Should there be an early signing period for football?

With debate regarding an early signing period for football, things have really started to heat up because a vote held last month.  The SEC football coaches had originally voted down an early Signing Day but that changed during the most recent vote.  By a final tally of 9-3, these coaches voted in favor of adding an early signing period for football during the week of Thanksgiving.

The three coaches that were the ones to vote against it were among the best in the league.  Arkansas’ Bobby Petrino, Florida’s Urban Meyer and South Carolina’s Steve Spurrier all prefer just having one signing period following the season.  Just the fact that a recruit’s decision would still be somewhat rushed if they did decide to sign early is a big reason why they are against.  And as Meyer mentioned, most of his recruiting is actually done after their season ends anyway.

This obviously brought a lot of different takes from writers and coaches throughout the country.  I am going to link a few of the more interesting debates and thoughts and then take a look at it myself again.  I have written a previous article about this but things have obviously changed enough where I can get a chance to reevaluate.

Four writers from Rivals.com share their perspective on the situation (Click here for the article):

Olin Buchanan: An early signing period makes sense for several reasons. More and more prospects are making commitments to programs by the summer before their senior seasons, and the vast majority of those players will honor those commitments. Why not allow those who have made their decisions the opportunity to finish the process? That would eliminate having to deal with coaches who won’t give up and continue to try to change the player’s mind.

Tom Diehart: Without a doubt, college football needs an early signing period. It makes too much sense on many fronts. An early date should coincide with when junior college players sign letters-of-intent in mid-December. The early period would allow schools to have a portion of their recruiting class “in the bag,” with no fear of losing any recruits at the 11th hour. Schools then could focus all of their energies on filling out the rest of their recruiting classes.

Mike Huguenin: An early signing period for football is long overdue. This is a case where football needs to follow basketball’s lead. Basketball has an early signing period, and a vast majority of the top players get it out of the way early.  I don’t think the same high percentage of football players will sign early, but I think there will be a sizable number who don’t want to go through the recruiting circus and will sign.

Steve Mcgargee: In an era when more and more recruits are committing early – and a growing number also are changing their minds afterward – an early signing period makes sense. The SEC has recommended an early signing period in late November, but I’m more in favor of the proposal made by the ACC last year to have that early signing period in mid-December because it wouldn’t interfere as much with the actual season that way. In fact, the teams that don’t appear in bowls already would be finished with their seasons by then.

Here is an article from Go Vols Extra with some quotes from coaches in the SEC (Click here for the article):

“I’m concerned it would make recruiting even nuttier than it already is,” Georgia coach Mark Richt said Tuesday at the SEC meetings. “I’m afraid that we’ll have to deal with recruits taking a lot of official visits during the season. We need to spend the time on our own team.

Alabama coach Nick Saban said he’s fine with a December early signing period. “A lot of high school coaches are opposed to having it (an early signing period) before a senior year, and I can understand why,” Saban said. “But I also feel we spend six weeks after Christmas chasing down guys we’ve had committed for six months or year, worrying about whether they are going to flip on you. With an early signing period, we could spent a lot of time on the guys who haven’t committed yet and learning about the younger guys in an evaluation process.”

Tennessee’s Phillip Fulmer said he sees both sides of the argument, but now is swayed for an early period. “There’s no reason you can’t get some of the guys off the board, and spend that time and money babysitting kids the entire month of January,” Fulmer said.

The International Herald Tribune talked with Penn State coach Joe Paterno and he is definitely against it  (Click here for the article):

“I don’t like it,” Paterno said Saturday before a dinner for Penn State alumni and boosters in suburban Harrisburg. “I would change some things about when you can talk to kids and when you can’t talk to them, but I’m not for the early signing date.”

“We do a terrible job when kids come up for official visits for a game,” he said. “Now other people do a good job, and maybe they got a bigger staff, or maybe their staff is organized differently.”

When talking to recruits, Paterno said “I don’t want to turn into a used car salesman. … We’re dealing with a young man’s life, and we’d like to be able to present the situation as best we can, and as honestly as we can.”

And in one of the most interesting debates, Andy Staples of SI.com thinks that we need to just blowup Signing Day altogether   (Click here for the article):

So before the coaches waste their dwindling vacation time devising a scheme that will result in an early signing period for the class of 2010, consider this alternative proposal.  Forget the current system. Blow it up.

Eliminate Signing Day entirely. Let coaches sign players whenever they want. The idea may sound irresponsible, but in practice, it would force coaches to exercise more caution lest they gamble away an entire recruiting class. They would have to consider all the ramifications before making an offer. A coach can sign a 300-pound offensive tackle after the prospect’s junior season, but if one of those all-you-can-eat buffets with the oh-so-delicious yeast rolls opens next to his school and Tiny balloons to 600 pounds in the ensuing 16 months, that coach had better order an XXXXXXL practice jersey, because he’s stuck with the butterball.

So what is may take on this?  I think no matter what, there needs to be an early Signing Period.  The fact that there is only one period for football players to sign is ludicrous.  For a kid who verbals during his junior year of football, he will have to wait almost a year and a half to eventually sign the Letter of Intent.  In my opinion, that is just way too late.

One problem that I have with the early Signing Period is that coaches are going to change after players have signed.  Then if the players want to leave, they may eventually have to fight their way out of the Letter of Intent.  In a lot of situations, I am willing to guess that it is not going to be pretty.

But the fact that a kid can sign early will relive a lot of pressure for them.  If they are 100% sure where they want to attend school, this could make things much easier for them.  It will take the pressure off of calls and which other schools are going to be offered.  As mentioned in a quote above, it takes the babysitting out of the lives of coaches (At least somewhat).

I really think you are in a win-win situation with an early Signing Day.  No matter if it is in July, November, or December, allowing kids another day to sign will be an advantage to them.  It allows them to get this pressure filled situation over with and worry about academics and finishing their high school career strong.