What gives more value when recruiting Topic

Is it more effective to offer 2 home visits or 1 campus visit
5/27/2016 8:31 PM
Recruiting Methods

Here is a quick reference guide for costs of recruit by distance (thanks to pureh21)
miles 10 200 200 360 360 1400 1400
Scouting Trip $150 190 265 300 530 660 700
Home Visit $300 340 415 450 745 875 1215
Campus Visit $800 825 1025 1050 1260 1445 2020
  • Here is a breakdown by hughesjr for cost/effort value
What is most effective based on distance:
0-360 HV CV ST Letter
370-1400 CV HV Ltr ST
1400+ Ltr CV HV ST

And effort/cost in a more detailed breakdown HERE
  • Here is a effort per recruit action compiled by TJ:
Phone call= 2
Letters =3
ST= 60
HV= 150
CV= 350
Scholarship= 250
Promised Start= 250
Promised minutes= 5 * minutes promised

And it takes about 400 "points" for a recruit to consider you.
5/27/2016 9:12 PM
My numbers are more in the ballpark than spot on. They are close but don't expect them to work perfectly.
5/28/2016 9:47 AM
Posted by kap the cub on 5/27/2016 8:31:00 PM (view original):
Is it more effective to offer 2 home visits or 1 campus visit
CV, for sure.
5/28/2016 9:48 AM
Yeah CV is more effective, but under 360 miles you can send [more than] 2 HVs per cost of a CV. There's many forums on more exact data but I usually simplify it and go by the 360 mile rule

https://www.whatifsports.com/forums/Posts.aspx?TopicID=441708&ThreadID=10807813#l_10807813
5/28/2016 10:39 AM
in the range 250-360 people differ on which is more cost effective - depending on your view of relative effect - is it 2.0? is it 2.5? dont know
5/29/2016 6:41 AM
What gives more value when recruiting Topic

Search Criteria

Terms of Use Customer Support Privacy Statement

© 1999-2024 WhatIfSports.com, Inc. All rights reserved. WhatIfSports is a trademark of WhatIfSports.com, Inc. SimLeague, SimMatchup and iSimNow are trademarks or registered trademarks of Electronic Arts, Inc. Used under license. The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.