It might be college football's most important and over-hyped day: the day recruiting classes are all but finalized and a fresh crop of players signs their letters of intent.
But past all the obnoxious hat-picking ceremonies and signing day madness, does the buildup really matter?
Probably not.
Maybe it is a reflection of the fans' overexuberance, but college football's obsession with rankings, stars and all the other trappings of recruiting has become, at the very least, troubling and, at worst, appalling.
There are few areas in sports that draw more adults to petulantly disparage young athletes anonymously. Online, one can quickly find instances where an ""upstanding young man"" suddenly turns into a ""thug,"" or a ""player who will never pass academically,"" all because he chose to attend another institution.
Fans pay real money to get inside information on the feelings of 16- and 17-year-olds toward different colleges. There really shouldn't be much joy in knowing that a defensive end from Tennessee enjoyed his campus visit or that a kid likes your school just a little more than all the others. For some there is, and that seems just a little bit wrong.
There is so much more to care about in this world, and yet people pour their time and energy into this.
There is some appeal of the unknown potential of new players, the same appeal of seeing Christmas presents and wondering exactly what is under the wrapping paper. Of course to complete the metaphor, people would be thinking about those gifts year-round and shelling out cash to lift and shake the boxes.
And it's all for a system that is not particularly accurate or predictive of future success.
This year's 24-scholarship class is ranked somewhere between 33rd and 86th in the country, and Wisconsin has not reeled in a top-25-ranked class in the last nine years. Of course those players filled squads that finished five of the last six years as top-25 teams, but that shouldn't be a big deal, right?
Look at Chris Borland, the Big Ten Freshman of the Year, whom coaches are very excited about. Scout.com gave him two stars out of five, and Rivals.com left him off their positional rankings. Judging by his impact, it is hard to see how he was the 13th-best player in the freshman class.
The history for the rankings inspires even less confidence. UW's lone four-star recruit in 2008, Tyler Westphal, has had nary an impact on the field. 2007's best, offensive tackle Josh Oglesby, was considered the top player at one of the most important offensive positions. He took two years to become a starter and has not blown anyone away.
Of the top two players from 2006, one just left the program (offensive lineman Jake Bscherer), while the other, Lance Kendricks, changed positions and only last season began having a consistent impact. The 2005 coup of top-rated defensive end Travis Beckum and linebacker Elijah Hodge was a mixed bag, as Beckum ended up moving to offense (and playing exceptionally) after struggling on defense while Hodge played poorly and got buried on the depth chart before finally leaving for Northern Iowa.
Even the starting quarterback, Scott Tolzien, was considered a throwaway recruit by many fans, but he somehow beat more sought-after competitors Dustin Sherer and Curt Phillips.
Just the last eight years of recruiting (when the attention on it has intensified) feature too many stories of strong classes and ""blue chip"" players who were busts or never came close to doing what the recruitniks claimed they would.
Bielema probably had the best sentiments, according to an Athletic Department liveblog.
""‘I'd rather be ranked at the end of the season than the beginning of the season,"" [Bielema] said: It's the same thing when looking at recruiting rankings.""
For the Wisconsin football team, that's all that should really matter.
Do you get excited for signing day? Let Ben know at breiner@wisc.edu.
