Ive been equally confused about this Commitable vs. Non-Commitable offer thing because its a term relatively new to recruiting. Its also something that more and more recruits/parents/coaches are going to become wise to. I dont think this practice will play out much longer in its present form. The more publicity this non-commitable offer situation gets increases the chances it changes in the future. In what way I dont know but there is already an increasing number of players who have been burned by trying to commit to non-commitable offers and its only going to get worse. This only raises the awareness level of everyone involved.
The term might be new but the practice is not and it will continue this way for a very long time IMO.
No, I am not. I clearly state that non-committable offers don't exist. And I clearly state that offers that schools extend to athletes are all committable. And I clearly explain why schools offer more scholarships available.
If this is true, then how can that be? Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but on one hand you're saying that schools don't offer "Non-committable" offers and in the same breath, that "Schools offer more kids than they have scholarships for" so if every kid who was offered a scholarship accepted, some would be "Non-committable", wouldn't they be? Splain please?
It isn't realistic to believe that every player that receives an offer is going to accept. So you obviously send out more offers than you have spots in hopes to fill every hole. If every player were to accept the offers then the coaches would have to start pulling scholarship offers back. Which never looks good but it is easily explainable due to scholarship restrictions. The kid is just SOL for taking so long to decided. This happens a lot. More and more kids these days are committing earlier and are forcing coaches to pull offers late in the game. I believe Florida did this past season and Georgia might have as well. And even if school over sign, there is a good chance that they can make them fit anyway (attrition, grayshirts...etc). Non-committable offers, if they existed, are neither a safe practice nor a logical one. Why would you extend an offer with limitations? Basically you're telling the kid he's good but not quite good enough. But hold on because you're our plan B. You're better off just telling him that we are still evaluating him and we have to make sure our numbers work. Being honest with the kid is much better than playing around with him. Besides, we are really fooling ourselves because nothing is committable until the school actually sends the athlete an LOI for him to sign
No, that's not the case. I can't speak for any other school but I know for USC that the only offer considered committable is one in writing. The difficulty IMO comes from the unknown conversations that occur between the coach and the recruit. A HC walks a thin line conveying some point of interest without actually confirming an offer. A recruit goes in wanting to hear an offer and may make some assumptions. All things considered, at the end of LOI day, the vast majority of players find a home they are comfortable with. Focusing in on the exception distorts the size of the problem.
Co-sign. The players know the circumstances when they talk to the coaches that send out the offers and they know there are limited spots. I said it earlier but these terms are more popular on the internet than in real life. 99% of players know whether or not they have an offer. Ones that dont understand can either blame themselves for having a very limited understanding of the recruiting process or their coaches, who are usually a big help in the process. Non-committable offers aren't offers. They are basically a VIP invitation to get in line and wait your turn.
That's what I meant by official offers. When I make reference to offers I speak in terms of written letters stating such. Kids get told all the time that they have been offered but yet don't receive anything for weeks. All they've been that they have been offered, officially they haven't. So when I say legitimate or officially I am referring to a written offer
You are exactly correct. For me the term "non-committable offer" is a get out jail free card. Why didn't so and so pick LSU? Well he didn't have a "committable offer". Why didn't LSU accept this kid's commitment? They never gave him an "committable offer". Either way LSU doesn't look bad but is very unnecessary. A simple LSU didn't offer the athlete would suffice
