Oversigning (capacity 25, everyone welcome! maybe)

[Jaxbuck]

Now you've moved the goalposts.

If the standard is 'potential to harm student athletes', that is a very different thing than 'competitive advantage', which has been the hue and cry about this issue.

This is getting into Chewbacca defense range here.

Answer the question for me please. If they don't think it helps them win why does the SEC oversign so much more than any other conference?

 

[AKAK]

Indeed.

In short order, I'll be taking care of a barn burnin' in southern 'bama. Then I'll be free.

No fair. The North Just had more guys.

 

[Deety]

I'll take your word for that as I'm not inclined to go through the entire thread and count.

If you only hand out letters for that which you can guarantee you have to give, the competitive advantage discussion is entirely moot anyway. Tackling the competitive advantage angle actually requires sweeping the kids' best interests aside first to defend whether mistreating the kids is worth it or just being done for no benefit whatsoever. This is why I find that part of the conversation extremely distasteful.

 

[Onebuckfan]

to me this question isn't about oversigning..its just a symptom of what we dont see

 

[jwinslow]

Now you've moved the goalposts.

If the standard is 'potential to harm student athletes', that is a very different thing than 'competitive advantage', which has been the hue and cry about this issue.

you have it backwards. The complaint is about unethical (bc of the harm to kids) methods to get an advantage (and really that term is misleading, as it improves one thing but only from your starting point)

 

[WilliamTSherman]

No fair. The North Just had more guys.

Perhaps. But when I'm the general, is it really fair for the enemy regardless of how many they number?

 

[AKAK]

Perhaps. But when I'm the general, is it really fair for the enemy regardless of how many they number?

Sure, Cump.... take the Rebs side on numbers.

 

[WilliamTSherman]

Sure, Cump.... take the Rebs side on numbers.

I did not realize I was taking the Rebels side when it's evident that they're not even trying to cover it up.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefoo...d-guys-utilize-oversigning-and-it-has-to-stop

So is Houston Nutt. He's the worst serial offender of this trend known as over-signing. Sounds almost harmless, doesn't it? Over-signing? The "solution" also has a nice little sound to it: a grayshirt. A grayshirt, technically, is a player who doesn't get a scholarship for whatever reason, but has an agreement with the coaching staff that if he stays on campus for a semester, or even a year, he will get his scholarship eventually. Sounds civil, doesn't it? Never mind that the player was promised a scholarship and then he turned down other schools -- and other scholarships -- to sign with a team that, oops, didn't have a scholarship for him after all.
Nutt's the worst. The NCAA allows 25 scholarship freshmen to report in the fall, but Nutt found a way around that. He'd sign well over 25, and then figure out which losers to cut loose. Two years ago he signed 37 recruits, binging on high school kids like a drunk binges on beer, and that was enough. The SEC passed what is known in coaching circles as "The Houston Nutt Rule," limiting its schools to 28 signees. That's a start, but it's still not good enough. Bad men like Les Miles and Nick Saban will binge by signing those 28 players, then purge the excess.

Admiral Akbar's Black Bears a-multiplyin'!

 

[OSU_D/]

None of the D-line guys tearing it up in the BCSCGs were the iffy-maybe, last on board oversigned guys.

We won because of our fast athletic defensive lines more than anything. I doubt that - using your theory - four or five new freshmen replacing perceived about to be Senior flops was the reason Bama plunger raped Sparty on the first. But hold that thought.

http://oversigning.com/testing/inde...-dareus-and-mark-ingram-really-be-at-alabama/

First, you are wrong, see above. Dareus was a 3 star, hardly the guy you hold a scholarship for without a doubt. And lets just throw in a Heisman winner for fun too. Second, I guess you are of the thought that the starters play the entire games of every season. So the depth provided by oversigning and cutting of lesser players has no affects on winning games throughout the year? Considering how the most teams need to lose 1 or fewer games we know you are just glossing over the benefits provided by cutting some and keeping the more talented.

You might have been absent during the extensive discussion regarding the nexus between oversigning and success, but to save you time, the Big East and ACC oversign like bitches and still suck more than conferences who undersign less. What to do about that?

The schools that oversign in the Big East and ACC would just be worse than they are now if they couldn't use that practice. This point makes no sense.

Nobody wants to be short of 85 good guys in our ultra competitive conference. I give you that.

Somehow Richt, Meyer and Vandy's coaches managed their numbers well. Maybe they just aren't as competitive as those from the west, as Spurrier?

Sorry. Define "oversigning" and delineate what practices it includes - other than having more guys with LOIs than say - y'all.

Oversigning guys who don't enroll means squat.*

* as a competitive advantage. Means the world to some poor kid who qualifies and is left out to dry.

Yep, only taking into account those that don't qualify and whitewashing over the ones that do and then end up having to leave school (see LSU last year), forcing kids to medical hardship status (see Bama and its statisically ridiculous 50% of your conference's medical hardship cases) etc.

But I guess if I had to defend the honor of the south and the SEC West's use of oversigning I'd be dancing like Gregory Hines too.

 

[SmoovP]

So, all these kids that are getting buttsecksed by the oversigning outrage...

You'd think they'd be hollerin' to high heaven at getting the last minute bait-and-switch, being forced out of the program, dubious medical conditions and all the rest, wouldn't you?

 

[cjmik_75]

You mean like the "fat" "lazy" QB from LSU? had his schollie pulled for "unfortunately" not meeting the performance requirements on the field...or however Les Miles so eloquently put it.

 

[SmoovP]

You mean like the "fat" "lazy" QB from LSU? had his schollie pulled for "unfortunately" not meeting the performance requirements on the field...or however Les Miles so eloquently put it.

Ummm...

Yeah?

 

[Gatorubet]

Now you've moved the goalposts.

If the standard is 'potential to harm student athletes', that is a very different thing than 'competitive advantage', which has been the hue and cry about this issue.

So. You just like the sound of your own bull[Mark May], huh?

Spare me. The passive-aggressive southern "class" is a bigger hoax than the return of Elvis, and you've mastered it.

Your "rebuttal" to the idea of competitive advantage due to oversigning is that programs such as Ohio State gain competitive advantage due to an inflated athletic budget, so the competitive advantage argument is moot. Correct?

No need to be rude to the porker because you have reading comprehension issues. His point was valid. In fact, every SEC poster on this thread including Smoov has up front denounced dumping under performing but otherwise qualified schollie athletes on your team at the last minute in favor of signing some new potential studs. Every SEC poster on this thread including Smoov has up front denounced over signing that leaves the over signed kids left out in the cold at the end of the recruiting season. So the first thing is, none of us have to keep repeating that we are not pro-"potential to harm student athletes".

It is fine for the subject to be changed slightly, there are many facets to this, but Smoov declining to jump to the redirect issue - or repeat for the umpteenth time that nobody wants to hurt the kids - does not make his straightforward reply bull[Mark May], nor is his comment a "defense" to anything, let alone defending actions that could cause potential to harm student athletes. Your entire post (in bold) shows that you missed what he had to say completely. Swing and a miss. He was just pointing out that "fair" is an entirely subjective argument, that one could argue as congently that tOSU has an unfair competitive advantage, given the reality that tOSU has advantages in quality of the school academically, tradition of the program, amount of money spent on facitities, stadium, etc, advantages that most of its competitors do not have.

And the personal attack on Smoov is out of line too. The fact that he is smart and in control enough not to respond in kind to your initial attack on him on "your" board is not passive aggressive, or fake southern class. Just a sign that he has his [Mark May] together as a newbie from a less than loved conference on your site.

And if it is what you say, then you could benefit from some fake class lessons yourself Sloop, because you are coming off as mean spirited here. I think it is because you are attributing positions to him that he does not hold, and inferring things in his posts that he does not mean.

 

[GeorgiaBuck2]

If anyone thinks that over-signing is not a competitive advantage then you are sorely mistaken.

JMHO.

 

[Gatorubet]

The schools that oversign in the Big East and ACC would just be worse than they are now if they couldn't use that practice. This point makes no sense.

Which is what I pointed out earlier. Oversigning has not helped their conference achieve success. So oversigning is not that significant a factor, and the ACC would be a mighty conference that was viewed as far superior than the not oversigning Big-10. It ain't. Which means that overigning may be an advantage, but there is not evidence that it much of one, given the lack of a correlation between oversigning and success between programs, and within programs.

Is it an advantage? Yes, possibly. It depends whether the two years into the program kid has more value than the brand new kid who replaces him. "Bird in hand" is a kid with a demonstrated ability to make the grades and master the college environment. "Bird in the bush" is a kid who has never been in college who might make the grades, adapt to college life, and be a star. I guess it is a better met if you have a good two deep, as launching a kid who is two or more years into a S&C program for a freshman may be chancy if he suddenly has to face life as a starter in the Big-10 or SEC.

But since someone like Saban is doing it, you have to think that he thinks he is doing it to better his program. So if it is not an advantage, he sure thinks it is an advantage. I never said that getting better was not the reason for it being done. I have just never seen any data supporting a connection to oversigning and on the field success within programs (or between conferences.)