2015 New Commit - Nolan Ulizio | Page 4 | The Boneyard

2015 New Commit - Nolan Ulizio

Status
Not open for further replies.
I baked him a cake ;)
 

Attachments

  • cake.jpg
    cake.jpg
    54.5 KB · Views: 78
Last edited:
CTMike said:
Dude, it's Michigan.
Expand ...
Right...so when you give your "word" to someone...it's conditional? I suppose that's the world we live in today....more and more people doing it and thinking it's fine. Which in the end means...a promise doesn't mean anything. Michigan? A week ago that didn't so much either!
 
Seriously dude, it's recruiting. Means nothing until a LOL is in. Remember Doug Wiggins? He was committed to St. Johns. I really wanted the kid, bur best of luck to him. In year you'll hardly remember his name.
 
I know it's recruiting...especially today. Too bad there isn't a middle ground, kind of like a conditional commit. You're right about the LOI...that's the only thing that really carries any weight anymore. That said, it becomes pretty impressive when you consider how many of our verbals have been holding strong. I guess that's a credit to HCBD for recognizing and recruiting guys with good character....for the most part. ;)
 
Former HCRE stated to me that verbal commits are leaning towards the school and nothing is set into stone until the first Wednesday in Feb.
 
For those who care. Ulizio went from a "not rated" commit for us on ESPN to a 78 rating for Michigan. Would have made him our highest rated recruit according to Espn.

Good luck to the kid. Can't blame him. If we only lose one recruit I'll be happy coming off the year we had. Shows the coaches are doing their jobs on the recruiting trail. Looking forward to 2/4.
 
.-.
uconnbill said:
Former HCRE stated to me that verbal commits are leaning towards the school and nothing is set into stone until the first Wednesday in Feb.
Expand ...
Then they should just rename it. Why put on a charade? I suppose it could then cut both ways too. If a school finds a better prospect, then they could drop one of the current ones if they wanted to...it would be understood by all.
 
Verbal commitment means absolutely nothing in recruiting.

Sure, the vast majority end up coming because of the same reasons they verbaled in the first place, but until the LOI is signed it doesn't mean a thing.
 
So, the subject heading might have been a typed representation of a verbal commitment. Now, a reasonable edit might be Ex-verbal commitment or Past Commitment. Moving on ...
 
Stairmaster said:
I don't understand how people are upset. Nothing in recruiting means anything until the NLI is received. For those of you who don't follow CFB recruiting as a whole (outside of UCONN), you'd be shocked at how many flipped commits there are.
Expand ...

Exactly. This happens all over the country, and probably on a daily/weekly basis. That's why as much as it sucks, it's hard to be mad at him and it's useless being caught up in the "woe is me" mentality. The sky is not falling and it appears the vast majority of our recruiting class is still in tact roughly a week away from Signing Day. Kids aren't flipping because we're UConn. It happens to even the most elite P5 programs regularly.
 
.-.
2Infinity said:
Absolutely! As I understand it, the kid who had committed to Buffalo, committed to HC Quinn. He was then fired. At that point, the kid should have every opportunity to consider his options. In this case, there was no change with our HC. I consider the two situations to be totally different!
Expand ...


Fair enough.
 
There is an early signing period proposal on the table. I believe the proposal would allow for kids to sign their LOIs in December. Based on what we've seen from our coaching staff in terms of identifying top talent much quicker than other coaching staffs, this would certainly help us retain a few prospects from the circling vultures.

Funny how Ulizio's "rating" shot way up after his commitment to Michigan though, huh? Just further proof that rating systems are complete hogwash.

Bottomline - if Ulizio wasn't 100% committed to UCONN, then I don't want him to sign a LOI and take a scholly away from another kid who actually does want to be at UCONN. If we're going to turn this thing around, we're going to do it with kids who want to be Huskies and are ready to put in the work for the love of the school and program. All the best to Nolan. Time to move on to kids who want to be Huskies and restore our football program back to pre-Pasqualoni era levels.
 
Another thing to think about...this kid flipped to Michigan...yeah MICHIGAN. It's not like we lost him to Eastern Michigan or Central Michigan. No one here can blame the kid for wanting a shot at a program like Michigan. As I said before, I wish him well and time to move on folks.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Verbal commitment means absolutely nothing in recruiting.

Sure, the vast majority end up coming because of the same reasons they verbaled in the first place, but until the LOI is signed it doesn't mean a thing.
Expand ...

Yes, that is exactly right. There is no legal or regulatory obligation in place.

But, presumably, at the time verbal commitments are given, the coach/institution state their intention to hold a spot for that prospective recruit and that prospective recruit agrees to honor his verbal commitment in exchange for that spot. Now, if the parties agree that it's understood that the prospective recruit if offered by another institution will go there instead, I say fine. Both parties understand. But, if these recruits are telling programs yes I am committed to you and simply playing the game, then I think we are doing a dis-service to these kids. I really do.

Yes, I know it's Michigan. But, I give my word often in life and think long and hard about it. I'm not even saying I'm perfect, but at least I know the damn difference.

"Hey Coach, sorry man, but it's Michigan." No......that's not right.

btw, my point has absolutely nothing to do with whether UCONN lost out on a good football player. It's a much bigger issue than that.
 
@uconndogs You're reading too much into the semantics of "verbal commitment".

Think of it as "unofficial pending intent".

I don't think staying true to your word and eventually committing to an early non binding decision have anything to do with one another.

We're talking about a young man making the most important decision of his life and he gets a better opportunity - you're saying his unofficial word should hold greater significance?
 
uconndogs said:
btw, my point has absolutely nothing to do with whether UCONN lost out on a good football player. It's a much bigger issue than that.
Expand ...
I don't see it as some kind of big issue that's an indicator of the decline in society (if that's what you were getting at). On the job market (depending on the sector) it's really not uncommon to accept an offer and then drop it if a better one comes along. In some industries people will even change jobs a few weeks after the start date if they feel it's not a good fit for them. Yeah, it's good to teach young people that word is bond, etc. etc. but to say a verbal commitment rises to that ideal is a bit of an overstatement IMHO.
 
.-.
The commitment works both ways as far as I am concerned, but not to all coaches,u Unfortunately. Many times a coach will recruit over a commit and tat commit loses his place. This mostly happens on so called "big time teams".
 
ConnHuskBask said:
@uconndogs You're reading too much into the semantics of "verbal commitment".

Think of it as "unofficial pending intent".

I don't think staying true to your word and eventually committing to an early non binding decision have anything to do with one another.

We're talking about a young man making the most important decision of his life and he gets a better opportunity - you're saying his unofficial word should hold greater significance?
Expand ...

As I stated, it all depends on the understanding between the two parties (the potential recruit and the coach). If that handshake is "I'm committed to you" and "I'm holding a spot for you based on that commitment" with both parties saying it's a done deal, then I think taking another offer or pulling the schollie are using semantics.
 
uconndogs said:
As I stated, it all depends on the understanding between the two parties (the potential recruit and the coach). If that handshake is "I'm committed to you" and "I'm holding a spot for you based on that commitment" with both parties saying it's a done deal, then I think taking another offer or pulling the schollie are using semantics.
Expand ...

I think you have to look at recruiting (and job offers for that matter) in a vacuum.

In 5-10 years is this young man better served by keeping a verbal commitment with a football coach who BTW could leave at the drop of a hat or going to a place where he feels he can best succeed?

Same with a job offer - if something comes along with more money opportunity you have to take it for yourself or your family.

To me, my word is saying I'll be there for a friend or family member and following through whatever that may mean.

An organization/corporation gets my loyalty and word to the extent that I'll work hard when employed there - and nothing more than that.
 
junglehusky said:
Yeah, it's good to teach young people that word is bond, etc. etc. but to say a verbal commitment rises to that ideal is a bit of an overstatement IMHO.
Expand ...
ConnHuskBask said:
I think you have to look at recruiting (and job offers for that matter) in a vacuum.

In 5-10 years is this young man better served by keeping a verbal commitment with a football coach who BTW could leave at the drop of a hat or going to a place where he feels he can best succeed?

Same with a job offer - if something comes along with more money opportunity you have to take it for yourself or your family.

To me, my word is saying I'll be there for a friend or family member and following through whatever that may mean.

An organization/corporation gets my loyalty and word to the extent that I'll work hard when employed there - and nothing more than that.
Expand ...

But you are not giving your word to your employer (typically) that you will not entertain other offers. In fact, it's implied that that you have every right to do so. You are an "employee at will" with most employers. I don't see the job analogy as lining up.
 
You guys that follow this nonsense crack me up. Haven't the actual games been hard enough to stomach without getting all wrapped up in this nonsense? People following kids on twitter and the like. Just strikes me as a big waste of time. Start paying attention when they actually sign and take the field.
 
.-.
Jimmy Serrano said:
You guys that follow this nonsense crack me up. Haven't the actual games been hard enough to stomach without getting all wrapped up in this nonsense? People following kids on twitter and the like. Just strikes me as a big waste of time. Start paying attention when they actually sign and take the field.
Expand ...
I agree it is nonsense, but compare the number of posts on Ulizio versus the Diamond Stone thread on the MBB board... now that's a nonsense thread!
 
Jimmy Serrano said:
You guys that follow this nonsense crack me up. Haven't the actual games been hard enough to stomach without getting all wrapped up in this nonsense? People following kids on twitter and the like. Just strikes me as a big waste of time. Start paying attention when they actually sign and take the field.
Expand ...
And here you are following the nonsense...........Just say'n ;)
 
Personally I do hope that an early signing period is enacted as that will greatly help programs such as ours. Unfortunately, standard operating procedure in this sport has always been that the big boys will start looking very late in the game at under rated prospects. This is a large reason why there hasn't been an early signing period.

As far as this kid goes, he had the choice between:

Playing home games at the Big House vs playing home games at Rentschler Field.
Playing in the B1G vs playing in the American.
Playing for Harbaugh vs playing for Diaco.
Playing for Michigan vs playing for UConn

As much of a UConn fan as I am, I don't see how any reasonable person can look at the above and blast this kid for changing his mind.
 
Ffld city fan. It all depends on if he was recruited as a player or a filler.
 
uconndogs said:
As I stated, it all depends on the understanding between the two parties (the potential recruit and the coach). If that handshake is "I'm committed to you" and "I'm holding a spot for you based on that commitment" with both parties saying it's a done deal, then I think taking another offer or pulling the schollie are using semantics.
Expand ...

Are you upset with Diaco also? He has offers out to way more kids than he could ever take. Isn't it a bit dishonest to not have a real offer out there? I mean if the best of the bunch committed, he would take them over the 2 stars. Where is the integrity there? It's how it works in the end and unfortunately how the rules are set up. Until that changes, you can't fault either side for trying to be the best.
 
The kid made a decision and we'll all find out in 4-5 years if it was a smart one.

I'll spend that time supporting those who chose to be a University of Connecticut student and Football player.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,321
Messages
4,563,701
Members
10,458
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom