Fleck's rule: 'You commit to me, you can't go see another place'

Donate To GopherHole

I don't think there's a right or wrong way to do it.

Some places don't care (well they care, they don't do anything) others want players to be more clear / committed.

This isn't too different than the coach's who say "We want people who want to be here." A guy who is still shopping around clearly isn't sure where he wants to be.
 

The problem is you have a high pressure salesman as coach. So he gets kids to commit earlier than they plan to. And then they want to look around. Seems like that story is going to be repeated every single year.
 

Sparlimb said:
The problem is you have a high pressure salesman as coach. So he gets kids to commit earlier than they plan to. And then they want to look around. Seems like that story is going to be repeated every single year.
Click to expand...

The story is repeated everywhere though.

Every program the moment a croot commits... starts worrying / thinking about how likely it is they might loose them. Nobody thinks it is a 'sure thing'.
 

Sparlimb said:
The problem is you have a high pressure salesman as coach. So he gets kids to commit earlier than they plan to. And then they want to look around. Seems like that story is going to be repeated every single year.
Click to expand...

Do we really know that the "high pressure" meme is true? I highly doubt he's putting heavy pressure and locking the door on a 2021 commit.
 


A verbal is just that, but means nothing until signed and shows up. Even then with the transfer portal or other issues. Gives people something to follow, but doesn't mean much.
 

<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

I dont think anyone really disagrees with his thoughts on the matter. The problem with this approach is that it only works at programs that are currently at the top of the college football world. Alabama, Clemson Etc.

The commitment of today is a big joke and its stupid but it is what it is. When employing a rule like this, you limit your recruiting base to the kids who actually believe in commitment and will shut it down. If a kid is forced to decommit due to a no tolerance rule there is zero chance they will ever come back, when the coaches could have fought and kept the commit despite them looking around and weighing options. This method doesnt work and he needs to loosen it up a little.
 

MaxyJR1 said:
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

As Julian says: Attitude reflects leadership
Players attitudes mirror that of the coaches
 



It also fits PJ's ... coaching style.

He really does focus on players he feels "buys into" his system. That's just the type of team he wants to build, a whole team where everyone is in on it. Plenty of teams out there that don't have that and you've got hot shots out there doing their own thing because they think they're good but not really that committed to the school / program.

PJ wants a more consistent culture, that includes picking guys who are likely to commit and really love PJ's culture / concept.

PJ is a salesman (all coach's are) and he wants those guys who REALLY buy in all the way. In sales those are the customers who spend the most money, not just a dime and walk. PJ wants the kinda guys who are really likely to buy into a thing whole hog.
 

A_Slab_of_Bacon said:
It also fits PJ's ... coaching style.

He really does focus on players he feels "buys into" his system. That's just the type of team he wants to build, a whole team where everyone is in on it. Plenty of teams out there that don't have that and you've got hot shots out there doing their own thing because they think they're good but not really that committed to the school / program.

PJ wants a more consistent culture, that includes picking guys who are likely to commit and really love PJ's culture / concept.

PJ is a salesman (all coach's are) and he wants those guys who REALLY buy in all the way. In sales those are the customers who spend the most money, not just a dime and walk. PJ wants the kinda guys who are really likely to buy into a thing whole hog.
Click to expand...

Think this is a good read on things. I have zero issues with telling recruits not to commit unless they are 100% on board and then holding them to it. That is what a commitment is supposed to be, not a "well I like you right now so I am going to commit to you but if school A, B, or C comes calling I am out the door". If you miss out on some of those guys that want to hold the world hostage while they make their choice then so be it.

As long as you are up front with the recruit and family about what a commitment means to your program then there should be no hurt feelings or sour grapes if and when the recruit decides to look around and the offer gets pulled.
 

MNVCGUY said:
Think this is a good read on things. I have zero issues with telling recruits not to commit unless they are 100% on board and then holding them to it. That is what a commitment is supposed to be, not a "well I like you right now so I am going to commit to you but if school A, B, or C comes calling I am out the door". If you miss out on some of those guys that want to hold the world hostage while they make their choice then so be it.

As long as you are up front with the recruit and family about what a commitment means to your program then there should be no hurt feelings or sour grapes if and when the recruit decides to look around and the offer gets pulled.
Click to expand...

It is also telling how PJ talked about his QB at WMU and them not seeing eye to eye because PJ was concerned the QB didn't buy into the culture. He later understood the QB was just a sort of low key dude and they got along after that.

PJ to some extent is building more of a team and his system is everyone rowing together. He really cares that the guys get with him and row together, even in a situation where say the obvious best QB might not be buying into it.
 

He is right to teach these kids what commitment means. It's a two-way street. He's committing to them too. What he is saying is that he won't hold a spot while they look around. They can recommit later if the spot is still there. Even if a verbal has not legal contract, he is teaching these kids that their word means something and that his does too. Having worked with kids my whole life, this is an important concept to teach to anyone who came from a family in which they weren't taught how to be trustworthy. Promises are important in any relationship and we all know how much we dislike those among us whose promises mean nothing and how much we gravitate towards people whose word means something whether at work or at home.
 



If Fleck will commit to stay until the end of his contract even if a better job is offered to him then I have no problem with this.
 

Ski U Master said:
If Fleck will commit to stay until the end of his contract even if a better job is offered to him then I have no problem with this.
Click to expand...

Sorry, he's in the transfer portal.

All coach's are in the transfer portal.
 

I agree 100% with PJ on this. He is making sure that no one is bigger than the program and that he won't compromise his culture for any one recruit. While it may seem a more likely strategy for schools that have 4 and 5 star players waiting in line...it goes to his belief in the way he does things and his own personal integrity.
 

I've read that this is Ferentz' policy at Iowa as well. I'm sure there are others schools and coaches as well, but we fight for the same kids as he does.
 

Agree with Fleck providing their isn't any high pressure involved. I would think however that if he is losing commits due to any tactics that he is using he would adjust. Right now I'm on board with Fleck.
 


bigtenchamps1899 said:
tf is that man wearing? high waters and ankle socks?
Click to expand...

Is that spring practice?

He always wear's special shoes for that, maybe he wanted to be sure they wouldn't be covered or something?


It seems weird... but I want those shoes too... so I guess that means something.
 

PJ needs to be PJ. If unwavering loyalty from the very start is important to him, then he should enforce it. I do suspect, and think it is fairly obvious, he puts a lot of pressure on kids to commit early - the opposite of our previous staff - which will result in de-commits a notably higher rate here than before. The end result is all that matters, so whatever works for him is fine. One more, in a growing list, reason to ignore recruiting rankings until signing day - if not always. Hard to believe, but they are even more worthless early in the cycle than later.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Even if they stay here, if they're willing to keep looking after they've committed, they'll probably keep looking while they are here.

It's completely fine to take a while to commit but if you're committed that should mean something.
 

GoGophersUMN said:
Even if they stay here, if they're willing to keep looking after they've committed, they'll probably keep looking while they are here.
<b>
It's completely fine to take a while to commit</b> but if you're committed that should mean something.
Click to expand...

If the team you are considering allows you to, sure.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Ski U Master said:
If Fleck will commit to stay until the end of his contract even if a better job is offered to him then I have no problem with this.
Click to expand...

It's a two way street. The schools will never commit to keeping a coach for the entire length of their contract so it would be foolish for the coach to lock themselves into staying for the duration as well. Fleck strikes me as someone that if the school guaranteed that they would not fire him under any circumstances, he would stick it out there even if he had a better offer, but that just doesn't happen in the world of coaching.

Recruiting is different. If Fleck promises he will honor a kids commitment as long as they shut down their recruiting then it is also totally fair for him to say he won't honor a commitment from a recruit that still wants to test the waters and look for a better/different offer.
 

it's all part of the same universe. if you look at college athletics, it's starting to become more like the pros - players are transferring and moving around at a much higher rate than ever before. more players are taking a "me first" attitude. if you don't like school #1, then transfer to school #2. If you want to chase a title, then find a helmet school and go there as a grad transfer.

And that attitude is moving down to high school players as far as verbal commitments. you're seeing a higher % of de-commits as players re-think their options or get hit with a recruiting pitch from another school. Yes, I understand that a majority of kids still honor their verbals - but I think you're going to see the # of de-commits keep going up.

bottom line - in a lot of cases, you're not going to know who is really in the recruiting class under the final signing day. And schools are going to see more roster turnover from year-to-year as players transfer in search of playing time or better results.

as the man says, you can't tell the players without a scorecard.
 

Recruits should be able to sign anytime during their senior year, with the caveat that after they've signed, they get a full week to change their minds (this gives the 'cruit an out if they end up getting pressured to sign during a visit). That way the commitment from both sides is binding.
 

I’m not even sure what this means. Or how it’s a story. What would be a story is a coach that accepted verbal commitments and then had no problem with a player continuing to take visits. Do any of those coaches exist?

PJ doesn’t even follow what the article is stating. Nolan Edmonds committed, decommitted and looked around, and then was welcomed back. I’d imagine there are a few more examples like this.
 

SkerzFan said:
If a kid is forced to decommit due to a no tolerance rule there is zero chance they will ever come back
Click to expand...

I don't think you can make that kind of blanket statement. The thought is that's what happened with Nolan Edmonds last year.
 

So, if someone is already given a verbal to another school, are they allowed to come to the U for a visit?
 

Breakin' The Plane said:
So, if someone is already given a verbal to another school, are they allowed to come to the U for a visit?
Click to expand...

I think we've had such visits, but I'm not sure anyone tracks what the other school's policy is. Not every school has the same policy.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom