Division I college athletes have extraordinary athletic careers to play at the level they are today. They are among the best in the country in their respective sports. But the journeys they've taken to get to where they are may vary differently depending on the sport they play. The recruitment process, which occurs annually, is not without significant criticism from all sides. An interesting aspect of this phenomenon is that it varies greatly from sport to sport, and the results of this lack of uniformity can have a significant impact on students, who the process affects academically, how they advance as players, and the pressure to succeed , experiment at different moments in their school career. Two sports that operate at almost polar ends of the spectrum are lacrosse and soccer. In lacrosse, there are fewer rules that coaches must abide by in recruiting. Football has significantly more stringent rules for communication between coaches and recruits, and the result of this difference creates a much more economically efficient recruiting system than lacrosse, with its weaker rules. That said, the NCAA has control over this system and it would be best to increase the rules for lacrosse and all other sports to make the recruiting process better for all parties involved. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay Although lacrosse and college football are different in terms of revenue, attendance, and many other popularity factors, they are fundamentally a collegiate sport governed by NCAA rules. Both have similar goals for national success and making a name for the university. Success in these industries will allow them to build their legacy and increase their already substantial salaries. Recruiting is an essential step in building and sustaining a successful college athletics program. As stated in the Magnusen, Mondello, Kim, and Ferris cases, successful recruiting over a period of time, other things being equal, can lead to a sustained competitive advantage over other programs (688). For this reason, it is essential that college coaches maximize their use of scholarships and their available recruiting time in order to bring in the best recruiting class possible. The recruiting goals are the same for football, lacrosse and soccer. any other varsity sport. But the processes for selecting top recruits are very different for football and lacrosse. In football, most players typically wait until at least their sophomore year to commit to school or sign national letters of intent. But top players often wait until the end of the recruiting process, National Signing Day, to commit to a school. This delay in selecting a school can signal their talent and allow them to see if they can be offered more scholarships or better offers (Bricker & Hanson, 972-981). In lacrosse, the process works almost the opposite. Instead of waiting until the last possible day, it has become increasingly common in recent years for young players perceived to be the best to make verbal commitments to schools before they have reached their third year. Sometimes this commitment occurs before the kids have played a single high school game (Preston). These processes are clearly very different, which raises the question of what leads to this significant difference in recruiting cultures. There aren't many clear differences between the two sports. They are both sportsteam practiced with specialized positions, and although they are in different seasons, they should not be expected to have a significant impact. Lacrosse players tend to play club lacrosse during the summer, while football players only play full contact in the high school season, although it will be argued that this difference is not something that affects the recruiting process but rather occurs as a result of it. The only discernible difference is the NCAA rules governing the recruiting process. In football, coaches are not allowed to officially contact players until their senior year. In lacrosse, and almost every other sport besides basketball, the rules are much more flexible. Coaches are allowed much more contact with players before their senior year, as it is player-initiated (NCAA Recruiting Chart). The NCAA fails to publicize the reason, although one can speculate that it has to do with money. Enforcing a more stringent set of rules is more costly for the NCAA, and it may not want to spend this money on a sport that generates no revenue. As with any type of recruiting process, the NCAA Division 1 Lacrosse journey is not without significant information asymmetries. An information asymmetry occurs when one party has more information about something than the other. These asymmetries can benefit some while harming others. They tend to benefit less experienced players who are able to fool recruiters and are detrimental to experienced players who may have difficulty showing recruiters their skills. These asymmetries are notable in the recruiting process where coaches and recruiters are unable to identify the real skills and potential of possible recruits. The importance of successful recruiting is very clear, and as a result, coaches must be willing to expend significant amounts of time and money to find and acquire the best recruits available. The recruiting process for college athletes can often be modeled as a game reporting process. The player has inside information that college teams don't have. There are the “good guys” who are among the most talented and hardworking in their graduating year, which makes them destined for success, and there are also the “bad guys” who are not among the best, but can try to achieve statistics and make yourself appear among the best so you can receive the benefit of a college education for a full or partial scholarship. Sports recruiting, however, is an imperfect version of signaling, as no player or coach can be sure of being successful, whether due to injuries, team clashes, loss of desire, or many other factors. This is only furthered when the recruited players are so far from when they will actually start playing their college sport. These different processes affect economic reporting in different ways, indirectly as a result of the different nature of revenues that sports create at the collegiate level (The Equity in Athletics…). How players report is partly a result of when they want to be hired if they consider themselves an excellent recruit. The best recruits in football will wait until the last possible day to maximize the number of scholarship offers they receive and to make sure they know everything they can about the school, as well as the other players who may be in their class. They may wait to draw media attention to their decision to attend a particular school to try to influence their playing time and future career prospects. The wait of the players ofaccepting any offers signals their ability as they are willing to allow coaches to delve deeper into their talent. The “bad guys” will be afraid that they will not stand up to this further scrutiny and, as time goes by, will be willing to accept any offer they may have rather than that of a high school (Bricker & Hanson 972-981). .In lacrosse, the process is very different. Weak communication rules lead to an arms race where, because coaches have access to players at such young ages, they continue to try to lure top talent to their teams with scholarship offers at ever younger ages. It's not optimal for these young, immature players to have to make a life decision before they can even drive and buy ice cream, but it's also bad for coaches and teams since they are betting instead on players who are far from when they will actually play for the college team. John's Hopkins coach Dave Petramala seems to say it best: “Something has to change. And I will tell you that we are more guilty of this than anyone else. To stay relevant and be successful at the elite level of Division I lacrosse, we've had to do the things we have to do to be successful and get those players. But at some point we have to take a step back and say this is not the best thing for these kids. This is not the best thing for our program, deciding what a ninth or 10th grader will be like seven or eight years from when they are a senior in college. " (Preston). Even if coaches don't want to recruit the way they currently recruit, it's an indication that the current system is flawed. It's a problem that leads to inefficiencies and suboptimal outcomes for all parties involved (Detweiler ) Modeling where the problem lies and where it can be solved, a perfect information extensive form game has been created. See Appendix a for the game diagram, along with the necessary notations and definitions and not many concrete numbers it is impossible to say whether they will be successful in their career as a college player or not. There is another variable, risk, which is different for each player depending on the time left and his characteristics as a recruiting player,. the best team still normally gets the first chance at the best prospects. Although a team realizes that working to get a commitment from a young player is riskier, it will do so if it believes the risk is worth the possible chance of him becoming a college player. successful. This can be found via backward induction, assuming that the smaller team (UMBC) believes that getting a commitment from a young player is worth the risk. They would do this under the assumption that they would otherwise get the player considered the inferior player. The model explains why under the current set of rules this early recruitment occurs. The effect this has on players is significant and the costs incurred by being part of this recruiting model, both quantifiable and non-quantifiable, are significant. Therefore, players must play and market themselves in a way that creates the strongest signals about their talent early on and before schools have exhausted their scholarships and moved on to the next, youngest recruiting class. What can be found through this game is that the optimal choice that allows teams to maximize their profit while minimizing risk is for the NCAA to promulgate rules governing the contacts and commitments of potential players. This would be more beneficial for all parties as they could have more knowledge of the recruits before offering them a grantstudy or a place in the team. The only party that could benefit from this current model are smaller schools that could see players fall by the wayside or benefit from schools that don't want to extend offers to players so early and incur so much risk. The football recruiting model is pretty simple, especially at a young age. All a player is expected to do is provide quantifiable numbers, both on and off the pitch, that can be stored in a database and collated for later purposes (gobigrecruiting.com). Lacrosse coaches may search for players, but expect them to want to be searched for and make a significant effort to ensure that this is the case. Since most college lacrosse and high school lacrosse seasons coincide, it is often the summers that prove crucial for prospective athletes. Due to the lack of resources like rivals.com that coaches have access to, they rely on others to perform expensive initial player analysis. Camps like Jake Reed's Nike Blue Chip and Showtime Lacrosse National Recruiting Spotlight. These camps are exclusive, invitation-only camps where camp administrators try to determine the best players in the country to gather together with top college coaches for scrimmages and drills. Admission to these camps along with travel and hotels can easily exceed $1000 (Feil). But it doesn't end here. Many players need highlight videos to gain admission to these camps, and videos made by professionals can easily number in the hundreds, much more likely to get the attention of those who need them - coaches and camp employees . Football players also need to make videos, but they won't be necessary until later in high school when coaches are really looking for players (NCSAsports.org). In addition to potential camps, top lacrosse players are expected to play on summer club teams, especially when playing high schools in non-hotbed areas. These are local all-star teams that travel throughout the region and across the nation to play in tournaments against stiff competition. These are tournaments where coaches have the opportunity to see players play against teams they are more familiar with and as a result can get a better sense of their true talent as players. These club teams are time-consuming and expensive, too: they can easily exceed $5,000 for the summer in travel, fees, equipment and coaching (Feil). These teams can give coaches a better idea of ​​the player's talent, but it's still a long way from that. For all of these signs, committed players must continue to play in the offseason at this level to show the coaches they have committed to that they are maintaining the skills necessary for success at the next level. These are a lot of things lacrosse hopefuls have to do to impress college coaches, but it's still very different than football recruiting (so...you want...). Recruits in football do not have contact football in the offseason, but must still report their ability to coaches. They have the advantage of not having to do much to impress coaches early in their high school careers rather than posting accredited objective athletic statistics such as 40-yard dash time, vertical jump height, 20-yard shuffle time, and the power launch distance. Websites like rivals.com will compile these statistics and provide them to coaches and passionate fans (Bricker & Hanson 975). As they get older they should upload highlight videos,similar to those of lacrosse players, but save money in years when they are not needed for football players. Instead of playing for club teams and summer camps, coaches often watch high school games when they come of age. This is a much more effective method because players can be seen playing in the environment they are most familiar with, with their classmates and coaches they know well. A football player with the necessary talents is very likely to acquire a scholarship for little or no money, and lacrosse players are far from having this opportunity. To some extent it is fueled by the revenue generated by sports, but the NCAA's change in communication rules could reverse the process and save players time, money and stress as young high school athletes (gobigrecruiting.com). Given the looser rules in lacrosse recruiting, coaches are able to learn more about recruits at a younger age and are also able to act early by securing a verbal commitment. Football coaches do not have direct access to players until the end of their high school careers and, as a result, the act of recruiting top players does not occur until later in high school. Although football coaches are not allowed to contact players until they become seniors, coaches have often followed players throughout their high school careers. Being able to follow a player and track his progress as he adapts to a team and subsequently establishes himself as a leader can provide much greater insight into the player and his character, all of which are important in predicting his success in the near future .level. Lacrosse coaches who are looking to gain the upper hand in recruiting will look at players at a young age, and if they are deemed worthy, they may be offered the opportunity to make a verbal commitment to a scholarship through conversations with the parents of the player. They do this to prevent other coaches from trying to hit the player and to avoid missing opportunities. Players feel undue pressure to accept these offers if they come from a reputable school because these offers can come and go in the blink of an eye (Corwin). Players have to fight to go to the college that might be best academically or professionally with those that offer them scholarships. Sometimes the impending scholarship pushes them to accept before they have the opportunity to receive a scholarship at the school they might actually want to attend, and that might be the best thing for their future. It is economically inefficient, but schools use the fear that a scholarship might be lost to convince players to accept it (Dumond, Lynch, and Platania 67-72). When a coach offers a recruit a position at such a young age, the coach is engaging in risky behavior. The player has a lot of time to grow and develop both as a player and as a person. It can be difficult to predict what type of person and player they will be when you do it four years in advance. Beyond the information asymmetries that exist in the process overall, this element of injury risk creates substantial inefficiency. When a scholarship is offered, even if it is a verbal commitment, it is rarely withdrawn due to the negative publicity it would create. This also applies in the event of accidents. Whenever the value of the limited number of scholarships is not used optimally, an inefficiency is created (Corwin). This early recruitment process.