Hello Husker Fans! Welcome to the Big Ten!

[SuperBuckFan08]

Oversigning is a huge advantage, and seems completely unethical to me. They're making themselves into football mills, not institutions of education, with this practice. It's a tragedy because it screws a lot of kids who could have gone on to careers at other schools.

 

The biggest perpetrator of the superiority of the SEC is ESPN, who (shockingly! ) has a $2 billion contract with the SEC. It's very much in the best interest of ESPN to continue to pimp the SEC. It's a shame that they purport to be a sports journalism source, yet they are very clearly a biased source of information.

Amen, we've been ranting about this since the Big Ten started its own network. ESPN has NOT taken too kindly to that

[kchusker_chris]

Oversigning is a huge advantage, and seems completely unethical to me. They're making themselves into football mills, not institutions of education, with this practice. It's a tragedy because it screws a lot of kids who could have gone on to careers at other schools.

 

The biggest perpetrator of the superiority of the SEC is ESPN, who (shockingly! ) has a $2 billion contract with the SEC. It's very much in the best interest of ESPN to continue to pimp the SEC. It's a shame that they purport to be a sports journalism source, yet they are very clearly a biased source of information.

I don't know if it's a "huge" advantage or not. It's certainly morally wrong, but USC seems to usually undersign yet they've won a few NC's recently. Texas? Oklahoma? Oregon? Plenty of teams are successful without oversigning. To say that Auburn won because of it, or Alabama wins because of it is a pretty big stretch IMO. Does it provide an advantage? Yup. But doesn't the fact that Ohio State spendss 38 million on football operations when Nebraska only spends 21 provide an advantage too? Or that Texas and Florida have so much division 1 tallent within 200 miles of campus? Or that it takes a genius to get into Stanford, but any guy of the streets w/ a 6th grade education can go to Florida State? Or Oregon has a blank check signed by Knight for anything pertaining to athletics? How about California co-eds being hotter than Iowa's? There's an endless list of "advantages" out there. These aren't stockcars. We all have our disadvantages...but to say "we'd have 4 national championships in the last 5 years if we could oversign too" is pushing it a little IMO.

[knapplc]

You should read up on oversigning.

[kchusker_chris]

without even clicking it i'm sure that goes to oversigning.com. I've read through that site frequently. I certainly think oversigning is wrong, don't get me wrong. I just don't think it puts the other 110 Div 1 teams at such a big disadvantage that they can't win an NC, or that they would win so many more if they could. Do you think it's the difference between the SEC winning national championships and the Big10 not? Had Cam Newton not signed with Auburn - we would have had a non BCS school playing in the national championship game against a Pac10 school. Auburn didn't win an NC this year because of oversigning, and the Big10 wouldn't have won the last 5 if they were able to oversign. I'd like to see what Ohio State football looked like in 3 years if they had their budget cut to 20 million. Money plays more of a factor in these advantages than signing a few exra longshots. (but not many complain about that)

[knapplc]

If you've read up on the advantages oversigning gives a team and still don't believe it, nothing I say will convince you.

[Coqui]

Oversigning is a huge advantage, and seems completely unethical to me. They're making themselves into football mills, not institutions of education, with this practice. It's a tragedy because it screws a lot of kids who could have gone on to careers at other schools.

 

The biggest perpetrator of the superiority of the SEC is ESPN, who (shockingly! ) has a $2 billion contract with the SEC. It's very much in the best interest of ESPN to continue to pimp the SEC. It's a shame that they purport to be a sports journalism source, yet they are very clearly a biased source of information.

I don't know if it's a "huge" advantage or not. It's certainly morally wrong, but USC seems to usually undersign yet they've won a few NC's recently. Texas? Oklahoma? Oregon? Plenty of teams are successful without oversigning. To say that Auburn won because of it, or Alabama wins because of it is a pretty big stretch IMO. Does it provide an advantage? Yup. But doesn't the fact that Ohio State spendss 38 million on football operations when Nebraska only spends 21 provide an advantage too? Or that Texas and Florida have so much division 1 tallent within 200 miles of campus? Or that it takes a genius to get into Stanford, but any guy of the streets w/ a 6th grade education can go to Florida State? Or Oregon has a blank check signed by Knight for anything pertaining to athletics? How about California co-eds being hotter than Iowa's? There's an endless list of "advantages" out there. These aren't stockcars. We all have our disadvantages...but to say "we'd have 4 national championships in the last 5 years if we could oversign too" is pushing it a little IMO.

 

All the other advantages speak to getting the athlete there. But doesn't talk about releasing said athlete once someone else better comes around. All those other advantages keep those players around for their full scholarship. Making room for a better player doesn't happen in all those other cases.