“If it falls apart, watch out.”

The NCAA appears to have taken a “spoonful of sugar helps the medicine go down” approach to recruiting reform with its 2016-116 proposal scheduled to be voted on by the end of this week.

Will that work?

But finally, most everyone who matters seems to be on board at least for a mid-December early signing date that would coincide with the junior college period. Proposal No. 2016-116 took years to craft; experts warn it could be picked apart.

The bundled package resembles a Congressional bill with typical partisan elements built in. Within the legislation is a proposal for a 10th full-time assistant coach. Was that enough to get the coaches to support an early signing period?

Any attempt to undo the bundle and make the proposals ala carte could mean failure.

“There are people who like some parts of it, not all parts of it,” Bowlsby said of the overall proposals. “So there is a fair amount of horse trading to be done.”

I’ve already linked to the story about Gus Malzahn pitching a fit about restrictions on hiring high school coaches.  Nick Saban is irritated as only Saban can be about camp restrictions.  Both apparently have company on those issues.  As Dodd notes in his article, though, there are aspects of the proposal that many coaches like, such as adding the tenth staff member.

If the sweet parts aren’t enough to entice the coaches to hold their noses, what happens then?  Probably nothing good.

If major-college football chooses to adopt all these measures, one high-profile recruiting expert called it “revolutionary.”

If not, one high-ranked source in the process speculated the NCAA Board of Governors may take over reform themselves. No one wants that.

Watch the vote to see who has the leverage.