DePaul gets commitment from 8th grader

[admin]

Whoa.

Amari Bailey might be just entering the eighth grade, but he is ready to make his college decision. Regarded as one of the best eighth graders in the country, Bailey verbally committed to play for the DePaul Blue Demons on August 11th, per his Instagram. Already 6’2″ with a fluid game, Bailey could turn out to be an outstanding recruit for the Blue Demons.

Bailey is from Chicago and is reportedly excited at the possibility of “staying home” to play in front of his hometown. The last time that DePaul secured a top-100 recruit was in 2013 when Billy Garrett committed. Prior to that, Dar Tucker was the latest, way back in the class of 2007. Surely, it is really early to start ranking eighth graders, but by the time Bailey gets into high school, maybe he will be a top-100 level recruit.

https://bustingbrackets.com/2017/08/11/ ... ue-demons/

[Demon22]

Quick!

Someone start the "2022 Recruiting Class Could Be the Best Yet" thread.

[stever20]

I've seen him play 8 times, and he's got serious holes in his games. no way is he top 100..... I did see a team mate of his who is also committed to East Carolina, and he's got game.

I kid, I kid. Seriously though, what a joke in general for kids in 8th grade to commit to something 5 years from now. I mean I know several 7th and 8th graders, and they can't commit to something 5 hours from now, let alone 5 years from now.

[jfan]

DePaul leading the nation in 2022 recruiting. Who would have thought! Bit of a gamble, but I hope it works out for DePaul and the young man. Outside the box thinking that may pay off big time if he develops like they think he will.

[GoldenWarrior11]

Dave Leitao won't be there by the time he gets there, and I sincerely doubt that Bailey ends up keeping his commitment to DePaul (or DePaul keeping it for him). Asking a soon-to-be-8th grader to make a decision that will impact his life 5 years from now is incredibly irresponsible and foolish by the DePaul coaches. While I have been impressed with the recent additions of Heirman and Campbell this summer, this is just puzzling.

If you think this will end well for either Bailey or DePaul, look no further than the stories of Ryan Boatright or Cully Payne.

[gosports1]

before I entered 8th grade I wanted to drive a freight train or own a farm with lots of animals. those plans changed shortly

[Demon22]

Dave Leitao won't be there by the time he gets there, and I sincerely doubt that Bailey ends up keeping his commitment to DePaul (or DePaul keeping it for him).

OK... So, let's say the kid breaks his commitment. Happens all the time. Who gets hurt?

Asking a soon-to-be-8th grader to make a decision that will impact his life 5 years from now is incredibly irresponsible and foolish by the DePaul coaches.

How so? I mean, you just said that the kid will probably change his mind.

While I have been impressed with the recent additions of Heirman and Campbell this summer, this is just puzzling.

The kid apparently wanted to commit, and his mother was in favor. Should they have turned the kid down at the risk of damaging the relationship with his coach.

If you think this will end well for either Bailey or DePaul, look no further than the stories of Ryan Boatright or Cully Payne.

Ryan Boatright maybe isn't the best example of a kid whose 8th grade commitment ruined his basketball career.

[Savannah Jay]

I don't see a downside for either the kid or the school. Kids change their mind all the time (I am assuming this is a verbal commit and not a signed LOI) and he can do so if he wants. Or he will stay home and play for DePaul. No downside for him.

Ditto for DePaul. Schools pull scholies all the time and if, for some reason, this goes sideways (kid's not very good, coaching change and new coach doesn't think the kid fits) in the next 4 years (assuming he is offered a LOI to sign in 4 years) and DePaul decides to pull their offer before he signs, they will do so quietly, the kid will find someplace else to play and it will be a non-story.

But for now...it's a nice little bit of recruiting buzz for DePaul and a hometown kid.

[sciencejay]

I don't see a downside for either the kid or the school. Kids change their mind all the time (I am assuming this is a verbal commit and not a signed LOI) and he can do so if he wants. Or he will stay home and play for DePaul. No downside for him.

Ditto for DePaul. Schools pull scholies all the time and if, for some reason, this goes sideways (kid's not very good, coaching change and new coach doesn't think the kid fits) in the next 4 years (assuming he is offered a LOI to sign in 4 years) and DePaul decides to pull their offer before he signs, they will do so quietly, the kid will find someplace else to play and it will be a non-story.

But for now...it's a nice little bit of recruiting buzz for DePaul and a hometown kid.

I'm going to disagree with you SJ. Recruiting at such a young age is terrible for both the schools and the kids/families. My younger daughter went through the recruiting process for volleyball. Attention started at 14 and was hot and heavy during 15s club season. She got offers and then got pressure to commit. She committed prior to her sophomore year (starting junior year now). Kids that are committing are making a decision about where they want to go to school. That is an enormous decision requiring multiple points of comparison between coaching staffs, schools, conferences, academic programs, geographic locations, etc. How can 14-15 year old kids do that with any degree of accuracy? Heck, 16-18 year olds make mistakes about those things, and a ton of maturation goes on during that extra year or three of high school (between 14-15 and 16-18). So my daughter is barely 15, and she is sitting in Head Coach X's office trying to answer questions like "what do you want to study when you are in college?" Those are questions more for the parent sitting next to the kid (have to act like academics matter), but what 14-15 year old has any f---ing clue? But that's how the process goes, so you do it. It's exhausting for such a young kid which I think leads to more rapid decisions just to make the recruiting process stop so the kid can go back to what they love--playing the sport.

Very importantly, the commitment is verbal, but if you do it in good faith, you shut down recruiting from other schools at that point ("Thank you for your interest, but as of right now, I am committed to play at U of ???. If that changes, I will contact you.") So you as a player (and family) stop evaluating/building relationships with schools/coaches. A school/coach/staff/city/etc that seems like a great fit to a frosh may not seem like such a great fit a couple of years later (maybe the kid no longer wants to play so far from home for example). First impressions really have inflated influence on the process. Or maybe the coach gets canned during the athlete's junior year in high school, so he/she has to completely open up recruiting again (and in volleyball right now, most top 50-75 programs are filling slots for 2020 and 2021 classes--this year's juniors are 2019s). Now there aren't as many options to get an offer from another good program because they have already filled their recruiting quotas for that year and moved on.

Down side for the staff? Even though the commitment is non-binding on either side, if a school pulls an offer from a kid who didn't get injured, there is significant bad publicity. Nebraska did it to a local kid in Omaha and the press was all over it. Any school recruiting a young kid (who is also being recruited to Nebraska) will point out to the kid/family that the NU staff can't be trusted. Another down side is that some kids peak early--they are studs when they are 10-15, but then the rest of the world catches up to them and they can't rise above. Coaches try to evaluate these things during the recruiting process, but the "miss" rate is much higher with 14-15 year old recruits than it is with 16-18 year old recruits. So the staff either rescinds the scholie offer (resulting in bad publicity and fodder for other programs recruiting the same kids), or they allow him/her to come as freshman and then have a meeting after the season suggesting that the kid could have better playing opportunities if he/she went elsewhere. This happens all the time (in football and basketball as well as volleyball).

I think that if recruiting began in earnest when kids were 16 (sophs in high school), they would be older/more mature, and there would be a much higher probability that they as players represent what they will be like when they get to 20-21 years old--or at least predicting their improvement would be easier/more accurate. It would also allow more time for kids and coaches to develop relationships and really be able to evaluate each other more thoroughly than the current recruiting environment allows. IMO, that would lead to fewer kids transferring after frosh/soph years of college.

The NLI doesn't get signed until senior year. And no "official" visits can happen until senior year, so the kid/family have to pay for all recruiting trips prior to then ("unofficial" visits). The "official" visits are basically ways for schools to get recruits/families on campus to celebrate the upcoming signing of the NLI rather than actually being used for recruiting--at least in VB and BB. Football recruiting does run a bit later, and those visits can be more crucial parts of the decision-making process. It's a fascinating process, and it was quite an experience for my daughter (and me), but it would've likely been better had it started a year or so later. Just sayin.

[Savannah Jay]

Tis fine to disagree. You've made many overarching points about recruiting, in general, and that's fine. I didn't say offering kids still in grade school is a good idea...but this is hardly the first (or last) time that will happen.

In this case, a school in need of some buzz in their hometown, I don't see a downside for either. The kid will still have contact with recruiters if he plays AAU, if he goes on unofficials or hangs out with anyone getting recruited, and has more information at his disposal about prospective schools because even committed recruits don't just disconnect from the recruiting world.

I've got kids (26, 24, 23, 16, and 15) and am well aware of maturation (or lack of!!!) and life decisions. I've had some exposure to the recruiting process, too, though my son chose not to play (football or lacrosse) collegiately.

Maybe this kid did make the decision to get it over with so he can just play basketball. He will almost certainly have different views of himself, his prospects, and DePaul in 3-4 years. And his thinking may change and he can re-open his recruiting. Or maybe he won't. But whether he changes his commitment or DePaul "goes another direction," neither will send shock waves thru the recruiting world. It just happens too much and, in this particular case, most people will look at the de-commitment (if it were to happen) with the same ideas about maturity and the recruiting process you put forth and say, "well, that's what happens when you recruit children."