2017-2018 Division I Commitments

[96IllinoisDad]

Minnesota
Alex Gulstene..................G..............(NAHA)......................Vancouver, BC

Wisconsin
Kyleigh Hanzlik.................F................(NAHA)...................Wisconsin Rapids, WI

 

[CrossCheck]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

Minnesota
Alex Gulstene..................G..............(NAHA)......................Vancouver, BC

Wisconsin
Kyleigh Hanzlik.................F................(NAHA)...................Wisconsin Rapids, WI

These kids are graduating High School in 2018? LOL....What are these little tykes...14?

Honestly, "committing" to your future college at that age is just plain silly [not to mention stupid on so many levels].

 

[ARM]

These kids are graduating High School in 2018? LOL....What are these little tykes...14?

Honestly, "committing" to your future college at that age is just plain silly [not to mention stupid on so many levels].

Sure, but some might think an inability to figure out that a 2017-2018 recruit is graduating in 2017 is another sign of stupidity, so your opinion might not count for much.

 

[CrossCheck]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

Sure, but some might think an inability to figure out that a 2017-2018 recruit is graduating in 2017 is another sign of stupidity, so your opinion might not count for much.

so sayeth the large Chipmunk.

 

[FiveHoleFrenzy]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

so sayeth the large Chipmunk.

You mad bro? Because he makes a good point.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

You mad bro?

Sources say he mad

 

[brookyone]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

Maybe I'm on an island here. I think there may also be a less than intelligent component to asserting a very early commitment is universally "stupid on so many levels" along with the associated sentiment I've read a few times that they are doomed to some catastrophic end for the athlete...the program, both. All this far in advance of any possible proof / disproof. The apparent belief that one not associated with the athlete or program can know this is "stupidity" in each / every instance.

An early commitment goes on to have a respectable career all as planned and committed to by all parties. What's the response then? Still stupidity? Quite possible and likely IMO that's what we'll see in enough cases to disprove the universally, all inclusive stupid / major mistake characterization.

I know there are some in the forum who will disagree. I just don't buy the blanket generalization it's clear stupidity for every individual. No offense intended...I'm also not buying anyone can know it's clear stupidity per every kid. Kids they don't even know.

Couple very early committed student athletes I'll eventually have the opportunity to watch regularly if I'm lucky. We'll see if a train wreck proves to be the only possible, easily anticipated end result.

I remember being told with unwavering certainty the Gophers implosion was inevitable when they put the "C" on a sophomore. I remember being told the Gophers were irrefutably 2-4 Canadians shy per their roster to entertain any remote possibility of a NCAA title.

Opinions...everybody has one.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

Maybe I'm on an island here. I think there may also be a less than intelligent component to asserting a very early commitment is universally "stupid on so many levels" along with the associated sentiment I've read a few times that they are doomed to some catastrophic end for the athlete...the program, both. All this far in advance of any possible proof / disproof. The apparent belief that one not associated with the athlete or program can know this is "stupidity" in each / every instance.

An early commitment goes on to have a respectable career all as planned and committed to by all parties. What's the response then? Still stupidity? Quite possible and likely IMO that's what we'll see in enough cases to disprove the universally, all inclusive stupid / major mistake characterization.

I know there are some in the forum who will disagree. I just don't buy the blanket generalization it's clear stupidity for every individual. No offense intended...I'm also not buying anyone can know it's clear stupidity per every kid. Kids they don't even know.

Couple very early committed student athletes I'll eventually have the opportunity to watch regularly if I'm lucky. We'll see if a train wreck proves to be the only possible, easily anticipated end result.

I remember being told with unwavering certainty the Gophers implosion was inevitable when they put the "C" on a sophomore. I remember being told the Gophers were irrefutably 2-4 Canadians shy per their roster to entertain any remote possibility of a NCAA title.

Opinions...everybody has one.

The risks are high in committing after your freshman year in high school (hope that I got that right and won't be abused for my timing analysis). Some of them are:

- Coach change prior to matriculation
- Lack of knowledge about what you want in a college experience at 14/15 years old
- Lack of maturity in making such a critical life decision
- Lack of skill progression and subsequently being dropped
- In some cases, lack of sufficient academics to gain admission to a school you committed to as a rising sophomore (you know, high school does get harder...and you haven't taken standardized tests yet)

By committing after your freshman year, you are presumably a VERY highly sought after player and would have many options a year (or two) later. With this commitment timing, you basically take yourself out of the process and remove options that you might otherwise have. So, the fundamental question - in the face of all of the risks listed with the early commitment and the fact that you will have other numerous opportunities a year later, why would you commit so early and eliminate/restrict your future options? Some of us feel that this type of early commitment is ridiculous (here we go again...).

 

[Rightnut]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

The risks are high in committing after your freshman year in high school (hope that I got that right and won't be abused for my timing analysis). Some of them are:

- Coach change prior to matriculation
- Lack of knowledge about what you want in a college experience at 14/15 years old
- Lack of maturity in making such a critical life decision
- Lack of skill progression and subsequently being dropped
- In some cases, lack of sufficient academics to gain admission to a school you committed to as a rising sophomore (you know, high school does get harder...and you haven't taken standardized tests yet)

By committing after your freshman year, you are presumably a VERY highly sought after player and would have many options a year (or two) later. With this commitment timing, you basically take yourself out of the process and remove options that you might otherwise have. So, the fundamental question - in the face of all of the risks listed with the early commitment and the fact that you will have other numerous opportunities a year later, why would you commit so early and eliminate/restrict your future options? Some of us feel that this type of early commitment is ridiculous (here we go again...).

I agree with all the potential downsides relating to the maturity of the person. However, with regard to limiting possibilities, in the case of the two girls who triggered this discussion (again), the schools they have committed to are among the elite hockey and academic schools. So I don't see how they will "improve" their opportunities from at least a hockey perspective by waiting. I do agree that they may change as people, mature etc. which could impact their choices down the road. But as apparently elite prospects, they probably could find another good landing spot if needed.

 

[Royale with Cheese]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

I think there may also be a less than intelligent component to asserting a very early commitment is universally "stupid on so many levels" along with the associated sentiment I've read a few times that they are doomed to some catastrophic end for the athlete...

I know there are some in the forum who will disagree. I just don't buy the blanket generalization it's clear stupidity for every individual. No offense intended...I'm also not buying anyone can know it's clear stupidity per every kid. Kids they don't even know.

I don’t think that you can speak in absolutes in any of this, you cant say that the athlete will end up better or worse off with an early commit. The truth is that there is a difficult balance between taking the early offer vs rolling the dice that it will be still be there later. On one hand senior year you could do an official visit at multiple schools and spend time with your potential teammates, see a real day in the life, sleep in the dorm, go to class with a player, see a practice or game, spend time with the academic department that your interested in. On the other hand you just get far less information to inform your decision as an early commit not to mention that most of the players you may meet will be alumni by the time you get there.

What people fail to grasp however is that if a player dreams of playing at a school or even just D1 in general and a school is interested it is darn near impossible to say "I am just going to wait and see what is around in 2 years". No guarantee that this or any opportunity will still be there, and neither the player or the parents will have expertise in any of this. There is a balance between getting more information to make an informed decision and striking when the iron is hot, it is not as easy to manage as people think.

 

[ARM]

Some of us feel that this type of early commitment is ridiculous (here we go again...).

And you are pretty quick to say so. But you also are reaching a conclusion with incomplete information, trying to do so for a general case where there may be factors of which you are unaware in a specific case.

The bottom line is that the student athlete is free to make the decision at a time that she feels is optimal. If she'd rather wait until she is a HS senior so she better knows what she wants, she can. There may be fewer options at that time, but there will still be some sort of options. Committing early means that she will likely know less about herself and her school of choice; that is true. Until she signs, she can change her mind, and the process is non-binding. Again, there will be fewer options in terms of a second choice, but that may be okay. No matter what she decides to do or when she decides to do it, I want it to be her choice, because going through life attempting to satisfy anonymous posters on internet message boards is even more ridiculous.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

I have a question -- if a player commits to a university their freshman (or sophomore or junior or senior) year, and then they suffer a career-ending injury prior to matriculating, do they still get a scholarship?

 

[Call It]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

I have a question -- if a player commits to a university their freshman (or sophomore or junior or senior) year, and then they suffer a career-ending injury prior to matriculating, do they still get a scholarship?

NO!

If their game goes in the tank, the coach could send them packing. If the player wants to go to another school, they are free to do so. Verbal Contracts are worth the paper they are written on.

 

[Eeyore]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

If their game goes in the tank, the coach could send them packing. If the player wants to go to another school, they are free to do so. Verbal Contracts are worth the paper they are written on.

Pedant Alert

Verbal contracts are every bit as binding as written contracts. The reason that they are hard to enforce isn't that they aren't valid; it's that it's hard to prove the exact terms.

Verbal commitments to NCAA athletic programs aren't enforceable because they aren't contracts. NCAA rules explicitly prohibit programs and athletes committing to an actual contract prior to a specific date during the athlete's senior year of high school.

 

[Call It]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

Pedant Alert

Verbal contracts are every bit as binding as written contracts. The reason that they are hard to enforce isn't that they aren't valid; it's that it's hard to prove the exact terms.

Verbal commitments to NCAA athletic programs aren't enforceable because they aren't contracts. NCAA rules explicitly prohibit programs and athletes committing to an actual contract prior to a specific date during the athlete's senior year of high school.

Hey Eeyore, do I have a deal for you!!!!

 

[ManBehindTheCurtain]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

Verbal contracts are every bit as binding as written contracts. The reason that they are hard to enforce isn't that they aren't valid; it's that it's hard to prove the exact terms.

This part I completely agree with.

Verbal commitments to NCAA athletic programs aren't enforceable because they aren't contracts. NCAA rules explicitly prohibit programs and athletes committing to an actual contract prior to a specific date during the athlete's senior year of high school.

For this part I would add that even if they are contracts, which I agree NCAA rules clearly establish that they cannot be, the Statute of Frauds would prohibit enforcement of a purported contract made by a high school freshman for an event to occur after her high school graduation, obviously more than one year after the commitment.

 

[HockeyEast33]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

The bottom line is that the student athlete is free to make the decision at a time that she feels is optimal. If she'd rather wait until she is a HS senior so she better knows what she wants, she can. There may be fewer options at that time, but there will still be some sort of options.

Two comments:
- No one can argue that anyone can do whatever they want if they are willing to live with the consequences. It doesn't make it a good decision. The hope is that a 14 year old gets some guidance to understand the consequences of committing early and just doesn't do it because it's cool, boosts her ego, and the ego of her parents.
- I wouldn't encourage any player to wait until their senior year to commit if they want to play D1 hockey (if they have options). The opportunities are hit and miss at best and their is no guarantee that there will be one - even National Team level players have had trouble trying to find a place they are happy with in their senior year in recent years. The period of time in women's hockey where senior commitments occur frequently has passed (as evidenced by freshman making "commitments").

I want it to be her choice, because going through life attempting to satisfy anonymous posters on internet message boards is even more ridiculous.

No one should make decisions to "please" anonymous posters (such as yourself). That doesn't change my opinion that committing to a college after your freshman year in college is generally a poor decision.

 

[pakidnyc]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

Handzlik is 16 (98). She just happens to be a '17 grad. MANY more 98s have committed ahead of her. And, there are other 2017 (99s) who have committed. They just haven't made it public yet.

 

[TonyTheTiger20]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

Verbal Contracts are worth the paper they are written on.

I laughed

Pretty good stuff in this thread. I'm not sure how I feel.

 

[OldDave]

Re: 2017-2018 Division I Commitments

Kids make decisions about their futures all the time. How many times have we read about an athlete or fireman or doctor who admitted they wanted to be an athlete or fireman or doctor since they were five? If you think there is a girl taking ballet lessons who doesn’t want to be a prima ballerina, you would be wrong. Motivated kids pretty much all set their sights high. And they make lots of decisions that they hope will advance those goals, sometimes as four and five year olds.

Claims that a kid cannot or should not make a decision about their futures as 15 year olds only make sense if you think the decision is made in a vacuum. We know that is not the case. These kids have wanted to be hockey players (or ballerinas) for a long time, they have worked hard to hone their skills over the years, and they have mapped out their steps to their ultimate goal (national team or Mayo Clinic or prima ballerina) a long time ago. My experience is that these kids have a list of schools that fit their needs in terms of academics or athletics by the time they are 14 or 15, and making a commitment to one of those schools is only the next logical step for them.

Will there be disappointments? Absolutely. Only a tiny percent will ever realize their dream, whether it be national team, prima, or Mayo. Will all the training and hard work be seen as wasted effort? Never. Each of these kids will have a fantastic basis for the rest of their lives. After all, which would you pick as an employer: the kid that tried for but failed to make the national team, or the kid that reached level 12 on some video game? Easy choice for me.

My two cents...