Share This Page

Penn State gets 3 verbal commitments

| Sunday, Dec. 9, 2012, 5:46 p.m.

A busy weekend hosting recruits translated into Penn State securing three more verbal commitments for its 2013 football class.

Harrisburg-area linebacker Zayd Issah, who had de-committed from Penn State in the aftermath of the NCAA sanctions levied against the program in July, pledged to sign with the Nittany Lions. So did Alabama linebacker Jonathan Walton and New Jersey defensive back Anthony Smith.

The 6-foot-3, 210-pound Issah was the most heavily recruited of the three players.

The Central Dauphin product, plus Walton and Smith, who is at Valley Forge Military Academy, committed after making official visits to Penn State over the weekend.

Penn State has 16 verbal commitments, and a handful of those are expected to enroll in January. Among them is tight end Adam Breneman, one of the Nittany Lions' top recruits, and running back Richy Anderson, whose father starred for Penn State in the early 1990s.

Breneman and quarterback Christian Hackenberg, who also is considered a blue-chip prospect, were among the recruits who visited this week.

They attended Penn State's 78-70 win over Army in a men's basketball game, and players from the 2012 football team signed autographs before tip-off, with lines snaking around the concourse at Bryce Jordan Center. The players, along with coach Bill O'Brien, were honored at halftime.

Penn State is limited in recruiting because of scholarship reductions, and O'Brien is close to the limit that he is allowed to sign in early February.

Penn State is allowed to sign 15 recruits on national signing day, though it has some flexibility because of early enrollees.

Scott Brown is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at sbrown@tribweb.com.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.