Administrators, coaches and football recruits long have agreed that an early signing period in college football was not needed and that the traditional signing day on the first Wednesday in February served the game well enough.
But over the past decade, the world of recruiting has changed dramatically. Coaches offer scholarships to 13- and 14-year-old prospects who have never played a down of varsity football. Power programs regularly accept commitments from players who've yet to finish their junior year in high school.
After numerous false starts, the Collegiate Commissioners Association is set to vote this week at its annual conference in Asheville, North Carolina, on a proposal that would officially bring an early signing period to college football for the first time.
ESPN's Mitch Sherman and Jeremy Crabtree examine how we got this point and what the implications of a change in policy would mean for recruiting.
Where do Pac-12 coaches stand on the issue? Below is a collection of responses from league coaches:
Gary Andersen, Oregon State
"I'd just like to see them allow kids to sign on the national junior college signing day in December. Everybody who wants to sign on that date can, and then have another one in February. In my opinion, that would be easy to do. It wouldn't take three years to change the process and do a bunch of things. It can be done today and it can save money. It can save time. It can relieve stress on kids, high school coaches and parents, assistant coaches and head coaches at every level of college football. It's muddy water and gets a lot clearer if you do it in December."
Sonny Dykes, California
"I think it takes pressure off of the kids and can help save money, from a recruiting standpoint, and time. To me, the way they're talking about doing it is a short-term solution. I think they need to take a look at the entire recruiting calendar. The recruiting calendar is constructed based on how people recruited 15 years ago where you sign these guys up and go out in May and find who you're going to recruit. That's not how it works anymore. You know who you're recruiting. You've known for a year. In my estimation, what they need to do is just take a look at the recruiting calendar and just start over. Maybe we're going to allow, since you know who you're going to recruit now, maybe we'll allow you a time to -- maybe the signing day will be later and maybe you can visit juniors and sign them the first week of May. No coaches are on the road during the football season. No coaches are on the road because you need to be worried about your team. When the season is over, you go recruiting. You used to have to go watch the players, but now the video and everybody has tape and the tape is easy. The whole thing has been constructed on a model 30 years ago, 20 years ago, 15 years ago. Whatever it is, it's an old model."
Todd Graham, Arizona State
Graham has supported the Pac-12's stance for an early signing period but not in August.
"I'm against August because that would be before they've even had an official visit. It's not even legal to take an official visit. If we want to move it to August, then let's let them take official visits in May and June after their school years are out.
"This is the most important decision of these kids' lives and they need the time to be able to do that right. I wouldn't be opposed to December, but I'm fine with where it's at. I'd rather see them do more things to give kids an advantage ... allow kids to take visits earlier. Some kids would like to visit these schools earlier, but just don't have the money. And some still commit before their senior season so it would be nice to be able to take an official visit before committing."
Mark Helfrich, Oregon
Helfrich has supported the Pac-12's stance for an early signing period but not in August.
"I'm in line with that, especially because of where we're at geographically.
"The one other thing we've knocked around is allowing official visits in June. Have a true camp experience, a true visit experience, let us pay for it. Then you could manipulate the signing day, but without doing that I wouldn't be in favor of [a signing day before the season]."
Mike MacIntyre, Colorado
"If you just look at kids who commit early, if they want to sign early and get it over with, you should let them. If you look at all the stuff at the end ... kids getting coerced at the end. I like the early signing day. My personal thing is it should be kind of like basketball is -- before their senior season starts. The problem is you would have to change the [recruiting] calendar a lot. To me, that's the best way to do it. December is good, but I think it should be earlier.
"Problem for me [with December signing day] is you have to bring kids in for official visits during the season and that's hard because a lot of times they're playing on Friday night and when they come in, you don't get to spend a lot of time with them, they don't get to know you.
"You have to really talk about changing the calendar. May and June maybe they can come visit. May would be like contact period off-campus and they would come and you could have a signing date, for me, like a Fourth of July dead period and sign after the Fourth of July."
David Shaw, Stanford
"I understand if it moves forward a little bit. I think if it goes too far forward -- a lot of people were talking about August -- you lose your argument that you're recruiting student-ahtletes because you have no senior year progress as far as academics are concerned. Once again, we're unique and just about everybody that we have an opportunity to recruit before we can send them an application we need to see some measure of senior grades. We need to see a fall test score and those aren't going to be in in time for a summer or August signing day. If these things ever get to governing bodies as far as how student-athletes are viewed, it's hard to say this was an academic decision. This was a coaching decision. This is what's best for coaches and you can't make a viable argument that this is what's best for student-athletes."