This year, the NCAA decided the recruiting calendar needed some more changes. Remember, about three years ago, after years of open recruiting periods in the spring and the summer, the NCAA told Division I coaches that they could no longer evaluate players in person during the spring once the high school season ended. They would have to wait until two 10-day periods arrived in July.
This year, as a compromise, they gave back some time in the spring (the last two weekends in April) but now limit the recruiting in July to 3 five-day periods. Plus, Division I coaches are allowed a little extra time in the summer to work with their own players on their campuses.
In reality this was probably a good move. At least for the big dogs. But the smaller players in this game now face some unintended consequences.
The changes are an over-reaction by the NCAA to the AAU and travel teams that were giving youth basketball a bad name. You’ve heard or seen the headlines: this shoe company paid that AAU coach. This player was getting paid to go to this school. The AAU coaches have more power than high school coaches. Kids are missing too much school. Coaches are spending too much time away from their families. There’s even a book about this stuff by a Pulitzer Prize winner.
And while this perception was bad (obviously) it wasn’t the majority of what was happening. They were the bad apples that ruined the bunch.
The travel teams that receive benefits from major sponsors (which isn’t illegal) are the ones that boast rosters of top 100 prospects and are highly sought after by high major Division I programs. But that makes up less than 1% of the players that will be playing at high majors. And those high major programs make up about only 6% of colleges and universities in the United States. What about the other 99% of players and 94% of colleges?
Here’s the problem: the other 99% of players that will someday play at a lesser known college now suffer. They suffer because summer travel to NCAA sanctioned tournaments just got a lot more expensive. And possibly less effective. How do they make up that extra revenue to cover additional expenses? Smaller clubs don’t have shoe contracts or major sponsors. They are generally funded by the players or a local sponsor that has an interest in the team (i.e. one of the kids has a mom or dad that can get their company to write them a check). But the conflict of interest there is palpable and puts a travel coach in a position they should never have to deal with. So the solution may be less tournaments and travel.
And while the 6% of high major programs have the budget to travel any where at any time, the other 94% have to very carefully pick and choose where they go and who they recruit. What happens to that recruiting trip to Las Vegas that they went to last summer and saw 100 players in 10 days? It might not happen now. For a coach to see that same number of kids in Las Vegas will require 12 days. That’s 2 more days of hotel rooms, rental cars and meals. Oh, and more time away from their families. Per coach. Maybe not a big deal to the big boys. But for the small schools this is going to create some real tough decisions.
So what is going to happen?
It’s hard to tell. It will be interesting to see how travel teams respond this summer. Their travel schedules may change. Funding models may have to be recreated. The well funded travel programs will still hit the bigger more prominent tournaments because they can. The smaller travel programs probably won’t. This could lead to a significant regionalization of tournaments, with teams and colleges staying local to save money.
Would that really be all that bad? More home town kids playing in their home regions. Local colleges developing better rivalries but staying on par with their conference’s competition level. Doesn’t sound terrible. This will be an interesting summer.
[polldaddy poll=6351191]
Pingback: Idaho Club Teams; where they are playing this summer