The Kelly aftermath – is there a fix?

A couple of interesting suggestions to the NCAA made in this article for you to ponder, in the wake of Brian Kelly hustling off to South Bend:

… The NCAA, which never has been shy about establishing rules, needs two more of them.

Rule One: No school shall contact a coach about a job opening if that coach still has a game remaining on his team’s schedule. No sit-down interviews, no phone calls, no contact whatsoever. If it’s determined that contact has been made, the school in search of the coach is put on probation and loses five scholarships, or 10 scholarships, or whatever the fair penalty is for defying the law.

Rule Two: Put off the national letter-of-intent day – the next one is scheduled for February 3, 2010 – by three weeks, so schools in search of a new coach aren’t forced to act quickly or else lose valuable time on the recruiting trail. Kelly, for instance, had no choice: If he isn’t amenable to the offer he got last week, Notre Dame immediately executes Plan B because the race is on for elite high school prospects.

So delay the race. Delay it for three weeks. The awful trauma of putting off the national letter-of-inent (sic) day until Feb. 24 would be more than offset by allowing coaches of bowl-bound teams to conduct unfinished business.

I’m not sure if the first of those is legal, but the second sounds sensible on its face, although I would expect to hear complaints from coaches who will have to hold their verbal commitments together for a longer period of time.


Filed under College Football, It's Just Bidness, The NCAA

6 responses to “The Kelly aftermath – is there a fix?

  1. Hmmmmm

    I agree on both of the issues.


  2. dawgman

    How about doing an early signing period with the stipulation that if a signed recruit does not like the new coache’s philosophy he would be allow to retract his LOI and allowed to signed somewhere else at the 2nd signing deadline?


  3. Ozam

    Or…..if your head coach coach leaves (for whatever reason) you can transfer schools. The plantation system that is NCAA football is good for continuity but bad for the “student athletes.”


    • 69Dawg

      +1 The best plan I have heard is if a coach leaves a program the 1st and 2nd year players can transfer without having to wait to play. They may not transfer to the school that the coach went to unless they sit for one year. The juniors and seniors have too much invested to leave any way.


  4. Chuck

    I can’t see why the first one wouldn’t be legal. The rule does not stop the contract process, but only regulates it in a way that is minimal, and has a legitimate goal, and is ultimately for the good of the game and the players, and the fans, and even the coaches. I imagine that Kelly would have preferred a different scenario, but when that didn’t happen, he played the cards he was dealt. The rule will never pass because the only people truly affected are College Presidents and the Athletic Boards, and they will never allow any self-regulation. But I can’t think of a better rule. The amount of the penalty could be debated ad infinitum, but that is where the argument should focus, not on whether the rule should exist.


  5. Macallanlover

    I think the author must read Get the Picture, those were my two suggestions in my reply to you over the weekend Senator (except I added the addition of the Early Signing option to reduce the amount of recruiting work to be done between early January and Signing Day.) I do feel the constant whirring of the coaching carousel will bring about some restrictions on talks between schools and coaches until the season is over.