Gold Classification

[Sam]

Registered College Coaches attending 2008 ASA Gold Nationals:

Jamie Pinkerton Arkansas
Gidget Pambianchi Arkansas Tech University
Ray Loeser Arkansas Tech University
Glenn Moore Baylor
Glenn Moore Baylor
Doug Chance Butler Community College
Mark Ryal Carl Albert State College
Belinda Hendrix Chipola College
Jimmy Hendrix Chipola College
Tim Walton Florida
Margie Wright Fresno State
Robert L. Coolen Hawaii
Bob Coolen, Sr. Hawaii
Mary-Ellen Hall Houston Baptist University
Roger Willhite Houston Baptist University
Gayle Blevins Iowa
Tracy Bunge Kansas
Scott Whitlock Kennesaw State
Sandy Pearsall Louisville
Yvette Girouard LSU
Megan Smith LSU
natalie poole mcneese state university
andy lott mcneese state university
Mike Raynor Mercer University
Jay Miller Mississippi State
Lee Smith Mississippi Valley State Univ.
Kathy Rodolph New Mexico State
Cat Heifner New Mexico State
Deanna Gumpf Notre Dame
Kris Ganeff Notre Dame
Pam Fink Oklahoma Baptist University
Kirk Walker Oregon State University
John Conway Saint Louis University
Lisa Mize Santa Clara University
Paula Martinez Santa Clara University
Teresa Wilson Texas Tech University
John Bargfeldt Tulsa
Brie Galicinao UC Santa Barbara
Caitlin Benyi UC Santa Barbara
Kyla Holas Univ. of Houston
Kim Nesloney Univ. of Houston
Marla Townsend University of Alabama @ Birmin
Lucy Bass University of Alabama @ Birmin
David Kuhn University of Central Arkansas
Jennifer Binnie University of Central Arkansas
Michael and Stefni Loitef University of Louisiana - Lafa
Joy Webre University of Louisiana - Lafa
Laura Watten University of Maryland
Alissa Smith University of Maryland
Elaine Sortino University of Massachusetts
Windy Thees University of Memphis
Ashley Blanton University of Memphis
Leslie King University of Pennsylvania
Melissa Finley University of Pennsylvania
Melissa Finley University of Pennsylvnia
Brian Kolze University of the Pacific
Eileen Schmidt University of Virginia
Chandelle Schulte Wisconsin
Barbara Reinalda Yale University

[Blind Squirrel]

So who will be getting the scholarships that are not used on the kids playing for the 50 gold teams? Will college coaches save them in the hopes of getting a gold kid the next year or will they simply forfeit them?

John

[Sam]

So who will be getting the scholarships that are not used on the kids playing for the 50 gold teams? Will college coaches save them in the hopes of getting a gold kid the next year or will they simply forfeit them?

John

It will cause heavy recruiting at 16A and likely force ASA to change the pitching distance for 16A to 43'. After a couple of years, you'll see a plethora of college coaches at 14U Nationals....pressuring 14 year olds to make the biggest decisions of their lives.

18A serves no purpose. I think the Punishers won 18A Nationals not too long ago....they were an exceptional team that may have been able to qualify for Gold Nationals....their 18A Championship was looked upon in SoCal as being the equivalent of the school bully winning the "Beating Up Retards on the Playground" Championship. Six SoCals and nine NoCals at the National Tournament.

[NorCal LVer]

Colleges will be forced to look at the 18A group to fill that years void.

[Sam]

Colleges will be forced to look at the 18A group to fill that years void.

If they do, they will be looking at 18A vs. 18A....never be able to tell how really good the players are....or they will fill from the benches of Gold teams....for this year. In the future, it would all happen at 16A....or below.....

[Blind Squirrel]

Colleges will be forced to look at the 18A group to fill that years void.

If they do, they will be looking at 18A vs. 18A....never be able to tell how really good the players are....or they will fill from the benches of Gold teams....for this year. In the future, it would all happen at 16A....or below.....

I'm not so sure. Don't most colleges get commitments from kids during the kid's senior year? If so, the the coaches are looking to fill spots for later that same year. 16s would do nothing to address that need.

John

[3Bsnag]

Don't most colleges get commitments from kids during the kid's senior year?

Most? I don't know, but from what I see, that is too late for a lot of the majors.

My "knowledge" only comes from 3 coaches (2 Big 12, 1 ACC). They have been done with '09 for some time and are looking to tie up '10 soon. All 3 will peak at freshman, but say their big time radar is on 2010's and 2011's. Not one of them prefers looking at 14 or 15 year olds, just a sign of the times. If they don't, someone else will.

Other than CO/CA showcases, I consistently heard (from all sides) that 16 Nationals was the national stage to be on this year.

I wonder if someone is tracking early verbals vs position played vs institution. When I think of really early verbals, the same big schools come to mind. And usually the blue chip pitchers, shortstops, and to some extent, catchers.

I just don't view 18A the same way as you. I hope you are right though, there will be quite a few young ladies that will be stuck between that 16 and 18G gap.

[Demonboy]

Most college coaches I have talked to are looking at 10's & 11's. There are still some looking at 2009's but I don't know that they're the majority.

[Blind Squirrel]

I guess this is the basic premise behind my observations/assertions (all of which are based on anecdotal evidence with no statistical/study data as a basis):

The schools in the PAC-10, Big-10, SEC , Big-12 and some other big schools try to get verbals from kids before the kids have completed their junior year. For every one of such schools, there are probably 5 or 10 other colleges who don't routinely make firm, specific scholarship offers to kids prior to their senior year. I'm talking about real scholarship offers. Not expressions of interest. Not invitations to make an unofficial visit. Not "We would love to have you." Actions not words.

To relate all this back to the concern about the change in gold classification, consider this:
Every year, every school has some number of scholaships available, usually around 2. A rather small number of kids verbal to anywhere prior to the start of their junior year. Between that time and the completion of their junior year, the second level of kids verbal. Their numbers are certainly greater than the previous level of kids but do the majority verbal during this time? It seems pretty unlikely and is contrary to what I've seen here in SoCal. That leaves the majority of kids committing at some point after the completion of their junior year, to colleges making offers to add to their programs the next school year.

Now, anyne who doesn't believe coaches are flocking to certain 16U tournaments/showcases is an imbecile. Why 16U? My guess is that is the first filter for most coaches rather than the time they arrive at a final, prioritized list of potential recruits who they will try to get to verbal soon thereafter. Certainly some of the big boys are there to finalize their choices of kids to verbally offer to, but I suspect they are greatly outnumbered. Given the number of offers still being made to HS seniors, it seems to me limiting gold teams will simply mean coaches HAVE TO scout 18U kids unless they want to not use their available scholarships for that year. So what does reducing the number of gold teams do, relative to the kids and their college aspirations:

1. Top level, verbal before the start of their junior year kids: Absolutely no impact

2. 2nd level kids who are clearly very desired by college coaches: Absolutely no impact as they are likely good enough to play on one of the gold teams.

3. Next level of kids who currently play gold now but wouldn't in a system with limited gold teams: Only impact is that they may not be good enough or have some other problem making one of the gold teams. In that case, they will be seen by coaches in an 18U setting which, if they are good enough to play gold, should allow them to shine in the context of lesser players.

4. Next level of kids who aren't good enough to play gold now: No impact except they will now have to compete on the field with/against better players if/when gold teams are limited.

Any of the above could certainly be wrong. I have no interest in anything but portraying things as they are and likely to be, based on logic and common sense. Please correct me where I am wrong. I'm just not buying all the gloom and doom over limiting the number of gold teams, at least as it impacts kids. Personally, I don't see anything to be gained by limiting gold teams except to shut the elitists the Hell up. That would be the ones whining about the dilution of talent. If your kid is so damn great, get her on one of the elite gold teams that routinely play against other elite gold teams. Problem solved.

John

[NorCal LVer]

John,

Totally Agree!!

Thank you!