Do you agree with Weis's commit policy?

[notredomer23]

I do. Thought this would be a good topic of discussion

[stonebreakerwasgod]

Whatever he's doing, seems to be working. I did not expect CW to get the haul that he did.

[WheelMan]

I think it is a great idea. If a recruit does not like his time there for a visit will he like his 4 years there?

[iloveirish_12]

After last year, yeah. If they aren't sure they shouldn't commit then.

[mlcspinner]

I agree irish12 if you are not 100% irish don't commit

[goirish41]

pretty hard to disagree with the success ND has been having this year.

[Svoboda]

I think the clear expectations given to recruits by Weis and Company is exactly what is needed -- and it shows by the commitments we've received thus far. God forbid a coach actually wants the term to equal the action, which is something I've never understood with all of the commits and decommits.

I still fully believe an early signing day would make recruiting a much easier ball game.

[ND Fanatic]

I do like his new policy, but I do think that it gives all of us recruitniks a false sense of security. I'm not saying its going to happen, because I don't think that it won't, but all of our commits can still de-commit if they chose to. Without an early signing period, an idea I like, our commits still have the right to chose a new school, Weis's new policy or not.

[scooper]

I do like his new policy, but I do think that it gives all of us recruitniks a false sense of security. I'm not saying its going to happen, because I don't think that it won't, but all of our commits can still de-commit if they chose to. Without an early signing period, an idea I like, our commits still have the right to chose a new school, Weis's new policy or not.
Right, but if they start looking, so does Charlie. Unless, of course, you have a Little problem on signing day.

I think ND fans are gunshy after last year. But that was freakish in that those types of defections aren't as common.

[mlcspinner]

It should never come down to signing day anyway. a recruit cannot be 100% committed to a school then switch on signing day. I bet if that recruit would sign he would be the one to transfer or never give you 100% in practice or on the Field anyway

[mlcspinner]

In Charlie we trust

[NDgrandson]

I do like his new policy, but I do think that it gives all of us recruitniks a false sense of security. I'm not saying its going to happen, because I don't think that it won't, but all of our commits can still de-commit if they chose to. Without an early signing period, an idea I like, our commits still have the right to chose a new school, Weis's new policy or not.

You are right. Is it a good policy based on the situation? Yes. That does not necesarily mean the execution of the policy will be equally perfect. For example; if Forston decides he wants to come to ND and we now have 5 DL, you could not really blame a kid for wanting to re-think things. Also, might CW take 24 or 25 with the assumption that he might lose one or two, worst case scenario.

I think his policy and his performance to date this recruiting year is great. We still have a whole football season to go before LOI day so lets hope we continue our momentum and we are equally pleased in February.

[NDGirlzRock]

You are right. Is it a good policy based on the situation? Yes. That does not necesarily mean the execution of the policy will be equally perfect. For example; if Forston decides he wants to come to ND and we now have 5 DL, you could not really blame a kid for wanting to re-think things. Also, might CW take 24 or 25 with the assumption that he might lose one or two, worst case scenario.

I think his policy and his performance to date this recruiting year is great. We still have a whole football season to go before LOI day so lets hope we continue our momentum and we are equally pleased in February.

Well said! One thing is for certain. Whatever he is doing is working. I remember several of the recruits saying that their mind is made up and that they won't go back on their word. I think that CW is really stressing that these kids need to be 100% sure before they commit.

[Sir John]

One thing as NDgirldzRock said it's working. if it's working don't meddle or try to fix it.:D

[stonebreakerwasgod]

Well......so far, so good. I'll provide my final answer on LOI day.

[daytonirish]

I agree with Charlie's stance on commits. On the rivals board (non-pay) they asked the same question most people said Charlie hasn't earned the right to do this yet. But I think more coaches are going to start to do this . If a kid commits and the coaches stop recruiting player (B) because of his verbal and then he does go somewhere else it hurts the team who stopped recruiting player (B). If ypur not sure or want to go on visits then wait until you have really made up your mind. Don't commit hoping it will get you other offers you would like to have besides the one you get from N.D.

[notredomer23]

well the vote is unanamious

[Grady]

Two points:

1. Weis's policy hasn't scared away the kids who would have followed it even without the reminder.

2. It gives those who might switch after accepting an offer some strong words to consider before making a decision.

The first point is a "first do no harm" point, which I think has been satisfied. The second point is still unknown, but I think we've lowered the chance that a switch will occur. So Weis hasn't hurt recruiting, and he's bettered his chances for success in February. I like it.

[Fishin'_Irish]

In Charlie we trust

WWCWD?

[rdrdreamer]

A lot of great opinions up in here. And several that were well thought out. I am of the opinion that as a highly sought out recruit, a young man has pretty much been groomed for the inevitable…an opportunity to play at the next level. The majority of the recruits within the top 100, 150 or any other ranking system have probably been visited in some capacity prior to their junior season in high school. These young men have no doubt fallen asleep on many occasions going through the various scenarios in their heads.

For instance, highly touted recruit ‘John Doe’ is ready to commit Irish, but is reluctant due to the possible backlash that will most likely surface? I for lack of a better term/word, refer to this as 'Friday Night Lights' syndrome. Some players come from high schools within cities that are known to be linked to certain colleges, such as Penn State, USC, Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and even Notre Dame. If they play for such a high school...then they are more than likely expected to go Home State U. Their friends, community and quite possibly their own family may expect them to choose local? Therefore he may choose to wait until their senior season is over? This may or may not lessen the backlash he will receive
by choosing another program…especially one that is a rival to Home State U.
Last year we anticipated that more than a few recruits were ours. We continuously heard the term ‘silent’.

With Coach Weis’s new commit policy…we have put out a decent number of offers out there. More than enough, if you ask me. While a part of my opinion is purely speculation...the results thus far speak for themselves.

[BigIrish]

the biggest impact of the commit policy is that weis is able to shut down the sorts of actions that might lead to a de-commitment in the first place. if a kid knows there's a zero tolerance policy out there, he knows he can't take an official visit here or there without risking his status with ND. that's a strong incentive to avoid calls from other coaches, visits, etc. as a result, they're less likely to be swayed by other schools as well.

[Irishkid]

yeah i agree with big irish

[Troy's Enterprise Pride]

boy, this one was controversial... 30 for - 0 against lol

[rontdtarchala]

hard to argue common sense