Oversigning.com
19Dec/1030

Ohio State vs. Arkansas

Based on Ohio State's average recruiting class size, 19.8, Arkansas has the advantage of having accepted nearly 2 full recruiting classes of signed letters of intent more than Ohio State.   Most notably, the DT, OL, WR, and those recruited under ATH, appear to be where Arkansas has recruited more players.

Filed under: Big 10, SEC 30 Comments
27Sep/1029

Michigan State Player Diagnosed with Cancer Keeps Football Scholarship for 3 Years

Arthur Ray Jr. accepted a scholarship offer from Michigan State in 2007 and signed a letter of intent with the Spartan during his senior year in high school.  The day before the MSU spring game that year, shortly after he arrived at Michigan State, Ray was diagnosed with osteosarcoma, a rare type of bone cancer.

This kid has endured 14 hour surgeries, chemo, and had his tibia removed for 8 weeks and reinserted.  And never once was his FOOTBALL SCHOLARSHIP in danger.  Never once did ANYONE at Michigan State consider pushing this poor kid out of the football program and onto a medical scholarship so they can free up his spot and give it to someone better who can help them win more games, or heck just play in a game.   Instead they all sucked it up and kept Arthur Ray a part of the team.

"This doctor, he didn't have too good of bedside manner," he said. "He was just like, 'You've got to start immediate chemotherapy. Throw football out the window. The most you'll do is run around with your grandkids.' I'm 17. I'm not trying to hear that at all. I'm not thinking about grandkids.

EAST LANSING, Mich. -- A large man appears at the entrance to the Skandalaris Football Center, braces himself with his crutches, swings open the door and hobbles inside.

The interview will be held on the second floor, and while the stairs are navigable, the football-shaped elevator is the safer option. When Arthur Ray Jr. reaches his destination, the lobby outside Michigan State's football offices, he lowers himself onto a couch and places his crutches to the side.

The crutches have accompanied Ray since July 2007, when he underwent surgery to remove a cancerous tumor from his right leg. Last week, doctors gave him the go-ahead to use only one crutch, but he hasn't fully supported himself for nearly 21 months.

He has enough hardware in his leg to fill a shelf at Ace or Home Depot. He has undergone four surgeries in addition to several other chemotherapy procedures. Amputation is still a word doctors use around Ray, who had a type of bone cancer that often results in patients losing a limb.

Bottom line: Ray doesn't look like a man who could play offensive line for Michigan State.

If Ray's leg continues to heal and can supply blood to the infected area to support his 6-foot-3, 307-pound frame, he can start increasing his activity. He returns to Chicago every six months for a series of tests -- MRI, X-ray, CT, bone scan -- and so far everything has been clean.

"Walking is the big step," Ray said. "Because before I can run, I've got to walk. Before I can sprint, I've got to run."

But skipping steps or rushing his rehab could have disastrous consequences. Infection remains a major risk, and Dietzel constantly stresses the importance of taking things slow.

"If you don't stay off of this and allow it to heal, the plates and the screws and the rod that's in your leg cannot support your weight by themselves," Dietzel tells Ray. "Bottom line is we are going to amputate your leg.

"My discussions with him are essentially, 'I want you to leave here in four or five years with a degree, being able to walk down the aisle and get your diploma and not going down with crutches or a wheelchair.' If he does play football, that's just gravy."

But football remains in the forefront of Ray's mind. He attended practices throughout the spring, wearing his No. 73 jersey on the sideline.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=4195097

Regardless of what side of the fence you are on with regards to the debate over medical hardships, we strongly encourage you to read the entire story, it is truly unbelievable.

And the next time you read a Wall Street Journal article about Nick Saban's former players who felt they were pushed into medical hardship scholarships and asked to leave the team in order to free up scholarship space under the NCAA 85 limit, think about Arthur Ray Jr. and his missing tibia, chemo, and bone cancer, and how Michigan State didn't kick him to the curb and off the football team just so they could get a better player and have a better chance at winning games.

Also think about Arthur Ray Jr. the next time you hear Alabama placing a guy on a medical hardship scholarship when his knee won't function effectively.

“He hasn’t been out there at practice, so he is getting a medical,” Saban said. “He can not function effectively on his knee. Those things happen on occasion. He tried to go through the summer conditioning program and struggled. It’s always a mutual decision when we make that decision with a player, as to what he wants to do in the future.”

Bottom line, if you aren't at practice, Nick Saban has no need for you.

Medical Hardship Scholarships Under Nick Saban

Year Player
2007 Tyrone Prothro
2007 Arron McDaniel
2007 Jake Jones
2007 Byron Walton
2008 Ivan Matchett
2008 Charles Hoke
2009 Jeramie Griffin
2009 Charlie Kirschman
2010 Darius McKeller
2010 Taylor Pharr
2010 MiltonTalbert

The real issue here is that the medical hardship is a safety net of last resort and Nick Saban has made a mockery of the process by using it as a tool to trim his roster, but as those who would defend him would say, it's legal.  Our advice to the guys currently on the roster - stay healthy - most likely 8-10 of you will have to go by next August.

Filed under: Big 10 29 Comments
16Sep/1029

Jim Tressel Awards 3 Walk-On Players Scholarships

Jim Tressel announced today that three walk-on players will be awarded with scholarships:  Ricky Crawford, Chris Malone, and Scott Sika. 

Sika has already graduated and will get an entire year of his graduate degree paid for by Ohio State.  Crawford and Malone are set to graduate this year.  Odds are that none of these guys see significant playing time, this is simply a reward for their dedication, hard-work, and character, and is the net result of Jim Tressel's recruiting philosophy, which is based on signing the number of kids you have room for on National Signing day and then awarding scholarships to walk-on players based on the shortfall between the number of guys signed and the 85 limit.   We outlined this method of roster management a while back--the contrast to this style is to signed 26-28 recruits instead of 17 and instead of adding walk-on players to the scholarship roster you cut lesser performing or injured scholarship players to get down to 85.

In contrast, this is the polar opposite of the recruiting styles of coaches such as Nick Saban and Les Miles, who purposely sign at least 8-10 more players than they have room for and then get rid of whoever they have to get rid of via medical hardships, transfers to lesser schools, or just flat pulling a scholarship, like Les Miles did to Elliott Porter this year, in order to get down to 85 players by the NCAA deadline in August. 

Tressel has had this philosophy since the beginning of his time at Ohio State and has never once oversigned a class and has awarded over 40 walk-on players with scholarships in his time at Ohio State.  You have to admit that it is pretty remarkable how he has been able to keep Ohio State in the National Championship picture despite working against such a disadvantage in terms of the numbers.  When you look at the numbers you see that Ohio State and Texas were very evenly matched in terms of numbers and the performance on the field against each other.  USC is a little different story given that they are currently on probation because of recruiting violations.  That leaves Florida, LSU, and Alabama, teams that have run through players at alarming rates, but who have also enjoyed a tremendous amount of success.   

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


Tressel has some interesting comments regarding the scholarship awards given to the three walk-on players.  The link below is about an 8 minute clip and his comments on this topic come around 2/3 of the way through.  He mentions that it is one of the neat things he gets to do and wishes he had 10 scholarships to give out to walk-on players every year.

http://www.the-ozone.net/flash/10-11/10-09-16/10-09-16-Tressel.html

Filed under: Big 10 29 Comments
3Aug/108

LSU’s March to 85 is NOT Over

We have been following LSU's journey to get their roster down to 85 players ever since one of our readers started posting the details of their roster situation a while back, and with the announcement that Chris Garrett was being cut from the team we thought that LSU's march to 85 was over.  Therefore, we started looking at LSU's recruiting for next year and that is when we noticed that Les Miles and LSU were getting a jump start on screwing players next year by already having more verbal commitments then they have room for next year.

Turns out we were wrong, forget about next year, Les Miles is not done screwing players from his current roster.  Word has come out today that Elliot Porter, who had this to say about his commitment to LSU...

"I stood face to face with Coach Miles and I committed,'' Porter said proudly Saturday evening shortly after meeting with Miles during an unofficial visit to the Baton Rouge campus. "I was blown away by the campus, blown away by the school. Just everything about it, I felt at home.''

              

http://highschoolsports.nola.com/news/article/-816132523422918078/shaw-lineman-elliott-porter-commits-to-lsu/

...has been asked to take a greyshirt because LSU does not have scholarship room for him because all 27 of the players they signed have made it academically.

Due to the fact that all 27 of LSU's signees are academically qualified, there would not be scholarships available for two players.

According to sources close to the situation, Archbishop Shaw High School lineman Elliott Porter will not be with the team when practice begins Thursday. Porter was asked to take a greyshirt. However, he did not want to be greyshirted. Porter asked for and received a release from his letter of intent.

Porter will be immediately eligible at any other school. A possible destination for Porter is Tennessee. Last year, Porter made 65 tackles. As a junior, Porter recorded 85 tackles, including 20 sacks. LSU intended to move Porter to the offensive line. Porter worked out with the team during the summer.

With Porter leaving, there are only two offensive linemen in the 2010 recruiting class - Evan Washington and Cameron Fordham. Washington enrolled in school last January and participated in spring practice.

http://lsu.rivals.com/barrier_noentry.asp?ReturnTo=&sid=&script=content.asp&cid=1109003&fid=&tid=&mid=&rid=

There are so many things wrong with this situation that we really don't even know where to start.  How does this even happen???  Why is this poor kid getting word at the last minute that there is not a scholarship for him?  At least Miles has enough sense to grant him a release from his LOI, but ask yourself, why is this poor kid bound to his commitment to LSU and LSU not bound to their commitment to him???  Why does he have to ask for a release AFTER they tell him that they are not going to give him the scholarship they promised him?

It would be one thing if this was the only situation to arise with LSU this year, but look at the list of attrition and the number of scholarships they have already had to cut in order to make room. 

The March to 85 - LSU

Player Position Reason for Leaving
Akiem Hicks Defensive Tackle Removed from the team - was involved in NCAA investigation
Kyle Prater Linebacker Transfer
Jhyryn Taylor Wide Receiver Transfer
Thomas Parsons Fullback Medical Hardship Scholarship
John Williams Wide Receiver Medical Hardship Scholarship
Clay Spencer Offensive Lineman Medical Hardship Scholarship
Chris Garrett QB Cut - Scholarship Not Renewed
Houston Bates Defensive End Released from LOI in April; refused Greyshirt
Elliott Porter Offensive Lineman Asked to Greyshirt in AUGUST; refused Greyshirt; released


Now add Elliot Porter to the list.

But this is nothing new at LSU, back in March we wrote a piece on Gerry DiNardo and his time at LSU and Indiana, and really nothing much has changed (sign as many as you can legally get away with and then do whatever you have to in order to get down to 85 by the fall).  Here are some of his comments regarding oversigning from an SI article a long time ago.

"There are 28 new Tigers, although some of them will not qualify academically (which will keep LSU within the NCAA one-year maximum of 25 new scholarships) and many will never contribute. 'It's a fact that only about a third of the guys you sign will end up starting, because if you get it going, you sign someone the following year that's better,' DiNardo said. 'There will be injuries, transfers, failures. There always are.'"

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1007746/1/index.htm

Perhaps DiNardo and Saban were a little better at using discretion when screwing players out of scholarship to make room for better players or when hedging their bets against academic eligibility, or perhaps there just wasn't enough media coverage of this aspect of college football recruiting.  There certainly wasn't an oversigning.com website back in those days.  

The most disturbing part about this whole story is that the schools and the coaches have all of the power and they dangle the NFL $$$ carrot out there to the recruits in order to get them to sign and to keep them from signing with someone else, and if they want to get rid of them at any time, for any reason, they can, and they do.  This is where the NCAA has got to step in and put an end to the games these coaches are playing with oversigning.  Sure, we understand that these guys are trying to ensure that they have a full roster, but at what price?  For all the MILLIONS of dollars these coaches make and given the fact that they are the adults, you would think that they would take the moral high ground and do the right thing ethically by these kids.  And where the hell are the University Presidents, Athletic Directors, and the NCAA on all of this???  They don't appear to have a problem with a coach accepting a signed LOI that binds the player to a school, only to rip it up and not honor it because he couldn't count to 85 and doesn't have enough room for everyone. 

Thankfully, not all coaches operate this way.  There are coaches who refuse gamble with lives of the kids they recruit by hedging their bets on academic eligibility and injuries.  Guys like Mark Richt, Jim Tressel, and several others around the country.

Jim Tressel was asked about recruiting numbers at the Big 10 Media Days this week, here are his comments:

When asked about the 2002 recruiting class..

"It was special, and it was 25 guys--which is an unusually high number."

25 unusually high???  Not for the SEC.  When asked about the size of his upcoming recruiting class...

..."21 or 22. That would be the lid. We never want to be in that predicament where we're close to being over, because all of a sudden you're not recruiting a guy that you said to him you're recruiting. And we've got some walk-ons that we try to help them out."

This is nothing new for Tressel, here are some of his comments regarding last year's class.  This was taken on National Signing Day.

How is it that Jim Tressel already knows EXACTLY how many spots he will have for the next recruiting class in August, yet some SEC coaches all seem to not know what their numbers will be until next August?  That's because Tressel is not gambling with his commitments and is not hedging his bets to gain a competitive advantage, something that is just a way of life in some places.

What LSU, Alabama, and other schools are doing is not only is poor taste, it cheats the game, not to mention the players that get screwed in the process.  We get all up in arms when a coach runs the score up on a weak opponent or does something cheap like call a last second time out from the sideline right before a kicker kicks a potential game-winning field goal.  We boo these acts because they cheapen the game and they are unsportsmanlike; oversigning is no different, at least for the time being until it is banned and then it will not just be unsportsmanlike, it will be illegal.

Filed under: Big 10, SEC 8 Comments
18Jun/1021

Indiana, Crean On the Clock

We just received the message below from a reader by the name of John, located in Chicago, Illinois.  And while we can recite NCAA By-Laws for football recruiting in our sleep, we are not that well versed, yet, in the recruiting By-Laws for other sports, such as basketball.  We do know that basketball is now subject to the one-and-done rules which enables players to jump to the NBA after only one year in college, but in being completely honest we are not totally up to speed on basketball recruiting rules. 

Regardless, what really matters here is that someone was compelled (outraged if you will) enough to write us about Tom Crean pushing players off the Indiana roster in order to make room for new recruits. 

Click link to continue reading >>>>

13Jun/105

It’s Legal, but is it Ethical?

At the end of the day, that is the fundamental question when discussing oversigning. By virtue of the way the NCAA by-laws are written and the structure of the 85/25 scholarship rules, there is no question that coaches, by NCAA rules, are allowed to sign as many players as they want (in fact the NCAA places no limits on the number of players that can be signed), as long as only 25 new scholarship players are added each year and no more than 85 scholarship players are on the roster at one time. Those that have been following this site already know all of this, as we have talked about it and debated it many times here.

For those just reading this site for the first time, we have taken a look at the restrictions some conferences have added to the signing process to prevent the practice of oversigning and we have looked at some conferences that until just recently have had no such restrictions and that blatantly oversign. There is no question that there are two schools of thought on this topic and that fans are just as passionate about this topic as they are about recruiting rankings and the games played on the field.

We ran across a wonderfully written article on oversigning and whether or not it is ethical at www.athlonsports.com.  If you follow this site and this topic then this is a must read article, as it touches on all of the main talking points when it comes to oversigning, including comments from high school coaches upset that their players were victims of oversigning, something that detractors of this site claim doesn't exist.  We're not sure when the article was written, but based on the comments from the coaches in the article our best guess is that this was written somewhere around 2003.

Let's take a closer look at the article (warning, this is a long, but very informative read - you might want to get a cup of coffee or something before you dive into this):

Click the link to continue reading >>>  

8Jun/1018

Slightly Off-Topic, But Still Relevant

The primary focus around here is oversigning, but from time to time you can't help but talk about academic standards and players qualifying when you talk about oversigning.  Those supporting oversigning often point to issues with finding enough guys to qualify academically to fill their roster.   We have mentioned here several times that we equate oversigning to hedging against attrition and how some schools have the luxury of doing it and some schools do not or will not.

Here is a prime example of how not being able to hedge can really bite you in recruiting.  Rich Rodriguez's prize recruit and the highest rated recruit for the entire Big 10 conference will most likely not play at Michigan this year, or next, or ever.  Demar Dorsey will likely not make it into school at Michigan this year, despite meeting the NCAA Clearinghouse requirements and being an NCAA qualifier.

Dorsey, the Big Ten's highest-rated recruit according to ESPN Recruiting, hasn't been allowed to enroll at Michigan, his high school coach Mark James told Corey Long.

"Demar is an NCAA qualifier with a 2.5 or 2.6 GPA and an 18 score on the ACT," said James. "But he hasn't yet been granted at Michigan."

Controversy surrounded Dorsey's commitment to Michigan when it was disclosed that he was arrested twice as a juvenile. He was acquitted on a charge of robbery with a deadly weapon in 2008 and had a previous charge of burglary dismissed.

James suggested that some of Dorsey's issues with his admission may stem from his previous transgressions with the law.

Both James and another source close to Dorsey told ESPN.com that Michigan's coaching staff is still working very hard to get him admitted.

http://espn.go.com/blog/ncfnation/post/_/id/22938/dorsey-situation-tests-michigan-rodriguez-bond

This brings a lot of areas of discussion to the table:

1. How is Dorsey affected by this?  He signed a LOI to a JUCO as a backup plan, but you have to think the kid was excited about clearing the NCAA clearinghouse and going to Michigan.  Will he end up at another D1 school on scholarship?  Rodriguez's comments about JUCO players are pretty interesting; pretty much he is saying that if Dorsey goes to JUCO it is unlikely that he will be able to come back to Michigan because of the issues with credits from JUCO transferring to Michigan.  This sure sheds some light on the JUCO farm leagues in Mississippi.  

In November, he spoke about wanting to sign a junior college player or two but not getting his hopes up.

“There’s not a lot of transferrable credits for junior-college guys to come in here,” Rodriguez said. “Sometimes people look at that as a quicker fix. That’s not going to really be an option for us just because of the academic differences.”

From the link above to the ESPN article.

Regardless, you have to feel for Dorsey who thought he was going to Michigan and is now looking elsewhere.  A lot of this can be solved by changing the signing process - one of our readers Mario, former linebacker at Alabama, has had some great insight and good ideas in this regard.

2. Are academic requirements really different across conferences and is it true that just because a guy clears the NCAA doesn't mean he will get into school?

3. How is Michigan going to be affected by this loss?  Had they been able to hedge their attrition by oversigning, would they have taken another player just in case?

4. What kind of competitive advantage is it to be able to oversign?

5. Does Rivals and Scout include the potential to qualify as part of their rating system??? Here we have the highest rated recruit for Michigan, and the Big 10, but at the end of the day, if he doesn't qualify how high should he really be rated?  If Rivals and Scout and all the other recruiting ranking services leave out academics or the ability to qualify it should be considered just as bad as if they left out a player's ability to read defenses or run a fast 40 time.  We see now why Randy Edsall was so livid about recruiting services.

6. Are part of Rich Rodriguez's problems at Michigan related in some way to the change in culture he is experiencing?  A guy like Dorsey would be lock to get into West Virginia, wouldn't he?

This could be a crushing blow to Michigan's secondary as Dorsey was expected to come in right away and help shore up a position of need.

29May/1078

On the Clock

    

In a previous post, we responded to Alabama fans that were outraged by our March to 85 piece by giving them a homework assignment.  The assignment was for them to bring us a BCS school that needs to shed more than 6 scholarship commitments between now and August when the NCAA will required that all teams have their rosters down to 85 players.   It took a little bit of time, but we finally had a reader post a list of schools that he claims are over the limit and needs to shed players. 

Here's the list from the Alabama fan:

"You want other programs? Here ya go….

LSU currently has 91 players on scholarship (Need to cut 6)
Miami currently has 91 players on scholarship (Need to cut 6)
Texas A&M currently has 90 players on scholarship (Need to cut 5)
Washington currently has 88 players on scholarship (Need to cut 3)
Nebraska currently has 87 players on scholarship (Need to cut 2)

Texas was at 88 players on scholarship, had 2 transfer, and now needs to cut 1 more."

Okay, so where do we start?  First, let's get a table of the recruiting numbers for each of these schools in one place so we can easily look at them together here.  This is everything from 2002 - 2010; we'll narrow this down to the numbers we need for this investigation a little later in this post.

On The Clock

Teams Conf. 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Average
LSU SEC 26 28 26 13 26 26 26 24 29 224 24.89
Miami ACC 24 24 28 17 22 19 33 19 28 214 23.77
Texas A&M B12 23 24 28 25 23 18 24 28 23 216 24
Washington PAC10 21 27 23 13 22 27 26 19 31 209 23.22
Nebraska B12 21 19 20 32 22 27 28 20 21 210 23.33
Texas B12 28 18 20 15 25 24 20 20 22 192 21.33

Done. 

Now, how do we figure out who went over the limit this year by accepting more signed letters of intent then they had room for given the number of scholarship commitments they had on National Signing day?  The math is really simple, but finding the actual roster numbers for the previous year online can be difficult, which is why we are asking you, the fans of these schools, to participate and help us determine if your team went over the limit.  We could do it on our own if all of these teams has a sweet online depth chart application like Notre Dame has available here; make sure you click on Roster Chart when you open the link (side note - if we had any sense at all we would build an application like this to house roster data for all 64 BCS schools and then charge a fee to access it - but as it is we barely have enough time to keep up with blog and our real lives). 

Regardless, we have the number of players signed to each recruiting class (see table above), therefore, all we need now is to know exactly how many players were on scholarship on National Signing Day.  Typically, this is the previous year's total number of scholarship players (which will vary from school to school because not all schools are always at 85 every year) minus graduating seniors with no eligibility left and minus juniors who have declared for the NFL draft by the deadline on January 15th.  We refer to this number as the "recruiting budget."

Until we can get those numbers, let's just look at how many players each school has signed over the last 5 years.  We're going to subtotal 2007 - 2009 and then add 2010 to that number and call it the subtotal for 2007-2010.  We are also going to show you the 2006 numbers, which would represent the 5th year senior classes for these schools.  It is very likely that each of these schools will have a few 5th year guys on their roster.

On The Clock - Numbers for 2006 - 2010

Teams Conf. 2006 2007 2008 2009 (07-09) 2010 (07-10)
LSU SEC 26 26 26 24 76 29 105
Miami ACC 22 19 33 19 71 28 99
Texas A&M B12 23 18 24 28 70 23 93
Washington PAC10 22 27 26 19 72 31 103
Nebraska B12 22 27 28 20 75 21 96
Texas B12 25 24 20 20 64 22 86

For comparisons sake, now let's look at a few teams that we have investigated in the past and that we know are not over the limit.

Not On The Clock

Teams Conf. 2006 2007 2008 2009 (07-09) 2010 (07-10)
Georgia SEC 28 23 24 20 67 19 86
Vanderbilt SEC 25 14 21 18 53 24 77
USC PAC10 27 18 19 18 55 20 75
Stanford PAC10 18 19 17 22 58 23 81
Penn State B10 24 21 14 27 62 20 82
Ohio State B10 20 15 20 25 60 18 78
Northwestern B10 17 19 20 18 57 17 74
Notre Dame Ind. 28 18 23 18 59 23 82

And then finally, here is Alabama.  Still above those on the clock and way, way above those not on the clock.

Alabama

Teams Conf. 2006 2007 2008 2009 (07-09) 2010 (07-10)
Alabama SEC 23 25 32 27 84 29 113

(Important: It should be noted that the 2007-2010 numbers do not include the 5th year guys from 2006.  Therefore, schools that are under 85 in this column are either short-handed or they have a number of 5th year guys; schools that are way over 85 either have no 5th year guys or they have a few and the numbers are even worse.)

Before everyone gets all up in arms, there is more to this than just these numbers and this is where it gets really time consuming in trying to investigate oversigning.  From 2006 to 2010 a lot of things happen to the rosters, some things are legitimate and some things are not.  The numbers above are the numbers signed; we still need to know who left the team and who still remains from the 2006 class, which will give us the total number of scholarship players at the end of the 2009 season.  From there we can subtract the graduating seniors and early entries into the NFL.  That will give us our recruiting budget for the 2010 class. 

We're not asking that you guys hunt down the back story to every single transfer (although that would be nice), all we really need is the total scholarship commitments at National Signing Day, which is what we described above.  Once we have those numbers we will add the number for the 2010 class and see if it is over 85.

So there it is, we have provided a nice starting point for investing the schools Alabama fans have claimed are also guilty of oversigning players.  Now we just need your help to finish up the investigation.  Please post anything you have here and we'll continue to discuss.

Filed under: Big 10, Big 12, PAC 10, SEC 78 Comments
6May/1023

2006 – 2010 Recruiting Numbers

Update 6/1/2010: This appears to be a very popular post.  It has been linked to a lot of websites over the last few days, and judging by the comments associated with the sites that have linked to it there appears to be some misconceptions as to what these numbers mean.   Here are couple of things to know before looking at the original post and the numbers.

1.) The table below is not a listing of teams from worst oversigners to least (we never said it was by the way).  It is simply the number of players that signed letters of intent (referred to as "commits") for each BCS school, sorted by the highest number of players signed to the lowest.   Granted, there is a strong connection between having a high number of players signed and oversigning.  However, not all teams that have high numbers are guilty of oversigning.  One reason for this could be the use of JUCO players that only have 2 years of eligibility, another reason could be consecutive years of attrition during the regular season or after national signing day on classes that were not oversigned.  For example, if a team has room for 23 guys and they take 22 and then 5 guys transfer during the spring, the team will go into the fall short 6...if this happens a couple of years in a row you could see teams with a high average number but yet never oversigned.  They too have a problem but it is not oversigning.

2.) In order to determine if the numbers below indicate that a school oversigned, you need to understand what oversigning really is.  It is not just having really high numbers every year and it is not having more than 25 in a single class.  Oversigning is the practice of accepting more signed letters of intent on National Signing Day than you have scholarship openings for under the 85 limit when you accept the signed letters and then depending on attrition between signing day and the NCAA deadline in August to get down to 85.   This is where we have pointed to Alabama as the easiest to understand example of oversigning.  They had 66 players on scholarship on NSD, leaving only room for 19 new recruits; instead of signing 19 new recruits they accepted letters from 29 players.  So while Alabama has lower total numbers below, they were actually more guilty of oversigning than Auburn.  Auburn's issue is that they have had so much attrition (mostly academic) that they, despite having signed more players than anyone in the country, are always playing catch up.  This too is a problem, but it's a slightly different breed of cat.  How they have managed to avoid APR penalties is proof that the system for APR is flawed.

3.) Determining which teams oversign is time consuming process and requires some investigation.  You can't just look at the numbers below and say that all the teams that have signed more than 85 players are guilty of oversigning.  In order to determine who oversigned you have to look at the the 2009 team roster at National Signing Day and determine how many players are on scholarship when the new letters are accepted.  This number is typically the number of scholarship players on the 2009 roster minus graduating seniors that have exhausted their eligibility minus any players that have declared for the NFL draft by the deadline on January 15th.  Once you have that number you subtract it from 85 and that gives you the recruiting budget for the next class. Lastly, compare how many players a team signed to how many they had room to sign, and that is how you determine who oversigned.  It's not an easy process and it is part of the reason why few people really understand this process and how the numbers really work.  There will be those that point to the 1-year scholarship rule, but they fail to realize that scholarships are not renewed until July first, therefore, players with eligibility remaining are still on scholarship on signing day.

4.) The real purpose for the numbers in the table below was to show how many players were signed by each school in hopes of shedding light on the schools that are doing a good job of retaining players and keeping their numbers in check, as well as showing the schools that go through a lot more players.  Yes, there are some that are guilty of oversigning, but don't go away from this article thinking that everyone over 85 has oversigned because they haven't and don't come away thinking that this is a list of oversigning teams from top to bottom.   

Back to the original post:

The results below should come as no surprise to anyone who reads this site or knows anything at all about oversigning, but we thought we would post them anyways.  The chart below shows the average number of players signed per team by each conference for 2006-2010 and the table below the chart shows all of the BCS teams and their numbers (note the total and average columns in table are just for 2007-2010 so that you can get an idea of what each school has done in just the last four recruiting classes). 

There is really not a lot to say here that hasn't already been said.  However, these numbers do give us a pretty good indication of exactly who is doing the best job of recruiting and retaining players at a high rate.  The NCAA needs to do something to rein in some of these schools that are simply abusing the spirit of recruiting student athletes.  Although there is a NCAA By-Law that states that football scholarships are 1-year renewable contracts, we all know the true spirit of scholarship athletics is to recruit players with the intention of developing them over a 4-5 year period and making sure they graduate from your school.  These numbers make it pretty clear who is operating within that spirit and who is simply running through players with a win at all costs mentality.

Recruiting Numbers 2007 - 2010

Teams Conf. 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 07-10 Total 07-10 Average
Auburn SEC 25 30 29 28 32 119 29.75
Ole Miss SEC 30 22 31 37 25 115 28.75
Miss. State SEC 24 33 27 27 26 113 28.25
Alabama SEC 23 25 32 27 29 113 28.25
Arkansas SEC 26 27 26 31 25 109 27.25
Kansas State B12 30 34 33 25 17 109 27.25
South Carolina SEC 24 31 23 29 23 106 26.50
West Virginia BigEast 16 28 30 26 21 105 26.25
LSU SEC 26 26 26 24 29 105 26.25
Iowa State B12 30 25 25 26 28 104 26.00
Oklahoma State B12 29 23 28 26 27 104 26.00
Kentucky SEC 31 29 20 29 26 104 26.00
Baylor B12 29 29 23 28 23 103 25.75
Washington PAC10 22 27 26 19 31 103 25.75
Arizona State PAC10 24 24 28 22 27 101 25.25
Washington St. PAC10 24 27 27 22 25 101 25.25
Louisville BigEast 25 18 26 29 27 100 25.00
USF BigEast 28 27 24 29 20 100 25.00
Oregon PAC10 21 29 22 26 23 100 25.00
Virginia Tech ACC 22 26 31 22 21 100 25.00
Mizzu B12 25 27 24 25 23 99 24.75
Miami ACC 22 19 33 19 28 99 24.75
North Carolina ACC 28 24 18 28 28 98 24.50
Syracuse BigEast 24 27 26 16 29 98 24.50
Minnesota B10 22 24 29 20 24 97 24.25
Tennessee SEC 22 32 18 22 25 97 24.25
Florida State ACC 31 20 32 21 23 96 24.00
Nebraska B12 22 27 28 20 21 96 24.00
Oregon State PAC10 33 34 18 24 18 94 23.50
Oklahoma B12 28 21 21 23 29 94 23.50
Cincinnati BigEast 19 23 24 25 22 94 23.50
Texas A&M B12 23 18 24 28 23 93 23.25
Illinois B10 27 23 28 22 20 93 23.25
Florida SEC 27 27 22 17 27 93 23.25
Michigan B10 19 20 24 22 27 93 23.25
Texas Tech B12 34 26 16 25 25 92 23.00
Connecticut BigEast 22 29 22 21 20 92 23.00
Colorado B12 22 28 21 20 21 90 22.50
Rutgers BigEast 26 23 20 23 24 90 22.50
N.C. State ACC 22 26 17 26 21 90 22.50
Maryland ACC 22 26 17 26 21 90 22.50
Arizona PAC10 25 19 24 24 22 89 22.25
Purdue B10 27 19 26 20 24 89 22.25
Wisconsin B10 23 18 26 21 24 89 22.25
Michigan State B10 28 23 21 23 21 88 22.00
Cal PAC10 20 26 22 21 19 88 22.00
Iowa B10 21 22 25 20 21 88 22.00
Pittsburg BigEast 27 24 19 20 24 87 21.75
Kansas B12 25 23 20 25 18 86 21.50
Georgia SEC 28 23 24 20 19 86 21.50
Texas B12 25 24 20 20 22 86 21.50
Boston College ACC 20 18 29 18 21 86 21.50
Virginia ACC 23 24 18 25 18 85 21.25
Duke ACC 26 21 17 27 20 85 21.25
Indiana B10 21 20 20 19 25 84 21.00
UCLA PAC10 22 11 23 27 23 84 21.00
Clemson ACC 20 23 25 12 23 83 20.75
Penn State B10 24 21 14 27 20 82 20.50
Notre Dame Ind. 28 18 23 18 23 82 20.50
Georgia Tech ACC 16 20 20 21 21 82 20.50
Stanford PAC10 18 19 17 22 23 81 20.25
Wake Forest ACC 15 20 17 23 19 79 19.75
Ohio State B10 20 15 20 25 18 78 19.50
Vanderbilt SEC 25 14 21 18 24 77 19.25
USC PAC10 27 18 19 18 20 75 18.75
Northwestern B10 17 19 20 18 17 74 18.50

Note regarding data above:  The Total and Average columns are for 2007-2010; we included 2006 numbers just to show how many players were signed prior to the current 4 year rosters.  The theory here is that if a team signed 115 players in four years, like Ole Miss did, and signed 30 the year prior to that, you have to imagine that they have a few 5th year guys who red-shirted.  So in addition to 115 new players in 4 years, you should have a handful of 5th year guys as well.  This just further exposes the oversigning of players relative to taking 5th year guys into account.

2May/105

Shameless Plug – Rivals.Com Radio

It has been brought to our attention that someone called Rivals.Com's weekly radio show and plugged our site. 

Click the link and fast forward to the 15:15 mark...Thanks to Andy from Chesapeake, Virginia for the shameless plug!

http://rivalsradio.rivals.com/radiostream.asp?SID=1135&TYPE=WM&cl_key=5496 

For those of you just now visiting the site for the first time, we encourage you to read everything here and come to your own conclusion.  Our main purpose for this site was to have a centralized place to discuss oversigning and explain all the little details that most college football fans overlook or are unaware of because oversigning is not something that is ever talked about on shows like College Gameday on ESPN. 

Please be sure to visit our Recruiting Numbers page and read so of our older posts - we believe that oversigning has cultural roots in the Southeastern part of the country and we have uncovered some every interesting stories that validate our beliefs.

Filed under: Big 10 5 Comments
27Mar/106

Mike D’Andrea, No Medical Hardship Scholarship

If you can't already tell, we've been bitten by the medical hardship scholarship bug.  If anyone out there can help shed some light on the topic it would be greatly appreciated.  In the meantime we are going to look for cases of players who we know were injured badly enough to be unable to continue to contribute to the team on the field, yet remained on football scholarship and remained part of the team. 

Despite how warn and fuzzy it feels to hear that an injured player is given a free ride to continue his education as long as he leaves the football team to free up a scholarship for another player, we believe that guys in this situation, unless they simply can't walk, should be allowed to stay with the team, work hard at whatever capacity they can, and continue to earn their scholarship by working as hard as they can, instead of just kicking them to the curb with a free meal ticket in order to avoid APR penalties, but then again, we believe in commitment and teaching guys commitment by sticking with them through injuries and continuing to mold and shape them through the 4 most life-altering years of their lives.  Of course we're not getting paid $4 Million Dollars a year to win football games either, though. 

Maybe for some coaches the pressure to win is so great that they don't have a problem talking a kid into leaving the team and taking a medical hardship scholarship (which we still don't understand how it works other than the player has to leave the team and he gets his education paid for).

First stop, Mike D'Andrea, former #1 linebacker recruit from the 2001 recruiting class.

 "Mike D’Andrea (6-3, 248, Sr.) – D’Andrea was the third member of the shining 2001 recruiting class that included Clarrett and Zwick (and, of course, Smith) but, so far, Mike’s career at OSU has been plagued with bad luck and injuries. A man-child as a freshman, D’Andrea worked hard and saw some playing time backing up Matt Wilhelm but had shortened sophomore and junior seasons. His junior season ending with knee surgery. He sat out all of last year and seems to be struggling to get back in health for this season. If he can get everything together and stay healthy, OSU will be thick at middle linebacker."

http://menofthescarletandgray.com/2006/07/19/2006-defensive-preview-linebackers/

Why was Mike D'Andrea not given a medical hardship scholarship so that Ohio State could replace him with a new recruit?  Simply put, because that is not how Jim Tressel rolls.  He doesn't oversign and he doesn't abuse the medical hardship scholarship thingy.  Instead, Mike D'Andrea finished his degree while on a football scholarship and watched the last 33 football games of his college career from the sidelines, with no real hope of ever seeing the field in a meaningful way. 

Here's a nice summary of Mike D'Andrea's time at Ohio State: http://www.nfldraftscout.com/ratings/dsprofile.php?pyid=10399&draftyear=2007&genpos=ILB 

Obviously there is a fine line between protecting a player that is truly at risk and abusing a loophole to make room for an overstuffed roster.  It's hard not to be suspicious of medical hardships that come during spring and summer practice and conditioning when a roster is oversigned and no matter what players have to be released or the school will face NCAA violations for being over the limit of 85. 

Simply put, we would not be so suspicious of medical hardships that Nick Saban and Butch Davis dole out if their rosters weren't so heavily oversigned.  Even if you submit to the notion that the medical hardships are legit, the fact that they oversigned ahead of time still leaves us feeling as though they are taking advantage of a loophole.  We'll state this again, coaches should have to prove where a scholarship is coming from before it is given out.  If a player is going to take a medical hardship then his scholarship shouldn't be given out until he is officially removed from the team. 

What football player do you know of that suffered career-ending injuries but remained on football scholarship and remained with the team until they finished school?  We want to know!

Filed under: Big 10 6 Comments
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.

Filed under: Big 10, Coaching, SEC 16 Comments
11Mar/100

Gerry DiNardo, Circa 1996

We found a Sports Illustrated article from 1996 with some interesting comments from Gerry DiNardo.  We can only imagine what a sobering experience it was when he came to Indiana and had to start recruiting by a different set of rules after spending 5 years at LSU. 

If you remember, he was the coach that led the charge in 2000 to get the Big 10 to approve a rules change to allow Big 10 schools to sign an additional 3 players over the 25 per recruiting season limit, provided the coach could prove that he had room for 3 in his previous class.

"There are 28 new Tigers, although some of them will not qualify academically (which will keep LSU within the NCAA one-year maximum of 25 new scholarships) and many will never contribute. 'It's a fact that only about a third of the guys you sign will end up starting, because if you get it going, you sign someone the following year that's better,' DiNardo said. 'There will be injuries, transfers, failures. There always are.'"

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/vault/article/magazine/MAG1007746/1/index.htm

DiNardo is right about the fact that once a coach get going and has some success he should be able to start landing better talent, and eventually these coaches are faced with a dilemma, sign as many of these better players as legally possible under the 25/85 rule and by exploiting the oversigning loophole of cutting guys between signing day and august or simply take what your roster budget will allow. 

DiNardo was at Indiana for three years and those were the 3 highest years in terms of recruits.  Despite signing a larger number of players, DiNardo was never able to put it together.  Indiana never won more than 3 games in a single year during his time and he was fired.

We find this extremely interesting.  One of the main things oversigning enables is for a coach to completely gut an existing roster and get his guys in faster; most of the time this is when you will see the most abuse of oversigning.  There have been several coaches who have coached other places (Ron Zook, DiNardo, Saban, Rodriguez, etc) that were all somewhat successful (ranging from NC caliber success to mediocre success) in other conferences (which obviously have different recruiting rules), yet failed to get it done in the Big 10.   Meanwhile, coaches that have had longer tenures in the Big 10 such as Lloyd Carr, Jim Tressel, and Joe Paterno, and all who were accustom to the Big 10 recruiting rules, have won National Championships and were (in Carr's case) or continue to be very successful (in Tressel and Paterno's case).  Our point here is that most new head coaches coming into the Big 10 are going to struggle if they have to come in and wade through 3-4 years of recruiting to get their guys in, instead of gutting the roster in 2-3 years by oversigning.   This is not to diminish the actual coaching these guys do - some coaches are much better recruiters than they are coaches - but there is definitely something to all of this.

Here is a look at his numbers while at Indiana (2003, 2004, and 2005); kind of interesting that Indiana's numbers leveled out some after he left. 

Indiana Recruiting Numbers 2002 - 2010

Teams Conf. 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Average
Indiana B10 21 25 26 25 21 20 20 19 25 202 22.44

The article is actually a great read.  Check it out.

Filed under: Big 10, History, SEC No Comments
9Mar/104

Calling Michigan State Fans!

 

We need some help tracking down the number of kids signed in each class from 1995 - 2000.  We have a project we are working on and we really need solid numbers from those years for Michigan State, not the number of players enrolled (unless that is all you have) but the number of players signed.  If any of you has that information or can point us in the right direction we would greatly appreciated it.

Filed under: Big 10, History 4 Comments
8Mar/100

The Big 10 Legalizes Oversigning

Maybe legalizes was a strong word, it's more like they made a slight rule change back in 2002, but stick with us, this gets pretty interesting.  We have already covered the history of oversigning in the conference that has the worst problem with it, the SEC.  Now we are starting to dig around and look at the history of oversigning in other conferences.

Recently, we found an article on Penn State's Collegian website from back in 2002, which we found extremely interesting. 

"According to Scott Chipman, Big Ten associate director of communications, the Big Ten has passed a ruling to allow teams to "oversign" on national signing day. Starting next season, teams will be able to sign more players to scholarship than were lost the previous season to graduation, which they are not currently allowed to do. Chipman said that the rule has been passed, but is still in the legislative process. The Big Ten released no further comment, and Chipman would not explain the workings of the legislative process."

"The cause was championed by Indiana coach Gerry DiNardo, who is in his first year at the helm for the Hoosiers. DiNardo spent four years as the head coach at Vanderbilt and five in the same position at Louisiana State, where he was able to oversign players. DiNardo and his staff introduced the legislation, and DiNardo lobbied faculty representatives."

"There's no way in most universities that you can manage your roster to be at 85 scholarships if you're not permitted to oversign and allow for no attrition," he said. "I don't know any program that has no attrition from the first Wednesday in February until the day freshman report. I think that creates a competitive disadvantage for the Big Ten as a whole in interconference play."

http://www.collegian.psu.edu/archive/2002/10/10-23-02tdc/10-23-02dsports-03.asp

The article delves further into the topic and we'll get into that after the jump. 

Click the link to continue reading >>>

3Mar/101

ESPN’s Outside the Lines Tackles Oversigning

If you care at all about this topic then you need to watch this video.  

Having watched the video, there is no question that ESPN could have done the exact same story on Nick Saban and Alabama.  The parallels are eerily similar.  Big name coach, long-term 35 million dollar contract, coach comes in and oversigns recruits and start gutting the roster, etc., etc.  All of those things are fine when you are dealing with professional athletes, but when you are dealing with unpaid, college athletes it's a different story.

Ramogi Huma, President of the NCPA, is leading the charge on NCAA rules reform.  Go check out the website!

 http://www.ncpanow.org/

Filed under: Big 10, Coaching, SEC 1 Comment
21Feb/100

All BCS Schools

Here are all the schools from the BCS conferences (and Notre Dame) and their recruiting numbers for 2002 - 2010.  We previously had this broken down by conference, but finally got around to putting all the data into one table for easy reference.  This table is sortable so knock yourself out.

All BCS Schools

Teams Conf. 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Average
Auburn SEC 31 27 29 22 25 30 29 28 32 253 28.11
Miss. State SEC 30 28 23 29 24 33 27 27 26 247 27.44
Iowa State B12 27 26 29 27 30 25 25 26 28 243 27.00
South Carolina SEC 27 28 29 28 24 31 23 29 23 242 26.89
Arkansas SEC 23 25 32 24 26 27 26 31 25 239 26.56
Kansas State B12 30 17 26 26 30 34 33 25 17 238 26.44
Ole Miss SEC 18 21 25 28 30 22 31 37 25 237 26.33
Alabama SEC 19 19 29 32 23 25 32 27 29 235 26.11
West Virginia BigEast 34 24 24 32 16 28 30 26 21 235 26.11
Oregon State PAC10 20 22 36 30 33 34 18 24 18 235 26.11
Oklahoma State B12 28 31 19 21 29 23 28 26 27 232 25.77
Louisville BigEast 23 31 24 28 25 18 26 29 27 231 25.66
Kentucky SEC 15 22 28 26 31 29 20 29 26 226 25.11
North Carolina ACC 23 26 25 25 28 24 18 28 28 225 25.00
LSU SEC 26 28 26 13 26 26 26 24 29 224 24.89
Arizona PAC10 29 26 29 26 25 19 24 24 22 224 24.88
USF BigEast 20 29 25 21 28 27 24 29 20 223 24.77
Texas Tech B12 24 25 26 21 34 26 16 25 25 222 24.66
Baylor B12 25 22 20 22 29 29 23 28 23 221 24.55
Syracuse BigEast 24 23 32 19 24 27 26 16 29 220 24.44
Oregon PAC10 24 23 29 23 21 29 22 26 23 220 24.44
Arizona State PAC10 29 22 22 21 24 24 28 22 27 219 24.33
Washington St. PAC10 28 18 27 21 24 27 27 22 25 219 24.33
Mizzu B12 23 23 25 23 25 27 24 25 23 218 24.22
Florida State ACC 22 20 26 23 31 20 32 21 23 218 24.22
Purdue B10 27 26 28 21 27 19 26 20 24 218 24.22
Minnesota B10 27 27 24 20 22 24 29 20 24 217 24.11
Tennessee SEC 25 22 24 26 22 32 18 22 25 216 24.00
Texas A&M B12 23 24 28 25 23 18 24 28 23 216 24.00
Michigan State B10 21 21 31 27 28 23 21 23 21 216 24.00
Oklahoma B12 24 24 18 27 28 21 21 23 29 215 23.89
Miami ACC 24 24 28 17 22 19 33 19 28 214 23.77
Illinois B10 23 27 24 20 27 23 28 22 20 214 23.78
Colorado B12 31 25 20 25 22 28 21 20 21 213 23.66
Rutgers BigEast 24 25 23 25 26 23 20 23 24 213 23.66
Pittsburg BigEast 23 26 25 23 27 24 19 20 24 211 23.44
Florida SEC 23 26 23 18 27 27 22 17 27 210 23.33
Nebraska B12 21 19 20 32 22 27 28 20 21 210 23.33
Virginia Tech ACC 20 23 20 25 22 26 31 22 21 210 23.33
Kansas B12 22 27 21 28 25 23 20 25 18 209 23.22
Washington PAC10 21 27 23 13 22 27 26 19 31 209 23.22
Georgia SEC 31 25 20 17 28 23 24 20 19 207 23
Wisconsin B10 25 22 23 22 23 18 26 21 24 204 22.67
Cincinnati BigEast 23 24 18 25 19 23 24 25 22 203 22.55
Indiana B10 21 25 26 25 21 20 20 19 25 202 22.44
Connecticut BigEast 14 20 28 25 22 29 22 21 20 201 22.33
N.C. State ACC 22 21 22 24 22 26 17 26 21 201 23.22
Maryland ACC 22 21 22 24 22 26 17 26 21 201 22.33
Cal PAC10 21 28 19 24 20 26 22 21 19 200 22.22
Virginia ACC 26 22 19 24 23 24 18 25 18 199 22.11
UCLA PAC10 26 19 26 21 22 11 23 27 23 198 22.00
Clemson ACC 26 17 27 25 20 23 25 12 23 198 22.00
Iowa B10 22 22 21 23 21 22 25 20 21 197 21.89
Michigan B10 21 17 22 23 19 20 24 22 27 195 21.67
Duke ACC 22 14 24 23 26 21 17 27 20 194 21.55
Texas B12 28 18 20 15 25 24 20 20 22 192 21.33
Vanderbilt SEC 22 22 20 25 25 14 21 18 24 191 21.22
USC PAC10 22 28 19 19 27 18 19 18 20 190 21.11
Boston College ACC 17 24 20 16 20 18 29 18 21 183 20.33
Penn State B10 22 11 25 19 24 21 14 27 20 183 20.33
Ohio State B10 24 16 24 18 20 15 20 25 18 180 20.00
Notre Dame Ind. 18 21 16 15 28 18 23 18 23 180 20.00
Georgia Tech ACC 15 21 24 19 16 20 20 21 21 177 19.66
Wake Forest ACC 20 23 18 19 15 20 17 23 19 174 19.33
Stanford PAC10 16 26 12 17 18 19 17 22 23 170 18.89
Northwestern B10 22 22 15 20 17 19 20 18 17 170 18.89

Filed under: ACC, Big 10, Big 12, PAC 10, SEC No Comments
19Feb/103

Sewanee, Tulane, and Georgia Tech

They all have something in common, well actually several things in common.  For starters, all three schools were, at one time, members of the SEC.  In fact, not only were they members, they were all charter members of the SEC when the conference was created in 1932.

Sewanee (The University of the South) left in 1940.
Georgia Tech left in 1964.
Tulane left in 1966.

Note: (In a previous post, we documented one of the main reasons why Georgia Tech left the SEC - basically they were unhappy with the gross oversigning of recruits.  Our reason for that post was to serve notice that oversigning is not a myth and not something we made up out of thin air.  Oversigning is real, and its historical roots are located in the heart of the southeastern conference.)

Back to the similarities: All three schools also have very high academic standards (US New and World Report Rankings):

Sewanee - 36th
Georgia Tech - 38th
Tulane - 50th

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/national-universities-rankings

Click the link to continue reading >>>

17Feb/104

Coach Comparisons

We have already compiled recruiting numbers for schools and conferences, see our "Recruiting Numbers" link above for that data, but now let's take a look at the numbers for National Championship coaches from 2002-2010.  Make sure to read our footnotes at the bottom regarding the data in the table below.

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

The first thing that jumps off the screen is that despite being out of college football for 2 years (2005 & 2006), Nick Saban still signed 193 recruits, which is second only to Les Miles his successor at LSU when Saban left in 2005.  Saban also has the highest average recruits per year at 27.50.   In 7 years, Nick Saban has never signed less than 25 recruits in a single year.

Let's compare that to the same set of years (2002-2004 & 2007-2010) for the coach with the lowest numbers, Jim Tressel.  Tressel signed 142 players in the same years that Saban signed 193 recruits.  That is a difference of 51 players over the same period of time, 7 years.  That is mind boggling to say the least.  

And to further put that into perspective, only 4 BCS programs in the entire country have signed fewer players than Ohio State's Jim Tressel, Stanford (170), Georgia Tech (177), Wake Forest (174), and Northwestern (170).  Notre Dame tied with (180).  For Jim Tressel to win a NC, compete for 2 more, and win the Big 10 Conference 5 Times in a row with those kind of numbers is simply amazing.   The same goes for Pete Carroll, although his numbers are just slightly higher, and what he did at USC.  Imagine if either one of those coaches had an extra 40-50 players to select from or to use in order to fill in gaps from unexpected attrition such as career ending injury.

Click the link to continue reading >>>

12Feb/100

Conference Comparisons

Draw your own conclusions...

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

Update:
The ACC is now on the board.  When putting all of this together we really didn't know what to expect; we knew that the SEC signed a lot of players, but we had no idea just how many and we certainly didn't expect such a wide margin between SEC and the ACC.  The numbers are staggering.

Filed under: ACC, Big 10, Big 12, PAC 10, SEC No Comments