Tiger or a Boilermaker.
Now picture the other athletes, the ones who will play those same sports in college, only at Division III schools. See them standing off to the side, lost in the crowd – watching. Or see them signing a blank piece of paper, not a document emblazoned with their school colors and punctuated by a dotted line. Under Division III rules, that is all they have ever been allowed to do.
Now ask them about those moments.
"I felt left out when the kids who had committed to participating in DI or DII athletics received the attention and publicity on signing day for their accomplishments while I stood in the crowd," said Audrey Hester, who played four years of lacrosse at Randolph-Macon College before graduating this year.
"I felt somehow less important or accomplished than my Division I and II classmates," said Jaime Salcedo, a junior midfielder on Medaille College's soccer team.
"I had nothing official to present to my friends and family," said Jenna Ortega, a 2014 Ohio Wesleyan University graduate who played field hockey and lacrosse. "I was a little embarrassed at the time."
Future Division III student-athletes may not be burdened by the same feelings. In January at the Convention, members will vote on a proposal that would permit prospective Division III student-athletes to sign a standard, nonbinding athletics celebratory signing form, which would be crafted by the NCAA and distributed to Division III schools so they can affix it to school letterhead and provide it to the student-athletes.
While there is strong support among student-athletes for the proposal, some coaches wish it went further. The proposal emerged from the Division III Recruiting Working Group, which was tasked, in part, with finding ways to improve coaches' work-life balance. Marci Sanders, working group member and volleyball coach at the University of Texas at Dallas, said a binding document akin to the National Letter of Intent would save coaches valuable time. They wouldn't be forced to continue recruiting athletes who have committed amid constant worries that other programs might poach them.
But Steve Fritz, recruiting working group member and longtime director of athletics at the University of St. Thomas (Minnesota), noted that the nonbinding caveat must stay in place for the document to successfully serve its purpose. It ensures that academics, not athletics, govern Division III student-athletes' college choices. For the same reason, the proposal includes a rule that students cannot use the form until they have been accepted to attend the institution.
Fritz said he was lukewarm on the proposal when it was first introduced, but he has changed his mind after realizing how important it is to student-athletes. And Sanders noted that many athletes who commit to her program immediately ask about signing a National Letter of Intent. She said she has frequently been embarrassed to tell them that their only option besides signing a blank piece of paper is to print and sign a document such as college admissions letters or academic scholarship offers, which are typically submitted by the student online.
The new form would change that. And, she said, student-athletes aren't the only ones who stand to benefit.
"Not only is it great exposure for our division, but for the university as well as the sport program," Sanders said. "Any positive exposure helps in future recruiting efforts."
I'm all for this. It makes D3 athletics more attractive to prospects; it will aid public relations and media exposure for D3 members; it doesn't violate the academics-first mission of the division; and, because it's non-binding, it doesn't lock D3 student-athletes into the indentured servitude of D1, D2, and NAIA (only without the scholarships).
I think it's a win-win, maybe even an elusive win-win-win.
Of course it won't pass. :D
/cynicism for $1000
Is there any regulation that prohibits a college from sending such a letter now? I have seen a few photos of CWRU commits who have a CWRU shirt or hat at their hs's signing day.
I like it as long as it is non-binding. Not sure I like the idea at the Early Signing period though. Still a lot of recruiting going on.
Maybe the signing ceremony should be signing the deposit check to remind everyone these kids are paying to go to school.
I don't have any problem with the proposal itself, per se. However, I think all it is doing is feeding the "everybody gets a ribbon" and entitlement sentiments our society is embracing. Personally, I do have a problem with that.
I don't know. I think it is a bit of a right of passage these days. Kids get into college and the bumper sticker goes on the car, regardless of whether it is Monstrous Lecture Hall U or Extremely Expensive Private C. Announcing where you are going to continue your athletic passion is much the same thing. Does it really serve a point? No, but it doesn't hurt anything and makes a difference to the kid. Arguably it is the biggest decision of a teenager's life, celebrating it a bit more isn't a problem.
Not to mention there are D3 programs in many sports, including football, that punch above their weight and can take out some D2 and occasionally even D1 programs. Someone going to, say, Messiah for soccer, UW-W for football, etc is at least as worthy of recognition as someone signing with a crummy D2 program that can't fight its way out of a paper bag and has poor academics to boot.
Many high schools already have "signing ceremonies" for the D3 kids, so why not make it legit?
I don't get how this is 'getting a ribbon' - it's a great accomplishment!
"I felt left out when the kids who had committed to participating in DI or DII athletics received the attention and publicity on signing day for their accomplishments while I stood in the crowd," said Audrey Hester, who played four years of lacrosse at Randolph-Macon College before graduating this year.
"I felt somehow less important or accomplished than my Division I and II classmates," said Jaime Salcedo, a junior midfielder on Medaille College's soccer team.
"I had nothing official to present to my friends and family," said Jenna Ortega, a 2014 Ohio Wesleyan University graduate who played field hockey and lacrosse. "I was a little embarrassed at the time."
First off, I'm not taking anything away from Division III athletes. I was borderline good enough to be a division III athlete (as in technically, a participant), but not actually good enough to be a "player". They are indeed skilled. However, every quote from the article helps elaborate on what I was describing. Each one of them likens their accomplishment to being lesser than a D1 or D2 player, and feeling slighted. That they deserved the same accolade. They did accomplish something, but not to the same extent. Very few players choose Division III. Division III, as a general rule, chooses players based on their level of achievement being relatively lesser than that of D1 and D2 players. So to me, it does sound like a "I'm entitled to a ribbon, too, even though I didn't accomplish the same feat."
Again, I have no problem with the proposal itself. It doesn't actually harm anything. But I don't like the underlying message it propagates.
Quote from: timtlu on November 13, 2014, 12:39:25 PM
"I felt left out when the kids who had committed to participating in DI or DII athletics received the attention and publicity on signing day for their accomplishments while I stood in the crowd," said Audrey Hester, who played four years of lacrosse at Randolph-Macon College before graduating this year.
"I felt somehow less important or accomplished than my Division I and II classmates," said Jaime Salcedo, a junior midfielder on Medaille College's soccer team.
"I had nothing official to present to my friends and family," said Jenna Ortega, a 2014 Ohio Wesleyan University graduate who played field hockey and lacrosse. "I was a little embarrassed at the time."
First off, I'm not taking anything away from Division III athletes. I was borderline good enough to be a division III athlete (as in technically, a participant), but not actually good enough to be a "player". They are indeed skilled. However, every quote from the article helps elaborate on what I was describing. Each one of them likens their accomplishment to being lesser than a D1 or D2 player, and feeling slighted. That they deserved the same accolade. They did accomplish something, but not to the same extent. Very few players choose Division III. Division III, as a general rule, chooses players based on their level of achievement being relatively lesser than that of D1 and D2 players. So to me, it does sound like a "I'm entitled to a ribbon, too, even though I didn't accomplish the same feat."
Again, I have no problem with the proposal itself. It doesn't actually harm anything. But I don't like the underlying message it propagates.
D3 has a problem with perception... that of being just a bit better than HS. The truth is that there's any number of reasons an athlete might choose to go to a D3 school over maybe a D2 or even D1. Location, family legacy, education (who wouldn't want to go to a prestigious school like MIT or Amherst or Chicago). There are far more athletes in high school who won't get to play in college at any level because there's simply not enough teams for everyone. So an individual who is talented enough to play for a team (whether a 6'9" basketball player who could make the NBA or a wide receiver with great hands but stopped growing at 5'9" and didn't get a look from the big schools) is certainly worthy of a little recognition and accolades. It's one of the biggest moments in that kid's life, I'd argue even more so for someone going to D3 than one of the power conferences in D1.
Quote from: timtlu on November 13, 2014, 12:39:25 PM
Very few players choose Division III. Division III, as a general rule, chooses players based on their level of achievement being relatively lesser than that of D1 and D2 players.
incorrect in so many ways...
The more I think about it I am not sure it is a good idea. Yes it is great to celebrate the accomplishment of getting into a college and also playing a sport. One of the big difference (for Baseball anyway) between D1, D2 and D3 is the recruiting timeline.
Many D3's do not start seriously start recruiting some kids till after the NLI signing. While they may have watched the kid play and made some contact, now is when they start in earnest. Kids start visiting campus and having overnights. Now is the time kids truly start comparing options. I would hate to change that sort of timetable so kids can sign at the same time as the other divisions.
With an NLI, you know what you are going to be paying for college at least for 1 year. A D3 athlete in most cases will not know for sure until Marc/April of next year, I have seen too many commit to a school too early and find out that the financial package is not quite as expected. Since the Athlete has no leverage because they only applied and were accepted to the one school during the early action period. Now where is there leverage. For some they ended opting for no sport and Big State U, because they were not aware of the costs of the school they committed to.
The D3 legislation specifies non-binding, celebratory piece of paper. In other words, it means nothing. Kids can still be recruited other places, apply other places, or change their minds once financial aid information appears. It's just a piece of paper celebrating where they think they are going at the same time other athletes are signing something about where they are actually going.
Any kid could do something similar with a blank sheet of paper these days, this just gives them some "official letterhead" paper from the school.
The other issue in play is that Division III schools cannot publicize (or is not supposed to) a recruit in any way, shape, or form until he or she has paid a deposit. There is nO legislation on the table to change that as far as I know, which means, yes, the kid could "sign" this non-binding agreement, but the university or college still cannot publicly acknowledge it. That is completely incongruous.
Quote from: jknezek on November 13, 2014, 02:55:48 PM
The D3 legislation specifies non-binding, celebratory piece of paper. In other words, it means nothing. Kids can still be recruited other places, apply other places, or change their minds once financial aid information appears. It's just a piece of paper celebrating where they think they are going at the same time other athletes are signing something about where they are actually going.
Any kid could do something similar with a blank sheet of paper these days, this just gives them some "official letterhead" paper from the school.
I understand that, but how many kids after signing that piece of paper will consider their journey done. They found a school and committed. Even though it is not binding. During the early signing periods most of the athletes do not even know if they have been accepted. I just worry this might be the first step down a slippery slope.
They can fix this by not having this until deposit is paid. Could be near the end of the school year, but so be it...
I would have no problem with that. D3 kids would just sigh at a different time. But does that meet the needs of the stated purpose? In the article it was basically so the students achievement could celebrated along with their D1 and D2 brethren. If their signing was on a different day, would it have the same impact as the D1 and D2, would athletes still be embarrassed or left out? Would their be a stigma over the later signing?
Conversely, it could be looked at as a special day, a celebration of the student-athlete...
They are choosing to go D3. Many times they turn down D-1 (usually partial scholarships or walk on spots) or D-2 money, or NAIA money, to play D3. Let's celebrate them like they were a NAIA signee getting a partial scholarship.
Conversely, it could be looked at as a special day, a celebration of the student-athlete...
They are choosing to go D3. Many times they turn down D-1 (usually partial scholarships or walk on spots) or D-2 money, or NAIA money, to play D3. Let's celebrate them like the other signees
Really I think it will come down to the preference of the Athlete. If this works for them then they will sign. If it does not then they will not. As long as no additional pressure is placed on the athlete and everyone understands that their is nothing binding by either party. As long as their is no Gentleman's agreement among coaches and schools to stop pursuing schools once it is signed.
OK, fine, but when the first kid pulls a banana slug out of their nose to announce their intention to go to UC-Santa Cruz, I'm done with it.
Quote from: Just Bill on November 13, 2014, 10:12:42 PM
OK, fine, but when the first kid pulls a banana slug out of their nose to announce their intention to go to UC-Santa Cruz, I'm done with it.
You've just made me even more interested in D3 having signing day ;D
Quote from: Just Bill on November 13, 2014, 10:12:42 PM
OK, fine, but when the first kid pulls a banana slug out of their nose to announce their intention to go to UC-Santa Cruz, I'm done with it.
How about when a kid pulls an anteater out of his butt to announce for UC-Irvine? ;D
Quote from: Mr. Ypsi on November 13, 2014, 10:35:44 PM
Quote from: Just Bill on November 13, 2014, 10:12:42 PM
OK, fine, but when the first kid pulls a banana slug out of their nose to announce their intention to go to UC-Santa Cruz, I'm done with it.
How about when a kid pulls an anteater out of his butt to announce for UC-Irvine? ;D
They're not D-III so someone has probably already done that.
The banana-slug-out-of-the-nose trick would certainly be entertaining, but I could envision a YouTube video going viral if it entailed a Gustavus Adolphus recruit pulling a golden gustie out of some bodily orifice.
Quote from: Gregory Sager on November 14, 2014, 03:11:29 PM
The banana-slug-out-of-the-nose trick would certainly be entertaining, but I could envision a YouTube video going viral if it entailed a Gustavus Adolphus recruit pulling a golden gustie out of some bodily orifice.
Two questions: What exactly is a "golden gustie" ? Despite that I have three GACer in-laws, I've no idea what it might be (animal, vegetable, mineral?) As well, what "orifice" have you in mind? ???
Both questions have been left to the imagination of others, Warren: the first by GACers and the second by me. ;)
I wonder where one would hide a grizzly bear ;D And how many injuries would result from said grizzly.
Several thoughts... I first talked about this on my trip to Indy and those at the office were very enthusiastic about this. They see it as a chance for Division III to get some headlines. Instead of the D1 and DIIs getting all of the attention when a student-athlete chooses where they are going to college. This can also be a cool story for small, local entities. All of the sudden one of the town's favorite players has a story about them going to a college with pictures and everything. Also, the press will get information about Division III at the event and thus the ideals of Division III can be spread out a bit more to people who may not be as familiar as the rest of us.
Secondly, the non-binding part is great. Sure, it doesn't mean they have to go to the school, but when those signing at the DIs and DIIs of the world they are actually signing important legal documents. It takes on a whole different meaning. Now, to the point that they can still go somewhere else, sure... but I don't think student-athletes are going to "sign a paper" unless they have actually made their decision on a school. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense to them either.
And then this: why not celebrate our student-athletes in more ways. Some of these individuals are incredible students, people, and athletes. They don't get the attention they deserve. This can be a way, even on a small media level, that allows them to be celebrated while also celebrating the division. I love this idea and hope it only helps raise more awareness for Division III and the student-athletes that make it great.
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2014, 11:38:08 AM
Several thoughts... I first talked about this on my trip to Indy and those at the office were very enthusiastic about this. They see it as a chance for Division III to get some headlines. Instead of the D1 and DIIs getting all of the attention when a student-athlete chooses where they are going to college. This can also be a cool story for small, local entities. All of the sudden one of the town's favorite players has a story about them going to a college with pictures and everything. Also, the press will get information about Division III at the event and thus the ideals of Division III can be spread out a bit more to people who may not be as familiar as the rest of us.
Secondly, the non-binding part is great. Sure, it doesn't mean they have to go to the school, but when those signing at the DIs and DIIs of the world they are actually signing important legal documents. It takes on a whole different meaning. Now, to the point that they can still go somewhere else, sure... but I don't think student-athletes are going to "sign a paper" unless they have actually made their decision on a school. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense to them either.
And then this: why not celebrate our student-athletes in more ways. Some of these individuals are incredible students, people, and athletes. They don't get the attention they deserve. This can be a way, even on a small media level, that allows them to be celebrated while also celebrating the division. I love this idea and hope it only helps raise more awareness for Division III and the student-athletes that make it great.
I agree 100% on all these points. I still have a hard time reconciling the difference between these points and the quotes in the story though. The athletes all alluded to how egocentrically "unspecial" they were. When everyone is special, it becomes that noone is special.
Argh! It's special for these kids to celebrate their accomplishments. Not everyone gets to play college sports at any level. You can't just waltz on to most all D-3 teams.
I agree smed, but do they want a "signing day" because it acknowledges their achievement, or do they want it because that's what the DI/DII kids get to do? If we really want to celebrate their achievement (including having the foresight to see how a generalized DIII education prepares them for life as opposed to many of the generalized educations DI/DII athletes get) then let's do that; but the quotes to me, at least, seem to back up the notion, they just want to be treated the same as a DI/DII athlete when in most cases (I understand many DIII athletes forgo DI/DII money, but that is the exception, not the rule), they are indeed not.
Why shouldn't they be treated the same? WHY?
This is a huge accomplishment for these kids. They are not 'leftovers'. They are student athletes who are making a big step in their careers.
As to the first, because they aren't signing a binding letter of intent, which is what National Signing day is all about.
As to the second, I would use your rationale as mine. It is a huge accomplishment. But it's a different accomplishment. Let's honor it by acknowledging it in a different way, if we so choose.
It is not different. They are choosing a school to continue both their academic and athletic careers. Same on BOTH fronts.
You earlier stated that D3 were, to paraphrase, 'leftovers'. They are not. I've spent 30+ years as a student, volunteer and finally in work all around college campuses, big and small. The student athletes at Oberlin, Monmouth or Kalamazoo were all recruited, all qualified as students, and all were quite qualified to play athletically in their leagues. These players CHOOSE D3. Rarely is it that some don't play HS at a very high level and then play D3. (Cal Tech hoops used to have some kids like that but there are myriad reasons for that and they have improved greatly in the past few years).
I've talked to a lot too, "I could have tried to walk on at X, or Y gave me a partial scholarship but the academics weren't what I wanted, or I chose academics and sports here than a full ride somewhere else." You watch Kenyon and Denison swimmers, many could have been D1 swimmers. You watch Williams or Wash U. or Wooster hoops, you can see that some have D2 talent or even lower level D1 talent, but the combination of athletics and academics are why they CHOOSE D3.
Some players go D1, don't like it, and transfer back. They CHOSE D3 too.
In fact, D3 freshman many times experience a wake up call like no other. All of a sudden, you go from all-conference to bench warmer. Just. Like. That.
I work at a D2 school now with a good athletics program. The big difference I see is depth, average size, and that the best D2 players are better. But the average D2 player wouldn't dominate a good D3 league. They may be one of the best players on the team, but they wouldn't look so out of place.
Maybe the stats bear you out, but I'd be willing to wager the majority of Division III athletes didn't have a chance of signing for scholarship money at a division I or division II school. That is not saying there are not many that do. I'm sure you've come across multiple, as I have I. But let's not try and act like that is the rule, rather than the exception. This is not a knock on Division III, or Division III athletes; the system is tiered for myriad of reasons, but one of the happens to be skill/athleticism. Unfortunately, money talks.
And again, I've said I have no problem with the proposal itself, though I see it unnecessary. I have a problem with the perception from the athletes. Not everyone gets treated equal. The line always has to be drawn somewhere. Schools who are willing to throw money at a kid to come to their school seems like a very sensible place to draw it.
I look at it like schools who are willing to treat all students equally.
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2014, 11:38:08 AMI love this idea and hope it only helps raise more awareness for Division III and the student-athletes that make it great.
GREAT ideas Dave!
I could go on for days about the virtues of college athletics/athletes and about how I and several family members have been positively impacted by our participation. I believe smed has 95% of that covered very well already, so no need. But I'll give you my spin.
I actually put together a wonderful SOS metric that we can use that will solve all of this too. ;) I'll come back to that.
Less than 7%of HS football players continue on to participate in college. This stat is very similar in other sports. That's statistically significant and a
very big deal when those few kids decide to make the commitment to play at the next level.
Football in the late '80s consumed a
great deal of my time- too much I thought. Now they even have spring football and seemingly year-round workouts. Out-of-class study time in the 80's consumed a ton of my time. Now it's just insane how much time is required of my daughter to adequately prepare for class. Put the two together and it takes a tremendous amount of discipline to effectively manage both. (That's why she decided against football, at least for freshman year.)
Seriously though, 7 out of 100 is a very exclusive group. We honor these student-athletes at our high school (no distinction of division levels), as do a great number of Cincinnati area schools. I see these on the news, twitter and Facebook all the time. The quick ceremony, in essence, serves to honor their athletic accomplishments of high school, as well as their commitment to the discipline required to handle sports and academics in college.
Simple quick ceremony- do it at lunch: athlete sits with parents, coaches behind, pics, vids, hat, sweatshirt, AD gives quick announcement for the group, cookies, milk, over in 25 minutes. Parents are proud. Student athlete pumped. Lifetime memory for this exclusive group.
My son will soon decide between D3 football/lacrosse or D1 lacrosse. Many factors will be considered before a final decision will be made. The number of I's after the D are insignificant. There is a much, much, much greater difference between playing/not playing versus the division level. The
honor is in the participation, dedication & commitment.Oh yeah, SOS is "Strength of Signing". If less than 9.25% of high school participants carry on the activity in college, then they meet this SOS metric required to be honored and made to feel special. And I'm just going to say that all college sports fall below that number (or close enough so don't argue).
Quote from: D3AlumniParent on November 17, 2014, 03:00:58 AM
Oh yeah, SOS is "Strength of Signing". If less than 9.25% of high school participants carry on the activity in college, then they meet this SOS metric required to be honored and made to feel special. And I'm just going to say that all college sports fall below that number (or close enough so don't argue).
Excellent point, D3AP.
Personally, having had a son who, as a D3 athlete, turned down transfer options to D1 and a very top D2 after his sophomore and junior years, this NLI signing proposal is not one I find very attractive. At its core, I think the NLI has become something it is not in so many ways. In my view, it should NOT be a recognition of past performance. Rather, is the reflection of an opportunity to compete and earn a spot at the next level. As one of the very best HS baseball coaches in the Country recently articulated about NLI's on another board:""A college commitment is the beginning of the pressure to get better, not the destination. Players need to have getting better be their top priority rather than where they are playing in college.There needs to be understood standards that must be met to play college ball..."
If the NCAA feels a need to upgrade the D3 image with the media and public, my view is it should do so with some of incredible success stories which exist when their student-athletes are juniors and seniors in college(and after) and are doing amazing things in athletics, in the classroom, or in the real world, or some combination.
When we really analyze an NLI, it goes to the top athletes at the HS level. The following August/September, most of those end up toward the bottom or middle of their college team. Stated somewhat differently, when they get to college, no one cares where they played or the honors they received before they arrived. If there is to be recognition for past accomplishments, dedication and success at the D3 level, my view is that celebration needs to occur toward the end of the D3 experience, not at a point where nothing has yet been done in college athletics.
My initial impressions on some of @timtlu's comments on this topic were that, basically, we weren't really in agreement. But we've exchanged several long emails over the past few days. And I have to say that his first-hand experience with D3 athletics is both far different from mine yet very interesting and thought-provoking.
Its probably a conversation best kept offline though, so if anyone feels so inclined, shoot a PM his way. Great perspective that I really appreciated, Tim.
That said, in the bubble in which I live, I still like the idea. Some kids may get theirs egos stroked too much. But far too many don't get enough recognition of the positive paths they take. And I'd rather err on that side.
Quote from: infielddad on November 17, 2014, 04:41:58 PM
...In my view, it should NOT be a recognition of past performance. Rather, is the reflection of an opportunity to compete and earn a spot at the next level...
If there is to be recognition for past accomplishments, dedication and success at the D3 level, my view is that celebration needs to occur toward the end of the D3 experience, not at a point where nothing has yet been done in college athletics.
I appreciate your perspective, @infielddad. But I want to understand better. It seems as though you're not really a fan of NLI ceremony/recognition for
any athletes, regardless of division. You're not drawing a line between D1/2 and D3, right? Thanks.
If DI and DII athletes really understood how many rights they are forfeiting when they sign the NLI, many wouldn't do it. You don't have to sign an NLI to get a scholarship or play DI or DII sports. Frankly, there's little advantage to signing one for the student-athlete. All the provisions protect the school, not the student-athlete.
This DIII proposal will be something altogether different of course.
The Division III letter is COMPLETELY different. There is no legal binding to it... it is basically a chance for a student-athlete to be recognized for choosing to continue playing at another school. It is a recruitment get for schools; it is a pat on the back for students. If the student wakes up the next morning and decided to change his mind, he could... though, he would have to call each any every media outlet and explain why the day before turned out to not be true :).
Even though it is non binding, I would never suggest a student/Athlete sign one of these during the early signing period. The early Signing Period, is much too early, IMO, in the recruiting timeline for most D3 athletes to make this decision. I think it would be best reserved for the regular signing period.
They can sign it whenever they want. I don't believe there is any "timing" associated with the letter... just the fact they can "sign" something and maybe have the media make a big deal about.
Quote from: timtlu on November 16, 2014, 01:47:01 PM
Quote from: Dave 'd-mac' McHugh on November 16, 2014, 11:38:08 AM
Several thoughts... I first talked about this on my trip to Indy and those at the office were very enthusiastic about this. They see it as a chance for Division III to get some headlines. Instead of the D1 and DIIs getting all of the attention when a student-athlete chooses where they are going to college. This can also be a cool story for small, local entities. All of the sudden one of the town's favorite players has a story about them going to a college with pictures and everything. Also, the press will get information about Division III at the event and thus the ideals of Division III can be spread out a bit more to people who may not be as familiar as the rest of us.
Secondly, the non-binding part is great. Sure, it doesn't mean they have to go to the school, but when those signing at the DIs and DIIs of the world they are actually signing important legal documents. It takes on a whole different meaning. Now, to the point that they can still go somewhere else, sure... but I don't think student-athletes are going to "sign a paper" unless they have actually made their decision on a school. Otherwise, it doesn't make sense to them either.
And then this: why not celebrate our student-athletes in more ways. Some of these individuals are incredible students, people, and athletes. They don't get the attention they deserve. This can be a way, even on a small media level, that allows them to be celebrated while also celebrating the division. I love this idea and hope it only helps raise more awareness for Division III and the student-athletes that make it great.
I agree 100% on all these points. I still have a hard time reconciling the difference between these points and the quotes in the story though. The athletes all alluded to how egocentrically "unspecial" they were. When everyone is special, it becomes that noone is special.
Only around 5-10% of high school athletes play in college. Even if you give all the college bound student athletes the chance to feel special you are still only recognizing the small number who are good enough to play in college.
My son is a senior in College. I have talked to him about this and he says he does not care. He is not sure looking back that he would have wanted to. But the option is there for those who do.
Quote from: Bishopleftiesdad on February 09, 2015, 03:06:48 PM
My son is a senior in College. I have talked to him about this and he says he does not care. He is not sure looking back that he would have wanted to. But the option is there for those who do.
My son said the same thing.
My son's high school has a "signing day" no matter what college an athlete is attending. Why does there need to be a "day" assigned by the NCAA? Most D3 kids cannot commit anywhere until A. They are accepted and B. Their parents see their financial aid package. The FA package in many cases is not back in a timely manner. When my son "signed" to go to HSC his high school coach had a copy of the HSC honor code for him. It was, of course unofficial, but his friends and family were there as was the local paper. It was done sometime in late April of his senior year. High school coaches should step up.
D-III will not have a signing day or period.
The NCAA actually doesn't assign a signing day. They have a period of time in which an NLI can be signed. It's the high schools and the media who turned the first day of the signing period into the "Signing Day" monster it is now.