Who Said That?
Several readers have asked about the quote at the top of the home page and who it belongs to. That quote was one of the inspirations for the site and it came from none other than Nick Saban. Here is the context from the original interview with Ian Rapport http://blog.al.com/rapsheet/2008/04/playing_the_numbers_game.html
Today, after Alabama's last spring practice, I had one of those situations. One of the big questions, I think, for the offseason is how will coach Nick Saban whittle the roster down to just 85 scholarships? There are 66 on scholarship now, and assume 25 freshman will enroll. That's 91. So six have to go by August.
How? That's what I asked Saban today. He was entertaining as always. Let's just say, the conversation was classic:
Me: "The numbers is issue. First, do you know, is Colin Peek on scholarship?"
Saban: (Time to play dumb.) "I don't know. You ask me, do I know..." (Bad question. Clearly, he knows.)
Me: "I think you do know." (See?)
Saban: "You'll have to ask somebody else." (Cue mischievous grin) "You're asking the wrong guy."
Me: (Alright, come on, it's getting late.) "He is, right?"
Saban: "Yeah." (Round one: Me!)
Me: (The real questions) "How are you going to handle the numbers and when do you start to worry about it?"
Saban: (Getting a little loud... What, Saban worry?) "I'm not worried about them. It'll all work out. I mean, the whole thing has a solution to every issue. You don't put yourself in a position where you don't know what's coming, then have to take it in the chops." ("Chops" is such a dad word. Not that there is anything wrong with that) "Aiight? We know how it has to be managed, and it will be managed."
(Pause)
Saban: "And you don't need to call me and ask me to write a column for you, and I won't call you and ask you how to manage our numbers. How's that?"
Me: (Deal! But when when did I suggest how to manage the numbers? If he did ask... I digress.) "I don't even have a calculator." (Can't do math without one of those.)
Saban: (The smile returns.) "You don't need one to do this."
Me: (Throwing the hands up in the air.) "So you're not going to tell us?"
Saban: "I'm not going to tell you what?" (That exit is looking mighty welcoming now.) "It's none of your business. Aiight? And don't give me this stuff about the fans need to know, because they don't need to know."
Me: "I would never say that."
Saban: "Don't even ask. Aiight? So. (Starts to walk out, but he's got one more zinger before he leaves.) Ya know, I thought we could get this one last thing without having to..." (attempt a scolding?)
Me: (Even I start to laugh at that) "You really thought that? No chance."
Saban: (Off the podium, he can't help giggling to himself, too) "Not with you."
Media relations guru Jeff Purinton: (Escorting Saban out the door) "He (me) needed something to hold him over until the season..."
True. Good times...
Compare that with Jim Tressel's press conference video below where he discusses his numbers and how he manages them each year. That pretty much says it all.
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
January 19th, 2011 - 07:36
considering Rappaport bashes the tide whenever he can, on an in-state paper, it is not surprising that Saban isnt going to say much to him. That would be like an Ann Arbor paper interviewing Tressel that bashes him for weeks, he isnt going to say much to him.
January 19th, 2011 - 07:54
Of course he does and of course that is the reason saban declined to answer the questions. It had nothing to do with being dead in the rights wrong and having no answer other than, I plan to cut a bunch o kid through forced transfers, medical hardships, and greyshirts. You are pathetic, just like the rest of the blind defenders of saban an oversigning coaches.
January 19th, 2011 - 08:18
wow, calling someone “pathetic” just because i pointed out that the writer of the article is someone that continually writes pieces slanted against Bama? notice that i didnt comment about the content of Saban’s response or defend him, just merely pointed out that it wasnt surprising that he didnt talk to him.
January 19th, 2011 - 08:29
Yes it is pathetic that you are more concerned with someone writing a slanted article than you are with addressing the problem.
January 19th, 2011 - 08:35
you are “pathetic” with your hatred towards Alabama, but i dont call you out on that. I merely state opinions on facts that i see. I have also said i would prefer scholarships to be 4-year guarantees, which would stop any coach from “running off players” and i have said that on many different articles and many occasions, sorry that you dont agree with my opinion, but isnt that what a discussion board is for? I will call a spade a spade when it counts, but i see misleading titles and facts on here too.
For example, when Star Jackson left, you proclaimed that no player would leave a bigger university just for more playing time, yet that was exactly what he wanted.
January 19th, 2011 - 09:39
The name calling is unbecoming from the manager of the site. Whether you disagree with this legal, but questionable practice is one thing, but calling someone pathetic makes you seem childish.
January 19th, 2011 - 10:56
No, pathetic is the correct word.
It’s a disgusting practice defended by people who are either ignorant of what it involves or who are pathetic people.
January 19th, 2011 - 11:27
says the person that bashes any school because they arent a div 1 football factory.
January 19th, 2011 - 20:04
Here’s a perfect example of someone’s point that “condescension is a great teaching tool”. It seems we have our #1 practitioner right here. It’s just that this idiot is such a blowhard it’s hard to take any time to address it. Guy clearly has the personality of a sociopath.
January 19th, 2011 - 07:49
Wow, your bias towards the Buckeyes knows no bounds. Why don’t you just make Tressel an ordained Saint while you’re at it.
Your objectivity is in question.
January 19th, 2011 - 08:09
You can question my objectivity if you like, but what is not in question is whether or not certain schools and coaches are abusing oversigning.
January 19th, 2011 - 10:26
Gee, is there any question as to whether the author of this site is against oversigning? Maybe he took his writing approach from that scene in “The Shining” where Shelley Duvall takes a look at the hundreds of pages that Jack Nicholson has been working on for weeks and sees he has just typed the same thing over and over.
Maybe you could overlay a sound bite on the website that announces you are against oversigning, and when someone brings up the site the sound bite could play.
T’would be awesome, and would layer right in with the outrageously repetitive tone of this site.
January 19th, 2011 - 11:20
Or – maybe he could keep doing what he’s doing. How does it come as a surprise to anyone that the owner of a site titled Oversigning.com, parked at, you guessed it – oversigning.com – is particularly hammering a single issue. Isn’t that the point?
And everyone’s exposure to the issue didn’t occur all on the same day. Readers of this site come in waves, with each new mention of the site across a myriad of media. So the very nature of this site should be cyclical to serve those new readers, while also updating developing issues.
Seems the prudent thing for oversigning proponents to do would be to challenge every assertion made here, using all the facts at their disposal, rather than to put on display the weaknesses of their cases by continually attacking the man and his motives.
After all, if they could bury this site with just the facts – why wouldn’t they?
January 19th, 2011 - 13:17
As someone who tried to portray himself as a learned person, perhaps you have heard of a book written by Upton Sinclair called “The Jungle”?
Let me help you out. Mr. Sinclair was appalled at the slave-like work standard of the meat packing industry around the turn of the 20th century, and wrote this novel as an expose of the industry as an effort to try and bring about some social reform.
Here’s the thing, though. After he wrote “The Jungle”, he didn’t come out with “The Jungle, Redux” or “The Jungle–Again, In Case You Missed It The First Time”. Does that make any sense to you at all? Do you understand why he wrote the novel and then didn’t keep on writing it? Are you capable of grasping the concept of diminishing returns, or would it be hlpful to you if I explained that concept in layman’s terms?
January 19th, 2011 - 14:14
Don’t open the can of worms as “The Jungle” they’ll use it as a rallying cry. The Jungle was against working conditions that caused health problems and death. And for anyone to say that oversigning EVEN APPROACHES “The Jungle” is a Chicken Little of the highest level.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:39
There’s no problem with the mention of that particular book. I got that the gist was to reference an author who was espousing a cause.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:43
Right, but I don’t trust most here to not take that analogy further than it should be.
January 19th, 2011 - 16:02
The point was that the guy wrote the book and then let it SIT THERE. He didn’t keep writing the book again and again, hoping that if he wrote the exact same book multiple times that somehow it would make his point better.
If you guys can’t get that “analogy”, then I can’t help you.
As for the Chicken Little thing, there was one alarmist here that referred to oversigning as an “atrocity”, which I think most of you will agree is a word generally reserved for things like the Holocaust and Darfur. So don’t put it past them to go to an absurd extreme.
January 19th, 2011 - 20:05
Your point wasn’t that deep that it needed further explanation. Look up “didactic”. That’s something that could “help” in this situation.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:25
This wasn’t helpful at all. But…thanks for trying? I guess…?
You take as your point of reference a single-channel (book publishing) literary work from a century ago, which is incapable of being feasibly cycled, to educate me about how a 21st century website publisher should disseminate his message.
Good work chief.
How is it that it escapes you that almost anything a new visitor to this site reads is new to them? That the pages of this site aren’t static like a book – that page one here changes frequently? That readership changes frequently – and takes in the site content in nonsequential fashion? Perhaps you know about how books are read (is there really any secret?) but you demonstrate a profound ignorance of the versatility and requirements of this electronic medium.
Also, you could do yourself a huge favor in learning to accurately distinguish between a “learned person” and the portrayal of one. You truly have no clue about this.
Plus, if you’re capable, I’d rather you educate me about the issue this site exists to address: oversigning. You got anything on that?
January 19th, 2011 - 15:22
So you’re saying that new people would take a TLDR; attitude? That they wouldn’t read the back articles?
Just saying that they don’t need it crammed down their throat every time, that they should be able to read for themselves.
January 19th, 2011 - 16:08
I go back to my earlier suggestion. For all visitors to the site, not just new ones, there should just be a wav file that plays of Saban making the “Aiight” speech, followed by a diatribe from the owner excoriating anyone who disagrees with the concept of the site. I agree that no amount of repetition is excessive. As they say, nothing exceeds like excess. It’s best to treat the visitors like idiots, as condescension is also a very effective teaching tool.
January 19th, 2011 - 11:01
True, but it makes your motives questionable, when at every turn you praise Jim Tressel like a saint, and treat Saban like the devil. Objective reporters, even if they have an ax to grind, don’t let it show in their journalism.
January 19th, 2011 - 11:37
Maybe Josh can speak to this, but who is it exactly that is fashioning him to be an “objective reporter”? By the very nature of this site it seems he’s clearly taken a side and is bringing everything that he can to bring to bear everything he can muster to expose what he believes are abuses, and those doing it, while also showing the right way to do things.
I don’t see the problem there and I’m not certain why he’d need to stray away from being opinionated when it’s the very facts that he’s encountered that shaped his desire to create this sight to expose a wrong.
Should an anti-poaching website not praise the nature conservancy directors who’ve found workable solutions to the problems in their jurisdictions? What would be the point of that?
January 19th, 2011 - 11:42
Oops. Scratch “everything that he can to bring”.
January 19th, 2011 - 11:59
No, but it shifts the focus from oversigning to personal attacks. Especially when he deifies one particular person and bedevils the other.
It’s like Fox News.
January 19th, 2011 - 12:39
It’s true that the tone set is important to the perception of the site. But in what I’ve read to this point, he’s given back far less than he’s taken – and for too many who visit, attacking him seems to be their primary reason for being here.
If he blows a fuse occasionally I can’t be too hard on him. Fact is, I understand it, and even empathize a bit, since the tone of some of my posts aren’t always as above the fray as I’d like for them to be. Sometimes you’ve heard enough and just get sucked in.
But, I suspect he’s acutely aware of the responsibilities he has as the site operator and the need to have a higher standard for himself than we do for ourselves – and many/most of us could do a better job of presenting our sides of the oversigning issue.
January 19th, 2011 - 13:54
yet i have never attacked him.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:35
I can’t lie – that one reply surprised me. I have no idea if there’s a history between the two of you, but absent any subtext, I could quickly find a better way to have phrased that reply. But then, all too frequently for my tastes, that’s true of my own posts.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:11
And I’m far less critical and attack-y of Joshua than most pro-oversigners. I was just pointing out that just as attacking weakens the point of pro-oversigners, it weakens the point of anti’s.
You know, like even when Fox News is right (and I still have a difference of opinion about what is fair and ethical) but nobody cares because the message is coming from a tainted source (insert MSNBC or CNN depending on your leanings).
January 19th, 2011 - 08:54
Why hold him to a higher standard than espin or CBS or Tony Barnhart or Kirk Herbstreit or Chris Fowler (I could keep going…) I know you’re used to everything in the media being pro-SEC, but not everyone sees things that way.
January 19th, 2011 - 11:03
If he’s going to be the figurehead of this movement, he should be held to a higher standard. Of course, I do agree with you that most journalists today are not like Walter Cronkite.
January 19th, 2011 - 10:57
Josh has applauded coaches at other schools like Mark Richt and Bobby Dodd. If you have some other examples of people he should be praising for refusing to engage in this extremely unethical practice, please suggest them.
January 19th, 2011 - 10:49
Rapoport is a Boston native and Columbia University grad. So he wasn’t just some local hack and SEC apologist like most of the local reporters.
He’s now covering the Patriots for the Boston Herald:
http://twitter.com/#!/RapSheet/status/22149876238262272
January 19th, 2011 - 10:50
Better link: http://twitter.com/RapSheet/status/22149876238262272
January 19th, 2011 - 11:32
The birmingham news sports department is made up mostly of auburn grads. Ian’s co-writer Kevin Scarbinsky is a former Auburn beat writer and big auburn fan. Ian wrote very few articles ever showing the Tide program in a good light and had a hard time ever getting a quote from anyone around the program because of his character assasinations in the Tide program.
January 19th, 2011 - 11:51
single out and try to say the author of this site is attacking only Saban all you want but the true topic is oversigning. Just keep on trying to justify the unethical practices of oversigning.
January 19th, 2011 - 12:00
The the topic should be oversigning, and not personal attacks against a SINGLE source. Everything lately has been all-Saban, all the time. Oh, when he wasn’t being a sunshine pumper to Tressel.
January 19th, 2011 - 13:45
If you want the site to look different, create your own. Saban is a high profile, repeat, offender; of course he’ll be mentioned often.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:12
Offender of what? He’s not doing anything illegal or against the law. He may be in a moral grey zone, but you’re acting like he eats babies.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:21
good comparison! Eating babies and oversigning? He is not doing anything illegal, yet! Stay tuned. Sometimes ethics is more important than law. Obviously his Mom didnt tell him to “always do what is right.” His Mom must have said, “Always do what you have to do to win, even if it means trying to ruin some kids life!”
January 19th, 2011 - 14:35
and yet, if he had ruined someones life, it would have come out. But no one has stood up and said that Saban ruined their life.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:48
And that is your OPINION that it is unethical. Who knows what these kids are actually told when recruited. You’re not there, I’m not there.
And I wasn’t making the comparison. I was saying you act like Saban eats children, instead of just being a guy you don’t like, that wins a LOT of football (which I think spurns a lot of the hate here).
So, you don’t do what it takes to win? You don’t have a competitive spirit?
You don’t think these kids wouldn’t pull a scholly themselves to get a spot on the team? You’re naive if you don’t think these kids wouldn’t do whatever it took to get on a high profile team.
Just look at what they do before they’re signed.
January 19th, 2011 - 18:03
Oversigning…isn’t that the name of the website…Regardless of whether you think it is right or wrong is besides the point. Saban does it, so this website will point it out. Since this website takes the stance that oversigning is wrong then why would you be suprised that they bring Saban up quite a bit? He’s an extremely high profile coach of a high profile program. I don’t think bringing up the Coach of Arkansas State as an example of the perils of oversigning would have quite as much impact. (I don’t know if Arkansas State oversigns or not, just a random example of a fairly obscure Div I program)
January 19th, 2011 - 14:17
how is that an attack on a single person? This is a coach who is one of the biggest abusers of oversigning who would not answer a simple question. Its fact he oversigns! Until he stops this he will continue to get criticized.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:50
Why does he have to? The reporter doesn’t have the right to know. That’s a recent concept. The reporter has a right to BE a reporter, but Saban is under NO obligation to tell him.
January 19th, 2011 - 16:57
nope he doesnt but this shouldnt even be an issue if he wasnt a chronic abuser of oversigning.
January 20th, 2011 - 07:53
And that comes down to a difference of opinion as to what an athletic scholarship is actually for. That is really the true difference here.
January 19th, 2011 - 14:54
The point here is not for people to get into a pissing match about the correspondent or each other, but rather that the SEC teams’ practice of gross oversigning gives them a distinct advantage over other conferences that prohibit the practice. Through oversigning Saban, Miles, and Houston Nutt get to lock down (via the LOI), evaluate, and choose starters from a decidedly greater talent pool of players than others. Those who they deem not sufficiently useful are run out via grayshirting, medical redshirting, and “suggestions” to transfer to a lesser program. During this entire process these players have effectively been shut out of other big programs, and kept from lining up against Bama, LSU, etc. It’s just a huge win-win for the oversigning schools.
January 19th, 2011 - 15:01
Well, at least you’re not arguing ethics. I’ll grant you that one.
I know if I was a football coach, I’d make sure I only had the best, and cut whatever fat I had to. I mean that is the point of an athletic scholarship. I don’t see why they get a free ride once they get it. Earning things is the American way.
January 19th, 2011 - 17:00
with his statement comes ethics. When Saban forces a kid out of the program because he doesnt meet up to standard or Saban just signs a kid he thinks will be better that is unethical. Maybe Saban, Miles and Nutt should just do their homework better before offering a scholarship. I understand there are some hit or miss kids but these three coaches just seem to have many more than most coaches across the country.
January 20th, 2011 - 07:55
Why is it unethical? I don’t see it. It’s an Athletic scholarship, if the kid was to be measured by Academic standards, he should have an academic scholarship. An Athletic scholarship should be given to only the best, and only those who can make a continuing contribution to the team.
And by contribution I don’t mean scout team or whatever like the scholarship welfarers want.
January 19th, 2011 - 15:51
yet it isnt just the SEC. It is the ACC, the Big12, the PAC10 the Big East. The only one that doesnt do it apparently is the Big 10.
January 19th, 2011 - 17:02
And you are free to post the numbers from the conferences around the country. I tried to post numbers for USC and they never were posted. I also posted for Arkansas and Nebraska. Three different teams from different conferences. Post your numbers and we will see who are biggest at oversigning.
January 19th, 2011 - 21:23
Sorry Red…having a hard time keeping up and the numbers number have slipped through the cracks…please repost here and I will get them up. Thanks!
January 19th, 2011 - 20:25
NFL early entries by conference: SEC 14, ACC 12, Pac-10 9, Big Ten 7, Big East 5, Big 12 3, Mountain West 2, C-USA 1, WAC 1, MAC 1.
January 21st, 2011 - 01:47
If a student receives an Academic scholarship and does not meet the standards of the scholarship it is taken away. Why should student athletes be treated any differently?? If they aren’t meeting the standards of the program then they do not deserve a scholarship. Almost of all of these athletes come to the college with the ability to play, but if they do not WORK in both the film and weight room diligently they will not play!! There standard is too play and play WELL, if they don’t meet that standard than the scholarship should be gone!!! If I don’t maintain my 3.5 GPA my scholarship is gone and I am SOL, but it was my fault and no one elses!!! As a student on an academic scholarship right NOW I see no problem with my fellow students being held to the same standards as ME!!
January 24th, 2011 - 09:23
Yeah, well good luck finding an anti-signer to agree with you. From what I can tell, from the comments I have read, that they believe that a player can skate by with whatever on the field effort he likes so long as they keep their nose clean.
These antis don’t want any kind of physical boundary on what is clearly an athletic scholarship.
To me, athletic scholarship means you’re being brought in for your brawn, not your brain, and if you get an education great.
The academic is just the opposide. You’re in for your brain not your brawn. If you get to play sports, that’s great. But you’re there for an education.
Hell, if these kids could get a high ACT they could get a free ride to a school of their choice.
January 25th, 2011 - 01:14
Exactly, they don’t want people to be held accountable for action or lack thereof… Free ride for everyone with no consequences!! That doesn’t cut it in life or on the football field!!! You are expected to produce and if you don’t someone else will be found to do so!!
February 8th, 2011 - 17:50
I’ve read numerous articles on this subject, I find the majority of fans supporting the practice of oversigning are really missing the point. If a high profileschool offers a scholarship to an athlete and doesn’t follow through, it spoils the chances for that athlete to attend a less high profile school, which would probably love to have him. This talk about the athlete not holding up his end of the bargain is pure crap. It’s possible these athletes are in over their heads but that’s not their fault, it’s the fault of the recruiters. I’m a beliver that everyone under a scholarship be it academic or sports related, should be held accountable. Maintain your gpa or work your tail off. Many of the athletes released have done nothing wrong, they may not be a 4 or 5 star performer even though thats where these rating guru’s have them. All scholarships should be 4 yrs min. provided the work required is performed. Just because an athlete isn’t as gifted during his second, third or fourth year as aincomming freshman, shouldn’t jeopardize his scholarship. IMO
February 8th, 2011 - 18:00
I’ve read numerous articles on this subject, I find the majority of fans supporting the practice of oversigning are really missing the point (mostly sec schools). If a high profile school offers a scholarship to an athlete and doesn’t follow through, it spoils the chances for that athlete to attend a lower profile school or a competing conference school, which would probably love to have him. This talk about the athlete not holding up his end of the bargain is mostly pure crap. It’s possible some of these athletes are in over their heads but that’s not their fault, it’s the fault of the recruiting practice of some schools. I’m a beliver that everyone under a scholarship be it academic or sports related, should be held accountable. Maintain your gpa or work your tail off. Many of the athletes released (in one way or another) have done nothing wrong, they may not be a 4 or 5 star performer the recruiting guru’s labeled them, they may only be a three star. but what about the three star that performs like a 5 star, it seems to me like it balances out. That is why some coaches are considered great recruiters, because they evaluate talent, not evaluate talent after all is said and done. All scholarships should be 4 yrs min. provided the work required is performed. Just because an athlete isn’t as gifted during his second, third or fourth year as a incomming freshman, shouldn’t jeopardize his scholarship. The kid made a commitment to a school, the school should make the same commitment. IMO GBR