wildcats20;635995 wrote:But if you are letting a kid out of his scholly, you can't penalize him by making him sit out a year and lose that year.

Why can't they? Like I said, it would deter athletes from multiple transfers and deter transferring to teams because they have a chance to win THAT year. Just because it would be "legal" to transfer, does not mean the NCAA cannot have stipulations in case a student does transfer.

they only have to sit out a year if they stay in D-1,,,if they decide to transfer down to d-2 or 3 or NAIA they can play right away.

I missed something on the Jo Pa denial, he denied a release to return to another D1 university (at least from what can be understood from comments)

That's still shitty, but in context with the rules:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=5987457

Bolden Sr. said his son was only interested in playing at the FBS level.

I'm willing to bet that without over signing, the SEC has no where near as many BCS titles as they have now. Perhaps the two by Florida, but the others are very questionable, since those three schools are the worst offenders at over signing, and have reaped the greatest benefits from it.

elbuckeye28;635997 wrote:Why can't they? Like I said, it would deter athletes from multiple transfers and deter transferring to teams because they have a chance to win THAT year. Just because it would be "legal" to transfer, does not mean the NCAA cannot have stipulations in case a student does transfer.

Allowing transfers could also promote letting kids currently under scholarship to lose theirs for a better player.

Whats new.....Of course the SEC will win 5 straight national championships when you get to choose from more players...

It's like having one division for the football playoffs here in ohio, of course the division I teams (SEC school) will be more successful, and the small catholic schools with small numbers but really good players (Big Ten) will be right up their with them. But when it comes down to it, the team that has more to choose from will be the winning team.

Until something is done about the oversigning, the SEC will be dominant in college football. Until then, if you can't beat them, might as well join them...right?

thedynasty1998;635861 wrote:You can't really fault Saban and the others for doing it if the NCAA allows it.

Yes, you really can. The notion that "coaches are paid to win and are fired if they don't" doesn't turn off basic rules of decency and permit an "anything goes" approach to their jobs.

queencitybuckeye;636110 wrote:Yes, you really can. The notion that "coaches are paid to win and are fired if they don't" doesn't turn off basic rules of decency and permit an "anything goes" approach to their jobs.

Is it against the rules? No.

wildcats20;636171 wrote:Is it against the rules? No.

I think that for most people, the applicable rules/laws are kind of a minimum and they set their personal ethics a bit higher.

queencitybuckeye;636210 wrote:I think that for most people, the applicable rules/laws are kind of a minimum and they set their personal ethics a bit higher.

I don't disagree with you, but until it is a rule violation, I don't blame anyone for doing it.

I do agree that it is wrong, but it's allowable.

The Big 10 can do it too...Just choose not to..

http://oversigning.com/testing/index.php/2010/03/08/the-big-10-legalizes-oversigning/

That is a very interesting article....thanks for posting that.

The natural reaction, which would make WAY too much sense.

Stop going to play for these schools and/or coaches.

Regardless of whether there are 200 scholarships available or 85, you still have kids lining up to even have a shot to play at LSU or Alabama. Why is that? Schools couldn't oversign if players didn't want to go there and if they knew these coaches were going to mislead the kids.

In reality, the SEC does oversign, but they also sign a lot of players with qualifying issues. Yes, I'll admit there are some casualties each year because a guy is "no longer good enough" or "is replaced by a more talented recruit", but most of the oversigning victims are replaced because of academics or discipline. In those cases, the players usually don't make it and are replaced justifiably on their own account. Very few simply get "forced out" like people here are implying.

I know Kentucky has had seasons where they recruited over their scholarship limit with a new class (say 15 available and signed 24) and when all was said and done they only had like 83 guys under scholarship. It wasn't because guys got their scholarships pulled, they went under 85 in the end because 3 or 4 completely bombed qualifications and other guys transferred or quit football. Then you have other scenarios where someone leaves for criminal reasons or something strange. Either way, you could look at the numbers in that situation and say "they way oversigned and then replaced guys", but if you look at the reasons, in reality, not one player was forced out because he wasn't good enough. You could say they just had a lot more unstable situations and eventually departures happened. I think this is the case a lot more often than not with these SEC schools, which is inhibited by the fact they ARE able to take a lot more chances on certain profile players in recruiting.

Oversigning basically gives them more mulligans.

In reality, the SEC does oversign, but they also sign a lot of players with qualifying issues.

The natural reaction, which would make WAY too much sense.

Increase the difficulty of academic qualifications to have better prepared student athletes.

They have.

However, many SEC schools (as many have pointed out on here) generally use the bare minimum NCAA guidelines to enroll student athletes. Other schools in other conferences do it too. It's just that many schools have set their own standards that are much higher and in a sense, forced themselves into this. Not saying it's a bad thing at all (I've witnessed first hand as a student what Ohio State has done over the last decade to pretty much reform their entire image in academics) but it's not feasible to make all schools go this route.

Money is the bottom line. Football generates more money than anything at a university, especially in the major conferences. So, schools don't necessarily want to always make this change. To get many to make this change would mean making money less of a factor in the sport and that certainly ISN'T the way we are trending. Quite the opposite.

Azubuike24;636650 wrote:Stop going to play for these schools and/or coaches.

I agree with this, but these young kids have been told from day one that they are destined for greatness etc... So when Nick Saban recruits them and tells them he is going to make them into an NFL player, why would they think they would be one of the kids that doesn't make the 2 deep or gets hurt and gets cut or forced to transfer. The coaches are filling these kids with delusions of greatness, and of course they believe them.

I agree, and that's unfortunate. However, it's a very vague generalization to say this is being done with each recruit a school signs.

However, when does the accountability get put on the recruits, their families and their support system? You have to have some perspective. Even though you sign with a high-profile school and/or coach, the odds of making it to the professional level is probably 5% or less. That is pretty simple to see, regardless of how great you are or how great someone is saying your potential is.

Maybe we need someone else to relay this message earlier, more frequently and more clearly to perspective student athletes. I sure as heck am not going to feel bad and cry foul if Player A signs with a school, believes they are future NFL player and two years later can't crack the 2-deep or make the cut of being one of the 85 guys who get a scholarship. Clearly the problem was as much with the belief they had prior to signing as it was with the coach who decided to recruit over this kid.

Azubuike24;636860 wrote:I agree, and that's unfortunate. However, it's a very vague generalization to say this is being done with each recruit a school signs.

However, when does the accountability get put on the recruits, their families and their support system? You have to have some perspective. Even though you sign with a high-profile school and/or coach, the odds of making it to the professional level is probably 5% or less. That is pretty simple to see, regardless of how great you are or how great someone is saying your potential is.

Maybe we need someone else to relay this message earlier, more frequently and more clearly to perspective student athletes. I sure as heck am not going to feel bad and cry foul if Player A signs with a school, believes they are future NFL player and two years later can't crack the 2-deep or make the cut of being one of the 85 guys who get a scholarship. Clearly the problem was as much with the belief they had prior to signing as it was with the coach who decided to recruit over this kid.

I don't think you want to tell a kid there's a slim chance he'll ever be successful in football. Coaches should make their evaluations, and stick w/ their decision.

Kids will keep going to these schools as long as coaches keep lying to them about their chances. And you can't convince me most of these SEC coaches aren't lying their collective asses off to keep the pipeline of good players flowing, so they can cull out the ones who don't end up meeting expectations.

Wasn't there a thread on this that said the SEC has a new rule? Even Florida boards are wondering about this. Same with FSU. They got away with all that cheating, took Booby's wins but only 1 scholly.
Florida spent 2 schollies last year, on Haden's brother and another kid from Md., both quit at the end of fall camp, right before classes started. One was supposedly homesick, common problem with out of area freshmen. Another looked around and saw himself deep DEEP down on the depth chart, so he left.
Halfway through the year, 5-star WR Dowling was booted out of the program because he thought he didn't really have to work and go to classes.

Azubuike24;636650 wrote:The natural reaction, which would make WAY too much sense.

Stop going to play for these schools and/or coaches.

Regardless of whether there are 200 scholarships available or 85, you still have kids lining up to even have a shot to play at LSU or Alabama. Why is that? Schools couldn't oversign if players didn't want to go there and if they knew these coaches were going to mislead the kids.

In reality, the SEC does oversign, but they also sign a lot of players with qualifying issues. Yes, I'll admit there are some casualties each year because a guy is "no longer good enough" or "is replaced by a more talented recruit", but most of the oversigning victims are replaced because of academics or discipline. In those cases, the players usually don't make it and are replaced justifiably on their own account. Very few simply get "forced out" like people here are implying.

I know Kentucky has had seasons where they recruited over their scholarship limit with a new class (say 15 available and signed 24) and when all was said and done they only had like 83 guys under scholarship. It wasn't because guys got their scholarships pulled, they went under 85 in the end because 3 or 4 completely bombed qualifications and other guys transferred or quit football. Then you have other scenarios where someone leaves for criminal reasons or something strange. Either way, you could look at the numbers in that situation and say "they way oversigned and then replaced guys", but if you look at the reasons, in reality, not one player was forced out because he wasn't good enough. You could say they just had a lot more unstable situations and eventually departures happened. I think this is the case a lot more often than not with these SEC schools, which is inhibited by the fact they ARE able to take a lot more chances on certain profile players in recruiting.

Oversigning basically gives them more mulligans.

Look at Calipari when he took over UK basketball. He got rid of the deadwood and brought in his recruits from Memphis. ESPN had a story on him telling the players they were no longer needed.

this doesn't suprise me... as others have said, until a kid steps to the table and decides NOT to play for them, it will continue to happen

gamauter;637350 wrote:Look at Calipari when he took over UK basketball. He got rid of the deadwood and brought in his recruits from Memphis. ESPN had a story on him telling the players they were no longer needed.

He didn't boot them. He just told them "you won't play under me because I didn't recruit you." 2 of the 3 left on their own after that.

There is a difference. Only one, to my knowledge, was "not asked" to come back.

Writerbuckeye;637337 wrote:Kids will keep going to these schools as long as coaches keep lying to them about their chances. And you can't convince me most of these SEC coaches aren't lying their collective asses off to keep the pipeline of good players flowing, so they can cull out the ones who don't end up meeting expectations.

The coach wouldn't be there is he didn't think a kid has potential. I think you over do this "lying" thing. It is up to each kid to account for his own performance. There is NO guarantee of success in life. It says a lot about the kid who expects that success is going to be handed to him on a silver platter, and then when it doesn't, blames the coach for lying to him about his potential. At the time, the coach likely thought the player could achieve. But it is up to the player to fulfill that.

You can only preach the same lie so many times before those you are lying to become the "stupid" ones.