# CBS sports take on oversigning



## Madsnooker (Aug 9, 2010)

From CBS Sports:

Bad guys utilize over-signing, and it has to stop

LSU football coach Les Miles is a bad guy -- literally, a subspecies of human being -- but make no mistake about this: I'm not calling him a cheater. Miles is a bad guy, but he's a bad guy with the official approval of the NCAA. 

So I guess I'm calling the NCAA a bad guy as well. But that fits, seeing how the NCAA won't let college prospects eat a cheeseburger under certain conditions -- but will let Isiah Thomas be on the New York Knicks' payroll as a consultant while also coaching the Florida International basketball team. The NCAA is made up of a lot of people, men and women, who are smart and kind and classy -- but as a whole, the NCAA is full of crap. 

Which brings me back to Les Miles, who's so full of crap he needs a full-body enema. A bad guy, I'm telling you, and in a minute I'll tell you why. And when I'm done, you'll agree with me. 

But don't get smug over there, fans of Miami or Ole Miss or Alabama. Your coach is a bad guy, too. Randy Shannon? Honest as he can be, but a bad guy. Houston Nutt? Not sure how honest he is. Positive he's despicable. Nick Saban? He follows the NCAA rulebook to a 'T,' yet is two evolutionary stages below a lizard. 

All of them have run players off their team, and out of school, because the players were guilty of, well, nothing. The players were academically sound. They were solid citizens. But they were the odd man out after their coach -- Miles or Saban, Nutt or Shannon -- signed too many players and had to go all grim reaper on someone. 

At LSU, Les Miles went grim reaper this year on three different someones -- none more appallingly than Elliott Porter. Porter is a freshman offensive lineman from Waggaman, La., who signed with LSU in February, qualified academically, reported to summer school in June and started taking classes. After two months as a member of the LSU football family, Porter was summoned last week from his dorm room to Les Miles' office to hear that he wasn't part of the family anymore. Sorry, son. You're out. The NCAA allows a team to add 25 scholarship freshmen, and LSU had gone over that limit. Someone had to go, and that someone was Elliott Porter. 

Miles is getting good at this. In March, when he first started to suspect that he had signed too many players -- he intentionally went over the 25-signee limit, assuming several would fail to qualify -- Miles took away the scholarship of linebacker Houston Bates, who went to Illinois. Last month, still needing to whittle down to get his overall roster to the NCAA-allowed maximum of 85 scholarship players, Miles cut redshirt freshman quarterback Chris Garrett. That slash of his scythe was especially galling, seeing how one year earlier Miles had talked Garrett out of his oral commitment to Mississippi State. Last week Garrett, after being screwed out of two SEC schools by Les Miles, transferred to Northwestern State. I don't know what NCAA division that school is in. Not even sure what state it's in. 

All I know for sure is this: Les Miles is a bad guy. 

So is Houston Nutt. He's the worst serial offender of this trend known as over-signing. Sounds almost harmless, doesn't it? Over-signing? The "solution" also has a nice little sound to it: a grayshirt. A grayshirt, technically, is a player who doesn't get a scholarship for whatever reason, but has an agreement with the coaching staff that if he stays on campus for a semester, or even a year, he will get his scholarship eventually. Sounds civil, doesn't it? Never mind that the player was promised a scholarship and then he turned down other schools -- and other scholarships -- to sign with a team that, oops, didn't have a scholarship for him after all. 

Nutt's the worst. The NCAA allows 25 scholarship freshmen to report in the fall, but Nutt found a way around that. He'd sign well over 25, and then figure out which losers to cut loose. Two years ago he signed 37 recruits, binging on high school kids like a drunk binges on beer, and that was enough. The SEC passed what is known in coaching circles as "The Houston Nutt Rule," limiting its schools to 28 signees. That's a start, but it's still not good enough. Bad men like Les Miles and Nick Saban will binge by signing those 28 players, then purge the excess. 

Saban has had to get rid of people every year he's been at Alabama, worst of all in 2008 when he signed 32 players -- again, the NCAA allows only 25 to report on scholarship -- and was saved, if you want to call it that, when some of his players were arrested or injured or run off the team by Saban himself. Last year Saban grayshirted three freshmen. This year he limited himself to only one, tight end Harrison Jones. For that, Saban deserves applause. Just like you'd applaud a seventh-grade bully who beat up three little kids yesterday but cut back to one bleeding first-grader today. 

At Miami, meanwhile, Randy Shannon added two sensational late signees -- two of the best 15 recruits in the country, defensive back Latwan Anderson of Glenville, Ohio, and offensive tackle Seantrel Henderson of St. Paul, Minn. -- but found himself over the 85-player limit. So he cut senior defensive end Steven Wesley, who had redshirted as a freshman at the coaching staff's request and then had his fifth-year senior season taken away ... just because. 

Because "The U" added Anderson and Henderson. Because Shannon couldn't make the numbers work without getting creative with his scalpel and removing Steven Wesley like a benign tumor. 

This has to stop. 

The rest of the country has adopted the SEC's "Houston Nutt Rule" limiting teams to 28 signed players, but that's still three too many if only 25 scholarship players are allowed to report to campus -- and if the solution to the dilemma is what happened to Elliott Porter. 

In his dorm room. On campus. Lifting weights and taking classes. Called into Les Miles' office and told to go home. 

It's indefensible, and it ought to be illegal. Next time it happens, I don't want to call Les Miles a bad man. 

I want to call him a cheater.


----------



## Hogtown (Aug 9, 2010)

A "gray shirt" at UF is not what is described by the post. At UF a gray shirt is you come to school in January rather than September.  Thus, the scholarship counts towards the following year.


----------



## Blue Iron (Aug 9, 2010)

Blah Blah Blah


----------



## irishleprechaun (Aug 9, 2010)

The NCAA needs to man up and lay out the rules.  Don't blame individuals who are working within the current rule structures.


----------



## irishleprechaun (Aug 9, 2010)

Blue Iron said:


> Blah Blah Blah



  Quote of the week from the sleep deprived


----------



## Blue Iron (Aug 9, 2010)

irishleprechaun said:


> Quote of the week from the sleep deprived


 

 Brother if you only knew. On the way to get something for lunch the day after she was born a dude from Switzerland that COULDN'T speak English side swiped me and then today the day after we got home the blower motor on my A/C unit went out. Its been an amazing week with little sleep and lots of trouble.


----------



## AlabamaExile (Aug 9, 2010)

I honestly do not understand the uproar about oversigning, as long as the coach is upfront with the player about the fact that he may be grayshirted.  Due to the vagaries of student academics and overall attrition in the program, it seems that a coach would be foolish not to oversign players if his conference allows it.

If I were a prospective student athlete that really liked a program, I think that I would be willing to take the risk and sign with them knowing that I might have to take a grayshirt, rather than settling for a program that I really do not like as much.  

Honestly, I don't see any conceptual difference between grayshirting an athlete and waitlisting a student who wants to get into a top-notch academic school.   At least the grayshirted athlete knows he will eventually receive a scholarship.  A student who is waitlisted has a good chance of never being admitted.

I'm sure someone will come along and tell me why I am wrong, but that's the way I see it, as long as it is done in an aboveboard manner (see the Harrison Jones situation at Alabama).  It is a different situation entirely if the athlete is hit with the grayshirt at the last minute without any knowledge that it might be coming.


----------



## chadair (Aug 9, 2010)

I have a buddy who's kid is goin threw this with UGA baseball at the moment.


----------



## tjl1388 (Aug 9, 2010)

Madsnooker said:


> At Miami, meanwhile, Randy Shannon added two sensational late signees -- two of the best 15 recruits in the country, defensive back Latwan Anderson of Glenville, Ohio, and offensive tackle Seantrel Henderson of St. Paul, Minn. -- but found himself over the 85-player limit. So he cut senior defensive end Steven Wesley, who had redshirted as a freshman at the coaching staff's request and then had his fifth-year senior season taken away ... just because.
> 
> Because "The U" added Anderson and Henderson. Because Shannon couldn't make the numbers work without getting creative with his scalpel and removing Steven Wesley like a benign tumor.



Blatant lie.

Steven Wesley missed well over double the classes required by team rules and even though he was kicked off the football team he was allowed (if he so chose) to continue his education, free of charge, at the University of Miami.    I'm sure we could have found a better player to "cut" than a guy that was on the 2 deep at D. End.


----------



## Madsnooker (Aug 9, 2010)

AlabamaExile said:


> I honestly do not understand the uproar about oversigning, as long as the coach is upfront with the player about the fact that he may be grayshirted.  Due to the vagaries of student academics and overall attrition in the program, it seems that a coach would be foolish not to oversign players if his conference allows it.
> 
> If I were a prospective student athlete that really liked a program, I think that I would be willing to take the risk and sign with them knowing that I might have to take a grayshirt, rather than settling for a program that I really do not like as much.
> 
> ...



So are you saying you do have a problem with oversigning, but only if the player is told at the last minute? 

I agree if all players are told that up front. But you and I both know, there is no way these coaches are telling their potential recriuts, OR THEIR PARENTS, that they want Johnny to come play for them but they are going to oversign and if all the recruits make the grades and no one leaves, somebody will lose their scolly and best case will get a gray shirt and we will see how next year plays out.

Even in the sec it's only practiced by a handfull of coaches. If it were not a big deal, than all the coaches in the sec (where oversigning is unfortunately still allowed) would do it. All of them do not. Wonder why that is.


----------



## Madsnooker (Aug 9, 2010)

tjl1388 said:


> Blatant lie.
> 
> Steven Wesley missed well over double the classes required by team rules and even though he was kicked off the football team he was allowed (if he so chose) to continue his education, free of charge, at the University of Miami.    I'm sure we could have found a better player to "cut" than a guy that was on the 2 deep at D. End.



If it is, I'm sure the writer at CBS sports will be informed about his misinformation. 

Still doesn't change the issue.


----------



## ACguy (Aug 9, 2010)

Is there a NCAA rule against oversigning ?


----------



## AlabamaExile (Aug 9, 2010)

Madsnooker said:


> So are you saying you do have a problem with oversigning, but only if the player is told at the last minute?



As long as the athlete is told up front that it is a possiblity, I don't have a problem with it.  



Madsnooker said:


> I agree if all players are told that up front. But you and I both know, there is no way these coaches are telling their potential recriuts, OR THEIR PARENTS, that they want Johnny to come play for them but they are going to oversign and if all the recruits make the grades and no one leaves, somebody will lose their scolly and best case will get a gray shirt and we will see how next year plays out.



I think it is quite clear that at least some schools are letting the students and parents know about it up front.

_Alabama informed Harrison Jones before he signed that a grayshirt was a possibility, but he didn't have a lot of options when Alabama asked him to do it at the last minute.

He couldn't become a walk-on and stay on the team that way because he was a recruited student-athlete. He couldn't become a redshirt and stay on the team that way because he would count against the 25/85 scholarship numbers, which wouldn't solve Alabama's problem. 

Jones is fortunate that he has an older brother on the team and a family that's able to provide him a place to live. He also was awarded an academic scholarship to Alabama some time ago, and the family's checking into whether he can use it to pay for his fall-semester tuition. 

If not, the family will cover it. 

"Harrison wishes he were out there, but he wants to be supportive of Barrett and of the whole team," Leslie Jones said. "We don't feel like we were treated unfairly at all, and they explained everything. 

"Harrison will work really hard this fall so he'll be ready when his time comes."_​
Birmingham News Article



Madsnooker said:


> Even in the sec it's only practiced by a handfull of coaches. If it were not a big deal, than all the coaches in the sec (where oversigning is unfortunately still allowed) would do it. All of them do not. Wonder why that is.



Maybe the other coaches should take advantage of it, as long as everything is made clear at the beginning of the process.  

Again, I am not saying this is an optimal situation from anyone's perspective, but as long as all parties know that it could be in the cards, I don't see a reason for the uproar about the practice.


----------



## rhbama3 (Aug 9, 2010)

At the end of deadline day, as long as there are 85 on the team and 25 signed freshmen, the NCAA is good with it.
Saban plays the juggling game every year, weighing the extra signee's against graduation, transfers, injuries, academic ineligibility, etc. and yes, i've held my breath a time or two wondering how it would shake out.
Like him or not, he does what he has to do to achieve the team he wants within the rules.


----------



## tjl1388 (Aug 9, 2010)

Madsnooker said:


> If it is, I'm sure the writer at CBS sports will be informed about his misinformation.
> 
> Still doesn't change the issue.



I agree. I think the school should have to honor the scholarship even if it's not an athletic one.


----------



## DSGB (Aug 10, 2010)

AlabamaExile said:


> As long as the athlete is told up front that it is a possiblity, I don't have a problem with it.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That doesn't seem to be the case here from what I'm reading.

No, it's not against the rules, but I don't agree with it. If you offer someone a scholarship, be prepared to honor that.


----------



## Madsnooker (Aug 11, 2010)

From oversigning.com

Most Common Arguing Points

1. The SEC banned oversigning when it created the Houston Nutt rule and set the limit to 28 signees per recruiting class, oversigning is no longer an issue.

Wrong.  The SEC did not ban oversigning with the Houston Nutt rule; it simply put a cap on the number of players that can be signed at 28.  Obviously, only 25 can be assigned to a single class per NCAA rules, which allows them to either back count 3 recruits to the previous year if they didn't take a full 25 the previous year or they can greyshirt 3 recruits and have them delay their enrollment until the following January and count towards the next year.  The problem is that 28 x 4 = 112 and you can only have 85 on a roster at a time.  The SEC rule lacks the supplemental rule of requiring coaches to prove that they have room for every signee they take at the time they accept a signed letter of intent that binds the player to the school and prevents them from going elsewhere until the school releases them.  This is the fundamental problem with oversigning -- coaches are binding players to their schools before they truly know if they have room for them or not.  If they knew that they would have room then we wouldn't have to wait until the last day before fall camp to see who is being cut.  

In the Big 10 conference, coaches are encouraged to establish their recruiting budget (number of openings for new signees) ahead of National Signing Day and stay within those limits; Big 10 coaches are allowed to sign up to 28 players to a single class, but they are required to petition the Big 10 office and prove that they have room for the 3 extra players and that signing the 3 extra players will not results in the removal of anyone currently on the roster with eligibility remaining.  They are also not allowed to accept a signed letter of intent for numbers 26, 27, and 28 until they receive permission from the Big 10 office and it is our understanding that the Big 10 office reviews the roster in question to make sure that there is room for those players before giving the coaches permission to accept those LOI.  And it is also our understanding that this is not the case with the SEC.

Prior to the Huston Nutt rule, teams in the SEC as a collective group averaged signing 29 recruits per year, which is off the charts high.  The new rule drops that number by 1.  For the conference with the biggest problem of oversigning, setting the limit to 28 helps, but it doesn't come close to solving the problem, and we saw that play out this year with LSU and Alabama who clearly oversigned their rosters and had to work until the last day before fall camp in order to get down to the 85 number.  LSU ended up removing/releasing 9 players between signing day and fall camp and Alabama 10.


2. There is no law or rule against oversigning so therefore no one is doing anything wrong. 
There is no law against adultery either, doesn't mean that it is not wrong.  Stupid argument and as irresponsible as Les Miles saying that his only obligation is to get his number down to 25 every year. 



3. Oversigning gives more people a shot at a scholarship - if you take it away you are robbing kids of an opportunity to get an education.

This might be the most laughable of all the arguments in favor of oversigning.  First of all, we live in a society and a country where we are blessed with opportunity, and if there is someone who is driven enough to want to get an education they can get an education, without having to be a football star.  There are federal grant programs, student loan programs, academic scholarship programs, and a ton of companies that offer tuition reimbursement programs.  Anyone with enough physical ability to play football could go work at Walmart, McDonald's, or a number of other places and get their education partially paid for and take out student loans or a pell grant for the rest.  

When you oversign your roster that means that players have to leave in order to get the new players in.  There are only 85 scholarships that can be given out each year and very few coaches waste them.  As we explained earlier, there are two models of signing recruits, oversigning and undersigning.  In the undersigning model the "leftover" scholarships (usually 1 or 2, sometimes maybe more) are given to deserving walk-on players who have earned a scholarship through hard work both on and off the field.  In the oversigning model, the same amount of scholarships are given out by a single school, but instead of signing within your budget and giving the leftovers to the walk-ons, coaches pushout  guys on the roster with eligibility remaining and bring in new, often times more talented players with more potential.  At the end of the day, the same number of players are being educated (85), but with the oversigning you have to shove out players and interrupt their education in order to educate someone else.  

The reason we say this is the most laughable argument is because the people that make this argument are clearly more concerned about losing the oversigning advantage than they are about educating young people.  This is nothing more than a feeble attempt to tug at the heartstrings of parents and policy makers, and the people that make this argument about oversigning enabling more kids to get an education are all about protecting oversigning and the clear advantages it has produced; they are worried about losing out a potential future star recruit, nothing more.  College football is a system where future stars are the lifeblood of the program because kids will only be around for 4-5 years; it is becoming more important to focus on the new incoming stars than it is developing the more senior players because by the time they develop they are gone.



4. Scholarships are 1-Year Renewable Contracts; we can cut whoever we want to cut and we are not doing anything wrong.

That is correct, scholarships are 1-year renewable contracts.  These contracts are set to be automatically renewed unless the coaching staff files paperwork to stop the renewal process. This was not always the case with scholarships, as up until 1973 scholarships were 4 year scholarships, not 1 year renewable agreements.

Basically, coaches want it both ways.  They want to be able to cut guys that are not living up to their expectations or to make room for someone new that has come along that has more promise, but they don't want the recruits to be able to leave on their own (hence the one-way binding letter of intent agreement) and they don't want other coaches to recruit kids away from their program (hence the rule that requires players to sit out a year if they transfer).  Sounds real fair.  It is our opinion that these changes are lockstep with the increase in coaching salaries and the revenue generated by the sport.  
The people that argue that scholarships are a one-year renewable contract and nothing is wrong are basically agreeing that the coaches should have all of the power to treat players like pieces of meat for their own personal financial gain.  We don't agree. These coaches are paid millions of dollars, the least they can do is not abuse loopholes like oversigning and exploit kids in the process.  If a coach is good enough he should be able to win without having to oversign players. 



5. You don't know what you are talking about, coaches know ahead of time which players are going to transfer and that is why they oversign.

We got this argument with regards to Star Jackson.  The argument was that Saban knew that Jackson was going to transfer and that's why he signed Sims.  Our position is that if Saban (or any other coach in this situation) knew that Jackson was going to transfer, then why in the world was he out there competing for a roster spot in the Spring game?  If his replacement or another guy was signed to his scholarship and his transfer was a foregone conclusion, then why was he out there working so hard for a spot on the depth chart?  It just doesn't add up.  The truth of the matter is that these coaches are signing a handful of extra players because they know they have some wiggle room and they always have the upper hand in that they can simply elect to not renew a scholarship or in Les Miles' case just tell a kid there isn't room and he can greyshirt.  That is a problem, but it is not a problem that will be solved without legislation because regardless of how much Les Miles screws a kid over (Elliott Porter) there will always be more players that want to come to LSU then he has room for and there will always be the allure of coming to a division 1 school in hopes of making it to the NFL and making MILLIONS of dollars.  This will almost always override any reservations or concerns about getting screwed over during the recruiting process, therefore more legislation is needed to prevent these coaches from exploiting the oversigning loophole.  

Those are probably the 5 most common arguments that we encounter here on the site in our conversations elsewhere on the topic.  It should be noted that almost always these arguments come from people who are fans of teams that oversign.  Very seldom, maybe only a couple of times, have we heard any of these arguments come from fans of teams that don't oversign.  That in and of itself is pretty telling.  Just look at the comments here on our site and you can count the number of comments on one or two hands that advocate oversigning and are not fans or supporters of a school or conference that oversigns.  

Update: We left out one other very common arguing point, apologies.


6. Oversigning doesn't create a competitive advantage so what's the big deal. 
This couldn't be any further from the truth, especially within the last several years.  Over the last several years the ability for coaches to evaluate players has decreased; the NCAA continues to decrease the amount of contact coaches can have with players (mainly out of fear of recruiting violations) which is making it hard for them to evaluate talent.  In addition, the NCAA continues to place more and more restrictions on the amount of time coaches can spend with players during spring and fall training camps and during the off season.  The  net result is college football has become less about developing talent and more about mining for the next "sure thing" 5 star recruit.  

When you oversign you have access to more opportunities to find that "sure thing" whether it be from landing a 5 star recruit or taking a chance on a borderline guy who turns out to be a stud.  It's a numbers game and obviously, given that most of the top tier schools can attract top tier talent, the more of it that you can go through to find the ones you really want the better you will be. 

Nick Saban and Les Miles have used oversigning as the backbone of building National Championship teams over the last decade.  If you look at the chart below and look at the number of players signed by Saban (who had the highest average) and Tressel (who had the lowest average), in the years that Saban was in college football he signed roughly 193 recruits; Tressel signed roughly 142 in those same years.  That is a difference of 51 recruiting opportunities over the same period of time.  Any change there might be a couple more good players in that list of 51?  If the difference were 5-10 I don't think we could point at this being an issue, but 51?

Some people will say that this doesn't add up because if you look at Huston Nutt and how many he has signed he should be the greatest coach of all time.  Our response is that oversigning is masking just how bad of a coach he really is and that we could only imagine how bad his teams would be if he weren't running through players trying to find stud players like McFadden.  Oversigning makes average to below average coaches look pretty good and average to above average coaches great or National Champions.


http://oversigning.com/testing/index.php/2010/08/08/most-common-arguing-points/


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 11, 2010)

51 over ten years?... 5 or 6 players _per year_? poor lil ol OSU...
As to Star Jackson? what an idiotic argument,..."why did Star work so hard in spring?"....maybe to get multiple offers from other institutions of his choice? i.e. "showcase his talent"

BAMA was coming off of scholarship reductions when Saban arrived,...the team was depleted, he rebuilt it...quicker than most of you would have liked,...the author clearly states that Saban operates with in the letter of the law...deal with it.


----------



## Madsnooker (Aug 11, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> 51 over ten years?... 5 or 6 players _per year_? poor lil ol OSU...
> As to Star Jackson? what an idiotic argument,..."why did Star work so hard in spring?"....maybe to get multiple offers from other institutions of his choice? i.e. "showcase his talent"
> 
> BAMA was coming off of scholarship reductions when Saban arrived,...the team was depleted, he rebuilt it...quicker than most of you would have liked,...the author clearly states that Saban operates with in the letter of the law...deal with it.



I don't need to deal with anything.

This has nothing to do with OSU. I didn't write this or post it because it mentioned OSU. I just think it is real issue in college football. I have a son that before too long could possibly be in a position to play college sports and would hate to see him get a scholarship and then have it taken away as many "DOCUMENTED" players have, because their coach oversigned. 

If you want to keep arguing it from a fan perspective becuase you happen to be a fan of one of the teams mentioned that's fine. That's a real shocker!! 

You can keep giving excuses all day long for your team and it doesn't change the fact, it's wrong to give a person a scholarship and then take it away just because you have someone else that now needs it. You can sugar coat it all you want, but the bottom line is, all these other teams that don't oversign get by just fine and they have all the same issues (injuries, eligibility, etc) as Bama does. Penn St can only sign 12 players this year because they can't and won't oversign. Saying this deosn't hurt Penn St at all is rediculous.

I would hate to have my son dealt with the way Les did recently and what Saban did with Harrison Jones(just one of many examples).

This was posted on another site by a Bama fan that sees the big picture. "I am a Bama fan and I don't like the fact that Harrison Jones had to take a gray shirt in order to let a later qualifier, Blake Sims, have his roster spot.  

Harrison Jones showed up in summer, got fantastic grades, did everything he was supposed to do on the field, was complimented for his efforts on the field, but then was grayshirted in favor of guy who just qualified and just now showed up.  Maybe Blake Sims is a good kid too, but it isn't right.  Sims should have to wait because he apparently didn't take care of business with his grades in high school."

I'm looking at this issue as someone it could impact one day, not as a fan spewing conference or team crap trying to prove something.


----------



## AlabamaExile (Aug 11, 2010)

DSGB said:


> That doesn't seem to be the case here from what I'm reading.
> 
> No, it's not against the rules, but I don't agree with it. If you offer someone a scholarship, be prepared to honor that.



The article clearly states that Harrison Jones was informed of the possibility of a grayshirt before he signed, so I don't see how anyone can argue that he was blindsided by it.  In fact, his family indicated that they were not treated unfairly at all.  He will still receive a scholarship, just in 2011 rather than 2010.  Harrison Jones grew up as an Alabama fan, so presumably he was willing to take the risk of grayshirting at Alabama rather than signing with a school he didn't like as much to receive a guaranteed 2010 scholarship.  It seems like a completely rational decision to me.



Madsnooker said:


> From oversigning.com



What a joke.  Oversigning.com is nothing but a shill for the Big 10 in general and tOSU in particular.  The vitriol for the SEC drips from that site like poison.  

If the Big 10 doesn't want its members to oversign, fine.  Just don't run down other programs for taking actions that are completely within the NCAA rules when no one is being misled by the practice.

AE


----------



## Hogtown (Aug 11, 2010)

The free market will handle this problem, IF in fact it is a problem. If a coach or school abuses the oversigning marginal kids will be not sign with them.


----------



## bkl021475 (Aug 11, 2010)

Why doesn't the almighty NCAA make a rule on this that is the same for every team! Then let's see what everybody's got come game day! NCAA is a load of crap if all of it's teams aren't under the same rules! Now go ahead and tell me why some schools should be able to sign more players than others!


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 11, 2010)

Madsnooker said:


> I don't need to deal with anything.
> 
> This has nothing to do with OSU. I didn't write this or post it because it mentioned OSU. I just think it is real issue in college football. I have a son that before too long could possibly be in a position to play college sports and would hate to see him get a scholarship and then have it taken away as many "DOCUMENTED" players have, because their coach oversigned.
> 
> ...



you "spew conference or team crap quiet frequently, so why not now?...candy-coated any way you choose"

When I was in school, I had several buddies who played at BAMA and a few other schools,...they all were very aware of the reality of the possibility of having a scholarship pulled for _any reason_ yet, miraculously, they chose to take that risk and be a collegiate athlete go figure...

Now, my buddies have kids going to these institutions, and looking to, or already have earned a scholly...with the same knowledge that their fathers had.

Good luck to your Kid.
He's a big boy now, life comes with risk,...I still have not heard you, or anyone else address the issue that all other scholarship students deal with,...performance...you don't make your grades, publish, or meet what ever criteria that you have, then your gone and your scholly is done.

If the NCAA wants to make all scholarships 4 year and irrevocable,...then let them...(this has problematic issues as well ) but until they do,... these kids get an incredible advantage even if for a short while which, by the way is the exception _NOT _ the rule .


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 11, 2010)

Madsnooker said:


> I don't need to deal with anything.
> 
> This has nothing to do with OSU. I didn't write this or post it because it mentioned OSU. I just think it is real issue in college football. I have a son that before too long could possibly be in a position to play college sports and would hate to see him get a scholarship and then have it taken away as many "DOCUMENTED" players have, because their coach oversigned.
> 
> ...




...oh, and by the way, you didn't address a single point that I made in your referenced post...simply came at me, or my "candy coated" "Fan oriented" biased "perspective"...
If it is in the rules, have at it, or deal with it, don't  when things don't go your way...meaning either you, or the guy writing the article et. al.


----------



## Madsnooker (Aug 11, 2010)

AlabamaExile said:


> What a joke.  Oversigning.com is nothing but a shill for the Big 10 in general and tOSU in particular.  The vitriol for the SEC drips from that site like poison.
> 
> If the Big 10 doesn't want its members to oversign, fine.  Just don't run down other programs for taking actions that are completely within the NCAA rules when no one is being misled by the practice.
> 
> AE



Why are you taking this so personal? The Big 10 is not running down any programs. 

 Their are coaches in the sec that do not practice oversigning. I garuntee you that's because they don't feel it's right to have to tell a player they recruited, and has been busting his butt in practice, "sorry, I ended up with more han 85 needing schollys so just sleep in tomorrow and see me next year and we will see what we have then. Remember Son, I made it REEAAAALLL clear to you and your family this was a real possibility as this is how I roll. No surprises right? By the way, tell your parents I said high, it sure was a pleasure getting to know them a few months ago. And Son, how bout shuttin that door on your way out.  

The site is dealing with COACHES that oversign, and if the sec takes the brount of their findings becuase of a few coaches, than it is what it is.


----------



## chadair (Aug 11, 2010)

Madsnooker said:


> The site is dealing with COACHES that oversign, and if the sec takes the brount of their findings becuase of a few coaches, than it is what it is.



come on Snook, you know we dont care for conference bias or homerism on this site


----------



## BrotherBadger (Aug 12, 2010)

chadair said:


> I have a buddy who's kid is goin threw this with UGA baseball at the moment.



This kind of stuff makes me sick. If the NCAA wants to allow schools to do this, fine, then allow students to transfer without sitting out a year. Otherwise, it's just not right, IMO.


----------



## SFStephens (Aug 12, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> ...deal with it.



The ones that really have to deal with it are the kids that are getting the shaft.  Its pretty moronic to defend it. Being "within the rules" doesn't make it right, regardless of which team is doing it.


----------



## Skyjacker (Aug 12, 2010)

Its like the Bama fans on this board don't want to recognize what's pretty clear.  

While oversigning is not illegal (and it probably should be), it puts schools in a position (who do oversign) of treating 17 and 18 year old kids very unethically.  

That's the bottom line.  

Years ago, Georgia Tech's coach Bobby Dodd fought vehemently for scholarship limits.  Back in the 60's there was not an 85 limit on scholarships.  Some schools, especially Bear Bryant's Bama teams, would regularly give athletic scholarships to kids solely to keep them from competing against them.  This is actually well documented in the history of the rivalry between Bear Bryant and Bobby Dodd and was the catalyst for why GT opted to leave the SEC because the conference did nothing to stop this practice which many including Bobby Dodd thought was highly unethical and fought against with the SEC and NCAA.  

Later the NCAA finally cracked down on scholarship limits because it was obviously a competitive advantage for football factories.  

The NCAA will eventually crack down on this too because it is highly unethical.  You offer a scholarship to a player, you honor it. These are 17 and 18 year old kids, lets not forget that.


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 12, 2010)

SFStephens said:


> The ones that really have to deal with it are the kids that are getting the shaft.  Its pretty moronic to defend it. Being "within the rules" doesn't make it right, regardless of which team is doing it.




Moronic?

You telling me these kids are forced to sign with an institution?....it is the kids' choice as to which School he accepts a scholarship,...these "culprit" schools are apparently well known,...so is the risk...it is moronic not to deal with it.  

...and to say that these athletes are treated unethically, or immorally or unfairly,...really? do they have other opportunities to go to school? tuition and expenses paid? school of their choice?

It is a "known" risk,...and an accepted risk, and a relatively rare instance where a kid does all of the right things and just doesn't "cut the mustard"
I'll be just as interested as you guys as to how this plays out.
How about this option,...instead of a 4 year guaranteed  scholly,...how about NO scholly ? (other than academic)

how many athletes then find a way to get through school?


----------



## Madsnooker (Aug 12, 2010)

chadair said:


> come on Snook, you know we dont care for conference bias or homerism on this site



I know, silly me.


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 12, 2010)

Skyjacker said:


> Its like the Bama fans on this board don't want to recognize what's pretty clear.
> 
> While oversigning is not illegal (and it probably should be), it puts schools in a position (who do oversign) of treating 17 and 18 year old kids very unethically.
> 
> ...



Sorry Skyjacker...GT left for MONEY, definitely not ETHICAL reasons....my Dad is a tech grad of that era, and my grandfather was sports editor for an Atlanta paper during that time...GT thought they would be a dominant independent school, more money.


----------



## bkl021475 (Aug 12, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> Moronic?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Bye bye football program! At least the way you know it today!


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 12, 2010)

bkl021475 said:


> Bye bye football program! At least the way you know it today!



Kinda like baseball is now,...who loses?


----------



## bkl021475 (Aug 12, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> Kinda like baseball is now,...who loses?



Your right! We can't expect to have premier athletes and the grades to be there! Just like homers and no roids!


----------



## Skyjacker (Aug 12, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> Sorry Skyjacker...GT left for MONEY, definitely not ETHICAL reasons....my Dad is a tech grad of that era, and my grandfather was sports editor for an Atlanta paper during that time...GT thought they would be a dominant independent school, more money.



Only part of the story.  Ask your Tech Dad.  And the money was no guarantee.  Dodd figured GT could possibly be successful as the only team in the south as an independent.  The SEC didn't fit with GT's mo.


----------



## SFStephens (Aug 12, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> Moronic?
> 
> You telling me these kids are forced to sign with an institution?....it is the kids' choice as to which School he accepts a scholarship,...these "culprit" schools are apparently well known,...so is the risk...it is moronic not to deal with it.
> 
> ...



Moronic indeed! Kind of like your post.

Here's a better option......award 25 scholarships that you can actually honor.


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 12, 2010)

SF...you fail to see your own moronic postings?

25 scholarships are honored...


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 12, 2010)

Skyjacker said:


> Only part of the story.  Ask your Tech Dad.  And the money was no guarantee.  Dodd figured GT could possibly be successful as the only team in the south as an independent.  The SEC didn't fit with GT's mo.




I heard about this in great detail many times, fortunately having a grandfather who was a non-biased sports editor, my version is different than your version.
Sugar coat it anyway you like, GT sought to gain a financial advantage by going independent...just didn't calculate the "centrifugal" effect of the SEC and went spinning off into oblivion for the better part of 50 years.


----------



## Hogtown (Aug 12, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> I heard about this in great detail many times, fortunately having a grandfather who was a non-biased sports editor, my version is different than your version.
> Sugar coat it anyway you like, GT sought to gain a financial advantage by going independent...just didn't calculate the "centrifugal" effect of the SEC and went spinning off into oblivion for the better part of 50 years.



I gotta agree with Ripper.  Half my family are Tech graduates and they all say it was purely financial.  Tech was dominating the SEC and got tired of not taking home 100% of the cash from bowls etc...  SO, they took their ball (and money) and left.  Ended up being a bad choice.


----------



## SFStephens (Aug 12, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> SF...you fail to see your own moronic postings?
> 
> 25 scholarships are honored...



Nothing moronic about it, you just refuse to see the point. If you can honor 25, yet you sign 28, then there are potentially 3 kids that will miss other opportunities and get screwed. See how that math works?  
If you can count to 25, I would assume Nick Saban can.


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 12, 2010)

SFStephens said:


> Nothing moronic about it, you just refuse to see the point. If you can honor 25, yet you sign 28, then there are potentially 3 kids that will miss other opportunities and get screwed. See how that math works?
> If you can count to 25, I would assume Nick Saban can.



again, it's a matter of perspective,...i definitely do not perceive that the kids who are dropped get "screwed"...like i said ad nauseam... Tanstaafl...there ain't no such thing as a free lunch...life has risk, losing your scholarship is one of them, and the kids that receive scholarships be it for one year, two, three or 4 get an opportunity that many other kids never will.

Do I feel bad for a kid who gets dropped because a better, more "valuable" player comes along? sure.
Just like I feel for the guys who get a crack at the pros...and get cut, or a regular student who just can't make the grades, or anyone else who goes for a dream and falls short.    
Trust me, i'm not missing your point,...I'm just not agreeing with your view.


----------



## Madsnooker (Aug 13, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> again, it's a matter of perspective,...i definitely do not perceive that the kids who are dropped get "screwed"...like i said ad nauseam... Tanstaafl...there ain't no such thing as a free lunch...life has risk, losing your scholarship is one of them, and the kids that receive scholarships be it for one year, two, three or 4 get an opportunity that many other kids never will.
> 
> Do I feel bad for a kid who gets dropped because a better, more "valuable" player comes along? sure.
> Just like I feel for the guys who get a crack at the pros...and get cut, or a regular student who just can't make the grades, or anyone else who goes for a dream and falls short.
> Trust me, i'm not missing your point,...I'm just not agreeing with your view.



Ripper, I think your missing the point. These coaches are not putting an add in the paper to try out. They are going into the homes of these teenagers and begging them, YES BEGGING THEM to come play for them. Once the player signs, they have no rights to back out, yet the coach can do what he feels. A few coaches are taking advantage of these young men by offereing more schollys then they can actually use and hoping it all works out in the end. Les Miles didn't "CUT" the player he did becuse he just didn't cut it or wasn't good enough. At the end of the day, somebody had to go, becuase of oversigning. Nothing more than that. 

It's ethically wrong no matter how much you thinks it's not. Some conferences have even left it up to the coaches to vote on it (Big 10) and they overwhelmingly voted against it. Keep in mind these are the very people that would benefit from it. For you to rationalize it in your mind as these are players just trying out, or they have played games already and just were not good enough is crazy. 

IF YOU GIVE A SCHOLARSHIP, HONOR IT!!!


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 13, 2010)

With all due respect Snook, I'm not "trying to rationalize" anything in my mind.
I know enough College athletes to know that they all understand the rules of "the game" when they accept their schollys.
And I'm sorry,...I know of NO Coach who "BEGS" a player to sign on.
You are delving into the emotional aspects of this issue pure and simple.
You see it one way, I see it another.
If the SEC, or NCAA bans this process, fine with me, I'll not loose one second's sleep either way.
None of you have answered even the first of my questions, instead you guys play on the "emotional" "fairness" side,...I don't deal in that.


----------



## Madsnooker (Aug 13, 2010)

RipperIII said:


> None of you have answered even the first of my questions, instead you guys play on the "emotional" "fairness" side,...I don't deal in that.



Well, I do deal in the "emotional" "Fairness" side which dictates ethics. And ethically, it's wrong and is why it's not allowed in most conferences. Plain and simple.

Well, we both know where we stand so no need in continuing to hash this out any longer.


----------



## RipperIII (Aug 13, 2010)

Madsnooker said:


> Well, I do deal in the "emotional" "Fairness" side which dictates ethics. And ethically, it's wrong and is why it's not allowed in most conferences. Plain and simple.
> 
> Well, we both know where we stand so no need in continuing to hash this out any longer.



...sorry again Snook, but emotions do not dictate ethics,..."fairness" is subjective at best in regard to this topic...and, like you, I am bored with this.
Here's to kick-off


----------



## hunting 101 (Aug 13, 2010)

*over signing*

I do not post much here but I tend to agree that oversigning is a bit sketchy.  First of I agree that every student athlete knows that if they dont have what it takes they can be cut from their scholarship.  However,  I look at it like this:
If you were going on a job interview and they offer you the job but if you take said job you cannot go ahywhere  else to work for 4 years.  You take said Job.  You come in Monday and your boss says "by the way,  I hired 28 people but only 25 of you will make it".  What would you say?

1.  Well my boss wasnt completely honest with me up front but I need a job so i'll work hard and not be the one to get cut.  Keep in mind that had they been honest up front you may have been able to find a different place to work.


----------



## Hogtown (Aug 16, 2010)

IF "emotional" has anything to do with ethics then my girlfriend is freakin' Mother Theresa.


----------



## Madsnooker (Aug 16, 2010)

Hogtown said:


> IF "emotional" has anything to do with ethics then my girlfriend is freakin' Mother Theresa.



I was speaking of Fairness more than I was emotions obviously. I should have been more clear.


----------

