Oversigning.com
6Aug/1170

Elliott Porter 2.0

According to this, and take it for what it's worth because it is not an official release from the University, it looks like LSU is in position to have to Elliott Porter someone because they appear to not have enough scholarships for everyone they signed.  This is despite the fact that they have already had a number of players leave for various reasons since NSD.

"LSU fall roster released. Chris Tolliver, Ryan St. Julien and Kellen Theriot are not listed."

http://twitter.com/#!/snslant/statuses/98832125003968512

In addition, 2011 signee Alzono Lewis did not qualify, which brings the total to at least 4 guys combined from the returning roster and the list of players signed in 2011 that will not make it to the roster with one player still pending the NCAA clearinghouse. 

Mickey Johnson signed with LSU in the 2011 class and is in the process of trying to clear the NCAA clearinghouse, and if he clears it is expected that he will join the team because he was not recruited as a greyshirt and there has been no talk of him taking a grayshirt.  Furthermore, Miles expects him to join the team when he clears the NCAA.

"We expect that he will clear," Miles said. "It's just a time issue. That being said, he might join us in August just before school starts.

The other missing recruit is wide receiver Alonzo Lewis of St. James. Miles said Lewis "would not be with us and may go the junior college route. We will still very much follow him."

http://www.nola.com/lsu/index.ssf/2011/08/lsu_football_tigers_report_min.html

The guys over at www.andthevalleyshook.com don't believe there is room for everyone and should Mickey Johnson qualify there won't be room for him under the 85 limit. 

Les Miles manages scholarships about as well as he manages the game clock in the waning seconds of a tight game.  If it does turn out that LSU does not have room for Johnson and someone has to leave the program in order for LSU to stay under the 85 limit LSU should be banned from oversigning for life.  They should have to report their number of available spots on NSD to the NCAA and then only be allowed to sign what they have room for on NSD.  If someone leaves after NSD then they can sign another player to that scholarship after the player leaving has a cleared an exit interview with the NCAA.  That should be their punishment if they, for a second year in a row, have to pull a scholarship at the last minute or play games with the numbers to come in at 85.

Filed under: SEC 70 Comments
22Jul/11221

Alabama’s March to 85 Finished?

Updated with new numbers.

Here is what appears to be the final shake down on Alabama's post NSD attrition this year.  Much like last year, Alabama is one of the few teams in the country to lose double-digit players post NSD.  Quick, name another school that has lost 21 scholarships players between NSD and August over the last 2 years.  That's an entire recruiting class.  And 6 of those 21 were medical hardships.  Here is the attrition for Alabama between National Signing Day and the August deadline to get to 85 players for the last two years.  Any way you slice it that is a lot of attrition.  For comparison's sake, Penn State has had 2 players leave their program over the last two years during this period of time.

2011 The March to 85 - Alabama

Player Position Reason for leaving after NSD
Glenn Harbin Defensive Line Decided to play baseball; Link
Demetrius Goode Running Back Transfer to North Alabama; Link
Petey Smith Linebacker Transfer to Holems CC; Link
Brandon Moore Defensive Lineman Transfer to East Mississippi Community College; Link
Corey Grant Running Back Transfer to Auburn; Link
Keiwone Malone Wide Receiver Transfer to Memphis; Link
Robby Green Defensive Back Transfer to California University of Pennsylvania ; Link
Darrington Sentimore Defensive Lineman Transfer to Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College Link
Arron Douglas Offensive Lineman Died during offseason; RIP, hate having to list him here.
Kerry Murphy Defensive Line Medical Hardship
Kendall Kelly Defensive Back Medical Hardship
Wes Neighbors Defensive Back Medical Hardship


2010 The March to 85 - Alabama

Player Position Reason for leaving after NSD
Terry Grant Running Back Scholarship not renewed
Travis Sikes Wide Receiver Scholarship not renewed
Rod Woodson Safety Scholarship not renewed
Star Jackson Quarterback Transfer, Georgia State Div 1AA.
Deion Belue Defensive Back Academically Ineligible; headed to JUCO
Alfy Hill Linebacker Academically Ineligible; future unknown
Taylor Pharr Offensive Lineman Medical Hardship
Milton Talbert Linebacker Medical Hardship
Darius McKeller Offensive Lineman Medical Hardship
Ronnie Carswell Wide Receiver Greyshirt
Wilson Love Defensive End Greyshirt


*Wilson and Love are still with the team, they grayshirted.  They left for 1 year but returned the following.

So does this end the 2011 March to 85?  Right now it looks like 10 scholarship players are gone since NSD with 2 more suspended indefinitely waiting to be "processed."  Regardless, despite Alabama not releasing official scholarships numbers, we are able to piece together a few bits of information that make the numbers a little clearer:

1. The number of players signed this year 22 + 2 grayshirt commitments from last year = 24

2. The number of players that left last year (3 JR to NFL + 8 SR to Graduation + 1 Pre-NSD Transfer) = 12


Click to enlarge; there are 14 guys on the list of players that left last year, 6 of which are listed SQ and there is no record of any of them in the Rivals database as ever being signed.

3. The number of scholarship players that have left since NSD (see above) = 12

When you add the number of players that have left since NSD to the number of players that left last year due to going to the NFL early or exhausting their eligibility you get 24.  That's pretty damn close to exactly the 24 they signed.

Saban did mention that that Alabama was not at a full 85 last year, which we still have a hard time understanding because 2 guys grayshirted because their wasn't enough room.  Regardless, let's say there was still room for 1 or 2 under the 85 limit last year.

There are only two possible explanations for the numbers:

1. Saban did not oversign: because when he signed 24 it took him to 85 (which if you remember on NSD when Saban told the media they signed what they had room for) and the 10 departures since NSD have created 10 openings, which have not been filled by walk-ons, and Alabama will go into the season with 73 scholarship players.

2. Saban did oversign: because with only 12 departing players on NSD and only a couple of open scholarships from last year there is no way he had room for 24 guys and it took X number of the 10 players leaving since NSD in order for him to get back down to 85.  If Saban did oversign, then this is a prime example of how the new "roster management rules" for oversigning in the SEC are ineffective.  Even with signing 24, which is 1 under the 25 enrollment limit, it is very possible that Alabama oversigned -- the only way they didn't is if they played last year with 73 scholarship players, which would mean the 12 under 85 from last year + the departure of 12 to the NFL and graduation would then justify the 24 they signed to get to 85.  Then in which case, with the 12 departures since NSD, Alabama would be at 73 going into this season.  Which in turn raises the question as to why 3 guys are being moved to medical hardship scholarships when there could be football scholarships that are left unused -- don't those guys deserve better for their sacrifice, especially when the room is there?

In summary, we might not have Saban's scholarship numbers, but we feel pretty confident that we have his number down pat by now.  This is the second year that we have been able to forecast the amount of attrition to take place after NSD almost to the exact number.  Last year we nailed it on the number, this year we said 11 and there has been 12 thus far.  Not too shabby considering we don't have his numbers.

The only person that can clear this up is Nick Saban and he has the perfect opportunity to do it tomorrow at SEC Media Days.  All he has to do is come clean on his scholarship numbers.

Filed under: SEC 221 Comments
16Jul/119

The Times, Gainesville Takes a Closer Look at Oversigning

Adam Krohn takes a loser look at the issue of oversigning.  http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/section/173/article/53185/ 


Photo by SCOTT ROGERS; Photo illustration by Colin Dunlop | The Times

Adam's piece includes comments from various sources on the topic ranging from university presidents to high school recruits.  Here are a couple of highlights:

1. Comments from Chad Hawley on the competitive advantage aspect of the differing oversigning rules, including him mentioning that if the SEC takes their new rules national that the B1G might attempt to do the same.

2. Comments from the University of Georgia's President and Athletic Director regarding oversigning and the possibility of redefining what a scholarship is both in terms of communicating the language and the length of the agreement. 

3. Comments such as these from high school recruits and high school coaches:

Chaz Cheeks, a recent East Hall graduate who signed with Georgia Tech, said concerns of oversigning factored into him eliminating Ole Miss from his list of school choices.

“(East Hall football coach Bryan Gray) and I sat down and looked at all of the offers on the table, the pros and cons of each school,” Cheeks said. “Coach said (Ole Miss) was throwing out offers to everyone, and they probably weren’t the best situation for me to go into. Having a spot wasn’t something I wanted to worry about.”

Cheeks said he had greater concerns — like making sure he was academically eligible to attend college — than to have to worry about if his offer still stood once he made it to campus.

“I was just thinking of myself and what I had to do,” Cheeks said. “For those that do get oversigned and have to be let go, I think that’s real messed up on the school’s part. They’ve got to be more careful.”

It's great to see some high school coaches and players starting to gain a level of awareness regarding oversigning but there is still a lot of work to do.  Check out the rest of the article here: http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/section/173/article/53185/

Filed under: Big 10, Quick Links, SEC 9 Comments
16Jul/1110

Bryce Sherman Update

Brent Holloway caught up with Bryce Sherman recently and asked him about the situation with South Carolina.

Sherman, a 5-foot-4 backup wide receiver who served as the team’s primary kickoff returner last season, said he first learned his position with the team might be in jeopardy a little more than a week ago. His fears were confirmed Tuesday in a meeting with Spurrier.

“They just said they got better players over the last year,” Sherman said. “Everybody they recruited committed and that never happens. And then everybody qualified (academically) and that never happens.”

Holloway goes on to dispute South Carolina's claim that everyone has qualified, but regardless, the explanation that South Carolina gave Sherman sure sounds like the definition of oversigning, but without the real numbers it is hard to be 100% sure he was cut to make the numbers work. 

Based on Sherman's comments in this article, which are slightly different than his comments to us regarding whether or not he knew his scholarship was a 1 year renewable deal, it sounds like he knew that his scholarship was year-to-year and that everyone on the knows they are competing for a spot. 

Sherman confirmed that. He said he was aware that his scholarship was a year-to-year deal, not a four-year pact between school and student-athlete. He said players at South Carolina are also aware that they are competing for their roster spots.

”It is what it is,” Sherman said. “It’s a business. I don’t think it’s fair, but it’s not my call.”

 An astute observation for a 21-year-old. It is a business and it’s not fair. Those are the realities of big-time college athletics. But need they be?

That’s a question the NCAA needs to answer for itself. Does it want to be an organization that allows its student-athletes to stand defenseless against the steamrolling, win-at-all-costs machinery? Currently constructed, it’s a system in which rising seniors can have their financial aid pulled out from under them, or freshmen who already enrolled in classes can be told they’re no longer part of the team, not because they failed a class or got in trouble, but because the coach at their school treats a scholarship like an expiring contract and there’s a hot new free agent he’s got to make room for.

http://www.gainesvilletimes.com/section/116/article/53183/

This leaves us with the debate over whether or not scholarships should be long-term details (4-5 years) like they used to be before coaching salaries skyrocketed and media/TV coverage turned into a 24/7/365 circus, or should we allow coaches to treat players like free-agents?  In the NFL, free-agents actually have an agent and the power to negotiate their best deal.  Could you imagine that in college?

Filed under: SEC 10 Comments
14Jul/1120

Latest on LSU’s Roster

As mentioned earlier in the week, Cody Worsham at Dig Magazine has been working on a piece on LSU and oversigning. 

As of press time, LSU is currently committed to 90 scholarship players for the 2011 season, including 24 signees for the incoming recruiting class.

To make matters worse, the Tigers are on a self-imposed two-scholarship reduction resulting from recruiting violations by former assistant coach D.J. McCarthy.

Consequently, LSU must meet marks of 83 and 23, respectively – which means seven players total, including at least two from the 2011 class, must go before fall camp.

Who those seven may be remains a mystery. LSU is keeping quiet on the subject.

“There’s a lot that could change before the team reports to camp and the start of the fall semester,” associate athletics director Michael Bonnette told Dig. “There’s nothing that we can say at this point regarding the number of players on the roster because those numbers are fluid and could change.”

http://digbatonrouge.com/article/gray-areas-2426/

This is one of the more baffling elements to oversigning and roster management in general.  Schools go way out of their way to make sure everyone knows exactly who they sign on national signing day. It's all part of the hype and the fanfare.   Alabama takes it so far as to run a webcam on the fax machine and post the names of the players as their signed LOI's come in and schools around the country hold special press conferences to highlight the players and introduce them to the media, but when asked later in the summer, as the deadline to get to 85 approaches, schools and coaches stonewall and don't want to comment on anything, and that is not just SEC schools, Ohio State did the same thing when we asked them to share their numbers.  Obviously there are certain things they are prohibited from commenting on, but there is nothing to stop them from sharing numbers.

The other troubling part is that LSU's athletic director believes a lot can change between now and the start of fall camp.  Fall camp is only a couple of weeks away, shouldn't rosters be settled by now or at least settled to the point where there is an explanation for the numbers?

Regardless, it's obvious that there are some spots that will need to be cleared up between now and the deadline for LSU to get to their max limit of 83.

On a somewhat positive note, it does appear that LSU tried to improve its communication with the players a little bit.  This is still not enough as most agree that grayshirt offers really need to be explicit, agreed upon on NSD, and shouldn't depend on the enrollment of another recruit falling through or a roster cut to make space.  For example, Ohio State and Cardale Jones agreed to a grayshirt offer when Cardale signed in February and despite 3 slots opening up since that time, Jones is still going to grayshirt.  This is because the main reason behind his grayshirt was to create separation between him and the others at his position, not because Ohio State wanted to sign him and keep him away from other teams while waiting for a slot to open up in the current class.  This was planned grayshirting; LSU is using the grayshirting as a buffer to make sure they don't go over 85.  Nevertheless, it is an improvement over how they treated Elliott Porter.

Still, even subtracting those five, LSU would need to axe two more scholarships in total to reach 83. Who those two will be is anyone’s guess, but LSU is promising they won’t repeat the same mistakes that they did with Porter last year.

“We’ve been very transparent with the kids this year,” Alleva said to Gannett Sports. “Around February, we told a few kids who may be grayshirted, and that’s okay. I think it’s a bad thing if you surprise the kid. It was accidental last year with Les (and Porter), but I didn’t like it.”

Overall Cody did a great job of explaining oversigning and providing a great update on LSU's situation. It would be nice if the NCAA would step in and regulate the grayshirt process so that it is clearly defined on NSD and so there is insurance for the student-athlete that his spot be available next January and also so that recruits that sign on NSD are not asked at the last minute to take a grayshirt because the school doesn't have the numbers.

Filed under: SEC 20 Comments
13Jul/1186

South Carolina and “Behind the Scenes Stuff”

Based on this string of twitter messages, South Carolina appears to be putting the screws to Bryce Sherman.  There is a 99.9999% chance that the "behind the scenes" stuff is oversigning and the numbers crunch.  In reading South Carolina sites, there really isn't another reasonable explanation.

This is yet again another example of coaches not being honest and upfront with kids, but who can blame them with the pressure to win and the money involved being so great that they don't have a choice, right?  All it takes is one school in a conference to abuse oversigning and next thing you know nearly everyone else is having to do it in order to compete.  It's a slippery slope that often leads to stories like Bryce Sherman.

The guys over at GarnetAndBlack.com have it right, Bryce Sherman deserves better than this. 

However, at the same time, Sherman was committed to this football program. After he earned his scholarship and worked hard to retain it, we owed him better than this. Now, after pouring his soul into the program, he'll have to pay out for his final year of college, simply because he wasn't going to get much playing time and because we signed more players than we had room for. Presumably, it's too late for him to find some other school that will give him a scholarship, considering that we waited until this late to cut him. His options are limited.

http://www.garnetandblackattack.com/2011/7/13/2274087/the-problem-with-oversigning-the-case-of-bryce-sherman

Why does this happen???

The answer is simple.  South Carolina, by current SEC rules and NCAA rules, is allowed to sign up to 28 players in a single class regardless of where that puts them with the 85 limit.  This opens the door for abusing the numbers and abusing kids like Bryce Sherman.  Most likely, South Carolina signed more than they had room for and they had to wait until now to find out who is going to be eligible.  Why?

“It's also different recruiting in a lot of the SEC states than it is in other parts of the country in that coaches are dealing with a larger pool of at-risk students academically. Granted, it's not politically correct to say that, and coaches are hesitant to say it publicly. But just about all of them deal with it in the SEC, and often it's a guessing game down to the last minute about whether a handful of players in each class are going to qualify academically.”

http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2011/06/steve-spurrier-is-wrong-how-bra-infects.html

By allowing Steve Spurrier to oversign and by scholarships being only 1 year renewable contracts, kids like Bryce Sherman are being held hostage and kept in the dark until the coaches find out who from the incoming class is going to qualify.  If everyone qualifies then someone has to go, and in the end, a good, unsuspecting kid who has done everything that has been asked of him is cut loose by a coaching staff and school that has made money of his efforts and dedication while operating as a tax exempt entity with the stated purpose of providing higher education.  And the kicker, that tax exempt entity (the university) is governed by another tax exempt entity with the stated purpose of ensuring that athletics are integrated into the educational process for the sole purpose of enhancing the educational experience.

Everything about this situation is wrong and the new SEC rules on oversigning are not going to stop it completely because the SEC did not address oversigning by capping the annual signing limit at the number of signed LOI that it takes to get to 85 when you combine the signed LOI with the number of players on scholarship when the LOI is signed.

The NCAA has got to step in and put a complete end to these scenarios, even if it takes completely restructuring the scholarship program.  Next year's Bryce Sherman is counting on them to live up to their mission statement.

Filed under: SEC 86 Comments
11Jul/1139

Tennessee have Oversigning Issues?

This morning Twitter started to buzz a little with news that 2011 Tennessee signee, Geraldo "Waldo" Orta had been asked to grayshirt. 

Click to enlarge image:

According to Andrew Gribble, at GoVolsXtra, in the short Signing Day video linked below, Orta was not a last minute throw in to the 2011 recruiting class and that Orta had been a long time Clemson commitment that Tennessee was able to flip at the last minute and get to sign a LOI on NSD.  Gribble never mentions anything about a grayshirt and in fact, he thought that Orta had a real shot at seeing playing time early.

http://www.govolsxtra.com/videos/detail/geraldo-orta-signs-with-tennessee/ 

Here is a quick video of Orta just shortly after signing with Tennessee.  Note: again there is no mention of grayshirting.

 

The last article written on Orta, also from GoVolsXtra, indicates that Tennessee is in an oversigned position and will need to make roster space in order to get down to the 25 annual limit.  It also indicates that there have been no announcements regarding plans to grayshirt any players, for any reason.  

With that, 27 of the Vols’ 28 2011 signees are enrolled in classes and with the program. NCAA bylaws allow just 25 to be on scholarship for the upcoming season, but UT is able to have 26 because it was able to back-count one spot from the 2010 class.

Freshman defensive back Geraldo Orta, who has been enrolled since the first session of summer semester, underwent surgery Friday for his second shoulder surgery since December.

If the surgery renders Orta incapable of playing in 2011, the Vols will have two fewer additions than anticipated for their rebuilding secondary, but could now have an easier decision to make with whom to grayshirt.

Coach Derek Dooley has not announced any plans to grayshirt any members of his 2011 class, but if all 27 remain qualified and eligible when fall semester begins, one player will have to fully separate himself from the team until January.

In May, Orta told GVX247.com that he would probably redshirt the 2011 season because of a surgery he had in December.

“I hit someone on the sideline, and my arm was up at a 90-degree angle, and it popped out,” Orta told GVX247. “I stayed in the game. I played the whole season. I never really thought about coming out.

“They told me that if it happened again, just go ahead and have surgery or whatever, but they had confidence that therapy (during the season) would help it a lot.”

http://www.govolsxtra.com/news/2011/jul/08/tino-thomas-enrolled-classes-edrick-loften-not-ut/

Based on some of Orta comments on his twitter account http://twitter.com/#!/Orta26, he seems a little upset and distraught:

Wes Rucker http://twitter.com/#!/wesrucker247 says that Tennessee hasn't confirmed anything yet, but it looks like Orta will be grayshirting.  He also mentioned that Orta had surgery on Friday.

@TheMarchTo85 That it looks like he'll be grayshirting (just had surgery), but UT hasn't confirmed anything.less than a minute ago via TweetDeck Favorite Retweet Reply

Our Take:

This situation seems very cut and dry.  First of all, in this particular scenario we are dealing with the NCAA's annual limit of 25 new enrollees per class, so we don't have to waste time trying to figure out if Tennessee has room under the 85 limit, which is always a lot harder to do.  According to the article above, Tennessee signed 28 and only had room for 26, meaning they had room to back count 1 to last year's class plus they had room for 25 more under both the 85 total limit and the annual 25 limit.  Therefore, all we have to look at is the current class and the status of the 28 guys they signed on NSD.

It appears that Tennessee is in the same position as LSU was two years ago when they signed more than they projected having room for and everyone qualified, which they didn't expect, and which also led to Elliott Porter being asked to grayshirt despite already being on campus and having no idea that they were going to ask him to grayshirt.

We have asked Orta to comment, but he has yet to respond.  

There is something serious wrong with this situation.  Everyone that visits this site, whether you are pro-oversigning or anti-oversigning, agrees that when it comes to grayshirting there must be an agreement on or before NSD.  Last minute grayshirts to clear space, either for the annual 25 limit or the total 85 limit, is wrong, and it is EXACTLY what Florida President, Bernard Machen was referring to as morally reprehensible when he wrote this article.

As Wes Rucker mentioned, this has not been confirmed by Tennessee yet, but if they do push a grayshirt offer on Orta this late in the process they should be crucified for it.  Regardless, if the numbers above from the GoVolsXtra article are right, even if Orta doesn't grayshirt, someone else is going to have to go in order to get to 25.

As soon as we know more on this story we will share it.  For now we're in a holding pattern as we wait to see what Tennessee does.

Filed under: SEC 39 Comments
9Jul/111

LSU Scholarship Numbers

Based on these two links from LSU fan sites, LSU is still 6 over the 85 limit.

That puts us at six over the limit (I'm taking the cautious route here, acknowledging the self-imposed two-scholarship reduction, though I'm not sure exactly how that will play out). Of everything I've mentioned above my guesses are that Fordham won't be on scholarship, one or two of the freshman won't qualify and a couple of the guys will take medical hardships (Kellen Theriot being the main candidate), which will get us right into the 83 we need. All in all, the roster is in pretty healthy shape, otherwise.

http://www.andthevalleyshook.com/2011/7/5/2260235/the-great-scholarship-quandary-of-2011

http://saturdaynightslant.com/site/content/roster-breakdown-football.html

Earlier this week we did a quick Q&A with Cody Worsham, Sport Editor at DigBatonRouge.com for an LSU story he is working on.  Worsham is interested, as are many, to see how the final numbers are going to work out for LSU this year.  We'll post a link when he runs his article.

Filed under: SEC 1 Comment
8Jul/110

Baseball Oversigning

You've been warned.  Oversigning in College Baseball is just as bad if not worse than it is in Football.  Here is just a small taste from Arkansas' Baseball Coach, Dave Van Horn:

Q: In your opinion, what does it take for a Big Ten school to get up to par with SEC schools and the nation's elite?

A: They need to commit to it. They need to commit to it 100 percent and put some money into it. They need to let them oversign a little bit because they know they'll lose kids in the draft. I know they can't, and to me that's ridiculous. If a kid in your program is a junior and projected to go in the first round, you should be able to recruit a guy to replace him. If he comes back, it works out. It's crazy that they don't do that. They need to straighten that out.

Q: Your program has been hit hard by the draft in the last two years. Is oversigning a more critical factor than people realize?

A: Yes. It's ridiculous. We signed 16 kids this year, and 13 of them got drafted. It's just the way it is. We should have the freedom to do what we need to do, and we do. The Big Ten doesn't. If they only have so much money available for seniors, that's all they get. You're never going to be able to compete with southern schools if you don't let them oversign. They have good players, but they don't have enough depth.

http://www.omaha.com/article/20110705/SPORTS/707059837#boss-hog-has-eye-on-omaha 

Stay tuned!

Filed under: SEC No Comments
23Jun/112

The March to 85 Continues – Alabama

Looks like Bama Sports Report is going to take care of the heavy lifting this year with their complete breakdown of scholarship numbers for Alabama.  Just like last year, our numbers are nearly identical to their numbers.  They had Alabama at 96 on NSD (72 returning after seniors and juniors leaving early for the NFL declared and 24 signed including greyshirt rollovers from previous year), putting Alabama 11 over the 85 limit on NSD, which is the same number we have, 11 over.

On NSD, Nick Saban told the media that no one knows what his scholarship numbers are and that Alabama was not at 85 last year (which begs the question, why did he waste scholarships by not giving them to walk-ons to help pay for their last year?).  He also told the media that what he signed "was the number of players we could take" (see the 7:35 mark in this video for his exact words) on NSD implying that Alabama had room for everyone they signed and that any new attrition would open more spots for them to add guys later.  Alabama has officially added no one thus far, as Duron Carter's status is still up in the air and it's unclear if has signed with Alabama at this point, and 6 guys have left the program since NSD.

Interesting side note: Saban does talk for a few minutes about how he wishes certain aspects of the "business" were more like they were when he was in the Big 10 Conference, specifically in regards to recruiting a player that has already verbally committed to another school.  Those comments come immediately after his comments mentioned above and are worth a quick listen. 

Here is what the March to 85 looks like:

2011 The March to 85 - Alabama

Player Position Reason for leaving after NSD
Glenn Harbin Defensive Line Decided to play baseball; Link
Demetrius Goode Running Back Transfer to North Alabama; Link
Petey Smith Linebacker Transfer to Holems CC; Link
Brandon Moore Defensive Lineman Transfer to East Mississippi Community College; Link
Corey Grant Running Back Transfer to Auburn; Link
Keiwone Malone Wide Receiver Transfer to Memphis; Link
Robby Green Defensive Back Transfer to California University of Pennsylvania ; Link
Darrington Sentimore Defensive Lineman Transfer to Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College Link
Arron Douglas Offensive Lineman Died during offseason; RIP, hate having to list him here.
Kerry Murphy Defensive Line Medical Hardship
Kendall Kelly Defensive Back Medical Hardship
Wes Neighbors Defensive Back Medical Hardship

 
Back to the oversigning.  If Saban is telling the truth and he signed "the number of players we could take" then he should have been at 85 on NSD.  Since that time, 6 guys have left their scholarships with 4 more rumored to follow.  Meaning, either Alabama is going to go into the season with 74-75 guys on scholarship or Nick Saban wasn't being completely honest when he said they signed the number of players they could take, and the attrition since NSD has enabled him to get down to 85. 

If Saban was telling the truth and he truly signed what they had room for, then Saban should be announcing 10-11 (or some number) walk-on players getting 1 year scholarships to take the place of all the guys that left and all of the scholarships that have opened up since NSD, and if he doesn't, those of you who scream about creating opportunities and maximizing scholarships should be screaming at Saban for letting those scholarships go to waste for a year. 

Pro-oversigning fans argue that oversigning enables all 85 scholarships to be used.  In a few weeks we are going to find out if all 85 are being used at Alabama or if all the attrition since signing day was required in order to get down to 85.

If the attrition since signing day has created scholarship openings and those scholarships are not given to walk-ons for 1 year until they can be given to new recruits next year, then Saban's argument about maximizing scholarships and creating opportunities through oversigning goes out the window.   You can't say in one breath that you believe in creating opportunities while in another breath let x number of scholarships go unused.   Either the attrition is going to get Alabama back down to 85 or the attrition is going to create openings for walk-ons, one or the other.   We'll see what happens.

Filed under: SEC 2 Comments
12Jun/11255

Paul Johnson with a Simple Solution

Paul Johnson pretty much calls BS on oversigning and the attrition that occurs after the fact. 

“We just don’t do it,” Johnson told the Journal-Constitution. “It makes it hard sometimes to hit your target number but it is what it is. I don’t see how you can do that to kids, weed out guys for whatever reasons. No matter what anybody says, if you’re oversigning, some of that has to happen on occasion.”

That last sentence is pretty damning coming from a coach.  When asked whether or not teams who practice oversigning gain a competitive advantage, Johnson replied:

"Sure they do,” he told the newspaper. “It’s just like you take 25 kids every year and then cut the ones you don’t want.

“You do the math. You have 85 scholarships. If you’re signing 28 every year for four years, instead of 85, you have 112. It doesn’t add up. So something is happening to those guys along the way. It just doesn’t add up. You’re losing them left or right academically or for whatever reasons.”

Read more: http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-football/story/2011-05-29/paul-johnson-georgia-tech-coach-says-oversigning-creates-advantages#ixzz1P7dnrfcO

Continue reading...

Filed under: ACC, SEC Continue reading
7Jun/11245

Alabama’s March to 85 – 2011

Right on queue, just a couple of days after the SEC meetings in Destin where the SEC presidents voted to place a soft cap on the annual signing limits, which by the way does only a little to stop oversigning (the loopholes for counting back and forward still exist and there is nothing to stop a coach who has 16 openings from signing 25 and going over by 9, but we digress), the transfers are starting to pile up at Alabama.  No better time to put up the March to 85 for Alabama.

The real issue is that these transfers are coming after spring ball.  With an oversigned roster, you bring in the new players like Trey DePriest to compete against Petey Smith and Dee Hart to compete against Corey Grant and Demetrius Goode, look to see how everything stacks up, and then after spring tell certain players they will never see playing time.  The extra pressure the oversigning puts on the roster and the fact that no matter what, when a coach oversigns in February, someone will have to leave the team to avoid NCAA rules.   The loophole is that certain coaches have found that they can use the spring to further evaluate players and make decisions.  This is gaming the system and it is forcing kids to downgrade their athletic and academic careers simply because a coach needs to get down to 85.

2011 The March to 85 - Alabama

Player Position Reason for leaving after NSD
Glenn Harbin Defensive Line Decided to play baseball; Link
Demetrius Goode Running Back Transfer to North Alabama; Link
Petey Smith Linebacker Transfer to Holems CC; Link
Brandon Moore Defensive Lineman Transfer to East Mississippi Community College; Link
Corey Grant Running Back Transfer to Auburn; Link
Keiwone Malone Wide Receiver Transfer to Memphis; Link
Robby Green Defensive Back Transfer to California University of Pennsylvania ; Link
Darrington Sentimore Defensive Lineman Transfer to Mississippi Gulf Coast Community College Link
Arron Douglas Offensive Lineman Died during offseason; RIP, hate having to list him here.
Kerry Murphy Defensive Line Medical Hardship
Kendall Kelly Defensive Back Medical Hardship
Wes Neighbors Defensive Back Medical Hardship

2010 The March to 85 - Alabama

Player Position Reason for leaving after NSD
Terry Grant Running Back Scholarship not renewed
Travis Sikes Wide Receiver Scholarship not renewed
Rod Woodson Safety Scholarship not renewed
Star Jackson Quarterback Transfer, Georgia State Div 1AA.
Deion Belue Defensive Back Academically Ineligible; headed to JUCO
Alfy Hill Linebacker Academically Ineligible; future unknown
Taylor Pharr Offensive Lineman Medical Hardship
Milton Talbert Linebacker Medical Hardship
Darius McKeller Offensive Lineman Medical Hardship
Ronnie Carswell Wide Receiver Greyshirt
Wilson Love Defensive End Greyshirt

Filed under: SEC 245 Comments
5Jun/1191

Weighing in

I'm always disappointed when the discussions of oversigning and the impact on young men's lives turns into childish rants and character assassination. You all know that Joshua and I speak for ourselves and have differing opinions about many issues. However, we agree on the most important issue: the college sports machine should not chew up and spit out young men on athletic scholarships whose only failing is their ability (or inability) to compete on the field with the team that recruited him so aggressively.

We are not too concerned with kids who are gaming the system or who prove themselves to be thugs, criminals, or miscreants. And we're not too concerned with kids who have parents and families that are capable of helping their son survive and thrive in this pressure-packed environment. We're concerned about the kids in the middle. The ones who have done nothing wrong, are doing well in school, who are good teammates and good kids.

The NCAA's current rules about oversigning, scholarship terms, eligibility, and compensation for college expenses put these kids in an environment where coaches can and do exploit them for personal gain in salaries, bonuses, and new employment contracts.

I know that this exploitation goes on in every college football conference if not in every program. It doesn't matter to me if it happens every day or just once in a while. The problem is that the NCAA's rules allow it to happen at the discretion of the coaches.

Oversigning and "roster management" goes on everywhere and it's wrong. Nowhere else in our society could an employer  1)terminate an employee without cause and 2) retain the power over where that employee can get his next job, and 3) dictate that if the terminated employee chooses to work for a direct competitor the terminating coach can dictate the employee not work for an entire year!

Surely we can all agree that this very real situation is wrong and the NCAA's rules need to be changed to make this impossible. The loopholes (like offering more LOIs than the school has openings for new players under the 85 schollie rule) MUST be stopped.

My recommendations?

  1. Create 2 types of schollie: a 5-year no-cut, no-trade deal with transfer limitations and a 1-year deal with no transfer limitations.
  2. Limit new signees to the exact number of openings being created by graduation/ineligibility/voluntary transfers/etc.

Yes, my suggestions put more burden on the coaches and will result in less than 85 scholarship kids on each roster each year. But if that's what it takes to stop the exploitation then so be it. Those coaches get paid plenty of bucks to win without doing it by exploiting kids.

4Jun/1127

Major Announcement!!!

Monday morning, Big 10 Conference Commissioner, Jim Delany, is scheduled to hold a press conference and announce that the Big 10 Conference is going to back to their pre-2002 rules on oversigning which bans the practice completely by working with a hard cap of 85, and he is going to demand that the NCAA make it a national rule. 

Okay, he's not going to do that, but imagine if he did!  Imagine the outrage around the country, especially down in SEC country if Jim Delany tried to do what Mike Slive just did, which was to push his rules on others by trying to make them national rules.

The pre-2002 rules in the Big 10 were originally created in 1956 and completely banned oversigning by limiting coaches to only being allowed to offer and accept as many scholarships as they had available under the annual maximum roster limit, in present day it is 85.  So for example, if a school had 16 scholarship openings come National Signing Day, they could offer and receive 16 signed letters of intent for new scholarships, not 37 Houston Nutt, 16.  Talk about making it hard on coaches.  Talk about working at a competitive disadvantage.  But they did it and they did it 50+ years ago because it was the right thing to do, regardless of what other conferences were doing. 

Continue reading...

3Jun/1114

Chess not Checkers

Our overall take on the situation:

This proposal was a reaction to all of the bad publicity (which to be honest started right here at oversigning.com), and while it does attempt to curb some of the excesses it does not address the core issue of oversigning, which is preventing schools from signing over the 85 limit.  Ridding a conference of the abuses that place because of oversigning is a process that requires building a culture throughout all of the conference sports; clearly the legislation that was passed today does NOTHING to address oversigning in baseball which is just as bad, if not worse than football, and proves that if the SEC University Presidents truly believe in what they say about oversigning and its morally reprehensible actions they would not tolerate it in baseball.  Baseball was never addressed by the SEC because we never addressed it here, well we did once, but that was a long time ago.

You see while they have been playing checkers by floating out a Red Herring with their 25-28 rules, we have been playing chess by getting them to admit that oversigning is wrong, morally reprehensible, and not to be tolerated in college athletics.  Eliminating exploitation through oversigning is a cultural and ethical decision, and if you don't believe in it then you put things in place to eliminate it everywhere in your athletic programs.  SEC officials told the world today that they don't believe in it, yet they never addressed it in regards to baseball, and that is because we never attacked it here and there was no bad publicity regarding oversigning in baseball.  There is no argument that can be made against that statement.  Their move today was based on bad publicity, not a desire to rid the conference of a culture of oversigning and exploitation.

Update: The main point we were trying to make here is that the new "roster management" legislation is the result of bad publicity, not because the SEC administrators woke up one morning and decided to reshape the conference's philosophy on oversigning and player exploitation.  Although we started the ball rolling in a major way by launching this site, it took national and local sports writers, ESPN's OTL, bloggers, sports-talk radio hosts, fans posting on message boards, and a lot of other people to make this happen. 

Going forward:

Another tactical error on the SEC's part today was demanding that the NCAA institute their new oversigning rule nationwide.  This opens a whole new can of worms.  Just like the SEC would not allow the Big 10 rule to be pushed on them, the Big 10 should not allow the SEC to raise the bar nationally to allow more oversigning than the Big 10 currently allows under their rules that address the 85 limit.  This is the first step in getting the NCAA to the table and to start discussions about true national, NCAA rules on oversigning. 

It is our hope they can find a happy medium that first addresses and eliminates the exploitation and morally reprehensible actions, and secondly creates a completely level playing field where every conference is signing players the same way.  It's going to be a tough task, but with everyone at the table it can be done.  Had the Big 10 pushed for this it would have been rejected because no one would want their ultra restrictive rules pushed on them, but by Slive, out of fear that they might lose their competitive advantage, demanding that the NCAA adopt their new rules nationally, he has opened the door for more substantive discussion.  Surely the SEC doesn't think it is going to do what it wouldn't allow the Big 10 to do, push its rules on everyone else, right?

From here on out we'll be focusing on the national discussion to come up with new national rules for oversigning, rules that won't allow what these will when a school has 16 openings and can still sign 25 guys and cut 9, but instead provides for fair and equitable treatment for the players and competitive equality for the schools and conferences.

We're probably going to start talking about oversigning in baseball now too.

Stay tuned...

Filed under: Announcements, SEC 14 Comments
3Jun/1175

Myth: Removing Oversigning Removes Educational Opportunities

Nick Saban and other SEC coaches, as well as SEC fans, want you to believe that by removing their ability to oversign you are going to eliminate educational opportunities for recruits.  Hogwash.  What they are afraid of is having to tell a kid they want that they don't have room and then have that kid go to a rival school that does have room.

Removing oversigning doesn't eliminate educational opportunities, it realocates those opportunities in a way that prevents student-athletes that are already receiving the opportunity from losing it.  The real problem SEC coaches and fans have is the reallocation of those opportunities.  In order to believe that removing oversigning removes educational opportunities, you have to believe that if a recruit is unable to go to the school on the top of his list because they don't have room for him that he will not go to college at all and will have no other offers or opportunities at other schools.  Myth.

If a school has 27 openings, but can only sign 25 it will leave two scholarships that coaches will have to give to deserving 4th or 5th year walk-on players for one year until the next recruiting class comes around and they can sign a new recruit with the intention of keeping him for the next 4-5 years.

For some reason, fans seem to think that all walk-on players are rich and don't need a scholarship, and that they are just being used as tackling dummies for the fun of it.  Not true.  There are walk-on players that are every bit as needy as scholarship recruits; the only difference between the two groups is talent and in some cases there are walk-on players that are actually better than some that are on scholarship.

Scholarships will not be wasted, period.  In fact, some coaches say that the greatest joy they get is from being able to award a scholarship to a deserving 4th or 5th year senior as a reward for all their hard work, dedication, and doing things right in the classroom and off the field.

Filed under: Rants, SEC Continue reading
2Jun/1117

Red Herring Alert!!! It’s Not About 28 or 25, It’s About 85!!!!!

The last two days of quotes and responses from SEC coaches, athletic directors, and now university presidents and the president of the NCAA Mark Emmert, have made one thing crystal clear, they either do not fully understand the issue of oversigning or they are using the hard cap of 25 as a red herring to divert the average fan's attention away from the real number that counts, 85

University of South Carolina President, Harris Pastides said today that he hopes that whatever the SEC does that the NCAA will force the rest of the country to follow along.  First off, his comments indicate that the competitive advantage aspect of the oversigning issue is much more important than the ethical treatment of players.  Secondly, Harris Patides obivously knows nothing about how the Big 10 Conference handles oversigning, because if he did he would realize that they have been 50+ years ahead of the curve on this issue.

"We'd love the SEC to play a lead role in doing the right thing," Pastides said. "We would hope the NCAA would adopt whatever we would do. That's where our ADs and coaches are. They don't want us to be so far out in front that we're the only league that clamps down on that."

NCAA President Mark Emmert, who met with SEC presidents and chancellors today, said it's possible the league's position on oversigning could become national legislation.

"It's certainly an issue that's more important to the SEC right now than other conferences," Emmert said. "So if they come out with a good position, it may well be one that could become a national standard."

"We certainly know that our football advocates would prefer there's a so-called level playing field," Pastides said. "I think the challenge is do we go first and hope (the nation) will follow? And what if we go first and they don't follow? Do we go back to 28? Nobody sees that happening."

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2011/06/south_carolina_president_on_ov.html

The lead role???  Are you kidding.  The Big 10 Conference banned the practice of oversigning in 1956 and only relaxed its rules slightly in 2002 to allow for 3 over a school's limit with tons of transparency.  The SEC is not taking the lead role here folks, they are playing catch up ball.

The key element that is lost on so many involved in this topic is that you have to address this at the 85 total limit, not the annual 25 limit.  If a Big 10 school has 16 roster openings to get to 85 on national signing day then they can sign up to 19 new recruits, provided there is proper documentation and approval from the conference office.  That's it, they can go three over the limit of 85.   

If the NCAA tried to force a hard cap at 25, a school with 16 openings could still sign 9 over the 85 limit by signing a class of 25.  How does that address or even curb oversigning?  It doesn't.

Setting a hard cap that remains static every year is not the answer, and it will never be the answer because the number of openings each year fluctuates.  Schools are allowed to have 85 scholarship players every year; some years schools will have 16 openings some years schools will have 25.  Therefore the limit needs to fluctuate with the amount of legitimate openings at national signing day and it should be based on getting to 85, not 25.

But what about attrition after national signing day?  The vast majority of that can be mitigated, as rules tighten on oversigning so will the recruiting practices.  Fewer borderline kids will be recruited because the expectation on STUDENT-athletes will be that they have to be prepared for college, remain eligible academically while in college, and not just gifted athletically.  A lot of the attrition that we see post national signing day is forced attrition due to oversigning, so all of that will be gone.  The rest, coaches will just have to deal with.  They can award a 1 year scholarship to a deserving walk-on and fill the slot next year with a new recruit they expect to have for 4-5 years.  This is a perfectly workable solution that eliminates the exploitation of players through the oversigning loophole.

When you demand excellence from student-athletes you will get it (just ask schools that are already doing it: ND, NW, PSU, Vandy, etc), but when you have a system that says to the student-athlete that they don't have to be prepared for college when they come in, they don't have to take classwork seriously when they get there and they don't have to keep their nose clean because they can easily be replaced via oversigning, you have a system that goes against everything college athletics is supposed to be about, which is the enrichment of the educational experience through competition in athletics.  We didn't make that up by the way, that is supposed to be part of the mission of the NCAA.

As fans and alumni, we should demand more from university presidents, they should demand more from athletic directors, they should demand more from coaches, and coaches should demand more from student-athletes.  To do otherwise by exploiting a loophole such as oversigning in order to run through kids in search of the best football talent is what is really hurting kids.

Filed under: NCAA, SEC 17 Comments
2Jun/115

Best Oversigning Video Ever

We can't seem to get the video player to embed in our page here so here's a direct link to the video on Brook's site. 

http://www.sportsbybrooks.com/saban-sausage-factory-facing-expiration-date-29698

There are several key elements in the video.  The money shot comes at 1:35 mark when Saban tells Ian Rapoport the numbers are none of his business and no one needs to know and the fans don't ask.  My how times have changed.  Why didn't Saban defend his oversigning practice as good for kids at this point? 

Another key element in the video is Mark Richt's comments about oversigning where he claims that other coaches are not being ethical when they oversign.

Filed under: SEC 5 Comments
2Jun/1175

What We Learned Today

Today was, by far, the busiest day for oversigning news since national signing day.  As you already know, the SEC coaches met today in Destin, Florida and briefly discussed how to divert the attention away from oversigning by having Steve Spurrier announce that he and a few other coaches think they should pay 70 players on each team $300 per game.  Didn't see that coming did you?  We didn't either, but nicely played by the old ball coach.

“They can give it to their parents for travel, lodging, meals. Maybe they could take their girlfriend out Sunday night or Saturday night and so forth,” Spurrier said. “A bunch of our coaches felt so strongly about it that we’d be willing to pay. Seventy guys, 300 bucks a game. That’s only $21,000 bucks a game.

“I doubt it will get passed. But as coaches, we make all the money, as do universities and television, and we need to give more to our players. That was just something we need to get out there.”

http://www.ajc.com/sports/sec-meetings-notebook-964500.html?cxtype=rss_news_128746

It's statements like that from Spurrier that remind us that coaches should stick to the X's and O's of football and leave the rest to school administrators, conference commissioners, and the NCAA.

Back to what we learned today. 

Yes, the SEC coaches did meet today, and yes, they did discuss the topic of oversigning and conducted a vote on the proposal drawn up by the SEC athletic directors and approved by the conference commissioner, Mike Slive.

12-0

Typically that indicates an undefeated regular season and a trip to the SEC championship game for the right to win the next National Championship, on this day, however, it meant that all 12 SEC coaches are against the new legislation that would attempt to curb oversigning and address the other roster management areas that have become a concern. 

Not that we expected them to vote in favor of the new legislation, but for those of us who are against oversigning and want to see it removed from college athletics there is still hope.  The coaches are not going to be the ones giving the final vote, and for good reason because if that were the case Houston Nutt would vote to set the signing limit at 80, Spurrier would vote to pay players out of his own pocket, and Saban would vote to have the bump rule reinstated.  We have no idea what Les Miles would vote for because it is impossible to figure out what goes on under the hat.  

Instead, the university presidents will get the final vote on Friday and that will be the one that counts.  If we had to guess, the coaches already know which way this is going to go and they are just making sure all of their fans know that they did not vote to have restrictions placed on their recruiting habits.  Kind of sets up nicely down the road should the new legislation pass and have the affect that Saban thinks it will have on the conference:

"In my opinion," Saban told ESPN.com, "it (cutting signee numbers) would really affect the quality in our league."

http://www.thetowntalk.com/article/20110601/SPORTS/106010303

Mark Richt

For all of the tough talk on oversigning that Mark Richt has been giving lately and all of the praise he has received for said tough talk, when he voted in favor of the status quo today it could only mean one of two things:

1. He already knows the outcome (that the presidents are going to vote in favor of it) and he doesn't want to piss the rest of the other coaches off by being the one guy who voted in favor of the new legislation, or...

2. He has been talking out of both sides of his mouth in order to project a certain image.

Either way, Richt missed a golden opportunity to be regarded as the second coming of Bobby Dodd and we are moving him out of the list of people against oversigning.  It would have been perfectly acceptable for Richt to say that the same thing Muschamp said today, but instead Richt went back on his previous stance by saying he's okay with oversigning as long as everyone knows what's going on up front.  We have always had a lot of respect for Mark Richt on this site for his previous stance on oversigning -- it would have been nice for him to take a stand, publicly, in front of his peers.

"We don’t over-sign," Muschamp said. "That’s a policy we have at the university. We’ve been successful, so it’s not an issue for us."

http://www.alligatorarmy.com/2011/6/1/2200334/will-muschamp-at-sec-spring-meetings-day-1

We'll be moving Muschamp to the "against oversigning" list. 

Nick Saban

This should probably go in a separate post, but we'll put it here to help curb the outrage from Alabama fans.  Saban raised some very interesting points today with his remarks to the media after the meeting where he blamed them for the increased scrutiny saying:

"You all are creating a bad problem for everybody," Saban told reporters. "You're going to mess up kids' opportunities by doing what you're doing. You think you're helping 'em but you're really hurting 'em. It took one case where somebody didn't get the right opportunity. You need to take the other 100 cases where somebody got an opportunity."

http://www.al.com/sports/index.ssf/2011/06/sec_football_coaches_favor_kee.html

So let's get this right, by the media analyzing what is going on with oversigning and documenting the stories of guys like Elliott Porter, Steven Wesley, and Chris Garrett, just to name 3, and how those kids were completely screwed by oversigning, it is now responsible for creating a problem for EVERYONE.  Really?

The general consensus of the media is that oversigning has to go, both for reasons of ethical treatment of players and competitive equality.  Georgia's AD and Florida's President both support this position and have done so publicly, so it's not just the media.

Essentially what Saban is saying is that to not oversign is harmful to kids -- those are his words.  That should be taken as a direct shot at the Big 10 Conference and its coaches -- in Saban's view they are hurting kids and robbing them by not oversigning. 

Ironically, Saban coached in the Big 10 for several years and there is no record of Saban lobbying to put an end to the injustice and harm that not oversigning was doing to kids while he was in the Big 10.   And based on how strongly he feels about this injustice, it's odd that he hasn't started a campaign to rid the rest of college football of the injustice of not oversigning kids.  Surely if he feels this strongly about it he would call out coaches around the country for not oversigning, "look guys, you are ruining lives by not doing this -- you can't do this to the kids, it's not right!!!!"

That's what he is selling -- are you buying?  We're not.

Oversigning was probably never even on Saban's radar until he landed at LSU and found out what a powerful tool it is for roster management.   Gerry DiNardo didn't realize what a constraint the B1G rules were until he came to Indiana from LSU -- he was the one that lobbied to have the rules relaxed in 2002 so that he could oversign by 3, not Saban.

Regardless, Saban wants everyone to believe this is a problem created by the media; he's dead wrong, this has been an issue for decades, the media is just finally bringing it to the forefront.

SEC University Presidents

It all comes down to the university presidents.  In 1964 the SEC university presidents were faced with the exact same dilemma, yes we've been down this road before, oversigning is not something that just starting being an issue here recently, and they voted in favor of not changing the rules for oversigning.  The numbers were slightly different back then, but the general principles were the same.  Coaches were signing way more guys than they had room for and then kicking the ones they didn't want to the curb. 

The SEC presidents at the time were torn over the issue with the vote being split down the middle. 

A vote was to be taken by the presidents of the colleges on the issue, and Dodd made it clear, Tech would have to leave the SEC unless the rule was changed. Dodd said he would live with 10, 20, 30, 40, or even 50 recruits per year as long as he did not have to chase any of his players off.

The presidents were split six for Dodd’s position and six against. Bear had promised Dodd he would get his president to vote for Dodd’s position, which would have changed the rule.

When the meeting was held, Bryant did not show up and the Alabama president voted against Dodd’s position and the 140 Rule was upheld. Tech’s president immediately walked to the podium and announced Tech was withdrawing from the SEC. Bryant never told Dodd why he reneged on his promise."

http://oversigning.com/testing/index.php/2010/02/14/why-did-georgia-tech-leave-the-sec/

The SEC Presidents have an opportunity to send a message and right the wrongs that have taken place since that decision in 1964.  Oversigning is not an issue that Nick Saban created, it's a systemic problem that is as old as the conference and has resulted in countless kids like Elliott Porter and Chris Garrett getting screwed out of their scholarships to make way for new, better players. 

On Friday we'll find out who really is in control of the SEC, the coaches or the Presidents.  For the sake of college football let's hope it's the Presidents and they vote to push through the new legislation.

Filed under: SEC 75 Comments
29May/1155

Arkansas AD Jeff Long Joins Nutt, Saban in Fight to Keep Oversigning

Based on the comments coming out from SEC coaches, and now Athletic Directors, it is very unlikely that the new legislation on oversigning is going to pass. The only way it passes is if the university presidents make it happen.

Here's te latest from Arkansas' AD Jeff Long.

http://tinyurl.com/3rjklws

The overriding theme from all supporters of oversigning is that they are doing it right, others are doing it wrong, there's nothing wrong with it if it's done right, and there is nothing wrong with treating a kid like a piece of meat as long as you tell him upfront that you are going to treat him like a piece of meat.

Most prognosticators have the oversigners willing this battle 8-4.

One thing is certain, if this legislation doesn't pass it will send a clear message to the rest of the college football world. If you want to compete with the best conference in the country you are going to have to get on board with oversigning and start treating your roster like an NFL roster.

Filed under: SEC 55 Comments