USCHO Fan Forum
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.
D1 Commitments 2012-2013
- Thread starter joehockey
- Start date
fanof the game
Registered User
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
A "commitment" at this stage is like going steady. Maybe someday you'll get married, maybe not! Too mnay things can screw it up. Grades, injury, not progressing as it seemed at the time and so on! NCAA is VERY unhappy about earlier adn earlier recruitment and verbal commitments that mean as much as the paper they're printed on!
A "commitment" at this stage is like going steady. Maybe someday you'll get married, maybe not! Too mnay things can screw it up. Grades, injury, not progressing as it seemed at the time and so on! NCAA is VERY unhappy about earlier adn earlier recruitment and verbal commitments that mean as much as the paper they're printed on!
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
Isn't it true that verbal commitments are non-binding on the school and the player?
Isn't it true that verbal commitments are non-binding on the school and the player?
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
Yes, although perhaps more so on the player. If word gets out that a program is pulling offers AFTER a recruit has verbally accepted, that would negatively impact their future recruiting efforts.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
Were their examples of a school backing away from a player after that player had accepted their offer? Mostly what you see from the school side of the equation is either the student can't gain admittance to the school, or the player takes too long to accept and the school has already given the scholarship elsewhere. It sounds like the latter was true in the most high-profile case of the recruiting year.
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
The significant development might be when a player gives a verbal to a school is the other schools stop calling and they focus on other players. It may not be binding but there is a reaction to the recruting class and places available at a given school.
The significant development might be when a player gives a verbal to a school is the other schools stop calling and they focus on other players. It may not be binding but there is a reaction to the recruting class and places available at a given school.
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
It appears to me that the school is taking the bigger risk. If the player performs poorly in her last two years, then the school is in a situation where if they back out of the deal they look bad but if they honor their commitment they get less player than they thought. Also, with the cost of tuition if a school backed out I could see a lawyer arguing that the student stopped shopping in reliance on the oral contract. The player on the other hand can decide to go to cancel the deal and go to another school without too much fallout since the NCAA would prohibit the school from doing anything about it. I suppose that a school must be very careful in who they offer an early commitment.
It appears to me that the school is taking the bigger risk. If the player performs poorly in her last two years, then the school is in a situation where if they back out of the deal they look bad but if they honor their commitment they get less player than they thought. Also, with the cost of tuition if a school backed out I could see a lawyer arguing that the student stopped shopping in reliance on the oral contract. The player on the other hand can decide to go to cancel the deal and go to another school without too much fallout since the NCAA would prohibit the school from doing anything about it. I suppose that a school must be very careful in who they offer an early commitment.
UCONN FAN
New member
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
Once a player is admitted a school can not back out because a player performs poorly.
Once a player is admitted a school can not back out because a player performs poorly.
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
That said, I would hope that that "out-clause" -- particularly in a low- or non-revenue sport such as women's hockey -- never be utilized.
I'm not so sure about that, to be honest. ESPN's Outside the Lines documented that all NCAA athletic scholarships are "renewable" one-year scholarships, revocable for any reason, and some schools and coaches taking advantage of that out. They documented this happening in particular in the Kentucky men's basketball program during a coaching change (see video discussion about that here).
That said, I would hope that that "out-clause" -- particularly in a low- or non-revenue sport such as women's hockey -- never be utilized.
Last edited:
dontyelldad
old n slo
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
I believe the point was that once a verbal commitment has been made, up to two years ahead of time, if the player fails to live up to expectations (athletic or academic) prior to matriculating at the institution of higher education, the school might have an issue.
Agree with the point that the school is at risk if it does so.
Agree, also, that generally, if a student is admitted, and scholarship awarded, performance is rarely a reason to revoke, although in extreme circumstances, I can see the one-year technical commitment being enforced.
I believe the point was that once a verbal commitment has been made, up to two years ahead of time, if the player fails to live up to expectations (athletic or academic) prior to matriculating at the institution of higher education, the school might have an issue.
Agree with the point that the school is at risk if it does so.
Agree, also, that generally, if a student is admitted, and scholarship awarded, performance is rarely a reason to revoke, although in extreme circumstances, I can see the one-year technical commitment being enforced.
5 4 Fighting
New member
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
If you are referring to an oral (spoken) contract between parties where the terms and conditions are not written then the obvious legal problem is proving what was said and by who.
The old adage that "An oral contract is not worth the paper it is written on" reasonably applies.
The moral and ethical part of an oral contract...well that's a different story.
If you are referring to an oral (spoken) contract between parties where the terms and conditions are not written then the obvious legal problem is proving what was said and by who.
The old adage that "An oral contract is not worth the paper it is written on" reasonably applies.
The moral and ethical part of an oral contract...well that's a different story.
OnMAA
Vort Doen.....Heija Heija Heija
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
Yes the old adage is "an oral contract is not worth the paper it is written on" however. I think the oral contract argument probably gets you to court. Most lawyers want to avoid a summary judgment and settle anyway don't they?
Yes the old adage is "an oral contract is not worth the paper it is written on" however. I think the oral contract argument probably gets you to court. Most lawyers want to avoid a summary judgment and settle anyway don't they?
Last edited:
5 4 Fighting
New member
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
It would be in everyone's best interest to have the case adjudicated by Judge Joe Brown...methinks.
Yes the old adage is "an oral contract is not worth the paper it is written on" however. I think the oral contract argument probably gets you to court. Most lawyers want to avoid a summary judgment and settle anyway don't they?
It would be in everyone's best interest to have the case adjudicated by Judge Joe Brown...methinks.
goaliedad35
Registered User
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
I know of one case here in New England as well where the individual and her parents were sure that they had a 4 year verbal commitment with scholarship only for this to vanish just prior to the NLI period. They stopped any further exploration of other schools when the verbal was given and were left in the terrible position of scrambling to find a spot long after most were taken. The message from this family was trust no one, take anything said with a grain of salt and if possible get things on paper.
I know of one case here in New England as well where the individual and her parents were sure that they had a 4 year verbal commitment with scholarship only for this to vanish just prior to the NLI period. They stopped any further exploration of other schools when the verbal was given and were left in the terrible position of scrambling to find a spot long after most were taken. The message from this family was trust no one, take anything said with a grain of salt and if possible get things on paper.
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
As was said a few posts ago, there is no four year commitment, verbal or otherwise. Scholarships are renewed each year at the discretion of the school. This is one of the first things coaches tell, or should tell, recruits.
As was said a few posts ago, there is no four year commitment, verbal or otherwise. Scholarships are renewed each year at the discretion of the school. This is one of the first things coaches tell, or should tell, recruits.
notfromaroundhere
A visitor in any town!
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
I'd like to see Judge Judy tear into a few of these "verbal committment" contracts and the characters who enter into them.
It would be in everyone's best interest to have the case adjudicated by Judge Joe Brown...methinks.
I'd like to see Judge Judy tear into a few of these "verbal committment" contracts and the characters who enter into them.
brookyone
Deport Right Wing Nuts
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
I guess I need a little clarification...the "verbal commitment" is just that, and nothing more right? More or less a handshake, verbal agreement...not legally binding in any way kind of an on your honor type thing?
I guess one of the aspects I've always liked about the women's college game as far as recruiting and commitments go, is that you can pretty much take those verbal commits to the bank nearly 100% of the time. Seems to be a much higher percentage of honoring one's verbal than several other NCAA sports. A little...or a lot more integrity in that regard vs. other sports. A good thing IMO.
With a possible trend towards earlier verbals, I really hope we don't see an increase in the "poaching" of verbally committed athletes like you see in other sports as well. I've appreciated that difference in women's hockey up to this point also. Hope it stays that way.
I guess I need a little clarification...the "verbal commitment" is just that, and nothing more right? More or less a handshake, verbal agreement...not legally binding in any way kind of an on your honor type thing?
I guess one of the aspects I've always liked about the women's college game as far as recruiting and commitments go, is that you can pretty much take those verbal commits to the bank nearly 100% of the time. Seems to be a much higher percentage of honoring one's verbal than several other NCAA sports. A little...or a lot more integrity in that regard vs. other sports. A good thing IMO.
With a possible trend towards earlier verbals, I really hope we don't see an increase in the "poaching" of verbally committed athletes like you see in other sports as well. I've appreciated that difference in women's hockey up to this point also. Hope it stays that way.
ARM
Fan of chipmunk-like mascots.
Re: D1 Commitments 2012-2013
That is true on the player side. But the student athlete is verbally accepting a scholarship offer. I would think that there must be some form of "offer" that she is saying she plans to accept. I wouldn't think she'd sign an NLI w/o knowing the terms of what they are being offered. So my guess is that at some point prior to signing an NLI, she gets to see something in writing.