Oversigning.com
2Mar/1186

Oversigning Time Machine

With the SEC meetings in June on the horizon and the topic of oversigning at or near the topic of the agenda, perhaps Mike Slive and the Athletic Directors of the SEC should use the oversigning time machine and rewind the clock back to the SEC meetings of 1964.  That was the year Georgia Tech took a stand against the practice of oversigning and eventually left the conference because it would not change its recruiting rules to prevent the abuses taking place relative to signing more players than there was room for, which subsequently led to players being run off the team and out of school.

It is absolutely amazing that 47 years later this is one of the hottest topics going into the conference meetings and still an issue in the SEC.  Granted, Georgia and Florida are not threatening to leave the SEC if Alabama, LSU, Ole Miss, Arkansas, South Carolina, and Auburn don't stop oversigning, but it is clear that the battle lines have been drawn and just like in 1964 the conference remains strongly divided on the practice of oversigning. 

The Georgia Tech Alumni Magazine recently wrote a wonderful article on the 1964 SEC meetings with a blow for blow account of what happened and why GT really left the SEC -- oversigning.  Here is just a snippet of the article; we highly recommend you read the rest of the article. 

Over the years, many have debated the reason for Tech’s departure from the SEC. Some will argue that Tech athletics had begun to slip and were no longer able to compete with the other conference teams. Others will point to a running feud with the University of Alabama as the cause. Still others will suggest that Tech wanted to be an independent all along, hoping to become the Notre Dame of the South. Tech was losing a lot of revenue generated from TV and bowl rights because of conference sharing rules. As an independent, Tech would be able to keep all the money it earned.

The true reason was over something called the 140 Rule — and Bobby Dodd’s determination to have it changed.

The SEC 140 Rule placed yearly caps on football and basketball scholarships at 45 and limited the total number of scholarships each school could offer to 140. Even with the normal attrition expected from academic dropouts and other issues, simple math shows that if a school recruited its full allotment of players each year it would be over the 140 maximum.

Instead of recruiting a smaller number of athletes each year to manage the 140 maximum, many SEC schools would simply cut the scholarships of players who had not performed to expectations. Atlanta’s afternoon newspaper, The Atlanta Journal, reported “Dodd’s chief complaint with the 140 has been the alleged practice of some schools ‘running off’ recruiting mistakes to make room for new signees.”

http://gtalumnimag.com/?p=5889

We have long believed that the practice of oversigning is tolerated in certain areas because of a cultural mindset that believes it's okay to treat student-athletes as pawns or pieces of meat.  This is the same mindset that believes in winning at all costs because bragging rights are more important than ethics.  It should be noted, both from a historical perspective regarding GT's decision to leave the SEC in 1964 because of the oversigning issue and from a contemporary perspective from the recent comments from Florida's President and Georgia's Athletic Director condemning the practice of oversigning that this is not a North vs. South issue.  This is an issue about ethics in recruiting and the sides are Right and Wrong, not North and South.  The Big 10 Conference put its rules in place in 1954 to deal with oversigning, 10 years prior to GT leaving the SEC, and there is no record of the Big 10 having an influence on that decision in 1964.  Likewise, very little is being said publicly by Big 10 officials on this topic.  Chad Hawley has provided comments and a few coaches have answered questions on the topic or provided commentary, but by and large the Big 10 Conference is not pushing its rules onto the SEC.  Instead, the SEC is right back where it was 47 years ago, heavily divided along the battle lines of oversigning, and this time it is Georgia instead of Georgia Tech that is taking a stand with Florida at its side.

Correction: The SEC Presidents and Athletic Directors meet in early June, not July as previously stated above.

Filed under: ACC, SEC 86 Comments
8Jan/1120

Leather Helmet Blog – Should Georgia Leave the SEC like GT Did?

The Georgia-based website, LHB, has been a supporter of this site since its creation.  We recently received an email from its owner, Greg Poole, regarding his concern that should Georgia lose Mark Richt that the new coaching staff would use oversigning in order to keep up with the Alabama's and LSU's of the SEC West.

Obviously, Poole and many Georgia fans take great pride in not oversigning.  Many of the SEC supporters that we have on this site are Georgia or SEC East fans being that the East does not oversign to the extent of the West.  This is not something new with regards to the state of Georgia or the issue of SEC West teams abusing oversigning.  We wrote a piece a good while back when we were first investigating oversigning regarding Georgia Tech's departure from the SEC.  Here are a couple of lines from that piece for those who don't want to read the entire entry.

This is a quote from Bobby Dodd's book, Dodd's Luck.

"Another issue of concern for Dodd was Alabama's and other SEC schools' over-recruitment of players.[11] Universities would recruit more players than they had roster space for.  During the summer practice sessions, the teams in question would cut the players well after signing day thus preventing the cut players from finding new colleges to play for.  Dodd appealed the SEC administration to punish the "tryout camps" of his fellow SEC members but the SEC did not. Finally, Dodd withdrew Georgia Tech from the SEC in 1963.[11] Tech would remain an independent like Notre Dame and Penn State (at the time) during the final four years of Dodd's coaching tenure."

Georgia Tech, a charter member of the SEC, withdrew from the SEC in large part because of the oversigning issue back in 1960's (yes we know about the fight with Alabama and the broken jaw, but that was only part of the issue according to Bobby Dodd in his book).  This problem, while greatly diminished from back in Dodd's day, still has not been completely eradicated.

More from Dodd...

"Bobby Dodd insisted there was no other reason he left the SEC, other than the 140 Rule. The 140 Rule stated a college program could only have 140 football and basketball players on scholarship at any one time. The teams were allowed to sign up to 45 players a year, but could not exceed the 140 Rule.

Dodd would not allow any of the football players choosing Tech to be dismissed from Tech, because they were not good players. Dodd said, “it is not the recruits fault for not making the squad, it was the coaches fault for misjudging their talents”. If a recruit came to Tech, he would stay on a football scholarship until he graduated.

Dodd would sign about 30-32 players a year to meet the guidelines, but the other schools in the SEC were offering 45 scholarships a year. Those players, not good enough to fall under the 140 Rule, had their scholarships withdrawn and sent packing before the end of each year. Dodd insisted, the recruiting of athletes by this method amounted to nothing more than a tryout for a scholarship.

Dodd thought it unfair and would not withdraw scholarships from his players. He wanted the SEC to limit the amount of scholarships to about 32 per year. This would keep the other schools from offering 45 scholarships, picking the best, and sending the rest packing.

Maybe it is time the University of Georgia takes a stand like Georgia Tech did back in the 1960's.  It's pretty clear that Georgia fans see oversigning for what it is and are against it; they see the harm it causes, the lying required to make it happen, and the competitive advantage that is gained through its abuse.  All of that has been well documented and is indisputable.  This is simply a matter of ethics.  Our advice to Leather Helmet Blog is to lead the charge for the SEC East to pressure Mike Slive and the 12 University Presidents to take serious action on this issue.  No more window dressing. 

The Huston Nutt rule was an absolute joke and nothing more than window dressing sparked by Nutt mocking the rule book in front of the media; had it not been for his blatant disregard in front of the media there would be no 28 player cap.  Force them to address this issue.  Force them to make each school report their number of openings after January 15th, the deadline for Juniors to declare for the draft, and force them to only accept signed letters of intent for the number of openings they show to have on National Signing day.  Stop the SEC from being allowed to sign way more than they have room for February and then figure out how to get back down to 85 in August.  This is exactly what was going on back in Dodd's day; the numbers are just a little different.

Everyone should demand transparency in the roster management.  Bring roster management out into the light; fans want to know about it, fans like Greg Poole over at LHB.

Filed under: SEC 20 Comments
6Jan/1154

Alabama with Verbal Commitment #22 and #1 Recruiting Class

Alabama picked up verbal commitment #22 last night from Xzavier Dickson and they now have the #1 ranked class according to Rivals.com.  http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/football/recruiting/commitments/2011/Alabama-73

That commitment seems to have ushered in the departure of another commitment as one of the 22 is now headed to JUCO. http://alabama.rivals.com/barrier_noentry.asp?ReturnTo=&sid=&script=content.asp&cid=1173085&fid=&tid=&mid=&rid=

It cannot be stressed enough how much of an advantage it is for Saban to not have to work withing a projected recruiting budget like he would if he were recruiting in the Big 10 conference.  With a senior class of roughly 8-10 players and no more than 4 Juniors jumping to the NFL early, the reasonable recruiting budget for Alabama should be somewhere around 14-15 players, which is what you would expect when a school has such a small senior class.  If you go back and look at schools such as Ohio State, you will occasionally see a small class of 15 or so recruits.  That is the normal cycle of recruiting when you are not allowed to oversign.

Ohio State signed 16 recruits in 2003, 15 in 2007, and 19 in 2010.   See the pattern there; every three or four years you have a small class if you are not oversigning every year.

Alabama on the other hand going back to 2005 has had 32, 23, 25, 32, 27, 29, and is at 22 this year. 

Alabama is not done recruiting yet as there are still a few players on their board and national signing day is not here yet.   The good news is that at least the SEC will stop them at 28; even though they are already way, way over their projected budget. 

Must be nice to just go out and get 25-28 new players every year, despite what you have room for, and never get so much as a phone call from the conference office asking where you are going to put everyone.

Mike Slive and the University Presidents of the SEC should be ashamed of themselves for allowing this to continue, but to them, maybe this is just a way of life...after all, this has been going on in the SEC since the days of Bobby Dodd and Georgia Tech being an SEC member institution.  At least they had the dignity to take a stand and leave.

Filed under: SEC 54 Comments
5Oct/1044

Don’t Blame the Coaches

Here is a decent column written by Gary Laney, sportswriter for The Advocate, and although the overall tone of the column is one that excuses the actions of the coaches, Laney does admit oversigning is an issue in the SEC. 

http://www.2theadvocate.com/sports/lsu/100504484.html

He basically acknowledges that oversigning creates a competitive edge and that it's a problem specifically in the SEC, but he says don't blame the coaches in the SEC, blame the NCAA rules.

Increased costs come with increased expectations and increased pressure to win.

If Miles doesn’t oversign, Nick Saban will (and he does) and LSU will lose some competitive edge in the process. You can’t let that happen, not when 9-4 doesn’t do the trick.

That’s not an ethical defense of oversigning, nor is it a defense of how LSU handles oversigned players. The point is when you look at the context in which it happened — high pressure to win and rules that allow it — you should only be surprised if it doesn’t happen..

So I guess we should be surprised that it doesn't happen in the rest of the country?  Or should we not be surprised that it is happening in the SEC?

He's right about it being an advantage, and we are seeing it on the field with Alabama over the last few year and we saw it at LSU and other places, but not all the blame should go to the NCAA.  The athletic directors, university presidents, and the mighty Mike Slive are just as much to blame as anyone at the NCAA office -- this is happening under their watch and they could stop it completely.  That won't happen though.  This is a problem that dates back to the 1960's with the SEC and it would take extreme pressure for them to address it on their own without being forced by the NCAA.

As it has been mentioned here before, this (oversigning) was the reason behind Georgia Tech leaving the SEC.

From the book Dodd's Luck written in part by former Geogria Tech head coach Bobby Dodd...

Bobby Dodd insisted there was no other reason he left the SEC, other than the 140 Rule. The 140 Rule stated a college program could only have 140 football and basketball players on scholarship at any one time. The teams were allowed to sign up to 45 players a year, but could not exceed the 140 Rule.

Dodd would not allow any of the football players choosing Tech to be dismissed from Tech, because they were not good players. Dodd said, “it is not the recruits fault for not making the squad, it was the coaches fault for misjudging their talents”. If a recruit came to Tech, he would stay on a football scholarship until he graduated.

Dodd would sign about 30-32 players a year to meet the guidelines, but the other schools in the SEC were offering 45 scholarships a year. Those players, not good enough to fall under the 140 Rule, had their scholarships withdrawn and sent packing before the end of each year. Dodd insisted, the recruiting of athletes by this method amounted to nothing more than a tryout for a scholarship.

Dodd thought it unfair and would not withdraw scholarships from his players. He wanted the SEC to limit the amount of scholarships to about 32 per year. This would keep the other schools from offering 45 scholarships, picking the best, and sending the rest packing.

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.

Perhaps we need a modern day Bobby Dodd to step in and put his foot down.  Mark Richt would be our choice given that he does not oversign players -- maybe Urban Meyer has enough pull to get it done, he doesn't oversign any where near the level of Saban and Miles.

Filed under: SEC 44 Comments
15Jun/108

Abuse Breeds Control

Andy Staples, writer for Sports Illustrated, wrote an excellent article on oversigning last year in the wake of Huston Nutt's 37 player class and subsequent thumbing of his nose at those who criticized the number of players he signed, given that he had 64 scholarship players set to return to Ole Miss and there was no way he would have room for all 37 players. 

Let's take a closer look at Andy's article.

First, regarding Nutt's position on his class of 37:

"I checked with [compliance director] David [Wells], and there's no rule that says that we can't sign 80," Nutt said at that Signing Day press conference. "All I know is we have to have 25 ready to go in August ready and eligible."

Is this the kind of coach with which you should entrust your child's signature on a letter of intent?  Seriously.  Fortunately, the SEC addressed the situation and placed a limit of 28 signed letters per class, but 28 * 4 != 85, so there is still room for improvement and further regulation. 

More from the article:

As long as programs keep their total at 85 scholarships and don't bring in more than 25 a year, the NCAA has no quarrel -- for now. The NCAA's Football Issues Committee discussed oversigning and grayshirting at its January meeting. The committee, which comprises coaches, athletic directors and conference administrators, agreed to monitor oversigning, but Sun Belt Conference commissioner Wright Waters, the committee's chair, said until the committee can get some hard data, it can't determine if oversigning is an issue that requires legislation.

"We don't know yet, because we don't know the numbers," Waters said. "If you look at it purely in principle, you're uncomfortable with it. But you've also got to ask if kids are being benefited by it. If they are, then you've got to find a way to not hurt those kids and at the same time make sure you maintain a level playing field."

As Waters noted, oversigning and grayshirting raise some ethical dilemmas. For instance, what happens when too many players have qualified academically and there is no scholarship available for a grayshirting player?

Clink link to continue reading >>>>

Filed under: Rants, SEC Continue reading
3Mar/102

Feedback!

If you haven't read the news, Michael over at Braves & Birds - The Atlanta Sports Blog has been reading our site and decided to write an essay on the topic of oversigning and the nature of our website.  Michael is an Attorney from Atlanta, Georgia, we on the other had are not attorneys (we didn't even sleep at a Holiday Inn, but we're going to give this a go anyways), but we did we bounce emails back and forth with Michael and he seems like a personable guy, not to mention he has been blogging since we were in diapers. 

So let's take a look at the article.

"I've been reading Oversigning.com over the past few weeks and enjoying the discussion. The authors there take a much harder line on oversigning than I would and at times, their writing devolves into unhinged attacks on the SEC from every angle. (Comparing endowments? Really?) In those instances, they come across as excuse-making Big Ten fans who want to justify the fact that SEC teams have won more national titles in the past four years than Big Ten teams have won in the last forty."

Yeah, we're pretty hardcore on the topic of oversigning.  People write about it from time to time, especially during the off-season and around signing day, but we are the first and only website completely dedicated to the topic.  Why?  Two reasons: 1.) During the 2007 during the National Championship game, we saw a graphic that showed the number of players signed in each of LSU's and Ohio State's previous 5 recruiting classes: LSU 28, 26, 13,  26, and 26 = 119 and Ohio State 16, 24, 18, 20, and 15 = 93.  A difference of 26 players, or essentially an entire recruiting class.  That raised an eyebrow.  It was the first time we could remember a broadcast ever showing those kind of numbers.  2.) A couple of months later we saw Nick Saban on ESPN battling it out with a local sports reporter over his recruiting numbers which led us to this link.  That raised a second eyebrow.  The thing that really got us going was Nick Saban saying:

"It's none of your business.  Aiight?  And don't give me this stuff about the fans need to know, because they don't need to know."

Something about that has always bothered us.  It wreaks of someone having something to hide. 

Unhinged attacks on the SEC.  Have we attacked the SEC, probably so, has it been unhinged, no not really.  If we were attacking the ACC for oversigning, then it would be considered unhinged, but to take the conference with the worst problem with oversigning to task is not unhinged attacking in our opinion.  Calling out the SEC for running off Georgia Tech, Tulane, and Sawenee isn't really all that unhinged either, in our opinion, it's more like factual history.  The post regarding endowments was a follow up on two fronts: 1.) Texas joining the Big 10, and 2.) The SEC running off academic universities because of disagreements on athletic competition, specifically football, and how that has left them poorly positioned in terms of adding a powerhouse like Texas who wouldn't consider joining the SEC back in the 90's because of the poor academic standards.  Again, those are facts, not unhinged attacks. 

Click the link to continue reading >>>

Filed under: Feedback Continue reading
21Feb/100

But Alabama was on Probation

We continue to hear that Alabama was on probation and scholarship reductions in 2002-2003 and that is why their numbers are so high. 

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/football/2002-02-01-alabama-violations.htm

We'll keep this brief and to the point.  If Alabama's numbers are so high because they were on scholarship reductions, then what were the schools listed underneath them on, double secret scholarship reductions?  We searched the Internet and couldn't find where the NCAA dropped the hammer on any of these schools for recruiting violations.  If you guys find something we missed let us know.

Alabama Comparison

Teams Conf. 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 Total Average
Alabama SEC 19 19 29 32 23 25 32 27 29 235 26.11
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: Rants 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 >>>

14Feb/1030

Why Did Georgia Tech Leave the SEC?

The fascinating history between Georgia Tech and the SEC is pretty well documented, but perhaps a lot of college football fans, especially those outside of the southern states or those under the age of 40, have forgotten the whole story behind GT and the SEC.  Georgia Tech was a founding member of the SEC and remained in the conference for 69 years until differences between Georgia Tech and the SEC could not be resolved. 

More on GT's relationship with the SEC:
http://rootzoo.com/articles/view/NCAA-Football/Southeastern-Conference-SEC/The-Strangest-History-Georgia-Tech-and-the-SEC_9907

More on Georgia Tech's history as a football program:
http://wapedia.mobi/en/Georgia_Tech_Yellow_Jackets_football#1

We felt in order for this site to have any credibility we needed to go back in time and establish an understanding of oversigning and its historical meaning; we needed to find its roots.   Thus far, all roads lead to the southeastern portion of the country - but don't worry, we're not done looking.  So before you jump to any conclusions regarding this site, we ask that you take a moment to realize that we do our homework on this topic, we're not just making things up as we go along. 

And for those of you who think that oversigning is just some new made up term for something that just started since the 85 scholarship limit, you would be wrong.  Oversigning is an issue that is as old as the SEC conference and played a major role in Georgia Tech's decision in 1963 to withdraw from the conference. 

"Another issue of concern for Dodd was Alabama's and other SEC schools' over-recruitment of players.[11] Universities would recruit more players than they had roster space for.  During the summer practice sessions, the teams in question would cut the players well after signing day thus preventing the cut players from finding new colleges to play for.  Dodd appealed the SEC administration to punish the "tryout camps" of his fellow SEC members but the SEC did not. Finally, Dodd withdrew Georgia Tech from the SEC in 1963.[11] Tech would remain an independent like Notre Dame and Penn State (at the time) during the final four years of Dodd's coaching tenure."


We're considering a new annual award to the coach who runs off the fewest number of players to make room for new recruits, a sort of anti-Saban Cup award; we'll call it The Dodd Cup award.   On a serious note, Georgia Tech fans should feel honored and proud to have a man like Dodd as a part of their rich history.  We're big GT & Bobby Dodd fans here at oversigning.com.  Bobby Dodd & GT were fighting the war on oversigning way before we were in diapers. 

More on Bobby Dodd:
http://www.georgiaencyclopedia.org/nge/Article.jsp?id=h-1998
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bobby_Dodd

Many will say that GT left the SEC because of the riff(s) between GT head coach Bobby Dodd and Alabama head coach Paul "Bear" Bryant, but in the book "Dodd's Luck," Bobby Dodd claims it was the 140 rule.   See this excerpt below:

"Bobby Dodd insisted there was no other reason he left the SEC, other than the 140 Rule. The 140 Rule stated a college program could only have 140 football and basketball players on scholarship at any one time. The teams were allowed to sign up to 45 players a year, but could not exceed the 140 Rule.

Dodd would not allow any of the football players choosing Tech to be dismissed from Tech, because they were not good players. Dodd said, “it is not the recruits fault for not making the squad, it was the coaches fault for misjudging their talents”. If a recruit came to Tech, he would stay on a football scholarship until he graduated.

Dodd would sign about 30-32 players a year to meet the guidelines, but the other schools in the SEC were offering 45 scholarships a year. Those players, not good enough to fall under the 140 Rule, had their scholarships withdrawn and sent packing before the end of each year. Dodd insisted, the recruiting of athletes by this method amounted to nothing more than a tryout for a scholarship.

Dodd thought it unfair and would not withdraw scholarships from his players. He wanted the SEC to limit the amount of scholarships to about 32 per year. This would keep the other schools from offering 45 scholarships, picking the best, and sending the rest packing.

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."

History goes on to show that Bryant and the Alabama football program went on to have one of the greatest runs in college football history.  From 1963 until Bryant's retirement Alabama won192 games, with 11 ten win season, 12 SEC championships, and 5 National Championships.  It would have been interesting to see how things would have panned out had the SEC voted in favor of reform on oversigning and GT stayed in the SEC.  Alabama and GT never played again and probably never will didn't play again until 1978 and only played 6 times (1978-1984).

Dodd also indicated that the stiffer academic requirements played a role in Georgia Tech's departure from the SEC.

"I just could not compete with those damn state universities. And Auburn is just as easily a state university. They could take these same boys we couldn't take, who wanted to come and play for me. And it just broke me down. I couldn't beat'em. You can just outcoach'em some of the time, brother. Better football players will beat you."

Link to a condensed version of Dodd's book: http://www.stingtalk.com/forums/archive/index.php/t-4395.html

It's hard to believe that 47 years after Georgia Tech left the SEC because of oversigning and discarding players that it is still an issue and the SEC still leads the country in the number of players signed. 

Of course now the rule is 85/25, back then the rule was 140/45.  Does anyone else get the feeling that no matter what the numbers are they will always be pushed to the limit in the SEC?  We're just shocked that Vanderbilt (which has normal recruiting numbers) hasn't pulled a GT and withdrawn from the conference.  When you think about it, is there another school in the country that is more out of place in their conference than Vanderbilt?

Filed under: ACC, History, SEC 30 Comments