Oversigning (capacity 25, everyone welcome! maybe)

[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.

So you say. Any hard evidence? No. Which is what I pointed out earlier. Oversigning has not helped their conference achieve success. So oversigning is not that significant a factor, or 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 no 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 idea 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.)

 

[Gatorubet]

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.

Long as we are asking questiong, if a Buckeye was not working hard on the field ( not doing the weightroom work, not doing film study, but making his grades): does he deserve an automatic renewal of his one year scholarship, or would you consider replacing him with some young highly rated kid?

If you say "no" to the first question, then you deserve to lose to any program that says "yes" to the second.

 

[GeorgiaBuck2]

BNFree

You can’t spell “cheats” without an “s” an “e” and a “c”. You also can’t spell “excuses” (Part One)… The SECheats. Yeah, you didn’t hear it here first. But before we get to their amorality and hypocrisy and the advantages all those things bring, let’s first look at the truly overall advantages of the SEC (those to which I am willing to stipulate):
1) The states the SEC recruits from have better (and more) high school stars
2) The SEC has better coaches (and are better paid!)
3) They definitely have better defensive linemen
4) They also have lower academic standards (see the above points)
5) And they cheat. They cheat openly and abusively. Cheat like John Edwards. Like Bernie Madoff. Like everything you have heard about them.
Cont...

EDIT: Cut and paste edit--21

 

[jwinslow]

So you say. Any hard evidence? No. Which is what I pointed out earlier. Oversigning has not helped their conference achieve success. So oversigning is not that significant a factor, or 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 no evidence that it much of one, given the lack of a correlation between oversigning and success between programs, and within programs.

For the last time, it isn't a magic elixir which transforms programs and players. It helps you undo mistakes in scholarships 2-3 years faster and maximizes your opportunities to bring in talented recruits by signing too many when you aren't actually restrained by that 85 scholarship limit.

If Miami & Georgia Tech do not attract, sell and/or develop prospects well, that won't change much with oversigning. Their extra 20 chances will still be fed largely through the same underperforming machine.

It's a huge difference when Saban and Miles do it, which is why I take such issue with your Iowa State examples. LSU attracts amazing talent with any coach, let alone a great recruiter with a network of boosters, alumni & hs coaches behind him. When LSU abuses the practice of oversigning, they are replacing a benchwarmer (or unneeded frosh forced to grayshirt) with another top notch recruit.

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.

How come your hypotheticals are overwhelmingly positive for the guy you might cut, yet include none of the reasons that a coach would consider cutting him? I think I know the reason

Outside of scout team or special teams help, raising the APR or mentoring another player, a 3rd year guy who is not improving has a much higher chance of being dead weight than the freshman with untapped potential, particularly since your approach requires retrieving a ton of scholarships each offseason.

"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 idea 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.

They aren't generally eliminating a useful 2nd or 3rd stringer. The guys they are cutting are disappointments who are often getting passed (or will soon be) by underclassmen.

The biggest threat (to a staff with no interest in honoring a 4 year commitment to a "bust") is to spend the next 2-3 years trying to fill that 2-deep with a player without much potential in your eyes.

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.)

No, you just used incomparable squads (like USC vs anyone, Texas vs Iowa St, and BIg East vs B10) as your metric, but were unphasd by the only conference with comparable squads to compare due to their similarly elite attraction/success in recruiting (Georgia vs LSU, Bama, UF).

 

[cjmik_75]

Long as we are asking questiong, if a Buckeye was not working hard on the field ( not doing the weightroom work, not doing film study, but making his grades): does he deserve an automatic renewal of his one year scholarship, or would you consider replacing him with some young highly rated kid?

If you say "no" to the first question, then you deserve to lose to any program that says "yes" to the second.

I would say yes to the first and no to the second. The thing is, and here's the kicker gentlemen... I'm not a football coach for a major university so my answers don't really mean jack shit. If actual coaches for tOSU or any other school in the country for that matter feel they need to do whatever they have to for the betterment of their roster, so be it. But just remember...I'm also not the one sitting in living rooms with recruits and parents telling them that they'll get a full ride to my school and have a chance to earn a prestigious degree. I also don't have someone like Chris Garrett calling me a liar on OTL.

So there's that.

I had a question too..

Posted on page 26 of this thread:

However, if schools were to make up athletic scholarships (Bear Bryant schollie) and those kids were allowed to practice and play in games but not count against the 85 it's definitely a competitive advantage. What's the deal w/ the Alabama schollie? Are those kids essentially "walk-ons" w/ full schollies? Do they count against the 85? I could see big programs using this to their advantage. What is stopping a school like Bama from offering 14 instead of just 4 schollies?

 

[jwinslow]

Long as we are asking questiong, if a Buckeye was not working hard on the field ( not doing the weightroom work, not doing film study, but making his grades): does he deserve an automatic renewal of his one year scholarship, or would you consider replacing him with some young highly rated kid?

If you say "no" to the first question, then you deserve to lose to any program that says "yes" to the second.

If a player is skipping practice/weights and not honoring his responsibilities, then he risks expulsion just like someone who acted that way in the classroom. Ideally there would be some wake-up calls and attempts to send him a message before jettisoning him.

When freshman DB James Scott doesn't maintain his off-field responsibilities, and the wake-up calls do not impact him, he is shown the door.

When backup Nate Oliver works hard in all phases but simply remains a guy that can only help you on special teams, getting passed by many youngsters (Barnett, Bryant, Johnson) at safety and star, he should not get jettisoned, though he would at Alabama if Isaiah Crowell wanted to join the already wildly oversigned Bama class.

When freshman starter Duron Carter does not maintain his off-field responsibilities, he gets suspended for the bowl game, and later expelled from the school to a junior college.

 

[generaladm]

Long as we are asking questiong, if a Buckeye was not working hard on the field ( not doing the weightroom work, not doing film study, but making his grades): does he deserve an automatic renewal of his one year scholarship, or would you consider replacing him with some young highly rated kid?

If you say "no" to the first question, then you deserve to lose to any program that says "yes" to the second.

I can't think of an Ohio State player in the last decade who has been dismissed from the team for reasons other than academic or legal problems. Disciplined or suspended temporarily? Sure. But I've never heard of OSU yanking a schollie to free up a slot for another player. Lack of dedication in FB practice usually comes packaged with academic and behavioral problems, so those guys tend to weed themselves out without the coaching staff having to play Donald Trump. There are many examples of scholarship players who came in with NFL caliber expectations, but for some reason never cracked the two-deep. As long as they keep there noses clean and in the books, they leave Ohio State with a diploma and a nice 'thank you' from the crowd on Senior Day. It's not like Coach Tressel has been stingy with second chances.

Hypotheticals are fine and dandy, but when they are beyond the realm of reason, they become pointless. You could say, "What if Team X had only offered the 85 players who ended up on the roster instead of the 137 they accepted LOIs from? Would they have lost more games because they didn't over-sign?" That's not what happened, it's not likely to happen, so who cares?

 

[billmac91]

If a player is skipping practice/weights and not honoring his responsibilities, then he risks expulsion just like someone who acted that way in the classroom. Ideally there would be some wake-up calls and attempts to send him a message before jettisoning him.

When freshman DB James Scott doesn't maintain his off-field responsibilities, and the wake-up calls do not impact him, he is shown the door.

When backup Nate Oliver works hard in all phases but simply remains a guy that can only help you on special teams, getting passed by many youngsters (Barnett, Bryant, Johnson) at safety and star, he should not get jettisoned, though he would at Alabama if Isaiah Crowell wanted to join the already wildly oversigned Bama class.

When freshman starter Duron Carter does not maintain his off-field responsibilities, he gets suspended for the bowl game, and later expelled from the school to a junior college.

I think this sums it up the best. A guy like Terry Grant (Decent running back but had been passed up on depth chart by Richardson and Ingram) was asked not to return. Alabama had wildly oversigned last year, and 2 upper-classmen randomly quit the squad, one being Grant.

I thought it was also very interesting 2 early-enrollees came down with medical hardships allowing 2 additional players to fit in under the cap if you will.

And then there was the player who was asked to gray-shirt and the enrollee who had a last minute issue on his transscript forcing him to go JUCO after all options were expired.

 

[osugrad21]

Just think how much of a mess we will have if the NCAA limits early enrollment and other ways to fudge the hardline 25 per year.

 

[Jaxbuck]

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?

Still waiting.

 

[SloopyHangOn]

Still waiting.

Didn't you read it? Gator spoke for everyone a few posts ago.

 

[ORD_Buckeye]

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 idea 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.

C'mon, Gator. What it is in plain and simple terms is an end around the 85 scholarship limit. Recruiting is a crapshoot as evidenced by the numbers of 3* kids who end up first round draft picks and the number of 5* kids who end up busts. If you're bringing in 28 kids instead of 20 every year while jettisoning those who don't contribute, you're essentially operating with over 100 scholarships a year.

That the SEC schools benefit more than the ACC schools has to do with the fact that the SEC schools are operating at a higher level of football/recruiting to begin with AND are bringing in athletes that many ACC schools wouldn't touch. The ACC's struggles don't negate the advantage of oversigning. In fact, it can be argued that they'd be even worse without the practice.

 

[SmoovP]

Still waiting.

I beg your pardon for not getting back sooner. It's been a busy weekend. I have many young children to wrangle and keep from strangling one another.

I'm not convinced that oversigning does or does not give a competitive advantage. I suppose I could be convinced that it is, but I'm not sure how you'd go about it.

As to why they do it, I have no real answer, but virtually everyone does - present conference excluded.

But what I'm becoming ever more unconvinced of, is that programs are "jettisoning" kids on the scale that appears to be the conventional wisdom here.

There are a few anecdotal stories where it's happened, but to hear you guys tell it, virtually every program in the SEC is giving 10 or 12 kids the boot each and every year. I can't find any evidence that is so.

 

[Jaxbuck]

I beg your pardon for not getting back sooner. It's been a busy weekend. I have many young children to wrangle and keep from strangling one another.

I'm not convinced that oversigning does or does not give a competitive advantage. I suppose I could be convinced that it is, but I'm not sure how you'd go about it.

As to why they do it, I have no real answer, but virtually everyone does - present conference excluded.

But what I'm becoming ever more unconvinced of, is that programs are "jettisoning" kids on the scale that appears to be the conventional wisdom here.

There are a few anecdotal stories where it's happened, but to hear you guys tell it, virtually every program in the SEC is giving 10 or 12 kids the boot each and every year. I can't find any evidence that is so.

No offense but I didn't ask if you thought it gave an advantage or not.

I am asking for even one possible explanation as to why the SEC oversigns so frequently if they don't feel it is for a competitive advantage.

 

[SmoovP]

No offense but I didn't ask if you thought it gave an advantage or not.

I am asking for even one possible explanation as to why the SEC oversigns so frequently if they don't feel it is for a competitive advantage.

That is why I said

As to why they do it, I have no real answer, but virtually everyone does - present conference excluded.