Oversigning (capacity 25, everyone welcome! maybe)

[BuckeyeNation27]

What everybody here loves to get amnesia about is the fact that every conference than the Big-10 signs more players than them. So number one, if it is an advantage, then it is an advantage for the ACC and the Big-12 (or what is left of it) and the PAC-10 too.

I'd be surprised to find out that people here don't have the same disdain for oversigning in the ACC and Big12 as they do for the SEC. It's just obvious that the SEC is the clear and away worst violator.......and not only do they get away with it, they get praised for having the best teams with no mention of all the shady shit they do to get those "best" teams, oversigning being just one.

 

[muffler dragon]

And by going to a JUCO program with ties to a major program,

Gator:

Would you mind elaborating on this, because at first glance, I interpret it as certain schools have a "minor league" type situation. If that is the case; then there is a certain advantage in the sense that it keeps said players from other schools. Please feel free to correct my interpretation.

 

[BB73]

One aspect of oversigning that's annoying to me is the way that the recruiting rankings are used. ESPN hypes the SEC teams as having the best recruiting rankings, ignoring the fact that many of those teams have a few guys that will never make it into the programs that just received their LOIs.

But ESPN uses the recruiting rankings, including the oversignings, as 'proof' that the SEC will continue to have the best teams. It's part of the self-serving hype that actually has an effect on where future recruits want to play.

Some of the sites that do the rankings actually revise them after the players are enrolled, so the final rankings are based on the players that actually became part of the 85, but there's almost no publicity when that's done.

The SEC may in fact get the most good players in a given year, but the diffrerence isn't as great as it's made to be on NLOID.

 

[Gatorubet]

Gator:

Would you mind elaborating on this, because at first glance, I interpret it as certain schools have a "minor league" type situation. If that is the case; then there is a certain advantage in the sense that it keeps said players from other schools. Please feel free to correct my interpretation.

Well, yes and no. There are JUCO schools that are happy to get a call from a coach like Tubberville with the news that he has a great kid for him with some academic issues. The JUCO school gets a good athlete, and Tubberville gets to place a kid in a spot that is as good as he likely would get absent signing with Auburn, qualification wise. If the athlete adapts to college, meets his grades, and continues to be a prospect, then that athlete can enroll with any school he wants. Now, a Tubberville will have an "in" with him as he knows the kid and his family, and set up (perhaps that is too strong a verb. More like knew the possible places where the athlete could find a JUCO home - Tubs has no say over the JUCO program or admittance) the current situation. That said, if Auburn is full of three deep five star defensive linemen, the kid will do what most do - look around for the best spot for him to start and shine and get the attention that helps him with his goal of being drafted in the NFL.

Does the fact that the kid was helped place in a JUCO give the original school he signed with an "edge" in recruiting? From my experience watching these, you would have to say, yeah, it does, but I also have to say that the more common experience is that the kid goes wherever it is good for him from a playing/starting standpoint. Florida has done that - steered kids to a JUCO - and then we see him down the road playing for our rivals.

And while unusual, that same kid can show up in a program's recruiting class two or three times - the original LOI, and the subsequent commit from JUCO. (sometimes they don't make the grades the first year after committing and then come on board the next year, but that is a rarity)

 

[kn1f3party]

It's part of the self-serving hype that actually has an effect on where future recruits want to play.

I think you make a great point here. We were all just graduating High School at one point--well most of us anyway--I remember how immature I was. Stupid things like how dominant a school looked in the media would have definitely been influential on me.

 

[Muck]

One does not need a dog in the fight in order to argue from merit and logic.

Gator very much has a dog in this fight. It's no coincidence his posts focus on a single program.

And. Shut. Your. Lying. Mouth.

Spurrier ain't Sabin and never will be.

 

[kn1f3party]

Does the fact that the kid was helped place in a JUCO give the original school he signed with an "edge" in recruiting? From my experience watching these, you would have to say, yeah, it does, but I also have to say that the more common experience is that the kid goes wherever it is good for him from a playing/starting standpoint. Florida has done that - steered kids to a JUCO - and then we see him down the road playing for our rivals.

I think the infatuation with recruits wears off as well and the original school doesn't want them back. I don't think a school is wrong for this, as long as they did not deceive the kid. Often times this happens because a kid can't make grades or something like that. In cases like that I don't think the school they signed with is under any kind of moral or ethical obligation to take them back if they get their grades up after some time in JUCO.

 

[Gatorubet]

I'd be surprised to find out that people here don't have the same disdain for oversigning in the ACC and Big12 as they do for the SEC.

I was not addressing the topic of disdain. I was addressing the fact that most conferences oversign far more than the Big-10, and that they are universally regarded as inferior to the Big-10 in football. I was addressing the absence of a correlation between success in football and oversigning, either between conferences or within conferences.

I realize that is an unpopular question as it tends to mitigate the "weight" of the real or perceived advantage. I also realize that some want to attribute the SEC success to oversigning, rather than any other factors, or at least maximize the influence oversigning has on our success, as it would be a defense to many things - the January 1 slaughter - possibly the LSU NCG loss - the BCS win stat - and maybe a reason that the talking heads love the SEC so much, and repeat it endlessly.

I get that.

 

[BuckeyeNation27]

You realize there is usually more than one cause for every effect, right? Oversigning is one of the causes.

 

[Gatorubet]

But ESPN uses the recruiting rankings, including the oversignings, as 'proof' that the SEC will continue to have the best teams. It's part of the self-serving hype that actually has an effect on where future recruits want to play.

What is funny about this is that for decades many of the southern schools, UF included, used to bitch about the hype everyone paid the Big-10, which we thought was far too great for the reality, and that the national press ignored the south, save for Bama and Tennessee.

In the 70s we used to bitch that the Big-10 (and ND and Penn State) had all of the national press eating out of its hand, the prestige of all of those years of championships, leather helmet wins, and a lock on the Rose Bowl with the PAC-10. That the Heisman and the other awards were dominated by northern schools because the writers favored the north, and the large cities and big newspapers were all up north.

So I find that interesting for reasons other than the ones you think are interesting.

 

[jwinslow]

I was addressing the absence of a correlation between success in football and oversigning, either between conferences or within conferences.

No, you were making a weak argument that if the oversigning factor does not determine success by itself, then it's not an advantage.

I realize that is an unpopular question as it tends to mitigate the "weight" of the real or perceived advantage.

Not really. What is unpopular is to you trying to invalidate a very real advantage with incomplete and overstretched comparisons.

There's no question that the SEC has a ton of advantages that the B12, P10 & BE do not enjoy, and a few that the B10 does not (the non-big 3 do not draw the talent or coaches that the mid-tier SEC teams do). Even the big three have differences in their athletic budgets, as the hierarchy and financial needs of their athletic department is much different at Ohio State compared with Alabama. There are some exceptions (Florida), but overall the balance is a bit different, and the cultural differences are tremendous as a whole when it comes to outlandish athletic spending at many big ten schools (see Michigan's struggle to upgrade FB & BB facilities due to the culture towards academics vs athletics).

Frequently in this thread we have acknowledged the southeast talent base, tradition, facilities, fan support, boosters, head coaches, assistant coaches, media support and other factors which fuel the strength of the SEC.

I also realize that some want to attribute the SEC success to oversigning, rather than any other factors, or at least maximize the influence oversigning has on our success, as it would be a defense to many things - the January 1 slaughter - possibly the LSU NCG loss - the BCS win stat - and maybe a reason that the talking heads love the SEC so much, and repeat it endlessly.

What a shock that you snuck this in yet again

 

[jwinslow]

What is funny about this is that for decades many of the southern schools, UF included, used to bitch about the hype everyone paid the Big-10, which we thought was far too great for the reality, and that the national press ingored the south, save for Bama and Tennessee.

Forget decades or the 70s. Try 2006, and a month later the entire region embodied the bias and disrespect they used to rail against.

I suppose that is fitting with the 'CFB is cyclical' mantra.

And yes OSU fans would be doing the same thing in your shoes, just with a different taunt/chant

 

[Gatorubet]

You realize there is usually more than one cause for every effect, right? Oversigning is one of the causes.

Yeah, it might be one. Which is why I wanted to know the causes of the kids leaving the programs. Do southern schools sign more kids who drop out because of academics or social inability to handle college, or do we have more discipline problems? Are we signing more kids because we are dropping more kids? Are there issues that lead to oversigning, with oversigning being the reaction, not the goal.

Again, I was sort of defending some of the assertions that just because you have more verbals than spots prior to signing day, you are automatically a cheater program that wins because of unethical behavior.

Look, this discussion has lots of side issues, and pointing out a fallacy in one area is not a denunciation of what somebody says on another issue. It has been hard to keep track of all of the mini-threads at once, and it is easy to take an answer to one post to mean that the response was directed at every other post.

 

[jwinslow]

Are there issues that lead to oversigning, with oversigning being the reaction, not the goal.

This is the philosophical/ethical difference Deety has touched upon.

I don't think you have to set out with a goal to cut your 3rd string FB to be guilty in the practice of oversigning. You know that is a very real risk and potential consequence of signing that many prospects beyond your available scholarship total.

I disagree that a coach must oversign in order to protect himself against uncertainty - or you know, stay competitive, with other recruiting classes - like verbals flipping, kids not qualifying or getting into legal trouble.

That is the source of the ethical disagreement. I don't think you hate kids, I do think we view what is necessary quite differently.

I agree that it might be required to maintain that competitive advantage (which in this case is just keeping up and thus not an advantage, other than over the alternative), but that does not excuse it imo.

 

[Diego-Bucks]

Gator very much has a dog in this fight. It's no coincidence his posts focus on a single program.

Yeah, I botched my writing. I think, though I may have been drunk at the time, that I meant to say "one can have a 'dog in the fight' and still argue from merit and logic". I can never tell what I meant these days...