Most Common Arguing Points
Here are some of the most common arguing points people have tried to use in defense of the practice of oversigning (in random order):
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.
Conference Comparisons 2002 - 2010
| Comparisons | SEC | Big 12 | BigEast | PAC10 | Big10 | ACC |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Average # of Total Recruits Signed Per School: | 227 | 219 | 215 | 208 | 199 | 199 |
| Total Players Signed: | 2,727 | 2,629 | 1,737 | 2,084 | 2,196 | 2,394 |
| Highest Single School Total: | 253 | 243 | 235 | 235 | 218 | 225 |
| Lowest Single School Total: | 191 | 192 | 201 | 170 | 170 | 174 |
| # of Times Over 25 in Single Class: | 54 | 37 | 23 | 28 | 18 | 22 |
| # of Times 28 or More in Single Class: | 33 | 24 | 14 | 14 | 5 | 10 |
| # of Back to Back Classes of 25 or More: | 35 | 24 | 11 | 8 | 6 | 5 |
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.
“I coach the team that I get here,” Miles said when asked if a signee would not be on scholarship this semester. “Scholarship is certainly a great inducement. I don’t mean to minimize that. But I don’t know that it’s my responsibility to determine publicly who is and who isn’t on scholarship. It’s my responsibility to be within the 25 number, which we are.”
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.
The one-year renewable scholarship, with a limit of five years of athletic aid, has been in place since 1973. Kevin Lennon, the NCAA's vice president for academic and membership affairs, said the 37-year-old policy has not been a frequent topic of concern among member schools. He noted that NCAA rules require colleges to provide athletes who lose scholarships with an appeals option, typically consisting of a campus panel formed from outside the athletics department. But such arbitration is not common, he acknowledged.
Requiring Division I transfers to sit out a year before competing for a new school prevents coaches from recruiting players away from other schools, said Maryland basketball coach Gary Williams.
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/mensbasketball/2010-05-24-revoked-scholarships_N.htm
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?
National Championship Coaches 2002 - 2010
| Coaches | Conf. | 2002 | 2003 | 2004 | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | Total | Average |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Saban (03/09) | SEC | 26 | 28 | 26 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 32 | 27 | 29 | 193 | 27.50 |
| Miles (07) | SEC | 28 | 31 | 19 | 13 | 26 | 26 | 26 | 24 | 27 | 220 | 24.44 |
| Meyer (06/08) | SEC | 22 | 19 | 25 | 18 | 27 | 27 | 22 | 17 | 27 | 204 | 22.66 |
| Brown (05) | BIG12 | 28 | 18 | 20 | 15 | 25 | 24 | 20 | 20 | 22 | 192 | 21.33 |
| Carroll (04) | PAC10 | 22 | 28 | 19 | 19 | 27 | 18 | 19 | 18 | 20 | 190 | 21.11 |
| Tressel (02) | BIG10 | 24 | 16 | 24 | 18 | 20 | 15 | 20 | 25 | 18 | 180 | 20.00 |
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.
Against Oversigning
In Favor of Oversigning
Blogroll
- Atholon Sports
- CFBDataWarehouse
- CFN – College Football News
- NCPA – Website
- NCSA – Athletic Recruiting
- POPA – Parents of Players Association
- RTN – Reform the NCAA
- The Drake Group
2011 Oversigning Cup
ESPN OTL Oversigning Video
Oversigning.com on Twitter
- @GerdOzone imagine what that number would be had he oversigned at the rate of Saban/Miles/Nutt/Petrino.
- @greggdoyelcbs someone tell the NCAA to call me.
- Fwiw, I just wanted to ban oversigning, you guys.
- @BryanDFischer @andrewjbone remind me again how many guys were in that 2008 class and how many had to be cut to make room for them all.
From People on Twitter
- Alabama and Mississippi were scary places in 1950. But the grandkids are doing a bang-up job: http://t.co/OiKZzyaC
- @JoePas_Doghouse @RowlffDogg Yes, he did.
Reader Survey – Vote Today!
Loading ...Pages
Meta
Categories
- ACC
- Announcements
- Baseball
- Basketball
- Big 10
- Big 10 Expansion
- Big 12
- Big East
- Coaching
- Feedback
- History
- MAC
- NCAA
- Non BCS Conferences
- Off Topic
- PAC 10
- Quick Links
- Rants
- SEC
- SunBelt
- The Oversigning Cup
- Uncategorized
Recent Comments
- Charlie9 on Elliott Porter 2.0
- Charlie9 on Elliott Porter 2.0
- Charlie9 on Elliott Porter 2.0
- Charlie9 on Elliott Porter 2.0
- WTF on Elliott Porter 2.0
Archives
- February 2012
- January 2012
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
August 8th, 2010 - 15:42
i think this summary of the oversigning arguments–”most common arguing points”–must become THE resource for any such questions or commentary on this subject going forward. someone should print it and send it to the NCAA today. if anyone out there still wishes to argue for the continuation of the oversigning practice AFTER reading this post, they may be beyond reason.
thank you. i’m going to direct every college football fan i know to this post.
August 8th, 2010 - 15:52
1. Point conceded
2. Comparing over signing to adultery. Ok. Still legal and not wrong
3. If I’m on an academic scholarship, i maintain a minimum GPA. If i fall below, a high school student gets it, not someone who aced their chemistry final. Those high school students are more deserving in many cases.
4. You should earn your scholarship all 4 years. Just like any other scholarship. And in the 70s, the scholarship limit was in the 100s, not 85. By my estimation, the real problem is the limit here. Raise that before you force teams to give football scholarships to walk-ons.
5. Undersigning will not prevent attrition. So long as we have more communication about greyshirts, i see no issue with planning for that.
August 8th, 2010 - 15:55
And thanks for changing the Hicks thing. Much obliged.
August 8th, 2010 - 15:58
1. I agree, the SEC did not ban oversigning, but as you state in your wrap-up most fans of SEC schools don’r really see this as the major earth-shattering issue that you do. What they did address is the gross abuse of signing kids who are obviously not going to make it academically (that is what Nutt did that caused the change), while still making it possible to take a chance on a guy or two who may not, but still has a chance.
2. No argument here, it is not against the rules. Where we disagree is how harmfull it is to the students.
3. So SEC schools don’t give scholarships to more kids who need it? I know that the B10 has great lofty academic standards for everyone and maybe all their players could easily get academic scholarships if the football thing fell through, but to many players in the SEC, this is their only way (and probably the best way for them as the academic aide that the players get is beyond anything they will be able to afford on their own). Looking at your own numbers, there have been about 500 more LOIs handed out in the SEC than the B10 over those 8 years (granted the SEC has 1-2 more teams in that period) and that does equal more opportunities to kids that wouldn’t have had it otherwise. Just because it didn’t pan out doesn’t make it wrong. And no, this is not the most laughable argument and you certainly didn’t offer a valad rebuttal to it.
4. You are right, scholarships were 4 year contracts until 1973. Just for my benifit, what was the cap on scholarships then? I actually agree with some aspects of this argument, as it is a little one-sided (a little as I am of the school that one free year of a DIV I education is worth whatever else is asked of these students) but there is definately room for improvement (give the same penalty to the school when a player transfers – it can’t fill that scholly until a year later – not perfect but a thought).
5. I don’t have much against your argument here, but I don’t think you have correctly stated the more commen argument that I have made (or seen by others). My stance is that Saban has a good feel for some that will transfer or leave by medical redshirt. Until this actually becomes to fruition, however, he lets some of the incoming recruits know that a greyshirt is possible, and some he tells that it is more of a likelihood. These candidates are the 3 star guys that need a year of weigh management anyway.
Yes, the SEC has an advantage with this practice – I don’t think that is much debatable – but it is neither unfair or of their own creation. The advantage that you are on a crusade against is of the B10′s (and other’s) own making. It is their own rules that create this unlevel playing field. As such it is their choice to do so, but to label everyone else as unfair or immoral is not.
August 10th, 2010 - 19:20
@catch5 and others…
How are more kids getting an opportunity for an education if there is an 85 limit yearly? Signing more kids doesn’t give more kids an opportunity. All it does is give the coaches a bigger pool of players to get their 85 limit from. At the end of the day, there are still only 85 kids that get the scholarship. That would leave kids with other options to pay for school…academic scholarship, grants, loans, etc. 85 is 85 not 86, 87, 88, 90, etc. Oversigning has NOTHING to do with more kids getting an education. This argument, as pointed out, is nothing more than a ploy to justify the oversigning. I’m flabbergasted that people actually buy into that argument knowing that there is a limit regardless of the number of kids signed. Anyone that isn’t a part of that 85 isn’t getting an education unless they figure out another way to pay for it.
Is it breaking the rules? No…is it moral? Not even close. I’m not sure how anyone could consider it moral to obligate a kid to a school but not obligate the school to the kid. Then, to kick the kid in the gut even more, tell them they have to sit out a year if they want to transfer to another D1 school. This, even more so than the oversigning itself, is just inexcusable.
August 10th, 2010 - 21:49
If a school doesn’t oversign but loses any players after signing day (as every school does) to transfer, academics, medical hardship, etc…then that school will have less than 85 scholly athletes. Sure, the school might give the extra schollys to walk-ons, but those players are already in school getting their education. A school that oversigns winds up much closer to the 85 scholly limit and therefore results in a greater number of players having the opportunity to get a college education.
August 10th, 2010 - 22:05
EVERYONE IN AMERICA has an opportunity to get an education, some even get the opportunity to have it paid for because they can run a football or solve a complex math problem, but to insist that oversign is a gateway to educating the masses is INSANE. You guys are far more concerned about missing out on the top shelf athletes that are byproducts of the piss poor primary schools systems in the south. If you truly cared about education you would do something about your primary school systems, not defend oversigning to the death as a gateway to a college education.
August 10th, 2010 - 23:11
I was simply explaining to BrowardBuck the flaw in his counterarguement. While I do believe that a few extra players wind up in college thru oversigning, I am not someone who uses it as an arguement for oversigning.
Just out of curiosity, how do you know that I’m not doing something to improve education in the south? There you go with those short-sighted assumptions again. Maybe the primary school systems in the north should increase focus on teaching students the pitfalls of drawing conclusions with inadequate information.
August 11th, 2010 - 16:42
Your argument doesn’t hold up with the situation. So, you are telling me that a kid that is oversigned by Bama but then loses that scholly isn’t capable of getting a scholly someplace else? That kid was going to get a scholly and an education somewhere else if he WASN’T signed by Bama. So, by now taking the scholly back, you have actually caused that kid to NOT get that education, unless he transfers to a 1AA school or pays his own way and how many can do that in today’s day and age? Arguing that oversigning increases the chances of kids getting a college education is not just stretching…it is an argument with no merit. Again, if that kid hadn’t been signed by Bama (or UF, or USC, or OSU, etc, etc), they would have signed with another school. That, in turn would have cost someone a spot at that school and they would have gone someplace else, etc, etc, etc. There are only so many scholarships that can be given out at every school. At the end of the day, unless you have a scholly, you aren’t getting that education unless you find a way to pay for it yourself.
Oversigning is oversigning. Some agree with it and some do not. I just have a hard time NOT calling a coach a slimeball if he purposely oversigns with the intent to “force” another player out or oversign knowing that the kid has put pen to paper and is now contractually obligated to your school with very little recourse, yet the coach and the school are not obligated to honor that contract. This is honestly a situation where the NCAA either needs to put a rule into place to stop oversigning across the board OR allow the kid to transfer to the school of their choice with no penalty if they are either pushed out or are told there is no room after they committed to the school.
August 10th, 2010 - 20:34
I can only assume you have an SEC education, if any. Ever heard of spell check? FYI . . . “valid” does not rhyme with “salad”.
You must be a heartless idiot, too, if you want to yank a kid’s scholarship because a slightly more talented kid wants to sign on. You said it yourself – that scholarship may be an SEC kid’s only chance. The new signees have the opportunity to sign with another school if LSU or Alabama is booked up. Don’t represent oversigning as charitable work.
August 8th, 2010 - 21:09
#6 When it comes to the average number of players per class signed by various coaches, don’t you believe that that could be a function of the personality/coaching style of each coach? For instance, it is well known that Saban is a very serious, down-to-business, and sometimes stern coach. Some would describe him as a taskmaster. I would argue that a coach like Saban experiences a lot more attrition due to voluntary player transfers than more player friendly coaches like Jim Tressel, Mack Brown, or Pete Carroll. Simply put, not every player has the drive and dedication to play for a demanding coach like Saban for 4 straight years.
Saban has been a head coach for over 15 years now and has a pretty good idea of how much attrition due to transfer he can expect each year. I think he budgets that number in to his recruiting class. If fewer players than average transfer in a given year, then some incoming players are asked to greyshirt. As long as the possibility of a greyshirt was discussed with the players prior to signing their LOI (unlike at LSU), then I see know harm.
August 8th, 2010 - 23:00
It’s ironic that you mention this because in a lot of ways Saban’s mentality is a mirror reflection of the mentality of the fans – either produce or we will get rid of your sorry ass and get a better coach in here that can win. That is where the problem started and now that mentality has trickled down to the players and it is not fair when they are considered to be student-athletes. Sure, guys need to live up to their responsibilities, but if they are taking care of business in the classroom and it’s a case where the coach just missed on his evaluation of the players potential why should he be allowed to force a guy out. Bobby Dodd at GT was totally against this in the 1960′s and felt so strongly about it that he had GT leave the SEC over it. That is pretty telling in my opinion.
Saban runs a pro-style program and is professionalizing college football (as are many coaches) with oversigning and roster cuts. How hard is it to just sign what you have room for on signing and develop players, make sure they finish their education with you, and send them off into the world.
We live in a disposable society where we are so quick to discard anything we don’t like for something we see that we think is better – this is exactly what oversigning coaches are doing. Is that really what we want for our educational system?
August 9th, 2010 - 01:05
You either missed my point or are completely dodging the question. I wasn’t talking about “forcing players out” or “roster cuts”, I was talking about VOLUNTARY (player initiated) transfers. Isn’t it possible that someone with Saban’s coaching style is likely to have more players VOLUNTARILY transfer than a more player-friendly coach like Tressel, Brown, or Carroll? The answer is obviously yes. Saban yells at his players and pushes them hard. Not everyone can deal with that for 4 years and the ones who can’t, VOLUNTARILY transfer.
August 9th, 2010 - 08:30
Vesper, he doesnt believe that any player leaving is voluntary. He still believes Star Jackson was cut, even though Star has said he wasnt, that he wanted to go to GSU, to a more laid back, less pressure situation.
August 9th, 2010 - 09:30
All his blather about how it was crazy to believe a guy like Star Jackson would voluntarily transfer from a great program to an NCAA Subdivision program to have a better chance at playing, but apparently he had amnesia about the 3rd string QB at Ohio State who did the same thing, transferring to Delaware in 2008.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3195112
The story Joshua tells depends on which school he’s talking about.
August 8th, 2010 - 21:59
Another factor in the number of players signed per conference is coaching turnover. Each time there is a coaching change at a particular school, there are typically a number of transfers because some players only commited to that particular school to play for that particular coach or maybe they don’t fit into the new coach’s scheme. There has been a huge amount of coaching turnover in the SEC over the last 4 years: Alabama, Arkansas, Auburn, Ole Miss, Mississippi State, Kentucky, Vanderbuilt, Tennessee (x2).
Sometimes raw numbers don’t tell the whole story. It’s easy to assume that larger recruiting classes equate to players being cut but in reality there could be other explanations such as an increase in voluntary transfers due to coaching style or coaching turnover.
August 8th, 2010 - 22:30
Joshua knows that the Alabama signees numbers were inflated over the last few years, he’s been told, he’s acknowledged it, but now he’s got amnesia because his mission is to put Alabama and the SEC in the worst possible light to explain why Ohio State can’t stay on the field with an SEC team.
By Alabama’s signees numbers that he posts being inflated, I mean that Kerry Murphy is counted in the classes of 2007, 2008 and 2009. He’s only one person, Joshua counts him as 3. There are at least a half dozen others that are counted twice. There are two in the 2008 signees who signed professional baseball contracts and never set foot on campus.
As far as this goes:
“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?”
That is a lie from start to finish. Nobody made the argument Joshua is attributing to others, Joshua didn’t make the argument he’s claiming he made. He’s completely full of it as usual.
August 8th, 2010 - 22:43
Inflated? I think not. And just for the record, every one’s numbers are counted the same if a guy signs in back to back years he counts both years, regardless. It’s the same way for all schools, so it’s not like Alabama was the only school that was counted that way. They are counted twice because if they make it they count against the scholarship number, regardless of the fact that it is the same guy twice. Carlos Hyde counted twice for Ohio State, so it’s not like counting more than once is something exclusive to Alabama’s numbers.
I don’t have the exact link handy, but I believe it was soccermike that argued on here or on another message board that Saban knew that Jackson was looking to transfer in the fall and that is why Saban signed Sims.
August 9th, 2010 - 08:11
You’re a pathological liar.
August 9th, 2010 - 08:32
seriously? The kid was the #2 QB in the nation i think, and you believe the ‘only’ reason that Saban signed him was because Star was looking to leave?
August 9th, 2010 - 08:50
This is starting to get highly annoying and extremely tiresome. Give Josh all of the information necessary to reach a reasoned conclusion, correct him when he misstates events as they transpired, and so on, and he still sticks with his fallacious premise. He starts another thread about proposing solutions, then responds to a reasoned proposal by saying “no, I want to do things the way my team does–it’s the only way that works”.
It seems that Josh is doing exactly that which he rails against so vehemently, which is to defend the way “his team” does things, while simultaneously going to insane lengths to prove that the devil is behind the door in Tuscaloosa, even when presented with a mountain of evidence to the contrary.
August 9th, 2010 - 17:26
Hey LeeRoi, you suck
Love, Ohio State
August 10th, 2010 - 09:23
Verifiable proof that there is no cure for stupidity.
August 10th, 2010 - 09:29
Verifiable proof that there is no cure for trolling.
August 10th, 2010 - 14:55
http://forum.tidesports.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8209
http://forum.tidesports.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=8219#p114822
August 11th, 2010 - 16:20
The link is for????????????????????
August 9th, 2010 - 09:47
Hey Joshua thinks “soccermike” said that on a message board, so it must be true.
I understand the only reason Jim Tressel recruited Terrell Pryor is because he knew two of the quarterbacks already on his roster were going to leave.
http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/12801/bauserman-waiting-in-wings-for-buckeyes
“Pryor is as entrenched as any quarterback in the country, having started 22 of Ohio State’s last 23 games. Other signal callers like Antonio Henton and Rob Schoenhoft left Columbus after Pryor signed, sensing the inevitable, but Bauserman has stuck around.”
It’s just CRAZY to think that quarterbacks would voluntarily transfer from a great program like Ohio State. Tressel must have cut them.
Tressel signed a great QB prospect in the 2010 class to sit a year behind Pryor and then take over, a kid named Taylor Graham.
http://www.escoutroom.com/eScoutRoom/Articles/ArticlesDetail/tabid/702/smid/1331/ArticleID/832/reftab/673/t/QB-Taylor-Graham-Commits-to-Ohio-State-for-2010/Default.aspx
Whoops, sorry Taylor. Braxton Miller committed to Ohio State for the class of 2011, so Tressel can go straight from Pryor to Miller at QB.
http://bleacherreport.com/articles/400803-five-star-qb-braxton-miller-commits-to-ohio-state-buckeyes
August 9th, 2010 - 10:01
Yes, Kenny Guiton or Taylor Graham will transfer. You can take it to the bank. But don’t look for any equal treatment by the site owner. Classic pot calling the kettle black, and it stinks to high heaven.
August 9th, 2010 - 15:50
I think Joshua, at some point in his life, was cut from a team to make room for a better athlete and he has an ax to grind.
August 9th, 2010 - 20:15
How about this argument:
If you want to investigate, get your numbers and facts right and stop purposely ignoring information that contradicts everything this website is about.
Or…let’s make it simple….find any one player, any one recruit from Alabama, that is no longer on scholarship, who doesn’t speak highly of Saban and/or addresses any wrongdoing on Saban or Alabama’s part. You can try….you can hunt all you want for something fishy… but you will never find it. For so many “oversigning” occurances, there sure seems to be an EXTREME lack in players complaining.
OR how about this one…Want to know why the SEC signs so many? Because THEY CAN! They are the most powerful, highly regarded conference in the land and they are located on the nation’s premiere recruiting territory. Everyone knows Florida, Texas, & California produce the most Div.1 athletes…but do you know who follows those schools… Georgia, Alabama, & Louisianna are all top 8 schools in prospects & can combine to form a recruting pool that rivals the big 3 states. In fact, all of the southern states produce enough athletes to rank in the top portion of states with the most prospects. The South region, EASILY has more recruits than Texas & California combined. Imagine if Texas had double the amount of recruits every year, that is the South, and in addition to being that populated, they take their fair share of Texas players too. The real question is why wouldn’t you sign every possible player possible? That is, unless you are Georgia…who thinks a good recruiting method is playing ping-pong at the coach’s house during recruiting visits.
August 9th, 2010 - 20:42
Yeah, I love the we sign more because we can argument. Great stuff.
August 9th, 2010 - 21:14
Can’t bring yourself to acknowledge the QBs transferring out of Ohio State after all the faux whining about Star Jackson, can you hypocrite?
August 9th, 2010 - 21:54
1. I still don’t understand why a guy would leave a school like Ohio State or Alabama to go play 1AA ball; personally, I probably wouldn’t do it. Why leave a top notch program, top notch coaching, and a top notch degree on the table? Doesn’t make sense to me, but that is just my opinion. It turns out I was wrong, which I have mentioned already, and that some kids really just want to transfer. My problem isn’t so much with them wanting to transfer, it’s when the transfer occurs.
2. Ohio State was never, and has never been, in a position to have to cut players or force them to transfer in order to get down to 85 before signing day. Schoenoft announced his transfer plans prior to National Signing Day (on January 13th to be exact), not after a new recruit for the current class was signed and not after trying to compete with him for a spot on the roster during spring ball like Jackson did with Sims. That is the main difference between Saban’s method and Tressel’s method. Saban oversigns first and then allows kids to compete for spots during spring ball and it isn’t until after the spring that we start to hear the majority of the transfer announcements, after Saban has the new recruits signed to binding LOI. Schoenoft saw that he wouldn’t play after being moved to the TE position during bowl practice, he announced his decision to transfer prior to national signing day, he was granted a release, and Ohio State replaced him. That is the way it is supposed to be done.
http://blog.cleveland.com/sports/2008/01/ohio_state_qb_schoenhoft_trans.html
August 9th, 2010 - 22:32
And just to follow up, since 2005 Alabama has signed 9 QB recruits; Ohio State 5. Not that I really give a damn, but since you seem to keep making an issue of it.
August 10th, 2010 - 00:45
I don’t know where you got your numbers, but according to Scout, OSU has signed 6 in that timeframe and Bama has signed 7. After the 2011 class is signed it will be OSU 7, Bama 7.
I don’t know any details about OSU’s QB signees. Maybe some are listed as QBs by Scout but were not recruited to play that position by OSU, but the same can be said of Jimmy Johns (recruited to play RB) for Bama. Not counting Johns, Bama has signed one QB per class since 2005 which is the norm.
August 10th, 2010 - 07:06
Like I’ve said, he’s a pathological liar.
August 10th, 2010 - 07:33
I guess he’s probably including someone like Blake Sims, who played QB in HS but is never going to do anything but potentially line up in the wildcat. He was not recruited as a QB, and neither was Johns. If a player is not recruited as a QB, then he doesn’t count. Ted Ginn was a DB in HS, not a WR. So do we say he was recruited as both a DB and a WR? Of course not.
And as I said before, look for Guiton or Taylor (I don’t even remember who Justin Siems is) to transfer, since if Pryor comes back next year (and he’d better, because he sure as heck isn’t going to be playing QB in the pros) then Braxton Miller is going to start in 2012 and neither Guiton nor Graham will ever play except in spot duty.
August 10th, 2010 - 07:47
As shown above, I used Rivals position listing. I am not just making things up. You can be assured of one thing if Guiton or Taylor transfer, it will not happen as a result of an oversigned roster and it will not happen after spring ball where they will be competing against an incoming recruit for a roster spot which was he case with Jackson. I don’t understand what is so hard for you thick-headed Alabama fans to understand with regards to the Jackson situation. Saban was over the limit, brought in a new stud QB, allowed Jackson and Sims to battle it out in the spring and during the spring game, and then after the spring game Jackson decides to transfer. Like I said, if everyone at Alabama knew he was gone back in the fall because he wanted to transfer, then why didn’t he transfer after the bowl game? Why was he continuing to compete for a spot on the roster if he wanted out back in the fall?
August 10th, 2010 - 08:17
First of all, as someone else has already pointed out, there wasn’t time for him to transfer after Bama’s bowl game and make it into another school for the spring semester. Since he pretty much had to be at Bama during the spring semester, he might as well go through spring training with Bama.
Secondly, his decision to transfer was due more to him falling behind AJ McCarron on depth chart than anything to do with Phillip Sims. Read this article and tell me where it mentions Phillip Sims: http://blog.al.com/bamabeat/2010/05/tide_backup_qb_star_jackson_ex.html
In my opinion, Jackson was probably thinking about transferring since he fell behind McCarron on the depth chart last fall. He decided to give it one more shot in hopes of beating out McCarron for the back-up spot in the spring. When that didn’t happen he decided to transfer. What is unreasonable about that scenario?
August 10th, 2010 - 13:50
I have to agree. Since Saban has been here, we have only signed one quarterback per year. What big time program does not sign at least one quarterback? If you do not sign a quarterback every year then you are setting yourself up for failure. If you have a good quarterback that leaves after his junior year and you did not sign a quarterback another year then you will be playing a walkon or close to one. Then again, the Star Jackson is only one instance, and does not debunk the oversigning debate. Just that this situation should not apply.
August 10th, 2010 - 15:20
To be honest, most people knew he would never play a significant down as QB at Bama. He had ‘project’ labelled all over him. Didnt play football til HS. played at a low division. Didnt even pass for 2000 yards his senior season. He was never going to see the field.
But you always seem to contradict yourself some. You said that Saban heard that Star was thinking of transferring and then brought in Sims. The #2 QB in the nation and you think the only reason he signed him was because Star was thinking of leaving.
Here you say that Star lost spring ball and decides to leave. Your logic spins in circles most people cant keep up with.
August 11th, 2010 - 11:54
Jackson didn’t transfer as the result of an oversigned roster. It’s astounding that you continue to try and push that square peg through a round hole. Don’t you have enough other things to harp on Josh?
If Graham or Guiton transfers, and one of them will if he wants to play while he’s in college, it will be for the exact same reason that Jackson did.
August 10th, 2010 - 07:33
According to rivals, which is what I used:
2005: Johns, Barnes, Wilson — Schoenhoft
2006: McElroy — Henton
2007: Fanuzzi
2008: Jackson, Smelley — Pryor
2009: AJ McCarron — Guiton
20010: Sims — Graham
Johns went to prison and I think Barnes, Fanuzzi, and Jackson have all transferred. Smelley moved to TE. So 5 out of 9 didn’t pan out; hence the oversigning.
August 10th, 2010 - 07:41
By the way, I checked scout and they have Orhian Johnson list at QB in 2008 with Pryor, so I see where you get 6. He is in the secondary now and never really even practiced at QB, but I have no problem counting him as a QB recruit.
August 10th, 2010 - 07:43
Johns was never going to play QB. That much was known by everyone. Same with Smelley, he was recruited as an athlete, not a QB. here is the article when he committed when he said he was going to play H-back.
http://www.tidesports.com/article/20070507/NEWS/70506001
but then, you would know more about Bama players than anyone wouldnt you.
August 10th, 2010 - 08:06
Using your criteria of “signed QB recruits [since 2005]“, Wilson would not count since he signed in 2004 and greyshirted which is why he is not listed under 2005 by Scout (Rivals lists him under 2004 and 2005).
If you don’t count Johnson for OSU, then Johns (who was kicked off the team after playing RB for 3 years) and Smelley (who started out at TE as opposed to moved to TE) should not count against Bama. That make the actual tally, 6 for Bama and 5 for OSU.
Just another example of how using raw numbers from a recruiting site doesn’t tell the whole (or even an accurate) story.
August 11th, 2010 - 15:01
Interesting that both Siems and Bauserman are both walk-ons. I can’t remember the last time Bama had two walk-ons that played the same position on the depth chart. Maybe that’s the key to this whole oversigning thing. Just recruit kids whose parents can afford to pay tuition?
But with Siems and Bauserman, OSU has 5 QBs, and none are seniors. Add Braxton Miller and that’s six. That’s a whole lot of cooks in the kitchen, Josh. And who gives a crap if two of them aren’t on scholarship. I was talking about having too many players at a position, not about whether it had anything to do with oversigning. As I have said from the beginning about Star Jackson, he’s not leaving because of oversigning, he’s leaving because he wants to play.
Bama has 3 QBs now, not 5 or 6.
August 10th, 2010 - 12:17
So Ohio St had no plans to recruit another quarterback before January 13th? That may very well be the most ridiculous argument you’ve made on this site. You honestly think they were able to go out and recruit a Div I QB in a couple of weeks? Ascenine!
August 10th, 2010 - 12:21
Secondly, how can Saban oversign and then allow players to compete for spots? If a person who doesn’t have a spot on the roster is practicing with the team, is that not an NCAA violation? In fact, Sims was counted against last year’s class via grey-shirt (how can that be if Saban oversigns every year?) and already had a roster spot when he was practicing in the spring. Like others that have already said – Jackson saw the writing on the wall, he would never see meaningful playing time and wanted to go somewhere where he would. Simple explanation and nothing to it.
August 12th, 2010 - 10:03
I think the difference here is that Tressel works to develop the whole person: football player, student, member of the community. Saban and Miles only care about what kind of football player a person is. If they aren’t good enough, they’re gone. Tressel had a kid (Nick Dilillo) this year who wasn’t doing the work that he needed to to be a good football player. Did Tressel just revoke his scholly and sign someone else? Nope. He left the kid off the 105 man roster and didn’t invite him to camp, but he left his scholarship alone. So the kid gets to keep working towards his education, even if he decides that football isn’t what he wants to do. That wouldn’t happen at Alabama or LSU.
August 12th, 2010 - 13:11
I bet Clarett really feels like he was developed fully. I bet Andy Katzenmoyer, who we all know was just a great student athlete feels he was developed intellectually.
August 12th, 2010 - 14:43
Mo didn’t stay long enough to develop. He chose to listen to Jim Brown instead of Jim Tressel. He is back in school at tOSU largely due to Tressel. Most coaches who had their program drug thru the mud by a former player with a grudge to settle would cut all ties with him. They were in touch the entire time Mo was in prison. He has acknowledged that had he listened to the one person who truly cared about him, he would have not ended up where he was. Andy Katzenmoyer never played for Tressel.
August 12th, 2010 - 18:44
This whole “he cares about his players more than he cares about wins” or whatever tripe comment you want to make is the same thing every fan of great coaches at great programs make. People said the same things about Woody “Sociopath” Hayes. Hooey, is what that is. Utter and complete hooey. Tressel is nothing more than a good Ward Cleaver imitator.
August 13th, 2010 - 06:51
They said the same things about Woody (and still do if you watched the NFL HOF inductions) because it was true. You keep up with this Woody as a “sociopath” while his players never said/say a bad word about him. Former player’s of JT’s all say the same thing “what you see is what you get” As usual, you have no idea what you are talking about.
August 13th, 2010 - 07:37
I only know of one college football coach in the history of the sport that has been shown on video thousands of time committing assault against a player. He’s lucky he didn’t go to jail, because he certainly could have. As usual, you have no idea what you’re talking about.
August 12th, 2010 - 13:56
Yeah, that’s the way you teach life lessons. I’m sure when the kid gets into the real world that and doesn’t put much effort into his job his employer will tell him to stay home but keep him on the payroll.
How did you get to know Nick Saban well enough to judge him? Why would a guy who doesn’t care about anything but football do this?
http://www.al.com/sports/birminghamnews/index.ssf?/base/sports/1212912959284070.xml&coll=2
The university announced Saturday that the Crimson Tide’s second-year coach and his wife, Terry, donated $1 million to the school’s scholarship fund and earmarked the sum for first-generation college students. The Sabans said they were both the first in their families to become college graduates.
“Nick and Terry have a special place in their hearts for students who are the first in their families to go to college,” President Robert Witt said in a statement. “We appreciate their generosity and the ongoing commitment they have to this university and the students.”
This is the second such donation for the Sabans. Six days after Nick Saban was hired to coach the Crimson Tide, he and Terry gave $100,000 to the scholarship fund. This time, the sum is 10 times that – more than one-quarter of the $3.75 million Saban is set to earn in 2008.
In 2007, six first-generation students benefited from the initial gift. Witt said he hopes the generosity shown by the Sabans will encourage others to donate. “Think how many students will benefit if we work together to multiply the impact of this contribution,” Witt said.
The announcement has no bearing on athletics or student-athletes, but students in general.
August 12th, 2010 - 14:29
More on Nick Saban, a horrible human being:
http://www.rolltide.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/102609aac.html
Terry Saban told the gathered crowd at the Harbert Center that the Saban family would donate $200,000 over the next five years to the club’s main charity, the Crippled Children’s Foundation. Nick Saban then stood and announced a $50,000 increase to the pledge, bringing the total to $250,000.
The Sabans started Nick’s Kids more than a decade ago, when he was head coach at Michigan State. Their charitable work continued when the family moved to LSU, and then to Miami. Since Nick and Terry Saban came to Tuscaloosa in 2007, more than $1 million in donations has been distributed to 150 charities across Alabama and the surrounding region.
August 12th, 2010 - 14:35
Don’t worry, DP. BuckeyeXB knows what he’s talking about. Tressel learned all of his Mother Teresa skills at Youngstown State, where players routinely received cash from boosters. Not only did Troy Smith get nailed for taking cash from a booster, but he was also accused of breaking a woman’s jaw long about that same time. Mo “Get My Goose On” Clarett had problems well before he ever got to Columbus, and Tressel knew all about them, yet recruited him anyway. He has had numerous other player issues since he has been at OSU and has also recruited kids with myriad off-field issues (Jamel Turner, Jaamal “Bong Daddy” Turner, The Hookah Brothers (Shugart and Adams), Alex “Don’t Tase Me Bro” Boone, Antonio “I Swear I Didn’t Know She was a Prostitute” Henton, Jonathan “Do You Want an Ounce, a Dime, or What” Skeete, and ON and ON and ON.
Get freaking serious, XB.
August 22nd, 2010 - 14:13
My cousin recommended this blog and she was totally right keep up the fantastic work!
January 17th, 2011 - 19:26
Why does everybody want to run down rabbit trails? If you only have 10 schollies to offer, why are you signing more than 10? that’s the issue! This is not the NFL where you have cuts to get your roster down to size. It’s just wrong!