Verbal commitments? Not big problem, can't be fixed, so move on

The National Association of Basketball Coaches board of directors converged on Kansas City and started meeting Tuesday evening. Early Wednesday, they were back at it, and depending on when you're reading these words they might still be locked in a room discussing, among other things, recruiting and how to handle the much-debated subject of verbal commitments.

There's a chance legislation could be launched.

Verbal commitments can cause headaches, but coaches like Bruce Weber are paid well to deal with such things. (Getty Images)

There's a chance guidelines could be put into place.

But if it's smart, the NABC will ...

Do nothing.

Not a thing.

Just leave it alone.

Because you can't fix it anyway.

"It is a gray area," acknowledged Jeff Jones, American University coach and NABC board of directors member, and he couldn't be more correct.

The subject of verbal commitments -- aka, when a prospect makes a non-binding declaration that he's attending a certain school prior to being allowed to sign a national letter of intent -- is indeed gray. Grayer than an elephant's back. Grayer than granite. Grayer than Richard Gere's hair. Grayer than David the songwriter, David the poet, David the mass murderer and David the snooker player. Combined.

Want to protect and police verbal commitments?

First, you have to define a verbal commitment, and good luck with that. You'd have an easier time getting Bill Clinton to define the word "is."

In fact, I'll go ahead and ask the question. When should a verbal commitment be recognized and respected by all? Is it when: