Players we could get?

[laxkid23]

Is there anyone out there, that you guys believe we could either randomly get or pull in from other school?

 

[ACamp1900]

All efforts should be poured into B. Smith at this point... there are pleanty out there that wanted to come to ND that have since committed elsewhere... not much time left so we'll know REAL quick

 

[laxkid23]

Is there any way Colasanti would come?
I actually could get my friend to talk to him, or just message him myself.

 

[Ricochet]

Well, if the go and try to get a kid that committed elsewhere I hope they do the right thing and call the school and tell them that now that they have a new DC and he's seen film on some of the kids that wanted to come to ND but were turned away under Minter but that he wants them and would like to see if they would to come aboard now. I just hope they don't go after some of these committed players like some of these dirty coaches out there.

 

[Freeman Ara]

Well, if the go and try to get a kid that committed elsewhere I hope they do the right thing and call the school and tell them that now that they have a new DC and he's seen film on some of the kids that wanted to come to ND but were turned away under Minter but that he wants them and would like to see if they would to come aboard now. I just hope they don't go after some of these committed players like some of these dirty coaches out there.

You honestly think that any school would say ok to that? Thats like telling your wife that her high school sweetheart called and now that he has won the lottery he would like to have a go at what used to be, you going to take that call? Its not being a dirty coaching to continue to recruit players, unless the kid has specifically said never call me again coach. This is college football where 40 year old mens careers depend on the whims of 18 year old boys. Look I don't like Meyer either but if you don't think Weis keeps avenues of communications open with verballed guys your mistaken.

 

[notdam4]

You honestly think that any school would say ok to that? Thats like telling your wife that her high school sweetheart called and now that he has won the lottery he would like to have a go at what used to be, you going to take that call? Its not being a dirty coaching to continue to recruit players, unless the kid has specifically said never call me again coach. This is college football where 40 year old mens careers depend on the whims of 18 year old boys. Look I don't like Meyer either but if you don't think Weis keeps avenues of communications open with verballed guys your mistaken.

Touche

 

[Ricochet]

You honestly think that any school would say ok to that? Thats like telling your wife that her high school sweetheart called and now that he has won the lottery he would like to have a go at what used to be, you going to take that call? Its not being a dirty coaching to continue to recruit players, unless the kid has specifically said never call me again coach. This is college football where 40 year old mens careers depend on the whims of 18 year old boys. Look I don't like Meyer either but if you don't think Weis keeps avenues of communications open with verballed guys your mistaken.

All I'm saying is that I would tell them about it, they won't like it but it won't be going around there back and stealing a recruit. There is nothing illegal about going after committed recruits it's just not ethical. I disagree with your analogy because a wife would represent a player thats already signed his LOI. Replace the wife in the analogy and make it your fiancé and after your 10 year HS reunion you see your HS sweetheart and there something there and you keep in contact after that and you decide that maybe you want another go around with your HS sweetheart because it feels right and you don't want to make a mistake by marrying the wrong girl so you take the chance of hooking back up with the HS sweetheart IMO you don't do it behind your fiancé back you come out and say what's what and let the chip fall where they may. Thats me though, I'm ultra loyal though the fiancé wil forgive or she won't but keeping it going behind her back then marrying here for her just to take 50% when you want to make the jump later. No the point is that it doesn't matter what they think, it's that you do it honestly because either way the player has yet to fully commit until the papers are signed. It's the right thing to do, it doesn't hurt you to do it and it will prove out in the end that your not just another snale in the grass.

 

[Freeman Ara]

All I'm saying is that I would tell them about it, they won't like it but it won't be going around there back and stealing a recruit. There is nothing illegal about going after committed recruits it's just not ethical. I disagree with your analogy because a wife would represent a player thats already signed his LOI. Replace the wife in the analogy and make it your fiancé and after your 10 year HS reunion you see your HS sweetheart and there something there and you keep in contact after that and you decide that maybe you want another go around with your HS sweetheart because it feels right and you don't want to make a mistake by marrying the wrong girl so you take the chance of hooking back up with the HS sweetheart IMO you don't do it behind your fiancé back you come out and say what's what and let the chip fall where they may. Thats me though, I'm ultra loyal though the fiancé wil forgive or she won't but keeping it going behind her back then marrying here for her just to take 50% when you want to make the jump later. No the point is that it doesn't matter what they think, it's that you do it honestly because either way the player has yet to fully commit until the papers are signed. It's the right thing to do, it doesn't hurt you to do it and it will prove out in the end that your not just another snale in the grass.

Ok has to be the longest rebuttal analogy I have ever seen, look I get what your saying and I agree its not illegal or in my opinion unethical, depending on how you do it. But there is no way CW could ever call say USC and tell Pete Carroll that they would like to sit down with Everson Griffen for example just because we made a coaching change and think that we have a better chance at landing him if we can get our new guy in front of him. Think of it it war terms, would you tell your enemy where you plan on hitting them before you do it? No. You don't have to tell the opposing school anything. My point is most of these kids understand that even when they commit most of the schools are still going to keep in contact with them in case something happens, i.e Petrino leaving UofL. Thats how it works its accepted,it hurts because we are the guys that had our closet raided this time but this is just how the game is played, not all things in life are nice and to ask a kid to be loyal to a school after a coaching change or any change in the program is asking a lot.

 

[leprechaun4life]

All recruits are fair game until they sign their LOI, if a player truly wants to go to a school, then whether opposing coaches continue to recruit shouldn't matter. As long as the coaching staff represents ND in a positive way, I have no problem with them recruiting previously committed players. The same goes for opposing teams, as long, as opposing teams do not use underhanded techniques to influence a player to decommit, I have no problem with it. In Brian's case, Weis should explain that Minter did not want to offer a schollie, and since he is gone the new DC has decided to extend an offer.

 

[kjones]

Right, the main point should be that we don't want negative recruiting. Weis has said repeatedly that he's not about bashing another school, and I think that's the ugly part of recruiting (besides money/sex/etc). If we go in to a committed student and say "hey, we got a new guy here and he sees something special in you, we'd love to offer a scholarship to you, but we understand if you'd rather keep your commitment," then I don't see how that's unethical at all. I'm sure the staff would TOTALLY respect a kid who said "You know, I wish you had offered earlier, but I'd like to be a man of my word." Can you imagine them NOT respecting that? If our staff kept pushing after a kid said that, I'd call that unethical, but talking to them in a positive and respectful way and seeing if they'd rather be a ND guy is not what I would consider unethical.

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

Right, the main point should be that we don't want negative recruiting. Weis has said repeatedly that he's not about bashing another school, and I think that's the ugly part of recruiting (besides money/sex/etc). If we go in to a committed student and say "hey, we got a new guy here and he sees something special in you, we'd love to offer a scholarship to you, but we understand if you'd rather keep your commitment," then I don't see how that's unethical at all. I'm sure the staff would TOTALLY respect a kid who said "You know, I wish you had offered earlier, but I'd like to be a man of my word." Can you imagine them NOT respecting that? If our staff kept pushing after a kid said that, I'd call that unethical, but talking to them in a positive and respectful way and seeing if they'd rather be a ND guy is not what I would consider unethical.

I've said this from the beginning and I'll continue to say it now...

Until I see a kids ink on a piece of of paper stating he's a part of said University...

EVERYONE IS FAIR GAME...

If Charlie wasn't doing the same thing...quite frankly, I'd think less of him...and don't kid yourself. He's out working his angles...pulling on kids already committed to other programs. Recruiting is a dirty business...Remember, these kids are the link to these coaches jobs...They'll do whatever it takes.

 

[marv81s]

agreed, this isn't the good ole days of recruiting where coach's are going to back off a kid that gives a public verbal. I would totally expect Weis and company to continue to contact a kid and bullshit with them, get a feel for how committed is. It is up to that kid to make a decision and stick to it. As long as ND isn't doing anything illegal, I would fully expect them to continue to recruit after a kid as long as that kid isn't telling Weis and staff to stop calling and that they are 1000% committed and their is no chance of them switching. If that doesn't happen, by all means continue to chase after them.

Doesn't mean I am not going to get pissed when a kid pulls a JT in the future.

 

[HereComeTheIrish]

agreed, this isn't the good ole days of recruiting where coach's are going to back off a kid that gives a public verbal. I would totally expect Weis and company to continue to contact a kid and bullshit with them, get a feel for how committed is. It is up to that kid to make a decision and stick to it. As long as ND isn't doing anything illegal, I would fully expect them to continue to recruit after a kid as long as that kid isn't telling Weis and staff to stop calling and that they are 1000% committed and their is no chance of them switching. If that doesn't happen, by all means continue to chase after them.

Doesn't mean I am not going to get pissed when a kid pulls a JT in the future.

Well said, Marv...Right on!

 

[kjones]

I would fully expect them to continue to recruit after a kid as long as that kid isn't telling Weis and staff to stop calling and that they are 1000% committed and their is no chance of them switching. If that doesn't happen, by all means continue to chase after them.

Is that not what I said? Maybe I was unclear, but I think if you go back and read what I said then you'll find it's the same thing. If you keep pushing for a kid who says he's committed and not going to switch, and asks you to stop, that sends red flags to me, and you're probably no longer being as straightforward and forthright as CW pretty much is by definition.

But maybe you were agreeing with me, and not HCtI