Not really I don't think. Here are some of the key issues.

My understanding is the Letter of Intent--the formal offer--states specifically that it can't be accepted until National Signing Day. And generally any contract offer can be revoked prior to acceptance.

I believe NCAA rules require scholarships to be awarded through the LOI process.

One could argue that an oral contract is an oral contract, and if the recruit accepts the contract orally before revocation happens, there is some legal duty to pay for his scholarship even if it runs afoul of NCAA rules. I'd guess that when they offer a player, coaches tell a player that the full terms of the offer will be contained in a forthcoming letter of intent--even if they cant actually send it to them for four years or so. If that's the case, then it's really just an offer to make an offer in the future, and that can't be accepted.

If a coach doesn't do that, though, it would be an interesting case if a kid accepted an oral offer, got hurt, got all offers stripped, tried to enforce the accepted offer. If being a football player was the premise of the offer, the school may be able to rescind the oral contract through the defense of impossibility. They didn't offer the kid a scholarship to simply be an ordinary student. (Arguably, they could require him to be "on the team," which is not something they would want to do anyway in any capacity that eats at the 85-man limit.) There's also the question of what a school would be entitled to fund. Four years? One year?

One could argue it's reasonable to look to the standard LOI terms as what a recruit in the circumstances would interpret the scholarship offer to mean. That would be one year. But if you're doing that, you should also import all the restrictions on written offer and acceptance that

But minors can enforce contracts. People just can't enforce contracts against minors unless the minor ratifies the contract when he reaches the age of majority.