Another article on the subject of football camps versus combines (Insider subs.) . As usual author bias and interest plays a huge role in the perspective. This one is by Tom Luginbill of ESPN’s Scouts, Inc. They don’t sponsor or presumably get to attend the combines. Can you guess which he thinks are better for the kids?

However, if a prospect can afford the cost of the camp, he should go that route. If a prospect has a few programs he really likes and is interested in playing for, the value of being instructed one-on-one by the position coach at that institution and other guest coaches can provide for outstanding exposure and possible opportunities down the road.
…
The bottom line is that many times combine combine results seem to be marketed to the public and fans as being an indicator of a player’s ability to perform in game conditions. However, when scouting and grading prospects for our rankings, we rarely — if ever — use combine results as a significant basis for a report. If a player performs well at a combine — or, on the other hand, performs poorly — what we see of him in game conditions will always take precedence.

No mention that the combines are sponsored by rivals in the market for recruiting information, and that these combines provide additional resources in making, maintaining and keeping contact with the recruits and their high school coaches. A competitive edge in the marketplace for Rivals.com and Scout.com over ESPN Scouts, Inc.

Now, to be fair, Luginbill does admit the cost of going to a camp is a big factor for a lot of kids and they are useful for both coaches and the kids. He even concedes that students from rural or less known high schools often benefit from the exposure of going to a combine.

However, marginal-to-good prospects who have not received the necessary exposure have absolutely nothing to lose and everything to gain by attending one or more combines in order to be seen and then later evaluated on film.

Regardless, the best way to get recruited is to get as much film out to as many schools as possible, then follow up with each program on a regular basis. There is no substitute for proof of how an individual plays the game.
…
College coaches, if nothing else, have been helped by the mass influx of accessible information on potential prospects nationwide that many of these combines help provide. That is a good thing, especially for the unknown or under-the-radar prospects who before all of this recruiting hysteria might have gone the Division I-AA route but now get seen or heard about enough for the big boys to take notice.

All in all, if combines are marketed correctly, do not make promises they can’t keep and most importantly always, always keep the student-athletes’ best interest as priority No. 1, it is a win-win situation for all involved.

I think the combines will continue and if the recruiting sites are smart they can turn it into an additional revenue stream. There is no reason not to tape every part of the combine. It seems they do that to some extent since some of the video is offered as clips to show what a particular recruit does on their sites.

They can package it as a full DVD of the combine and sell it to the coaches. Neatly getting around the rule of prohibiting coaches from attending the combine; providing the additional exposure for the recruits who might need it; additional revenue stream for the recruiting sites; and still providing the kids with an incentive to attend combines with the promise that coaches from other programs will see them.

It just seems so logical and reasonable.