After hundreds of satellite camps were held all over the country, camp season is almost over. While Jim Harbaugh continued to make headlines, there were many schools that held or participated in camps in different regions.

What was the most notable takeaway from camp season on the whole?

Erik McKinney: Not all satellite camps are created equal. They are without question an overall positive for the under-recruited athlete, but it can be easy for a prospect to see a college logo on a flier and assume that the entire staff will be present and eager to toss out offers at the conclusion of the camp.

There is a significant difference between institutional and non-institutional camps in what the college coaches are allowed to do as far as recruiting, and there's also a significant difference between a head coach and multiple assistants being present compared to a single recruiting assistant. All camps serve as a revenue stream for somebody, and the differences often seemed glossed over and mostly unrecognized by recruits.

Jeremy Crabtree: Within a few weeks of the start of satellite camps, it became clear high school coaches across the country were concerned about the proliferation of the events, especially the non-institutional camps.

Most understand the importance of some satellite camps, but a lot of them were seeing their star players attend three or four a week, exposing them to injury or burnout weeks before the start of fall practices.

“I want to know what college coach would let next year’s starters go try to impress pro scouts before the season and risk injury trying to impress over and over,” Hutchinson (Kansas) High School coach Ryan Cornelsen said. “None of them would.”

Tom VanHaaren: There is a huge interest from prospects to get noticed and to get better. With the uproar from a few conferences trying to get camps banned, there sure were a lot of prospects who showed up to the camps. In New Jersey there were around 1,600 prospects at two camps in one day between the Paramus Catholic and Rutgers camps.

Prospects were able to get outstanding instruction from college coaches, and a ton of prospects were able to perform in person in front of coaches they may not have been able to without the camps.

Greg Ostendorf: There's a lack of regulation at these camps. We saw coaches taking pictures with recruits’ moms. We saw recruits showing up in street clothes just to see or interact with these coaches.

I like the idea of satellite camps. I think they benefit recruits, and I think they benefits some of the smaller schools who might be able to evaluate kids from outside their region. But the NCAA has to find a way to either limit these camps or better regulate them before next offseason.

Derek Tyson: There was a lack of big-time prospects at the camps I attended. While VanHaaren saw many prospects up in New Jersey, it was very different down south. I attended camps in Atlanta, Macon (Georgia), Columbia (South Carolina) and Jacksonville (Florida), and yet saw very few Power 5 prospects. The well-known players I did see at the camps such as Tony Gray (No. 53 in ESPN 300), A.J. Terrell (No. 105) and Jaden Hunter (No. 165) in Atlanta, Shaun Wade (No. 13) in Jacksonville or Richard LeCounte III (No. 11) in Macon – none of them participated at the camps and therefore weren’t even allowed to talk to coaches.

While these camps can certainly be beneficial for smaller programs, I generally did not see a need for bigger schools to attend satellite camps other than spreading a school's brand. With that being said, Harbaugh and Michigan have clearly benefited from the attention and the buzz he created, but how long will that last? Only time will tell.