Letter Of Intent

[Cooper]

The Ivy League does not subscribe to the Letter of Intent. The Athletic Hook website takes a look at the LOI and recommends the Ivy League institute one at the same time a few major college coaches are pushing for the program to be abolished.

http://www.athletichookcollegecounseling.com/blog/

[lionsrking2]

There's no reason to sign a letter of intent. Could never understand why anybody does other than they don't know any better.

[clenz]

There's no reason to sign a letter of intent. Could never understand why anybody does other than they don't know any better.
Um...

If you don't sign it you don't get a scholarship?

[DFW HOYA]

Um...

If you don't sign it you don't get a scholarship?

Not true. Schools can offer a scholarship without the NLI.

[gumby013]

All the NLI does is limit options for the athlete. It locks them into a school. You can just sign the scholarship papers without it.

[lionsrking2]

All the NLI does is limit options for the athlete. It locks them into a school. You can just sign the scholarship papers without it.

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. If recruits were to ever seek advice or representation, there's no way they would advise them sign an LOI. Especially the better players. Kids sign it because they're under the impression they have to in order receive a scholarship, which is not the case. Now there may be some institutions who would choose not to extend scholarships to players who refuse, but I doubt seriously a school would turn down an impact player because he refuses to sign an LOI. Once the masses catch on, there will be no more National Signing Day or National Signing Period.

[clenz]

Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! We have a winner. If recruits were to ever seek advice or representation, there's no way they would advise them sign an LOI. Especially the better players. Kids sign it because they're under the impression they have to in order receive a scholarship, which is not the case. Now there may be some institutions who would choose not to extend scholarships to players who refuse, but I doubt seriously a school would turn down an impact player because he refuses to sign an LOI. Once the masses catch on, there will be no more National Signing Day or National Signing Period.

A school only has so many scholarships per year.

A kid doesn't let a school know where he's going until reporting for fall camp there's a good chance he won't have money.

You want to talk about potentially opening a can of worms with boosters and what not...

[lionsrking2]

A school only has so many scholarships per year.

A kid doesn't let a school know where he's going until reporting for fall camp there's a good chance he won't have money.

You want to talk about potentially opening a can of worms with boosters and what not...

The bottom line is if I'm a 5-star recruit, or even a recruit with multiple schools beating down my door, there's no way in hell I'm signing a National Letter of Intent. I'll commit to a school, tell them I'm coming, and go through all the normal application and enrollment processes and leave it up to them to decide whether they want me or not. The scholarship will be there I can promise you. A kid with limited ability and limited options may get the cold shoulder and sign out of fear of being left out, but the highly recruited guys have all the bargaining power if they would open their eyes. Sounds like some are starting to do that.

[lionsrking2]

Not sure if this story has been posted in another thread but I've been saying this for over 20 years. Finally folks are realizing they have other options ...

http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/02/09/national-letter-intent-punt-pass-pork

[PAllen]

Not sure if this story has been posted in another thread but I've been saying this for over 20 years. Finally folks are realizing they have other options ...

http://www.si.com/college-football/2015/02/09/national-letter-intent-punt-pass-pork

If I need Snoop to close the deal with a recruit, I don't want that recruit.

[Franks Tanks]

A school only has so many scholarships per year.

A kid doesn't let a school know where he's going until reporting for fall camp there's a good chance he won't have money.

You want to talk about potentially opening a can of worms with boosters and what not...

I agree. The vast majority of athletes should sign a LOI to ensure their scholarship money. Big time 5 stars guys with 40 offers may be the outlier, as programs would make room if they decided to enroll at the last minute, but this would apply to a handful of kids. Scholarships are precious, especially at our level where many schools have 12-15 to give in most years, and coaching staffs need to know a kid is committed.

[Nova09]

A few notes on this thread:

Which major coaches are calling for abolishing LOI? Not implying anything, but I haven't heard that.

You would have to be a top 10 nationally recruit for a school to save a spot for you. Yeah, numbers change for various reasons between February and August, so you would have a spot somewhere if you are nationally ranked, but it might not be your first choice, even if you are "5 star"

If you know where you want to go and you send in your application and pay your deposit as soon as accepted, why would it hurt you to sign?

Signing also benefits the athlete in that it ends the recruiting. So if you are a top recruit and think you don't have to sign because they want you so bad they'll hold a spot for you in the hopes you show up to camp, would you really want to deal with all the calls and emails from schools you definitely are not going to?

And finally, besides just stating that signing is bad for the athlete, can anyone demonstrate a few reasons why they feel that way?

[clenz]

A few notes on this thread:

Which major coaches are calling for abolishing LOI? Not implying anything, but I haven't heard that.

You would have to be a top 10 nationally recruit for a school to save a spot for you. Yeah, numbers change for various reasons between February and August, so you would have a spot somewhere if you are nationally ranked, but it might not be your first choice, even if you are "5 star"

If you know where you want to go and you send in your application and pay your deposit as soon as accepted, why would it hurt you to sign?

Signing also benefits the athlete in that it ends the recruiting. So if you are a top recruit and think you don't have to sign because they want you so bad they'll hold a spot for you in the hopes you show up to camp, would you really want to deal with all the calls and emails from schools you definitely are not going to?

And finally, besides just stating that signing is bad for the athlete, can anyone demonstrate a few reasons why they feel that way?
Because it forces them to actually follow through on a legal document they signed...and "kids change their minds"

[gumby013]

I agree. The vast majority of athletes should sign a LOI to ensure their scholarship money. Big time 5 stars guys with 40 offers may be the outlier, as programs would make room if they decided to enroll at the last minute, but this would apply to a handful of kids. Scholarships are precious, especially at our level where many schools have 12-15 to give in most years, and coaching staffs need to know a kid is committed.

Signing a LOI ensures nothing.

[Nova09]

Signing a LOI ensures nothing.

What? It ensures a scholarship. No wonder you didn't like them when you didn't realize the athlete gets something substantial out of it.

[gumby013]

A few notes on this thread:

Which major coaches are calling for abolishing LOI? Not implying anything, but I haven't heard that.

You would have to be a top 10 nationally recruit for a school to save a spot for you. Yeah, numbers change for various reasons between February and August, so you would have a spot somewhere if you are nationally ranked, but it might not be your first choice, even if you are "5 star"

If you know where you want to go and you send in your application and pay your deposit as soon as accepted, why would it hurt you to sign?

Signing also benefits the athlete in that it ends the recruiting. So if you are a top recruit and think you don't have to sign because they want you so bad they'll hold a spot for you in the hopes you show up to camp, would you really want to deal with all the calls and emails from schools you definitely are not going to?

And finally, besides just stating that signing is bad for the athlete, can anyone demonstrate a few reasons why they feel that way?

Signing a LOI does not ensure you will receive a scholarship. The only thing it does is lock that athlete into giving up a year of eligibility to that institution.

- - - Updated - - -


What? It ensures a scholarship. No wonder you didn't like them when you didn't realize the athlete gets something substantial out of it.

I suggest you read the LOI. It does not ensure a scholarship.

[Nova09]

Signing a LOI does not ensure you will receive a scholarship. The only thing it does is lock that athlete into giving up a year of eligibility to that institution.

- - - Updated - - -



I suggest you read the LOI. It does not ensure a scholarship.

I'm not even going to go through the trouble of citing this but I guarantee you it is a term of the National Letter of Intent that it is accompanied by an offer of athletically related financial aid (scholarship). That scholarship needs to be for a specified amount. If the athlete signs the LOI and returns it without having signed and returned the specific amount of scholarship money offered, the LOI is considered invalid.

[gumby013]

I'm not even going to go through the trouble of citing this but I guarantee you it is a term of the National Letter of Intent that it is accompanied by an offer of athletically related financial aid (scholarship). That scholarship needs to be for a specified amount. If the athlete signs the LOI and returns it without having signed and returned the specific amount of scholarship money offered, the LOI is considered invalid.

That's why you sign the scholarship papers. NOT THE LOI!

[Nova09]

That's why you sign the scholarship papers. NOT THE LOI!

But the scholarship offer is non-binding without the LOI. So to your previous post, you have ensured nothing by signing a "scholarship offer," you only endure it by signing a LOI. Unless you take the scholarship offer, forward it to your attorney, have the same monetary amount drafted into a legal document, return to the school, and hope they send it back to you signed. But most schools wouldn't be willing to do that.

[heath]

The NLI certifies a decision to enroll in that school. It is voluntary and not required to receive athletic aid and participate in intercollegiate athletics. It also allows or gives consent for release of info and education records of the person signing the NLI to the media/3rd party.

[gumby013]

But the scholarship offer is non-binding without the LOI. So to your previous post, you have ensured nothing by signing a "scholarship offer," you only endure it by signing a LOI. Unless you take the scholarship offer, forward it to your attorney, have the same monetary amount drafted into a legal document, return to the school, and hope they send it back to you signed. But most schools wouldn't be willing to do that.

They are two separate documents, neither dependent on the other. Either can be signed without the other. The only effective function of the LOI is to limit the athlete. The really misguided ones are the walk-ons who sign a LOI.

[Nova09]

They are two separate documents, neither dependent on the other. Either can be signed without the other. The only effective function of the LOI is to limit the athlete. The really misguided ones are the walk-ons who sign a LOI.

They are dependent on each other for practical purposes, because a school is not offering a scholarship without the LOI. At least not until the summer. So your scenario, where an athlete says "I will sign for acceptance of the scholarship offer, but not the LOI" would just lead to the school saying "Sorry, if you don't sign the LOI we can't hold a place for you. We need to be sure that the people who are signing are actually going to attend this school."

[clenz]

They are dependent on each other for practical purposes, because a school is not offering a scholarship without the LOI. At least not until the summer. So your scenario, where an athlete says "I will sign for acceptance of the scholarship offer, but not the LOI" would just lead to the school saying "Sorry, if you don't sign the LOI we can't hold a place for you. We need to be sure that the people who are signing are actually going to attend this school."
That's exactly right.

I accepted a football scholarship, a baseball scholarship and a track scholarship out of high school all from different schools. I then went to another school all together.

Are they supposed to hold money/space for me after I don't sign a LOI? No

[Bisonator]

Did you guys even bother to look at this: http://www.nationalletter.org/documentLibrary/NLI-Guide-2014-15.pdf


It explains the LOI pretty effectively.

[Uncle Rico's Clan]

This article from ESPN is very topical. A 4 star recruit from Georgia chose to sign only a financial aid agreement with no LOI. The article explains he did this because it will give him an out to find a new school if there is a coaching change that he doesn't want to deal with.


The fact that Smith chose to sign a financial aid agreement instead of a letter of intent protects him from being tied to a university if the Bulldogs have any unexpected coaching changes before he enrolls in June.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/recruiting/football/story/_/id/12320035/roquan-smith-chooses-georgia-bulldogs-ucla-bruins

[clenz]

Should the team be able to pull his scholarship offer if they find another running back, or no longer want to wait for him deciding if "he wants to deal with their coaches"

[lionsrking2]

Should the team be able to pull his scholarship offer if they find another running back, or no longer want to wait for him deciding if "he wants to deal with their coaches"

Not if the player signs a financial aid agreement with the school.

[clenz]

Not if the player signs a financial aid agreement with the school.
Is there a rule preventing them from signing multiple agreements?

[lionsrking2]

Is there a rule preventing them from signing multiple agreements?

Nope.

[clenz]

Nope.
So why should a school be held to the agreement if the kid isn't??

[lionsrking2]

So why should a school be held to the agreement if the kid isn't??

The school doesn't have to offer a scholarship in the first place. Secondly, all the agreement is is a guarantee the school will give financial aid if the student-athlete attends the school. If student-athlete does not attend, school is not obligated to pay.

[clenz]

The school doesn't have to offer a scholarship in the first place. Secondly, all the agreement is is a guarantee the school will give financial aid if the student-athlete attends the school. If student-athlete does not attend, school is not obligated to pay.
Kid doesn't have to accept if he doesn't plan on going there.

A school should have no obligation on a scholarship offer post signing day if a kid shows up on campus. The kid can still sign or not sign and he can still show up or not show up. The school should be able to tell the kid no. Especially since other kids (remember, there are other kids on a team...FBS has walk ons that could use the money and FCS has other kids that can be moved too) would do quite a bit for that money.

If you want to get rid of the LOI that's fine. The second you sign the financial aid agreement you're bound to that school - academically or athletically

[lionsrking2]

Kid doesn't have to accept if he doesn't plan on going there.

A school should have no obligation on a scholarship offer post signing day if a kid shows up on campus. The kid can still sign or not sign and he can still show up or not show up. The school should be able to tell the kid no. Especially since other kids (remember, there are other kids on a team...FBS has walk ons that could use the money and FCS has other kids that can be moved too) would do quite a bit for that money.

If you want to get rid of the LOI that's fine. The second you sign the financial aid agreement you're bound to that school - academically or athletically

We're not talking about bus boys or fry cooks. We're talking about student-athletes, with special skills, who are in demand. Of course a school could play hardball, but if they want a good player, they'll extend an offer and accept the player on his/her terms. There will be a taker for a good player I can promise you. Kids with limited ability and desperate, may not have the leverage, until it becomes accepted practice not to sign an LOI. All an LOI is is a form of a non-compete clause.

[bonarae]

Uh oh. The Ivy League should move to a D-III style (the ED2 in the blog post) system instead of an LOI.