Ohio State Highlights National Letter of Intent’s Coaching Changes Policy

I recently read about an Ohio State football recruit who signed a National Letter of Intent (NLI) with Ohio State, but asked for, and was granted, his release.  Other players who orally committed to Ohio State have also changed their minds.  None of this comes as a surprise considering the NCAA investigation concerning allegations of improper benefits during Jim Tressel’s tenure as head coach.  However, these stories serve as a reminder about a clause in the NLI that could restrict the ability of Ohio State recruits to change course and attend another school.

The NLI specifically contemplates student-athletes requesting releases from their NLIs on the grounds of a coaching change:

Coaching Changes.  I understand I have signed this NLI with the institution and not for a particular sport or coach.  If a coach leaves the institution or the sports program (e.g., not retained, resigns), I remain bound by the provisions of this NLI.  I understand it is not uncommon for a coach to leave his or her coaching position.

The rationale for this rule is that student-athletes should choose a university, not a coach.  Of course, this is a practical fiction.  How many times have we heard football players, including Terrelle Pryor, refer to their head coach as a father figure?  And how many times has a player transferred because his skills do not fit a new coach’s system (i.e. Ryan Mallett)?

There has been no indication that Ohio State will refuse to release its recruits from their NLIs.  But this shouldn’t even be an issue.  Why should a recruit be required to seek permission to change his commitment to Ohio State?  The program, without Jim Tressel and facing an NCAA investigation, is not the same program to which the recruits committed.  There is uncertainty surrounding Luke Fickell and whether he will be the long-term coach at the university.  NCAA sanctions are likely.  So why does Ohio State still have the ability to control these recruits? 

The question of whether the NLI has a place in collegiate athletics can be left for another day.  But the clause regarding coaching changes should be eliminated.

For more on  the NLI, see the following posts:

Connecticut Sports Recruiting: National Letter of Intent Basics

The Final Word on the National Letter of Intent

Signing Day Brings National Letter of Intent (NLI) into Focus

Talk to My Lawyer: 3 Situations Requiring Counsel in Collegiate Athletics

CTSportsLaw Mailbox: Is the National Letter of Intent Legally Enforceable?

Should Memphis Recruits Be Allowed to Follow Calipari?

National Signing Day: Beware of the National Letter of Intent

Jagodzinski Controversy Overshadowed Plight of Recruits

Comments

  1. Awesome blog Dan Fitzgerald

    Really love your writing style.

  2. Beneficial web blog Dan Fitzgerald

    Awesome blog Dan Fitzgerald

    Guy I take delight in your blog post. If I could generate myself a blog comparable to this, I would be as blissful as a speckled puppy dog.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: