|
Replies: 41
| visibility 1
|
Hall of Famer [23122]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19822
Joined: 1/15/11
|
OVERSIGNING - Misconceptions
Jan 18, 2013, 12:17 PM
|
|
Reading other thread about oversigning, it's plain to see there are some misconceptions about what constitutes OS. Seeing some claim that as long as it's held at 25 it's not OS, it's BS.
I don't care if it's A&M bringing in 30+, if they have 30 spots because of attrition, being under the limit, failing, transfers, as long as long as they're not looking at a player passing his grades and saying they will not renew, it's fair.
If have 18 graduating ,only 2 leaving for whatever reasons and were at the 85 limit last year, bringing in 25 in means up to 5 scholarships will be yanked ("not renewed")between signing day and August. Just because they're allowed to bring in up to 25,they're still oversigning when they bring in more than they have Scholarships for.
http://oversigning.com/testing/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oversigning
http://www.elevenwarriors.com/2011/10/the-oversigning-bowl
http://oversigning.com/testing/index.php/tag/steve-spurrier/
http://michiganstate.247sports.com/Board/93/Steve-Spurrier-rips-the-B10-for-not-oversigning-recruits-1346192/1#a1346266
http://www.yardbarker.com/all_sports/articles/steve_spurrier_oversigning_is_a_helpful_and_ticklish_situation/4273233
Think about it,the practice pulling the bottom 4-5 scholarships every year and replacing them with those they think are better. How does this not build up depth faster than doing things the right way ?
Someone please find the link of the OBC on the practice last year when he was asked about yanking scholarships.
As a final note-
While some schools might have a large number of guys going pro, across college football 95% of these guys will never play pro ball. Out of that small percentage that will go pro , HALF will never make it past their first contract. That's the odds, these young men are owed an education.
|
|
|
|
 |
All-TigerNet [11024]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9048
Joined: 2/22/00
|
Have to use coot math to really understand it.
Jan 18, 2013, 12:20 PM
|
|
with redshirting, you have players from 5 classes on campus at any given time.
In Columbia they do it this way:
28 X 5 = 85
its easy and fun to do coot math.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-American [598]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 1040
Joined: 10/13/02
|
Coot math 101 with professor steve***
Jan 18, 2013, 12:24 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aficionado [174]
TigerPulse: 34%
Posts: 436
Joined: 11/8/12
|
Re: OVERSIGNING - Misconceptions
Jan 18, 2013, 12:27 PM
|
|
It doesn't change the FACT that you can only have 85 on scholarship for any year....2011-2012-2013.....doesn't matter. If you have several opening through transfers...academic casualties...or any other reason you are allowed to add recruits to fill those slots. It doesn't give you more players and you only dress 60 something on game days anyway so what is the big deal ? You CAN NOT over sign period !!!!!! You can play with the numbers but you CAN NOT over sign.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23122]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19822
Joined: 1/15/11
|
They never oversigne because after signing day
Jan 18, 2013, 12:32 PM
|
|
they have till August to report their 85 scholarship athletes. What happens then is guys that have been on the team, passed their classes, not been in trouble, not transferring, not leaving the program on the own are not having their scholorships renewed to make room for those that are brought in. So yes there is oversigning. It's widely reported.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aficionado [174]
TigerPulse: 34%
Posts: 436
Joined: 11/8/12
|
Re: They never oversigne because after signing day
Jan 18, 2013, 12:49 PM
|
|
It's still within the rules so technically it's not over signing. Your argument would not pass the mustard in court....or with in the NCAA rules. Most schools use this to their advantage. The NCAA needs to close the loophole if it becomes a problem. Just because some don't use it doesn't make it wrong. It's still a choice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6781]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5464
Joined: 8/14/03
|
If you determine whats right and wrong based on what's legal
Jan 18, 2013, 1:02 PM
|
|
you're going to have a tough life.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [434]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11/6/09
|
I agree 100%!***
Jan 18, 2013, 1:30 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4504]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9112
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [434]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11/6/09
|
Re: NCAA?? How about the coach and school having a
Jan 18, 2013, 1:34 PM
|
|
Integrity and the SEC / USuC are antonyms!
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10498]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 4281
Joined: 11/5/01
|
Amen, they ask these kids to make a huge commitment
Jan 18, 2013, 5:12 PM
[ in reply to NCAA?? How about the coach and school having a ] |
|
But don't hesitate to stab them in the back when something else comes along. Despicable practice
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17135]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10934
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: They never oversigne because after signing day
Jan 18, 2013, 1:40 PM
[ in reply to Re: They never oversigne because after signing day ] |
|
Oversigning is explicitly the act of "signing" (which happens in college football in February) more players than the school will have room for with current returning scholarship players. Oversigning is not a legal or NCAA term and it is completely ridiculous for you to deny it exists.
Additionally, where did you come up with the idea that a football can only dress 60 players? Can't believe no one else caught that. You have zero credibility on this topic now so just stop. Roster and dress limits for D1 are set by conference not the NCAA. Most conferences allow 105 to dress at home. Some conferences adopt a 60 man travel limit but most schools voluntarily curtail the road roster due to expenses. And it isn't relevant in any way to a discussion of oversigning.
If you care, this is the real ill-effect of oversigning. Say Player A is a high 4 star DE. Obviously lots of schools are interested. Alabama, who already has 4 star DEs stacked like cordwood. But, a few booster handshakes and the promise of playing in the NFL after three years and he's sold. Alabama is so deep they are recruiting defensively - that is keeping people away from their competition. So, Mr. 4* shows up and quickly realizes that he isn't going to be playing anytime soon, much less going to the NFL in 3 years. Then, by rule, he has to sit the next season out if he wants to stay D1. Even if he wants to stay and get his education Alabama can drop him without ramnification. So now a kid who would have been instant impact for a great number of good schools enters his junior year without seeing a snap. It is punitive to the signee who suffers for while giving all control to the institution who have no obligations to the kid - not even to provide him with the 4 year education that most everyone thinks should be reward enough.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [25265]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 43367
Joined: 7/31/10
|
Great analogy and straight to the point. Satan's method.+1.***
Jan 18, 2013, 7:23 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
MVP [502]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 178
Joined: 11/30/98
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6321]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5009
Joined: 12/19/06
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [434]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11/6/09
|
If you sign more than 25 in a year, you have oversigned.
Jan 18, 2013, 12:52 PM
[ in reply to Re: OVERSIGNING - Misconceptions ] |
|
How many times has USuC done this in the OBS era? I would venture to say every single year. Whether it's within the rules or not, it is unethical. And everyone knows that is Stevie's middle name!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rookie [13]
TigerPulse: 24%
Posts: 60
Joined: 7/1/11
|
Re: If you sign more than 25 in a year, you have oversigned.
Jan 18, 2013, 1:03 PM
|
|
Question, can you "flunk" football? You give a scholarship with certain expectations that the recipient will work to improve himself and your team. In math, English, engineering if given a scholarship and you don't perform the scholarship will not be renewed. Why should it be different for football?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [434]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11/6/09
|
You can find pros and cons to both, however if you are
Jan 18, 2013, 1:14 PM
|
|
allowing unscrupulous coaches to police themselves, then you get a perverted system. You also don't get "apples to apples" match ups when some coaches like Dabo, do the right thing and honor their word. What the OBS did to that orphan a couple of years ago on signing day was horrible! Win at all costs is his legacy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Head Coach [768]
TigerPulse: 87%
Posts: 1098
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: If you sign more than 25 in a year, you have oversigned.
Jan 18, 2013, 1:43 PM
[ in reply to Re: If you sign more than 25 in a year, you have oversigned. ] |
|
Good point and I would say valid point if the initial parameters are laid out with the understanding to the recruit that if they are not seen as a valuable contributor within the agreed time period (say 2 years) then their scholarship is subject to non renewal. The 1 year school discretion renewal policy is a very one sided contract imho.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23122]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19822
Joined: 1/15/11
|
Yes, but anytime you bring in more than you have room for,
Jan 18, 2013, 1:08 PM
[ in reply to If you sign more than 25 in a year, you have oversigned. ] |
|
and have to not renew some scholarships in the Spring , you have also oversigned. I think people get hung up on numbers, or like some above thinking . it's not against the rules to pull scholarships of players that haven't worked out on the field, but are still passing their classes and not been in any trouble, well that just shows a bottom feeder, win at all costs mentality. When these guys are recruited, they are owed an education. Barring failing, transfering, getting into trouble,the coach shouldn't have the right to pull schollies. I wonder if any coach that practices this has ever sat in a recruits living room and looked him or his parents in the eye and told them , they could be cut if they're not on the 2 deep.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Conference [434]
TigerPulse: 97%
Posts: 1061
Joined: 11/6/09
|
Re: Yes, but anytime you bring in more than you have room for,
Jan 18, 2013, 1:27 PM
|
|
You are right. Then think about how Dabo treated Jake Nicolopulos. Very different methods. Who would you want your child playing for?
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [6781]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 5464
Joined: 8/14/03
|
I would slightly disagreed with that.
Jan 18, 2013, 1:08 PM
[ in reply to If you sign more than 25 in a year, you have oversigned. ] |
|
1. they can grey shirt kids which isn't a bad thing if you are upfront with the kid about it and he still makes the choice.
2. You can also also count some early enrollees to the previous class which of course the student is on board with.
both of these can get a class that is over 25 to under 25 ethically.
the rub comes when after employing both of these methods the class is still over 25 and you have to either
1. say at the last minute nope nevermind i know you signed an LOI but you can't enroll here. Either wait to enroll in the spring or find someplace else.
2. Or you look at your current roster and just see who you can cut.
is it within the rules? yes, but is it right? most of the time no.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16186]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8525
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: OVERSIGNING - Misconceptions
Jan 18, 2013, 2:01 PM
|
|
A LONG time ago, the NCAA decided that scholarships were for one year, renewable at the descretion of the institution. The rules make it clear that it is permissible for the school not to renew the scholarship of a player, any player, for any reason.
A great many schools, probably the large majority of schools have not renewed scholarships for one reason or another. The jock will not go to class. The jock will not get and stay in shape. The jock and the school made a mistake and it's clear the player will never play a snap. Two DUIs is too many. One honor court violation is one too many. The player has been on scholarship for four years already. The player has graduated already but wants to go to graduate school.
Like the rest of real life, you can lose your ride. Welcome to the real world.
I am not sorry to be willing to live within the rules.
If the rules need changing, then the schools/NCAA should change the rules.
If they do change the rules, I'd like to give athletes a four year ride provided the athletes are compliant with a clear set of academic, athletic and law/character/representing the instituion guidelines. I'd also like to say that any athlete can transfer at any time, sit out a year and play for the new school without the old school have the right to limit where the jock goes.
But I'm ok with 'oversigning' as many use the term.
Harley
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aficionado [174]
TigerPulse: 34%
Posts: 436
Joined: 11/8/12
|
viz
Jan 18, 2013, 3:06 PM
|
|
If you read what I said you would see I said most teams only dress 60 or so for a game. Some maybe more but you don't tie up trainers and equipment just for players to stand on the sideline. No coaching staff is going to dress 105 payers for a game. That would be stupid. Hell even "Rudy" couldn't dress just to stand on the sideline.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [53835]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17471
Joined: 5/21/08
|
Re: viz
Jan 18, 2013, 7:41 PM
|
|
You need to count players on the sidelines of every SEC and ACC game next season. The home teams dress way more than 85. There were several walk-on guys from the local area where I live who actually got snaps in a couple of games this year. And if you are on the team as a walk-on, you have a uniform with a number and all the equipment it takes to play in a game so there is little extra work for trainers for them to show up and stand with the three deep guys.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17135]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10934
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: viz
Jan 18, 2013, 7:52 PM
[ in reply to viz ] |
|
I read what you wrote and you are wrong. Almost every D1 program dresses more than nearly double the number you continue to assert - for home games. For most major programs, equipment costs are covered by your equipment sponsor (Nike, UA, Reebok, etc) and they aren't going to quibble over a few jerseys. The road roster is smaller because the school does shoulder travel expenses which are substantial. Clemson listed 114 players in its media guide for the NC State game and almost everyone was dressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94453]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95631
Joined: 12/25/09
|
Let's not get self righteous about this.
Jan 18, 2013, 5:23 PM
|
|
It's just like tax breaks. The poor blast the hail out of the rest of the tax payers for having so many deductions and paying a less percentage of taxes than they.
The system of over signing and cutting players works. I see nothing wrong with doing it as long as we are not making promises we won't keep. A scholorship is a one year contract. That's all we promise, one year at a time.
We claim not to oversign but every year we lose a player or two to grades, conduct or they just move to where they can actually get on the field. We should oversign enough to have a full stable at every position.
Either that or stop taking tax deductions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [23122]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 19822
Joined: 1/15/11
|
You're not oversigning if you're just bringing in what U
Jan 18, 2013, 5:30 PM
|
|
need to replace those you've lost through graduation, failing, transferring and early draftees. But "cutting" players that are passing and haven't been in trouble to make room for other potential players is just wrong. Anyone that doesn't think we owe these young an education and should just cut them when they don't work out on the field, well that says as much about you as it does the coaches that practice this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94453]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95631
Joined: 12/25/09
|
This is the real world not a made up place with candy houses
Jan 18, 2013, 8:12 PM
|
|
A player and college sign a contract. The player agrees to work hard on and off the field to help the school reach it's goal.
It's just like having a contract job. You do your job or they'll find someone else that will.
I don't believe trading up is the morally superior thing to do when it comes to employees or players. I've never done it. I think we have a misunderstanding if I presented that I believe trading up for players is morally acceptable.
However I'm not sure that all those accused of doing that are guilty or as guilty as accused.
When I had an employee who didn't do their job the best they could I'd give them a raise and tell them if they didn't earn it to find another job. It never failed to make them better or make them leave.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17135]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10934
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: This is the real world not a made up place with candy houses
Jan 18, 2013, 8:15 PM
|
|
In the real world can your employer fire you but also directly prevent anyone else from hiring you for a year?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94453]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95631
Joined: 12/25/09
|
That has nothing to do with NCAA regulations.
Jan 19, 2013, 4:45 AM
|
|
A player can go anywhere he wishes if he is willing to sit out a year. His new school pays him for the year with education and training whether he plays or not.
You are trying to find something bad about the relationship between the players and schools they sign with. There's not. If a player wants to get paid 12K/yr's worth of education he can go to Old Miss. If he wants to get paid 100K/yr in education he can go to Wake or Duke.
If he want to get 250K/yr's worth he can always play in the IVY. The only was those kids don't get their money's worth is when they blow off the course work and party.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17135]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10934
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: That has nothing to do with NCAA regulations.
Jan 19, 2013, 7:46 AM
|
|
Ivy League doesn't give scholarships.
And no the athlete cannot go wherever he wishes. The schools can specifically block where they go. Murphy Holloway would have been at Clemson otherwise. He would have had to sit a year either way. But by not releasing him to Clemson he would have had to pay his way also.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Oculus Spirit [94453]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 95631
Joined: 12/25/09
|
I didn't know that.
Jan 19, 2013, 2:01 PM
|
|
I agree the student athlete is more likely to come out on bottom than the school.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aficionado [174]
TigerPulse: 34%
Posts: 436
Joined: 11/8/12
|
clover
Jan 18, 2013, 7:46 PM
|
|
Home games maybe...road games...not happening...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17135]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10934
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: clover
Jan 18, 2013, 8:02 PM
|
|
But that wasn't your original assertion. Your original assertion was that a school can actually only suit 60 players for a game so the 85 scholarship limit was irrelevant.
The NFL has a 53 man roster limit but can only have 45 active for a game. There are no such rules in college. I can't even find a definitive answer as to what the roster limit is in the ACC but some unverified sources put it at 115. Anyone on the sideline is eligible to play.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Aficionado [174]
TigerPulse: 34%
Posts: 436
Joined: 11/8/12
|
Re: clover
Jan 18, 2013, 9:26 PM
|
|
Read what I said dude....I said most only...ONLY suit 60 or so. I DID NOT say they can ONLY...read it again....Teams don't normally suit up that many...it makes no sense.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [17135]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 10934
Joined: 1/25/07
|
Re: clover
Jan 18, 2013, 10:22 PM
|
|
I am reading what you are saying. "Most" or a large majority. Yet, I've explained that the home team in D1 dresses over 100 routinely. That means at best half - not most - on any given Saturday stick to your precious, completely made up number of 60 - and all of those teams already have the equipment for the other guys, they just don't want to pay for meals, rooms, and more buses/planes. I can't even imagine what point you're trying to make now. This OP was about oversigning. If a team was only consciously gonna use 60 players - barring injury - in the course of a season then it makes the act of oversigning even more egregious. We were deep into the "veteran roster" during the Furman game. We may have actually played close to 90 people in that game. Clemson is not an outlier in this category. If Clemson does it, if the ACC does it, if BCS conference schools do it - then it is willfully ignorant for you to turn around say "oh yeah, well most other teams only suit 60 because I think it is silly to do otherwise."
I have a friend who was a walkon at Clemson. Never saw the field in 3 years on the team and dressed every single home game and even got to go on a couple of road games. But, I have obviously run into someone who isn't willing to admit a mistake no matter how glaringly wrong they are or how trivial the matter is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [53835]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 17471
Joined: 5/21/08
|
Re: clover
Jan 18, 2013, 8:57 PM
[ in reply to clover ] |
|
I did not say they had more than any specific amount for road games, but you did not differentiate between home and away game at all. I did do that by saying that home teams have way more than 85 dressed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16186]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8525
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: OVERSIGNING - Misconceptions
Jan 18, 2013, 10:45 PM
|
|
I do not accept the premise that every kid who signs a LOI is assured a four year scholarship. As someone else said, it's a real world, not a made up candy house world. The scholarship offer is for one year, renewable at the schools descretion. It is not immoral or unethical for the scholarship grantor to operate in accordance with the rules.
Plenty of great athletes quit on the school after three years and go to the pros. If you oppose 'oversigning'
and terminating scholarships, I'd assume you also think players should NOT be free to quit or to turn pro.
Harley
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [4787]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 9986
Joined: 6/12/10
|
i have got to disagree, harley.
Jan 19, 2013, 4:54 AM
|
|
when you are in this kids house, and wanting him to come to school x, you don't tell him that if, after 2-3 yrs., he isn't on the 2-deep, he is history. we all know the schollie's are 1-yr. renewable every year, but imo, this is written to protect the schools if the kid does not adhere to the rules/laws ( and even then, they are given second, or more, chances,for the most part ). this thread is about outright "cutting" a kid that, YOU, the hc of school x, sat in his home and told him and his parents to come to your school, and not school a,b, or c, because of your program,history,facilities- and educational opportunities. if the kid signs the loi, he has to sit out 1-yr, and you can even limit where he goes, so you shouldn't be able to say adios, if he's lived up to his end of the deal. you just made a mistake in your evaluations of him, take responsibility for YOUR actions!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legend [16186]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 8525
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: i have got to disagree, harley.
Jan 19, 2013, 7:47 AM
|
|
I know that many are of the opinion the scholarship is a four year commitment on the part of the school, but everyone in the business, including the jock's high school coach knows the real score. The coach offering the schollie knows the real score. I am against pretending that all coaches and schools should adhere to something that is a nice to have and calling it an ethical issue when the school does not.
It IS an ethical issue in my view, when the school offers a kid, the kid says makes a verbal commitment and the school later retracks the offer. That happens and it's wrong.
I just do not have a problem with telling a player on the team his scholarship will not be renewed because of playing ability. In the real world, we all get cut based on lack of ability and fit.
3rd year players turn pro. If the players can go because they have too much ability, the school can also let players go when they have too little ability.
I'd like to see the rules on transfers changed such that if a player transfers, the school cannot limit WHERE he transfers. The school does not own the players.
I think the rules were written the way they are for financial reasons. Schools cannot sign 125 players. Schools must live within the 85 player rule. That sometimes means kids get cut. A benefit of kids getting cut is that deserving walkons can earn a scholership. That seems highly desirable to me.
Harley
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [80]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 78
Joined: 11/30/98
|
Re: i have got to disagree, harley.
Jan 19, 2013, 2:09 PM
|
|
I think this is where the hs coach needs to step in and make sure the player knows and understands the practices of schools. High schools do not have to let the colleges in that are acting unethically. If school A treats a kid from a school "wrong" then they do not need to cooperate with that school going forward.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 41
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
