• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Oversigning (capacity 25, everyone welcome! maybe)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
MaxBuck;1857315; said:
I think you have completely mischaracterized what I said. It's obvious that some entering freshman will prove to have academic inadequacies, and likely this is a bigger problem in Alabama and Mississippi than it is in Ohio (or, to be honest, Florida). But we have non-qualifiers, too; it's just that what we can do after the problem is fully realized is much more limited.

Briefly: some oversigning is done in anticipation of academic casualties. But certainly not all. And regardless of the reason for oversigning, the bottom line is that SEC schools are picking 85 scholarship athletes from a pool of 96, while the Big Ten is picking the same number of team members from a pool more like 85. Regardless of what the "reasons" were behind the oversigning, this constitutes a competitive advantage - and I'd think your conference members were stupid if they didn't exploit it.
Click to expand...

I guess I'm wondering who you get the 96 and 85 numbers, and how you are so sure that the 96 does not contain known likely to sure as shit non-qualifiers? Seriously, if I see some numbers with a break down of the status of the "overs" I might jump to your side. What I am frustrated with more than anything is the lack of knowing the "why" of the oversigning, and by that I mean the quals versus non-quals, etc.

I still do not see how a non-qualifier signee counts as an advantage when your 85 number is not affected. A non-qualifier adds the value of a kid who signs with another program. He is not on your roster.
 
Upvote 0
Briefly: some oversigning is done in anticipation of academic casualties. But certainly not all. And regardless of the reason for oversigning, the bottom line is that SEC schools are picking 85 scholarship athletes from a pool of 96
Click to expand...
The disparity is 85ish to 105ish, as seen here...

I still do not see how a non-qualifier signee counts as an advantage when your 85 number is not affected. A non-qualifier adds the value of a kid who signs with another program. He is not on your roster.
Click to expand...
When you have a routine in place to handle 8 more kids than you have spots for, then being able to sign those borderline students is an advantage because you do not face the same risk as the team who does not take measures to clear room for higher than expected or allowed scholarship totals.
 
Upvote 0
Gatorubet;1857318; said:
I guess I'm wondering who you get the 96 and 85 numbers, and how you are so sure that the 96 does not contain known likely to sure as shit non-qualifiers? Seriously, if I see some numbers with a break down of the status of the "overs" I might jump to your side. What I am frustrated with more than anything is the lack of knowing the "why" of the oversigning, and by that I mean the quals versus non-quals, etc.
Click to expand...
Wanted to address this separately.

I fully appreciate and understand your frustration on that topic. I would consider breaking down every bama player into categories regarding departure, but the thing is, would it matter?

If I show you that the scholarships that open up are 85% roster departures & 15% recruit delays (whether permanent or juco), would that convince you of anything, or would you still remain skeptical because we can't give evidence for all of the medical redshirts?

Note, those statistics are completely made up.
 
Upvote 0
SmoovP;1857323; said:
All this sniffing about 'competitive advantage' is pretty entertaining.

What do you guys want to happen about this 'oversigning' problem anyway?
Click to expand...
I want Alabama to stop getting away with this garbage (the problem is it is legal, just despicable):
Saban has roughly 8 scholarship seniors and he announced this week that 3 Juniors are leaving early for the NFL. That is roughly 11 scholarship openings. Let's be generous and say there are 15 openings. His class right now has 22 verbal commitments plus two players that accepted a grey shirt offer from last year and are expected to enroll this year. That makes 24 total scholarship commitments this year and only 15 at most openings. There was no room to back count players to last year's class so everyone is going to count towards this year.
Click to expand...
If this were USC, Ohio State (or maybe even Florida from 08 was it?), they would have to take a small class around 15, and that's only if they know they have 3 going pro and 2 transfers.

At Bama, they haul in two dozen for those 11 spots and keep recruiting. They have a number of prospects still in play (jernigan, clowney, crowell, etc).


Right now, they need 13 players to find the exits or never make it to campus. That's outrageous, and that total likely grows before signing day.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
SmoovP;1857316; said:
All teams have an 85 man roster limit.

Until someone can show me quantifiable documentation that the SEC is cutting scholarship holding players in favor of high school seniors, on a scale beyond what happens elsewhere, I'm going to remain unconcerned about this mythical oversigning strawman.

Because most of the arguments I've read here are predicated upon the belief that kids are getting cut left, right and center.
Click to expand...

Yep. We all know that the practice of oversigning exists because it has no benefit to the product on the field. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
 
Upvote 0
OSU_D/;1857329; said:
Yep. We all know that the practice of oversigning exists because it has no benefit to the product on the field. Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Click to expand...
Well, I assume it is not done because it is a negative.

I'm mostly trying to quantify what advantages it really gives, if any, and to find stats that support the theories that it is an advantage for the reasons being suspected/asserted.

Given the 85 limit, there seems to be to be only a limited number of ways that oversigning could produce a benefit. And I have no stats on those factual situations - by conference - to tell me that it is or isn't.
 
Upvote 0
Gatorubet;1857335; said:
Well, I assume it is not done because it is a negative.

I'm mostly trying to quantify what advantages it really gives, if any, and to find stats that support the theories that it is an advantage for the reasons being suspected/asserted.

Given the 85 limit, there seems to be to be only a limited number of ways that oversigning could produce a benefit. And I have no stats on those factual situations - by conference - to tell me that it is or isn't.
Click to expand...

For the love of God just swallow your pride and shut it.

We all know that "in theory" you're right and "in practice" Josh is right. This is just a waste of bandwith at this point. :lol:
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top