Loyalty in Baseball

Who Owes It? To Whom is it Owed?

I’ve read and heard a lot lately about loyalty in Baseball. “Kids/Players are not loyal to their teams.” “Coaches are not loyal to their schools or teams.” I’ve also heard it’s just about the money. So what is the driver behind the constant shuffle and these statements of loyalty? I believe there is more than just money behind it. It seems almost every article I read narrows the driver down to money. If that’s the case, then whose fault is it???

Most schools, especially in the power conferences, expect the coaches to win. For some the goals and expectations are almost unreachable year over year. As a result, the coaches are driven to a “win now” mentality, and player development falls to others, like smaller schools, the players themselves, or even Indy leagues. The pressure to “win now” drives a number of factors that impact loyalty, or at least the perception of loyalty.

With college recruiting for example, do the coaches owe the recruits any loyalty? We often see really large recruiting classes with last minute cuts prior to the Fall, and then more cuts at the end of Fall. Granted, the schools need to address the potential loss of students through transfer and the draft. This drives them to recruit more than they may potentially need, but it’s understandable. When “shoe-in” draft picks don’t happen, that spot doesn’t come open, meaning that someone else will be let go. Is that a loyalty issue? If these last minute cuts happen too often, then people will suspect that the coaches are knowingly over-recruiting and had no plans of retaining certain players. Recruits are promised the world. They commit, and then are let go right before they are supposed to report for Fall. What about the verbal promises made, and then reneged on? If the player then decommits, is he being less than loyal? Without knowing the driver behind the decisions, who is not being loyal?

So when you see a player enter the portal, it can mean a couple different things. Did the player feel he didn’t get enough playing time, and can’t compete at that level so he entered the portal? Did the coach tell him he should enter the portal, or was he quietly cut? Can you really pin it on loyalty without knowing the details? Maybe there were some backroom conversations, and it’s a money decision. If the school fires a coach, is it just about the wins? Did the school provide the coach with the resources to compete at the expected level? With the roster size reduction and the MLB taking fewer high schoolers than before, the competition for college spots has never been higher.

One can argue loyalty from many perspectives. The tragic story is when a player enters the transfer portal, and no one picks them up. Would he still have been able to play at his current school? If he developed, would he play later? There are certainly examples of players who had limited playing time as a freshman or sophomore and went on to very successful college and even professional careers. Sometimes baseball rewards patience and hard work versus instant gratification. Sometimes it’s not “loyalty,” it’s just poor decision-making or lack of understanding. The one free transfer rule and the 5 years to play 5 are steps in the right direction to calm some of the chaos. Can you fault those that are trying to do better for themselves? Would you go for the money?

NIL and paid players have certainly changed the look of college baseball. With their impact considered, is it really loyalty that is questionable? Baseball has become “corporate.” Similar to the quarterly profitability of a public company. Teams must win … now! Many are working for those wins at any cost. From the players’ perspective, they must know where they fall within the roster constraints. How far down the depth chart are you? What is your level of dedication to the team? What is your development window? Make sure you are in the right place for you!!

A lot to unpack here, but I’ll leave it with this . . . Coaches definitely held the upper hand in recruiting. It was a verbal commitment in both directions, but coaches could drop committed players without any short-term consequences. On the other hand, after a player committed, most recruiting from other schools ceased. Over time, the patterns could be recognized and players would scrutinize certain schools more closely before committing. As the pendulum swings, the transfer portal has at least provided some alternative to the players. Free transfers may have pushed it too far the other way, but only time will tell.

I really hope to see schools recruiting players that they WANT and plan to incorporate into their team, even if it means they need to develop them. I want to see players recognize and commit to those schools that develop and strive for team and player continuity. What will it look like if the MLB stops recruiting high schoolers? August first is fast approaching!