SEC Recruiting

[cm husker]

What's sad is that $500 is a lot of money to these kids.

$500 is nothing in the scheme of picking a college. Even cars shouldn't be.

I wish there was a way to hold these boosters over the barrel for real money.

 

[DomiNUs]

A great read.

The Bag Man excuses himself to make a call outside, on his "other phone," to arrange delivery of $500 in cash to a visiting recruit. The player is rated No. 1 at his position nationally and on his way into town. We're sitting in a popular restaurant near campus almost a week before National Signing Day, talking about how to arrange cash payments for amateur athletes.

http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2014/4/10/5594348/college-football-bag-man-interview

That's very interesting. I have never seen that article before. I'm starting a petition right now to fire our "bag men." They obviously haven't been doing their jobs.

 

[huskerfan2000]

The payoffs are the payoffs... stuff like that happens a lot, unfortunately. That's part of the reason I'm for paying players, so there's less incentive for kids to take money out of necessity and so we have more moral authority when we crack down on players who do take benefits.

But to me, the real advantage that the SEC gains in recruiting is the games it plays with recruiting restrictions. I haven't seen a recent updated, but at one point, there was a detailed report showing that SEC teams signed upwards of 20% more kids over a 4 year period than the average team from any other P5 conference. When you have a mentality of "more grist for the mill," of course you're going to (a) reduce the impact of standard attrition, and (b) withhold from other schools that oversigned talent or disrupt the development of talent that may eventually transfer to a non-SEC school.

Seriously? you think paying players will make the slightest bit of difference? Hell no it won't, it will only add to what they get. Money will be there, the price will just go up.

EDIT: paying players will only solidify the thought process of taking money, and as such it will become worse! it is really no different than welfare, the more you give the more they take.

 

[Stumpy1]

The Gumps are notorious for putting players on medical hardship if they don't contribute to the team. This is how they have such rapid roster turnover. There was a player a couple years ago that brought this to light. He was told by Saban that he will be put on medical hardship and can still attend school but won't be apart of the team anymore. The player said he didn't want too and was told that he really has no choice if he wants to continue his education.

Anyone remember Jonathan Cook? He committed to us before switching to Bama. He was dismissed from the team for undisclosed reasons, some says from failed drug tests. His mother said that they received a call from Saban telling them that Jonathan is no longer on the team. She said that he had some off the field issues he was trying to figure out but it wasn't anything illegal. There was another player dismissed because of "grade issues" from when he was in high school. The kid enrolled early and was released before the season.

Those are just a couple of BS examples that happen in the SEC and it allows them to recruit more.

 

[cm husker]

The payoffs are the payoffs... stuff like that happens a lot, unfortunately. That's part of the reason I'm for paying players, so there's less incentive for kids to take money out of necessity and so we have more moral authority when we crack down on players who do take benefits.

But to me, the real advantage that the SEC gains in recruiting is the games it plays with recruiting restrictions. I haven't seen a recent updated, but at one point, there was a detailed report showing that SEC teams signed upwards of 20% more kids over a 4 year period than the average team from any other P5 conference. When you have a mentality of "more grist for the mill," of course you're going to (a) reduce the impact of standard attrition, and (b) withhold from other schools that oversigned talent or disrupt the development of talent that may eventually transfer to a non-SEC school.

Seriously? you think paying players will make the slightest bit of difference? Hell no it won't, it will only add to what they get. Money will be there, the price will just go up.

EDIT: paying players will only solidify the thought process of taking money, and as such it will become worse! it is really no different than welfare, the more you give the more they take.

Yes, seriously. There are kids who take money because it's the difference between being dead broke or having a little cash to go out (they can't take side jobs like other students or, as far as I know, loans - because their tuition and board is paid). I think taking some pressure off of that category of kid would take away their incentive to take payoffs.

And that's an odd comparison about welfare. It'd be just as easy to argue that th NCAA and universities are engaging in pseudo slave labor while lining their pockets.

 

[hskrpwr13]

I don't doubt all the stories above of paying, over-signing, abusing the med hardship rule, etc. What I find interesting though, is that kids/parents continually get sucked in.

Is it just that promise of quick money that far outweighs the possibility the kid will never make the team due to over-signing or he may be booted from team once next year's recruiting class is signed?

 

[RedDenver]

I don't doubt all the stories above of paying, over-signing, abusing the med hardship rule, etc. What I find interesting though, is that kids/parents continually get sucked in.

Is it just that promise of quick money that far outweighs the possibility the kid will never make the team due to over-signing or he may be booted from team once next year's recruiting class is signed?

A bird in the hand.

 

[Sargon]

Sure wish this thing would blow up this month into a huge scandal that pulled in several SEC schools. And ruin a recruiting year for some of them. In fact, I'd really like to see the SEC go the way of the South Western Conference. But it's doubtful that will happen.

:

I'm with you. If had buckets of unneeded cash I'd go give Wade a visit and see if he's worth funding. I'd rather take down texass bama and blow u however.

 

[Husker Psycho]

Seriously? you think paying players will make the slightest bit of difference? Hell no it won't, it will only add to what they get. Money will be there, the price will just go up.

EDIT: paying players will only solidify the thought process of taking money, and as such it will become worse! it is really no different than welfare, the more you give the more they take.

Thank you for your intelligence.

 

[GOAT]

All I'm gonna say is that I know a current commit for an SEC school who was given 2 brand new cars, a Camaro and a Challenger, one in his mother's name and one in his brother's name. Bottom line is when these recruiters come around down here and they see one school giving gifts and getting away with it, they all resort to the same tactics. There's much more I could tell but I'm biting my tongue.

And this is why the SEC is perceived as the best

No, that has nothing to do with it. Like it or not, illegal recruiting tactics or not, the SEC has the best players and the best teams.

 

[GOAT]

All I'm gonna say is that I know a current commit for an SEC school who was given 2 brand new cars, a Camaro and a Challenger, one in his mother's name and one in his brother's name. Bottom line is when these recruiters come around down here and they see one school giving gifts and getting away with it, they all resort to the same tactics. There's much more I could tell but I'm biting my tongue.

Can u at least say what school?

I know that LSU paid for a recruit to have ACL surgery with James Andrews.

 

[Stumpy1]

All I'm gonna say is that I know a current commit for an SEC school who was given 2 brand new cars, a Camaro and a Challenger, one in his mother's name and one in his brother's name. Bottom line is when these recruiters come around down here and they see one school giving gifts and getting away with it, they all resort to the same tactics. There's much more I could tell but I'm biting my tongue.

And this is why the SEC is perceived as the best

No, that has nothing to do with it. Like it or not, illegal recruiting tactics or not, the SEC has the best players and the best teams.

And guess how they get the best players, which in turn, makes them the best teams?

 

[cm husker]

All I'm gonna say is that I know a current commit for an SEC school who was given 2 brand new cars, a Camaro and a Challenger, one in his mother's name and one in his brother's name. Bottom line is when these recruiters come around down here and they see one school giving gifts and getting away with it, they all resort to the same tactics. There's much more I could tell but I'm biting my tongue.

And this is why the SEC is perceived as the best

No, that has nothing to do with it. Like it or not, illegal recruiting tactics or not, the SEC has the best players and the best teams.

I thought I read an article recently that the ACC atheletes have been consistently testing at the combine as well, and often better, than their SEC brethren. And that the p12 was not far behind.

 

[BigRedBuster]

All I'm gonna say is that I know a current commit for an SEC school who was given 2 brand new cars, a Camaro and a Challenger, one in his mother's name and one in his brother's name. Bottom line is when these recruiters come around down here and they see one school giving gifts and getting away with it, they all resort to the same tactics. There's much more I could tell but I'm biting my tongue.

And this is why the SEC is perceived as the best

No, that has nothing to do with it. Like it or not, illegal recruiting tactics or not, the SEC has the best players and the best teams.

And guess how they get the best players, which in turn, makes them the best teams?

Face palm.

 

[huskerfan2000]

The payoffs are the payoffs... stuff like that happens a lot, unfortunately. That's part of the reason I'm for paying players, so there's less incentive for kids to take money out of necessity and so we have more moral authority when we crack down on players who do take benefits.

But to me, the real advantage that the SEC gains in recruiting is the games it plays with recruiting restrictions. I haven't seen a recent updated, but at one point, there was a detailed report showing that SEC teams signed upwards of 20% more kids over a 4 year period than the average team from any other P5 conference. When you have a mentality of "more grist for the mill," of course you're going to (a) reduce the impact of standard attrition, and (b) withhold from other schools that oversigned talent or disrupt the development of talent that may eventually transfer to a non-SEC school.

Seriously? you think paying players will make the slightest bit of difference? Hell no it won't, it will only add to what they get. Money will be there, the price will just go up.

EDIT: paying players will only solidify the thought process of taking money, and as such it will become worse! it is really no different than welfare, the more you give the more they take.

Yes, seriously. There are kids who take money because it's the difference between being dead broke or having a little cash to go out (they can't take side jobs like other students or, as far as I know, loans - because their tuition and board is paid). I think taking some pressure off of that category of kid would take away their incentive to take payoffs.

And that's an odd comparison about welfare. It'd be just as easy to argue that th NCAA and universities are engaging in pseudo slave labor while lining their pockets.

Ok, maybe it was odd but your comparison is worse. Not one college player is required to go to any school. If you want to play ball, with the chance at make millions in the NFL you have to live by certain rules. Pretty simple if you ask me.

Paying players will not change a thing!