BOTC - US Lacrosse Community Forum Forums NORTHEAST LACROSSE BOTC MAIN FORUM (LI, CT, WC) IMLCA DI Coaches Support Banning Recruiting Contact Prior to HS Junior Year

The DI men's coaches voted by a resounding show of hands Friday afternoon to significantly limit early recruiting, supporting a ban on contact between coaches and recruits prior to September 1 of prospects' junior year of high school, members of the IMCLA's Executive Board told Inside Lacrosse.

The vote, which took place at the annual IMLCA Convention held at Baltimore's Marriott Waterfront hotel, is a sizable step forward for an organization that's undergone significant bylaw and leadership changes over the last 24 months.

"This is a monumental day for us," says IMLCA Executive Director Phil Buttafuocco.

The proposal will require approval from the NCAA.

An advisory committee chaired by Princeton coach Chris Bates that included Richmond coach Dan Chemotti and St. Joe's coach Taylor Wray led the more than a year long discussion, which culminated in a pair of two-hour long sessions Friday, building consensus among the 70 programs and more than 200 DI coaches.

"I think we are all excited to have made such big strides in our meetings," Bates says. "We as a coaching body decided to do the right thing and take a very positive stand. Now hopefully we can fundamentally change the recruiting landscape in our game."

Penn coach and IMLCA Executive Board member Mike Murphy summarized his thoughts on the decision succinctly.

"We collectively did what is right for our sport and for our college coaching profession," he says.

"We can only hope the NCAA sees the need for change and supports the proposal," Wray says.

As for next steps, IMLCA leadership will explore the prospect of joining the proposal that the IWLCA put forward in September, which is poised to enter the NCAA's legislative review process in January. If that happens, the larger consensus is likely garner more significant consideration from NCAA officials. If the IMLCA is unable join the IWLCA's proposal, the men's organization will draft its own proposal for consideration in January 2017, the next opportunity to put forward such a comment.

"I am very pleased to see that the men’s coaches have taken action on this. I have repeatedly said that this is the most important issue in lacrosse right now. I think the men supporting our effort sends a strong message that we need to inject some sanity back into the recruiting process for the kids, most importantly, and our coaches and programs as well. Given that this is an issue in other NCAA sports, I think it's a great that both men’s and women’s lacrosse are taking the lead with this very important issue," Duke women's coach Kerstin Kimel wrote to IL on Saturday. Kimel and Penn’s Karin Corbett co-chaired the IWLCA Recruiting Issue Committee.

"We will need to hear in some official IMLCA capacity that the men want to formally support our proposed legislation. Once we do, we will need to contact the liaison with the SAEC (Student-Athlete Experience Committee) to see what the protocol would be to have them added to the proposal. Given that the SAEC wanted to vet out interest from other coaches organization on our proposal, I would assume they would welcome this support from the men’s coaches and give them an avenue to formally join our efforts. The feedback we have received from the SAEC has been very positive, and I am certain that our position will only be strengthened by having the men on board," she continued.

IMLCA President and Limestone head coach J.B. Clarke said that the decision was a credit to Bates, Chemotti and Wray, and was pleased with the way it demonstrated an improvement in the organization's communication and workflow.

The vote comes as a surprise given that, as recently as yesterday, expectations for the most substantial changes to the recruiting rules involved additional restrictions to the calendar. If a ban on contact prior to high school players junior years were implemented, it'd all but eliminate the wave of sophomore and freshman verbal commitments that have gained momentum in recent years, going so far as to prohibit coaches from speaking to high school sophomores that approached them during an unofficial campus visit.

we can only hope that it ends up getting the support of the NCAA

They did do the right thing for the sport....Now if only this will become a reality

Watch what they do, don't listen to what they say.

And how many freshmen committed since that bogus vote? Come on, this is all for show. When NCAA actually clamps down, I'll believe it.

Do you think this effects the economics of all these club teams who prey on the families who desperately want an early recruit distinction?

Everytime I come across something about early recruiting, it is generally stated that it is bad for the sport. The weird thing is that I never read anything to support it being bad for the sport. Does anyone have anything to support this thought other than because it just is?

Agree - but tis would most likely entail rules applying over ALL sports. Good luck getting all the football and basketball crazy coaches to agree to NO contact

I think this would be great for the good clubs who have good coaches and emphasize player development. If this were to pass and freshman and sophomore verbals were eliminated it would be a big blow to clubs that use the early commitments as their only currency.

To the first post:

* You sound bitter. There is obviously a market for club teams. They offer a product that some people want (you may not want it but others do). I have never heard of anyone being forced to play for a club team.

* College coaches are the ones responsible for early recruiting. No college coach has ever been forced to go watch 13 and 14 year boys or girls play lacrosse.

* It is not the club directors or the parents who created this early recruiting phenomenon, it was the college coaches.

To the second post:

* If the proposal is adopted by the NCAA it will only help the club teams. More kids will be playing club as Rising Juniors and Seniors.

ANYTHING that will calm down the lunatic parents that are ruining the team experience and sidelines is a plus. Let them be kids and then in 11th grade have your kid verbal. If this goes through hopefully the rest of us get three more quality years of lax 8-10th grades and then the crazies can take over again. Lots of kids like playing but aren't going the verbal in 8th grade route, let them play

This is such good news for anyone involved in youth lacrosse. How many people knew where they wanted to go to college when they were 14 yrs old? Colleges will still have recruit weekends and prospect days. It's guys like Jake Reed and Jaimie Munro that may lose their respective allure.

I agree, the lunatic parents that can not believe that their kid is not being recruited and offered is getting out of control. The jealousy and bitterness is insane. It has ruined the sidelines.

So it isn't about the sport, universities or the young athletes? It is to help control the parents and then lofty expectations?

This would be a huge benefit for clubs. Won't stop us lunatic parents starting our kids in 3rd grade. Now also keeps us paying into junior year. Also the pressure of showcases rises dramatically into fresh/soph/junior year.

Best outcome is it starts to diminish benefit of holdback.

I don't see this being a deterrent to the hold back culture created.

For all of you who think governing bodies need to control the population.
#Colleges did their part defining the grade to recruit
#US Lacrosse has to do their part and define the levels/age groupings.

Meanwhile, in College Park, Maryland, John Tillman is looking to verbal his 1st 2020 and add to his confirmed 13 2019 verbals.

Why does the 2% getting cash to play in school have to ruin it for the 98% who embrace that their kids are slightly weaker but LOVE and can play the game? The worst sideline in High School sports in Lacrosse there isn't even a close second. This isn't a sport anymore this is a job to get recruited. So sad

I don't think it's the 2% that ruin it. I have witnessed the bitterness of the parents. In my experience it is not the parents of the 2% who have the snide comments. It is not the parents of the early recruits who feel the need to comment on the other players in an attempt to tear them down.

Have you ever witnessed how the mood and demeanor of a parent changes when after a prospect camp the coaches approach one of their kids teammates but not their child? Have you seen the facial expression change when they hear that a player other than their child is being offered a spot at at top lacrosse school or university? Have you listened while they tell you why the other kid is making a mistake by committing early? Have you listened as they go on endlessly justifying why going to XYZ University is better than going to any of the Top 20 Schools in the country?

The college coaches may not like the early recruiting but they are the ones responsible for it. It is not the parents, players, HS coaches, club coaches or directors.

There is generally a consensus by the top college coaches as to who the best players are. The top coaches/programs all identify the same kids and then they race to get them. Early recruiting is about the best programs in the country identifying and "recruiting" the best players. The best players are "recruited" by the top programs, they don't send countless letters emails to the coach, they don't approach the coaches at prospect camps and they don't ask the HS or club coach to make a call for them. I think this is what has driven the insanity. Parents can not believe that their kid is not one of the top recruits.

Parents ruin most sports, its just that the Lacrosse industry has capitalized on this fault and have made themselves millionaires.

Cha Ching. God Bless America.

My son will be going to a top D3 school with many Championships and he'll be a stud, as well as play a ton of time and be happy. This D1 nonsense is a joke.

Was your son recruited or contacted by any Div 1 schools? Just curious. Also hope the Div 3 school isn't Salisbury University or your son could be in for a rude awakening.

I think the post above this one acknowledges that they aren't in the top 2%, but the 2% and their parents are ruining the game and sidelines. The ball hogging starts younger than ever. Because they need to stat build by 8th grade! And then you get to HS and the absolute worse thing in the world is posting the games stat lines in the paper which is like putting gasoline on a fire. We all get that your player is special just don't ruin it for everyone else and when we are up by 8 goals tell your kid to PASS THE BALL!

not Salisbury. He's going into Engineering at a top Boston area D3 school. I looked at D1 for him and he was approached by a few, but his choice was what did the future look like after college and this school is very exceptional. In the end I realized that he was more mature about the big picture than I was. He has the right idea: find an awesome school, get a lot of playing time, continue to play at an elite level which can beat a lot of D1 schools, graduate and make a lot of money for a future family!

Congrats! When did he commit to the D3 school? Just wondering what the D3 timing is? Summer/fall going into Junior year?

So you mean Tufts? Only Boston area D3 school with many championships is Tufts who doesnt talk to or look at recruits until their Junior years and your kid better have awesome grades. Oh and you better be prepared to shell out 60k a year or something close to it because they are pretty stingy with academic money and there are no athletic scholarships. Great school and great lax program to be sure but unless your son is a 2017 with great grades I think your jumping the gun a little bit.

Typically going into Senior year after all of their grades and standardized test scores come out. Lacrosse wise theyll start talking Fall of Jr. year. The school hes referring to is Tufts University, I dont know why he wont say it, but whatever.

Just a question...whats wrong with Salisbury?

Salisbury could beat a lot of D1 schools...

Not sure. Nice campus with new buildings and a recent upgrades to the lacrosse stadium. Large roster like all the big D3's with 50 kids and everyone plays so very few get tons of time. Surrounding town is iffy like most college towns. 25 minutes to the beach. I think they have been down in the top 10 the last few years but before that they won probably 10 of the last 20 championships. Its a big sports school that gets a lot of D1 transfers from D1 schools

I think academically salisbury is not good.

No, it's not

Are there very many D3 programs that are commiting 2017's already?

Yes, the top programs are.

Nice post
Just let them play and develop into the level they can become and then as jrs make a better educated decision then when they are in middle school in some cases to best set them up for lacrosse but more importantly the education that will drive them towards a chosen career path

Another smoking gun coming out of the decade long UNC passing of players to keep the athletically eligible.

Email from a teacher to the football department that clearly says " I passed all your football players even though many failed, were passing calculators to each other and submitting very similer answers".

One of the reasons most schools guide players to certain easy majors. NO enginerring, architiecture or medical majors