the danger, as previously stated, is once a player 'commits' the other coaches move on. its really tough to convince those coaches to look again and near impossible if they are set.

this is why i am confused by the rush of players to commit early. a lot can change in a year and even more in 3 or 5 (with the schools coaching staff and/or philosophy).

I don't know what age the kids of all of the people that see "danger" and "risk" are, but my kid is right in that age group where kids are committing all the time. He isn't worried about it, they aren't worried about it, why are you worried about it? It's become so commonplace that nobody cares any more.

The kids my kid's age and younger have grown up in a hockey generation where there is zero loyalty among coaches and organizations. Used to be, if you wanted to join a team, you had to be a LOT better than the current player you'd be replacing. Now, you can be perceived as 1% better, and the spot is yours.

Everyone's a free agent, every year. Kids with enough talent to get verbals know that there's another coach out there waiting to take them.

"...a hockey generation where there is zero loyalty among coaches and organizations."

Truest statement there is. And many parents worry about moving on to a different team and they don't understand little Jimmy can be (will be) replaced in a heartbeat

Is there a news item on this anywhere?

That's why I love it to see how freshmen in high school are "committing" to a college. Until they can actually sign an NLI, they can "commit" to whatever they want. But it isn't worth the paper it's printed on. The coaches can move on to someone else at any time.

where did i say worried? i said confused. and here is why: what advantage is gained by the player by doing it (we are talking about players committing early, not coaches). all that happens is the player is closing doors. what a player is really saying is all other colleges are out.

big program coaches have little time to convince them to change AND no doubt there could be blow back from the original school staff. wouldn't it benefit the player by keeping all options open, hearing all offers, especially since THEY HAVE NONE: not even the college the player wants to attend.

what D1 coach wants a player that 'can't make up their mind' (committing, decommitting, recommitting). the common question by college coaches is 'are they coachable'. my experience is if they hearing anything but yes, they move on to the next player.

While I have no doubt this is common among most schools, I am surprised an Ivy League school would break it's commitment to a student-athlete. Are there any other examples of an Ivy breaking a commitment?

"...any other examples" oh sure, but 6 at once is a bit strange other than when there is a coaching change

where has this been reported?

Your comment has some validity and some inaccuracies. Once a player is verbally committed he isnt taken off boards and coaches do move on but absolutely keep files on players that are committed to other schools in case they decommit or something changes. Like it or not teams are built 4+ years in advanced and scholarships are slotted except in the Ivy when that doesnt matter.

Well said