*RANT* Oversigning *RANT*

[Danny Bateman]

It really just kind of makes me sick to read stories or see the stories on TV congratulating Saban on being such a world-beating great coach. I'll admit the dude is a pretty great coach. He's had one losing season for crying out loud. That in and of itself is impressive. But the way he's doing it with this Alabama team just sickens me. Not to mention he ticked a lot of poor Dolphin fans off by bolting for Alabama.

 

We've all seen the implications of oversigning this year for ourselves. LSU passed on one of our commits over and over again, only to finally enter the game late after deciding they were good enough off without him. Then they change their mind and threw an offer his way; he took it like a fish and a worm. Perhaps them stealing Debo was the straw that broke the camel's back for me... but oversigning really p*sses me off.

 

It leads to overprivelaged SEC teams who get a gigantic pass from the NCAA to pull this crap. You all saw the commercials on how the SEC has won the last 6 MNC's. There's a reason! There's an unequal distribution of high school talent to begin with... Teams in California, Texas, Florida, and the South all have an inherant advantage in recruiting to begin with. The NCAA exacerbates the problem by sitting around and doing nothing while the SEC teams do whatever the heck they want when it comes to recruiting. We also saw it last year in the crap Arkansas pulled to reel Tevin Mitchell away from us. Blatant violation, putting his name on a jersey on a visit, that just flies under the radar.

 

The game sickened me last night for two reasons: 1) It just flat out sucked and was a terribly boring and anticlimactic way to end the season. and more importantly, 2) While LSU and Alabama may have great coaches, they are head and shoulders above the rest of the teams in the nation because they have signed whoever the heck they want, as much as they want, and kicking the scraps who don't pan out to the curb. This is unethical for sure, and now it's starting to tick me off as a Husker fan because it's leading to a growing schism between the top teams and the rest of the pack. A divide that is the direct result of dirty recruiting.

 

I read a story about ESPN being a possible catalyst behind conference realignment (it stated they were more or less deciding what teams should go where) in order to benefit from the profit. This is interesting, and as a corollary, I think this effect might be part of the reason NCAA isn't even thinking about busting some skulls for the SEC's recruiting. It makes for good teams who garner ratings and earn cash, so who the hell cares?

 

I don't really have a direction for this thread... it IS a rant. But I felt it was appropriately placed in the Recruiting section since it's about oversigning. Do you think this problem is going to get any better? I know they've put a limit on the amount of signee's per class, but I wonder if that will help. I question the recruiting tactics of SEC teams in general, not just oversigning. What can we do as DONU, a team that's already located in a sparse recruiting region to begin with, to combat the dirty oversigning done by SEC and narrow the gap it's created in team talent?

 

/End rant. Thank you. Feel free to blow off some steam as well.

[huskerhill]

Somewhat similar situation back in the 90's... not even close to being unethical but most definitely provided a competitive advantage.

 

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1007647/index.htm

 

I guess if you're an SEC team and it apparently isn't against the rules, why wouldn't you do this? I know Georgia doesn't practice this in their recruiting (good for them) but that probably explains all of the championships they've played in recently...

[NUance]

^^ The partial qualifiers allowed in the 90s was a MUCH different situation than what the OP points out. A partial qualifier is a kid that only met one of the two entrance requirements, either a 2.0 GPA or a 900 SAT (or 21 ACT). Under prop 48 a team was allowed to let a kid come to college even though his scores were not quite up to par. The kid could not participate in athletics, and was given one year to meet the mandated entrance qualifications. In other words, schools could sign a kid even though he didn't qualify and give him a chance to qualify. The SEC is doing the opposite. They over-sign recruits. And then winnow down the class to the maximum allowable size based on whatever criteria they choose--which could be academics or could be based on the kid's on-the-field performance their senior season in high school. In other words the SEC teams mentioned in the OP are telling kids they can join the team, but then they yank the rug out from under their feet before signing day. So that's not really even close to a similar situation, is it?

[huskerhill]

^^ The partial qualifiers allowed in the 90s was a MUCH different situation than what the OP points out. A partial qualifier is a kid that only met one of the two entrance requirements, either a 2.0 GPA or a 900 SAT (or 21 ACT). Under prop 48 a team was allowed to let a kid come to college even though his scores were not quite up to par. The kid could not participate in athletics, and was given one year to meet the mandated entrance qualifications. In other words, schools could sign a kid even though he didn't qualify and give him a chance to qualify. The SEC is doing the opposite. They over-sign recruits. And then winnow down the class to the maximum allowable size based on whatever criteria they choose--which could be academics or could be based on the kid's on-the-field performance their senior season in high school. In other words the SEC teams mentioned in the OP are telling kids they can join the team, but then they yank the rug out from under their feet before signing day. So that's not really even close to a similar situation, is it?

 

As I said above, one is unethical while the other is not. I was trying to point out that one conference's ability to sign partial qualifiers while other conference's couldn't would also provide an unfair advantage similar to one conference's ability to essentially "cut" non performing players to open up scholarships while other conferences could not/would not. The unfair advantage is similar, not the way the advantage was obtained.

[Count 'Bility]

I'm asking questions here. I dont follow recruiting that much. I pay attention to detail of anything else in our program, but recruting I just cant get into. I just need someone to explain to me what exactly happens in this "oversigning" process that is going on. I've seen this term thrown out before and have read a few exerpts explaining but I still do not have a clear understanding of what exactly happens, but from what I read in the post by Nuance previous to this one, the extra recruits were not actually signed, but rather just commited, and then abandoned on signing day? But then again I also do not have a clear understanding of recruiting's basic rules and regs either. If someone could explain this to me great, but if you think I'm a lost hope, that's fine too. I do understand the the partial qualifier issue and have read into that in detail in not only a couple of Osborne's books, and I truly believe it was not as much of an advantage as what many outside our program want to claim it was. There were far more obvious reasons for our success that a few partial qualifiers. But also mentioned was how SEC teams "yank the rug" out from under a kid's feet on signing day to get the class back down to maximum. The way I'm reading this is that the school is not recruiting the player, but rather the players are recruiting the school. Another thing, if this is going on in the detail as some see, the long term affects on the schools actually doing it could become devastating in the eyes of "public perception". So many are worried about Bo's 2 minute tyraid every game affecting recruiting, what about high school stars not knowing if theyre actually going to be a part of the program when they committ? Like I said in another thread, current SEC dominance is cyclical just like anything else, and at some point in time someone is going to figure out how to cut down down the fence around that region and start tapping into that talent and equaling things back out a bit. And just like the spread and pistol, once one has success doing it, so will many others, and then the gravy train for the SEC is over.

[NUance]

^^ The partial qualifiers allowed in the 90s was a MUCH different situation than what the OP points out. A partial qualifier is a kid that only met one of the two entrance requirements, either a 2.0 GPA or a 900 SAT (or 21 ACT). Under prop 48 a team was allowed to let a kid come to college even though his scores were not quite up to par. The kid could not participate in athletics, and was given one year to meet the mandated entrance qualifications. In other words, schools could sign a kid even though he didn't qualify and give him a chance to qualify. The SEC is doing the opposite. They over-sign recruits. And then winnow down the class to the maximum allowable size based on whatever criteria they choose--which could be academics or could be based on the kid's on-the-field performance their senior season in high school. In other words the SEC teams mentioned in the OP are telling kids they can join the team, but then they yank the rug out from under their feet before signing day. So that's not really even close to a similar situation, is it?

 

As I said above, one is unethical while the other is not. I was trying to point out that one conference's ability to sign partial qualifiers while other conference's couldn't would also provide an unfair advantage similar to one conference's ability to essentially "cut" non performing players to open up scholarships while other conferences could not/would not. The unfair advantage is similar, not the way the advantage was obtained.

True enough. My only point is that Prop 48 provided an advantage to the students. While oversigning screws them over.

[PaulCrewe]

I'm asking questions here. I dont follow recruiting that much. I pay attention to detail of anything else in our program, but recruting I just cant get into. I just need someone to explain to me what exactly happens in this "oversigning" process that is going on. I've seen this term thrown out before and have read a few exerpts explaining but I still do not have a clear understanding of what exactly happens, but from what I read in the post by Nuance previous to this one, the extra recruits were not actually signed, but rather just commited, and then abandoned on signing day? But then again I also do not have a clear understanding of recruiting's basic rules and regs either. If someone could explain this to me great, but if you think I'm a lost hope, that's fine too. I do understand the the partial qualifier issue and have read into that in detail in not only a couple of Osborne's books, and I truly believe it was not as much of an advantage as what many outside our program want to claim it was. There were far more obvious reasons for our success that a few partial qualifiers. But also mentioned was how SEC teams "yank the rug" out from under a kid's feet on signing day to get the class back down to maximum. The way I'm reading this is that the school is not recruiting the player, but rather the players are recruiting the school. Another thing, if this is going on in the detail as some see, the long term affects on the schools actually doing it could become devastating in the eyes of "public perception". So many are worried about Bo's 2 minute tyraid every game affecting recruiting, what about high school stars not knowing if theyre actually going to be a part of the program when they committ? Like I said in another thread, current SEC dominance is cyclical just like anything else, and at some point in time someone is going to figure out how to cut down down the fence around that region and start tapping into that talent and equaling things back out a bit. And just like the spread and pistol, once one has success doing it, so will many others, and then the gravy train for the SEC is over.

The quickest and easiest way I'll try to explain the practice of oversigning is think of being cut from a team. There are so many spots for any given school to fill. 85, the max number of scholly athletes, minus the number of scholly players returning. What coaches will do is take more than whatever that number is and let them sign LOI's. One reason they do this to help protect against any academic casualties. Now say you have scholly players that aren't doing jack or contributing and look like they never will(ahem JT Kerr, Cruz Barret, etc) and not renew/pull their scholly and give it to said new recruit. The part that sucks and this has happened at LSU recently is said new recruit is getting ready to move in and go to college and the numbers don't add up and they are left outside looking in and looking for a new school/option.

 

This is why the practice has it's pros(you select your roster and dump failed recruits) and a lot more cons(kids getting screwed out of an education potentially). The B1G limits its teams to oversigning by 3, more or less an insurance against non-qualifers. The SEC takes this process to far worse extremes.

 

Hope that helped a little.

[NoLongerN]

I'm asking questions here. I dont follow recruiting that much. I pay attention to detail of anything else in our program, but recruting I just cant get into. I just need someone to explain to me what exactly happens in this "oversigning" process that is going on. I've seen this term thrown out before and have read a few exerpts explaining but I still do not have a clear understanding of what exactly happens, but from what I read in the post by Nuance previous to this one, the extra recruits were not actually signed, but rather just commited, and then abandoned on signing day? But then again I also do not have a clear understanding of recruiting's basic rules and regs either. If someone could explain this to me great, but if you think I'm a lost hope, that's fine too. I do understand the the partial qualifier issue and have read into that in detail in not only a couple of Osborne's books, and I truly believe it was not as much of an advantage as what many outside our program want to claim it was. There were far more obvious reasons for our success that a few partial qualifiers. But also mentioned was how SEC teams "yank the rug" out from under a kid's feet on signing day to get the class back down to maximum. The way I'm reading this is that the school is not recruiting the player, but rather the players are recruiting the school. Another thing, if this is going on in the detail as some see, the long term affects on the schools actually doing it could become devastating in the eyes of "public perception". So many are worried about Bo's 2 minute tyraid every game affecting recruiting, what about high school stars not knowing if theyre actually going to be a part of the program when they committ? Like I said in another thread, current SEC dominance is cyclical just like anything else, and at some point in time someone is going to figure out how to cut down down the fence around that region and start tapping into that talent and equaling things back out a bit. And just like the spread and pistol, once one has success doing it, so will many others, and then the gravy train for the SEC is over.

The quickest and easiest way I'll try to explain the practice of oversigning is think of being cut from a team. There are so many spots for any given school to fill. 85, the max number of scholly athletes, minus the number of scholly players returning. What coaches will do is take more than whatever that number is and let them sign LOI's. One reason they do this to help protect against any academic casualties. Now say you have scholly players that aren't doing jack or contributing and look like they never will(ahem JT Kerr, Cruz Barret, etc) and not renew/pull their scholly and give it to said new recruit. The part that sucks and this has happened at LSU recently is said new recruit is getting ready to move in and go to college and the numbers don't add up and they are left outside looking in and looking for a new school/option.

 

This is why the practice has it's pros(you select your roster and dump failed recruits) and a lot more cons(kids getting screwed out of an education potentially). The B1G limits its teams to oversigning by 3, more or less an insurance against non-qualifers. The SEC takes this process to far worse extremes.

 

Hope that helped a little.

 

Exactly ... and my point would be that since their are even additional exploitation and "rules" in the SEC that it is now time for the NCAA to step in and set the rules rather then each conference as it a conference like the SEC now holds an unfair advantage. One has to not only look at the past National Champions over the past 5 years but even the "average" teams in the SEC and how they dominate games. Essentially, with the 15 extra players they sign over the 85 limit, they essentially get a 15% advantage over the competition. If you want to factor in the 3 the B1G allows .... fine. My point would be that the SEC seems to exploit even their own rules to gain a bigger advantage. As another posted stated in another thread we were talking about this, basically, alot of the SEC schools get one additional recruiting cycle every 5-6 years with these additional players.

 

Lest I come across as a "complainer" ... I'm still of the belief that if we clean up our play on the field we can compete year in and out ... but as we have seen, when you are not playing solid football the superior athlete wins out ... just look at NU verses USC this bowl season as an example.

[jsneb83]

Come on guys, you know you all oversign in NCAA Football and cut the crappy players. Just think of it as these schools are doing it in real life.

[Treand3]

Don't look now but Alabama currently has 27 commitments.

[Stumpy1]

Don't look now but Alabama currently has 27 commitments.

And I believe they only have 17 schollies available...Another thing Bama does that is BS is that they force guys into medical schollies even if the said player isn't really hurt. Since Satan has been there, they have put 15 or 16 guys on medical schollies to free up ones to give to the new recruits. This is more then all the other SEC teams combined.

[Treand3]

Don't look now but Alabama currently has 27 commitments.

And I believe they only have 17 schollies available...Another thing Bama does that is BS is that they force guys into medical schollies even if the said player isn't really hurt. Since Satan has been there, they have put 15 or 16 guys on medical schollies to free up ones to give to the new recruits. This is more then all the other SEC teams combined.

 

I wasn't even sure what their supposed allotment was but Saban ought to be winning championships with this practice. Think his class next year will look different after the oversigning rules go into effect? We'll see...

[Atbone95]

Don't look now but Alabama currently has 27 commitments.

And I believe they only have 17 schollies available...Another thing Bama does that is BS is that they force guys into medical schollies even if the said player isn't really hurt. Since Satan has been there, they have put 15 or 16 guys on medical schollies to free up ones to give to the new recruits. This is more then all the other SEC teams combined.

 

I wasn't even sure what their supposed allotment was but Saban ought to be winning championships with this practice. Think his class next year will look different after the oversigning rules go into effect? We'll see...

New oversigning rules? Haven't heard of that... whats this?

[Treand3]

Don't look now but Alabama currently has 27 commitments.

And I believe they only have 17 schollies available...Another thing Bama does that is BS is that they force guys into medical schollies even if the said player isn't really hurt. Since Satan has been there, they have put 15 or 16 guys on medical schollies to free up ones to give to the new recruits. This is more then all the other SEC teams combined.

 

I wasn't even sure what their supposed allotment was but Saban ought to be winning championships with this practice. Think his class next year will look different after the oversigning rules go into effect? We'll see...

New oversigning rules? Haven't heard of that... whats this?

 

They are SEC mandated, and I'm not sure how much they'll change things, but read below.

 

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/42750/new-oversigning-rules-wont-ruin-sec

[Stumpy1]

Don't look now but Alabama currently has 27 commitments.

And I believe they only have 17 schollies available...Another thing Bama does that is BS is that they force guys into medical schollies even if the said player isn't really hurt. Since Satan has been there, they have put 15 or 16 guys on medical schollies to free up ones to give to the new recruits. This is more then all the other SEC teams combined.

 

I wasn't even sure what their supposed allotment was but Saban ought to be winning championships with this practice. Think his class next year will look different after the oversigning rules go into effect? We'll see...

New oversigning rules? Haven't heard of that... whats this?

They can only have a class of 25 and can not back count. Back counting is them getting a recruit that comes in before spring ball and can go against the previous years class instead of the year that they are recruiting.