Oversigning.com
13Mar/1016

Saban’s March to 85 Continues, Grant and Sikes Leave Team

Quick recap: We addressed Alabama's recruiting numbers and the situation they are in this year (same as the last two years and the same as almost every year while Saban has been in the SEC) in an earlier post, here.  Basically, Alabama had 66 players returning on scholarship on signing day and they signed 29 recruits to LOI's.  66 + 29 = 95.  11 of the 29 enrolled early and counted towards last year putting the roster at 77, thus leaving 18 in this class but only enough room for 8 to stay under the 85 limit.  Therefore, 10 players have to hit the bricks.  With the loss of Grant and Spikes, that number is now down to 8.  Robby Green, previously thought to have been booted from the team for rules violations, is still on the roster for now.  He is awaiting due process...

Details on Sikes and Grant here:

The loss of Sikes is a complete non-issue. Hey was a greyshirt signee from several years back under Mike Shula, and never made any impact whatsoever. He never caught a single pass in his career, nor did he ever play a meaningful snap. The height of his career was playing special teams in a few games in 2007, but he redshirted in 2006 and did not play in a single game in 2008. This past year in the Crimson Tide's national championship run, the only playing time he saw was some mop-up duty against Chattanooga. He was a good kid and it is certainly good to see him get his degree -- both for him personally and for us (APR purposes) -- but he was just never a meaningful contributor in any real sense, and frankly I'm not even sure that he was still on scholarship towards the end.

With Terry Grant, however, it was a different story. He was the highly-touted tailback signee in 2006 out of Lumberton, Mississippi -- though in hindsight, it was clear that Rivals dramatically overrated him -- and at one time he seemed to have a relatively bright career in front of him. Of course, though, that was before surgeries for a sports hernia, and it was also before the arrival and emergence of players like Mark Ingram, Trent Richardson, Glen Coffee, Eddie Lacy, and Jeramie Griffin. You hate to see it for the young man, but as I mentioned yesterday, it is simply the harsh reality for some by having a roster so loaded with talent and depth.

Interestingly enough, though, it seems that Grant didn't necessarily just give up football, but instead is probably looking to go out the way of the medical scholarship.

http://www.rollbamaroll.com/2010/3/13/1371415/spring-practice-news-and-notes

The article above mentions having a roster loaded with talent and depth, but neglects to mention that it is also a roster that is oversigned.

Saban comments on Grant:

"He's been injured two years in a row," Alabama coach Nick Saban said of Grant, who had two surgeries for a sports hernia.

"He decided because of injuries -- he's already graduated -- that he would not come back for his fifth year. He does qualify for a medical, if we need to do that, so he can continue academically. ..."

We're not exactly sure what "qualifying for a medical" means, but we assume that it is some sort of hardship case that enables players to remain in school on some sort of scholarship, but it frees up a scholarship for football--we would like to know more about this.  Also, not sure what "if we need to do that" means either; does that mean if Grant is unhappy about being cut and wants to stay in school they will give him the "medical?"  

Grant and Spikes both used red-shirts already and still have 1 year of football eligibility left, despite already finishing their undergraduate degrees.  The bottom line here is that although they both have eligibility left it is clear that they will not see the field due to the depth at their positions, and the fact remains that due to Saban's oversigning, 10 players have to leave the team. 

The fact that both players have graduated eliminates any APR implications for Alabama and makes the story a little less egregious; but it now raises another interesting point.  Schools avoid APR penalties by making sure players don't leave the team with either not graduating or not transferring to another school.  We find it very interesting that Alabama's graduation rate was the second highest of any BCS Bowl team this year.  You see where we are going here, don't you.  With a higher rate of graduation you have a larger pool of players to "cut" without facing APR penalties.  Probably a bit of a stretch on our part, but it should be noted that Alabama traditionally hasn't had high graduation rates.

What is the issue here?  The issue is that without oversigning Saban would not have 10 extra new recruits (from a top 5 recruiting class mind you) to squeeze into his roster and guys like Grant and Sikes would probably still be on the team.  Does anyone really believe that Grant and Sikes walked into Nick Saban's office, unaware of the numbers crunch, and told the coach they just decided not to return?  If Saban had not oversigned then we would believe a scenario like that, but given the fact that players have to go or Alabama will face NCAA penalties, it is highly unlikely that these two guys just happened to quit football on their own accord.  Also, without the extra 10 players in this recruiting class, would Saban be so willingly to let a player like Grant leave the team or would he encourage him to use the last year of his eligibility?

"Spring is a time where we're going to fiddle around with the roster a little bit," Saban said. "Depth chart means nothing in the spring. Mostly it's for organizational purposes."

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4991170

What a luxury to have several extra guys in the bank during spring evaluations and practice.  Saban calls it "fiddling" we call it oversigning, but of course he makes $4 Million a year and we write this blog for free; guess the joke's on us.

Here's what would have happened if Saban was required to announce his recruiting budget before signing day and had been permitted to only take enough recruits to stay within his budget.  Saban would have announced 66 returning scholarship players and he would have been given 19 scholarships to offer, not 29.  In addition, had Saban announced 66 and signed 19 AND Grant and Sikes still left, then Saban would have been faced with a scholarship shortfall, similar to the kind of shortfall Lloyd Carr was talking about here:

"I think it's a positive change from the standpoint of being able to be on the same playing field with a lot of the teams in other conferences," Michigan coach Lloyd Carr said. "Especially when you look at our bowl hookup with the SEC in the Citrus and Outback Bowl, it's an important rule. I can remember going to bowl games with 77, 76 guys on scholarship against a team with 85 ... In bowl games against conferences that have an advantage of doing that, Big Ten teams were at a severe disadvantage."

http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.ssf/2008/01/stricter_scholarship_rules_put.html

We've posted this before, but it is the perfect example of how recruiting classes should be managed and bears repeating here.  Tressel's recruiting method is in sharp contrast to Saban's approach.  In the video below, Tressel is upfront about the number of vacancies and explains the importance of not going over the limit, or even to the limit.  His method rewards walk-on players for sticking it out 4 or 5 years, whereas Saban's method simply discards those that are not able to produce anymore to make room for new players.  

Both methods are within the NCAA rules, but Tressel's method is also within Big Ten Conference rules which do not allow gross oversigning, whereas Saban, residing in the SEC, does not face those same rules.  There is no way a coach in the Big 10 would get away with signing 10 players more than they have room for on signing day, but in the SEC it's just another day at the office because like it or not attrition is simply a way of life. 

More on Tressel's class: At the time of this video (National Signing Day) Tressel was still waiting to hear from Seantrel Henderson, the #1 player in the country and the 2nd OL that he hoped to sign in the class, and Ohio State was sitting at 18 players signed to fill their 20 vacancies.  Shortly after this video, Henderson opted to go with USC and Tressel was left with very little or no options at the OL position they wanted to fill with two prospects.  Therefore, with 20 vacancies and 18 players signed, Tressel's class was done - 2 short of 85.  A week or so later Tressel awards a scholarship to Archie Griffin's son, a relatively unknown prospect who originally wanted to walk on.  This leaves Tressel with 1 scholarship in the bank either for another walk-on or for next year; this is a total night and day difference from Saban's situation where he has 10 players too many and needs to start dropping bodies to avoid NCAA rule violations. 

Essentially, when you look at the 19th scholarship in Tressel's class, he traded the #1 player in the country for a walk-on, but he almost had to - he didn't have three other OL signed because had they all made it academically that would have put him over the limit and he would have to cut players to make room, players like Garrett Hummel and Ryan Schuck who will never see the field at WR with all the depth at that position or a guy like Tyler Moeller who suffered a possible career-ending head injury off the field (Moeller's career story is almost identical to Terry Grant's, both red-shirted and both had a lot of potential, the difference is that Moeller will get his shot to come back and use his last year of eligibility, whereas Grant, due to Saban's oversigning and need to shed players will not); conversely, with the departure of Grant and Sikes, Saban just traded out two spots with new recruits from a top 5 recruiting class for two guys that would have never seen the field this year.  That is a drastic difference.

Nevertheless, the march continues and the number is at 8.  We're waiting for the announcement of a gray shirt or academic casualty next.

Comments (16) Trackbacks (0)
  1. So when UA only signs 18 to 20 players what issue will you have with Saban and SEC next year. I also understand the concern with oversigning but if you are going to report on it do it without a bias and this site diaplays a very big bias. There are alot of different reasons things are done in different conferences. You can make all the assumptions you want without posting arguements supporting both sides, but you decide not to. Your hatred towards the SEC and Saban are very apparant. But again that just represents your bias. Just like when you slant the articles. It is apparant that this site is very supportive of the Big-10 and maybe if the Big-10 had not fallen as far as it has over the past 5 years this site would not be created to find an excuse of doing poorly in CFB. Maybe the excuse is the lack of good coaches and poor recruiting by the Big-10 and not because everyone else(SEC) is playing unfair. When it comes down to it, it still involves the players on the field and the 85 on each roster. A coach can only coach the players he has. If the the Big-10 is doing it right why can they not recruit 85 players that can play. To me it just sounds like an excuse for their inability to perform on the field. In the end you only need 11 players on offense and 11 on defense so with 85 at their disposal I give them no sympathy for their inability to perform as players or coaches in the Big-10.

    What I do find amusing though is the write-ups. Anyone that follows the sport really could care-less for the ramblings you provide other than the entertainment. At first I saw on boards where fans were upset now it is more of a joke. I think people look at the sight with the same enthusiasm they would while waiting in line at the grocery store and seeing the tabloids on the rack. Good for humor but other than that very lacking in substance. I mean how many times can you deomnstrate or write about your hatred for Saban and the SEC. We get it you are a Big-10 fan who is upset that nobody concerns themself with the Big-10 when talking about CFB. Even the ACC gets more sound bites on ESPN than the Big-10. This gives you an ample avenue to promote your conference. You would probably gain more respect if you did it in an unbais manner, but you have demonstrated you could care less about the respect of any SEC fan.

    In the end keep pushing your articles because the site will get less and less visitors unless you actually provide valued info. Remember reporting new info gets people to return, but regurgitating the same old rhetoric over and over about how much you despise Saban and the SEC, or any conference that overshadows the Big-10 will eventually flame out any desire for someone to visit. I have read this site on and off for a while but yet waited to comment to see if it would provide any new info or info of value and it has yet to do so. Atleast nothing I have not been aware of. CFB is a business in todays current sports environment. If that does not suit your fancy find something else to watch. Remeber fans who love the sport enjoy all aspects of it, but the one thing have learned from all the boards I am on and the fans I know is that they can not stand someone that trashes it such as this site does. This site only so far has demonstrated a lack of respect towards any fan that is not a fan of the Big-10.

    • Thanks for the feedback Mike, we appreciate you taking the time to write. If Alabama and Saban only sign 18-20 players next year we will give them full credit…you don’t see us hounding GT, Vanderbilt, Georgia, ND, Stanford, and other programs that don’t oversign on this site, do you? While you might not like the content here and believe that it is bias, the fact is that it is not bias; the topic is oversigning and we are going to talk about teams and coaches that oversign. Right now, Saban is at the forefront of that topic, along with a few other coaches and programs, most of which reside in the SEC. We have given Georgia and Mark Richt a lot of love here because they should be commended for not oversigning and having to compete directly with a slew of teams that do.

      Site traffic has been consistent since the initial leveling off after the first few days the site went online. As you can see, we don’t advertise on the site so it’s not like we are in this for the money. We have had a wide range of feedback both on the site and via email, and even though you don’t agree with our position and think the site is slanted towards hating the SEC, we still enjoy your feedback and welcome your comments. And we appreciate you keeping your comments clean, unlike a few of the other commentors.

      We will add one comment about the relevance of the Big 10 Conference in football. The conference is currently in the middle of expansion discussions and it is one of the hottest topics on the Internet. Visit Frank The Tank’s Slant blog if you don’t believe us. No one running a personal blog is getting more traffic in college football than this guy. People all over the country are talking about it and it is apparent that the expansion of the Big 10 is going to have a huge ripple effect on college football. We don’t mention this to tout the Big 10 or defend it, we simply mention it to refute your claim that no one cares about the Big 10 – maybe that is the case where you live or where you go on the Internet, but that is not reality.

    • Couple more comments:

      1. You’re right, in the end it does come down to coaching and the 85 players on the roster. The topic of oversigning addresses how teams arrive at the 85 players on the roster which is very relevant and important.

      2. This site does not seek the respect of any fan base, we’re simply looking to uncover the topic of oversigning and expose it for it what it is.

      3. Your comment that “there are a lot of different reasons things are done in different conferences” begs the question, then why are they all competing for the same national championships. If we were to apply this to the NFL it would be like saying, in the AFC teams usually draft 10 new players every year and in the NFC they only draft 6 new players each year, why, just because things are different. See how bizarre that sounds.

      4. If you only need 11 players on offense and 11 players on defense and you have 85 at your disposal, then why in the world does Saban oversign every year???

  2. First lets see how Saban and UA do in the future if he remains at UA. Each time you site him or many of the other SEC programs it is concurrent with coaching changes. Remember Saban will still have players on the team he did not recruit next year. Maybe a better stat would be to look at schools that are oversigning with a coach that has been there more than 4 years. Is oversigning an issue, maybe, but there will always be a turnover in players when a new coach comes in. Players decide on a school based on the relationship they have with the coach that recruited them. Yes some will say they should pick the school because of the school not the coach but it usually does not work that way. The SEC has seen a huge turnove in coaches in the past 5 or 6 years and in turn a relationship with the number of players leaving the program. Why would a coach want a player that does not fit in their program. A coach’s job is to win plain and simple in CFB and so he has to implement a system with a certian group of players that can contribute within that system. If a player recruited by a previous coach does not work in that system why keep them. Every player that has left UA since Saban’s arrival is not as evil as this site makes it out to be. They either left because of legal issues, which is a good thing for the school, because before Saban players were always in trouble. So I commend him on that to clean up the program. They also transferred to other programs, which again if the player either did not meet up to his potential or does not fit in the new system why keep him there to sit the bench if there is a better opportunity to play elsewhere. The other thing is with players like T Grant, they might not be playing at UA anymore but they graduated just like many last year that did not return to school but yet had eligibilty left. Nothing evil in that and the one promise they were offered was to graduate and they did. It not like these players were thrown to the wolves to make numbers as suggested on this site.

    Again UA gets to 85 each year, but do not make it out to be some behind the scenes willing and dealing that palyers are getting the shaft.

    In regards to the Big-10 they might be getting attention for possible expansion, but they have lost alot of luster in the past 5 years. Even now they are struggling to get other teams into the conference. But CFB is a cycle and I am sure the Big-10 will once again be in the top tier of CFB.

    • Great point Mike, this is something we have mentioned, but only briefly touched on. There is no question that coaching turnover and oversigning are related, but it could very well be that the ability to oversign and gut the roster is the enabler to the coaching turnover.

      We did acknowledge that the Grant and Sikes departures were not as egregious as others – they did get their degrees.

      The bottom line here is that based on the number of players that still had eligibility on signing day Alabama should have only signed 19 recruits this year, not 29. For the time being Saban and other SEC coaches have the luxury of being able to oversign and purge their rosters between signing day and August, other coaches either don’t have that luxury or opt not to take advantage of the loophole.

      • Actually they have until June 1st I believe that all players have to either sign or not renew their scholarship.

        Also several players from 2008 roster that did not return in 2009 did still graduate.

        One other point that the 2007 class had 10 players leave, but only 1 was recruited by Saban since he did not arrive until a few weekes before NSD and had to trust the previous coach to fill out the class. The one player he recruited was Murphy who is playing now but had to defer that year.

  3. A few other points. Comparing schools like Vanderbilt or Wake Forest to an UA or OSU for that matter is not a very good analysis. VU and WF have very strict guidelines for enrollment vs most FB schools. Even NW is very selective on who gets in and so I do not see how oversigning is a disadvantage because even if most schools in the SEC did not their 18 to 20 best players would always out perform those schools.

    If you are going to compare lets look at the top 25 to 30 schools in the rankings for the past 10 years and compare classes and results.

    I do think that oversigning might be an issue but not with the way it is explained here. It is not like some schools are getting an advantage over others for stockpiling talent. There were plenty of years where schools oversigned and sitll schools that had not won the BCS.

    Two things I would like to see would:

    1) Compare the top 25 to 30 schools for this past decade in regards to recruiting classes.

    2) Coaching turnover in relationship to recruiting class sizes.

    In regards to stockpiling talent you also referring to players that for the most part only wanted to play in the SEC and were from those states. They were not looking to go elsewhere so it is not like the SEC is keeping the Big-10 or other conferences from getting them. I would wager that if one didn’t oversign it is because another did in the conference. The problem is not as much of the SEC oversigning but more players wanting to play there. If the player is aware of this situation and are still willing to go there than who cares. I am sure there is plenty of negative recruiting going on telling players these stories but it does not change that the majority of players, especialy in the south want to play in the SEC. Just like why so many players are migrated to the SEC that are not from the south.

    For all the Demons you might feel that Saban releases also remember the Javier Arenas that were a walk in that 2007 class that is now a future NFL player come the draft.

    • All schools compete for the same national championship; we’re not saying every schools should recruit like Northwestern or Stanford, those schools have academic requirements that are above and beyond most schools, but there is a healthy balance out there and schools such as Georgia, Texas, Ohio State, USC and other top 25 teams, are able to find it and they are not oversigning.

      As to your point about stock-piling talent, talk about bias…lol. So basically everyone wants to play in the SEC and no one wants to play in the Big 10, therefore the SEC has to oversign in order to accommodate the high demand and the players SEC schools sign that are from the southeastern states don’t want to go to the Big 10 anyways so it doesn’t matter if they are cut…wow…if that’s not homerism we don’t know what is…lol.

      • Read into what you want and again show your bias. The majority of the top recruits do want to go to the SEC right now. Sorry the Big-10 is not as attractive as it once was. Your assumption seems to be that if the SEC didn’t oversign talent these players would flock to the Big-10, sorry but have to disagree here. Also you make the assumption in this site and your post that if every school did not oversign that the Big-10 will prevail as champions every year. Again I do not concur here.

        One important factor you continue to leave out is the most important and that is the player. They fully understand that nothing is a guarantee in playing. They talk with the coach and understand that if they work hard they will get the opportunity to play, but if not sorry sit the bench or leave. You might think that is not right but this is why the NCAA wants scholarships to be renewed each year. You seem to be under the impression that players are guaranteed a scholarship for 4 years, wrong each scholarship is and can only be given for one full year. BTW even the Big-10 does that and follows that rule in case you did not know. If a player signs a NLI with the understanding they may be greyshirted or might have to be placed in a JUCO why should you care or anyone else. It is their choice not yours. Some of these players if it was not for the sign and place policy would never get the chance to play or get a college education. Some still do not make it from there but they are atleast given a second chance which seems not to be the case in the Big-10 according to you.

        Now again to my other point that you seem to avoid. Your examples:

        UGA- CMR been there since 2001
        Texas-CMB 1998
        OSU-2001
        USC-2001

        Again manipulate the numbers all you want. That is what I love about stats. They can say whatever you want them to. But when you leave out important variables that would directly impact your output, your output becomes meaningless numbers. I know no matter what I say you will still be a Saban hater and this site is dedicated to that, but come talk with numbers when Saban is at UA after 9 seasons and lets see then if your assumptions are right. No coaching turnover will eliminate huge player turnover and allows schools to sign smaller classes. Check that I am using your info to show a flawl in your thinking.

        • Mike, again, thanks for all the discussion. Top recruits want to go to the top schools, Florida, USC, Alabama, Ohio State, etc., but I don’t think that means that every recruit wants to come to the SEC…most recruits actually want to stay close to home so their family can see them play — we don’t see players from all over the country flocking to Miss State, Ole Miss, Auburn, etc. Our position has never been that the SEC oversigning is keeping players from the Big 10…that is not the case. There is a historical reference to SEC teams oversigning just to keep players away from other SEC schools though. If you haven’t read our post on that you should. http://oversigning.com/testing/?p=262

          You are incorrect about the 1 year scholarship agreement–that was something coaches pushed for and got, that was not something the NCAA created or mandated. We have a piece on that as well. http://oversigning.com/testing/?p=698

          Lastly, there is no need to manipulate numbers, Saban’s recruiting numbers stand on their own. We also have a piece on that. http://oversigning.com/testing/?p=421

          Now if Saban stays at Alabama for 10 years and his oversigning stops then we’ll know two things: 1. He used oversigning as a crutch to rebuild Alabama instead of taking normal numbers and just grinding it out. 2. That oversigning definitely provides a competitive advantage.

          Until then we’ll just have to wait and see…thus far Saban hasn’t signed less than 25 in a single season in 7 years of being in the SEC.

  4. A little unclear about what you mean regarding scholarships. But when a player signs a scholarship it is only good for one year and then must be renewed prior to the next season. Usually it always does unless issues have arisen that would keep the school from renewing it. Even when a recruit is recruited and offered they are completely aware that the scholarship is only for one year. Once a player becomes eligible for the Clearing House they must acknowledge that they completely understand certian rules, one which is regarding that a scholarship is only good for one year and must be renewed.

    Whoever pushed for that is sort of a moot point because it is now an NCAA rule and is strictly follewed. But the point is that the players know that they must renew their scholarship.

    • We mean that the 1 year scholarship agreement was created by coaches; scholarships used to be for 4 years. I think you need to realize that a lot of NCAA rules are intended to be baseline rules that leave enough room for all the different conferences to further influence how they want to manage student-athletes and athletics in their conference, which is usually in accordance with their mission as a conference. If a player receives a football scholarship and suffers a career-ending injury on the field, shouldn’t he be entitled to the full 4 years instead of being discarded? The irony of the situation is that those who fall short on the football field or who suffer injuries are the ones that will need their education the most, yet they are the ones that are most often discarded.

      Using the “1 year only scholarship” rule is a cop out. Sure, there are situations where a player needs to be booted from the team, but 9 times out of 10 a coach will do everything in his power to avoid APR penalties.

  5. What does this mean?

    “For all the Demons you might feel that Saban releases also remember the Javier Arenas that were a walk in that 2007 class that is now a future NFL player come the draft.”

    Did you mean walk on? Javier Arenas was never a walk on. Shula signed him as a PR/KR specialist who worked his butt off to be a decent DB. He was unranked 2-star his senior year in high school by Rivals. When alabama offered and committed, he was bumped up to a 3-star. His only other offer was florida antlantic who he was comitted to until the SEC offer.

  6. Mike, I would like to address your post:

    Players just want to play in the SEC so over-signing is a result…

    Come on, really? You do not believe this.

    The major benefit that comes with over-signing is that you do not have to be as accurate in your “hit rate.” What I mean by that is that all recruiting is projecting, and by signing an additional 30% of players, you have a much wider room for error.

    Take for example, your Heisman Trophy winning running back from Michigan. In 2007, Ingram was a 3 star running back out of Michigan. He was lightly recruited by the big boys of the Midwest (ND, OSU, PSU, Michigan) although most of those schools declined to offer him a scholarship because (a) he was an academic risk, and (b) because based his academic standing, his risk did not outweigh his reward. None of those 4 schools offered him a scholarship.

    Because Alabama did not have the 85 limit constraints, they were able to take a risk and it ended up working out perfectly for them.

    It is not necessarily the 5 star guys that we are talking about (I will admit that more 5 stars prefer to play in the SEC than Big Ten – for many reasons including location/competiveness and others). We are talking about the hit rates for many 3 and 4 star players that compromise most of every team’s classes.

    This is especially important with respect to offensive lineman and quarterbacks- arguably the two hardest positions to project.

    Ohio State has had to decline to offer players due to scholarship limitations which Alabama skirts.

    Another example is Zerbie Sanders. He was a 4 star project lineman out of Dayton, Ohio. Ohio State had verbals from a terrific offensive line haul already which included three (3) 5 star players Mike Adams, Mike Brewster, and JB Shugarts. Ohio State was a finalist, along with in state West Virginia, for 5 star guard Josh Jenkins. Josh Jenkins planned to announce on signing day so Ohio State never offered Zerbie Sanders because of scholarship limitations.

    Zerbie Sanders wanted an OSU offer but he never received one because OSU could not take both Jenkins (who ultimately chose WVU on signing day) and Sanders. Sanders went to Florida State and will be a 3 year starter this year.

    Had OSU been in the cutting/skirting business, they would have offered Sanders a scholarship and probably landed him.

    My final example is this year’s recruiting class (2011). Ohio State is hot on the tail of Braxton Miller, maybe the number 1 player in the nation. However, Ohio State only has around 19 scholarships available for this year.

    Cleveland Glenville (a huge OSU feeder school that produced Ted Ginn, Troy Smith, Dante Whitner and many more OSU players- coached by Ted Ginn Sr.) has a stellar senior quarterback named Cardale Jones. Cardale is a probable 4 star quarterback with a HUGE ceiling. He is very, very athletic and has a nice arm, he just needs some refining (very similar profile to Troy Smith coming out of high school).

    However, it is very likely that OSU will NOT offer him a scholarship because of roster limitations. Now, this kid is a great recruit, from a school that sends every stud they have to OSU yet OSU will probably not offer due to scholarship limits.

    This is where the skirting the scholarship rule provides a HUGE (and slimy) advantage. Alabama would take both kids in a heart-beat, but OSU will not. (Similarly, both OSU and Alabama are recruiting Trey DePriest, a stud 5 star linebacker out of Dayton. OSU is not offering 2-3 other stud linebackers until they hear from DePriest, which may be on signing day. This could prevent OSU from taking any linebacker from the next class- whereas other programs (SEC, SEC!) would just offer the back-up plan and still go hard after DePriest).

    Teams that recruit within the letter and spirit of the rules are at n extreme disadvantage compared to the schools that are willing to marginalize non-performers. It is not because everyone wants to go there, it is because they have a larger margin for error.

    • KA if you keep this up I’m going to have to ask you to become a guest writer for the site. Great stuff again!!! You definitely get it. I’m sure most SEC fans will just dismiss you as another Buckeye fan whining about losing to the SEC, but we both know that is not the case. It’s about the future of college football and preserving what has made it so special. If SEC fans want to professionalize college football then they should create a separate league and leave the NCAA…then they can have the JUCO version of the NFL.


Leave a comment


No trackbacks yet.