• New here? Register here now for access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Plus, stay connected and follow BP on Instagram @buckeyeplanet and Facebook.

Oversigning (capacity 25, everyone welcome! maybe)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
MililaniBuckeye;1870787; said:
Big difference between being three oversigned for the entire allotment and being a dozen oversigned for a single recruiting class, Mr. Layerman...
Click to expand...
4-cute-puppies-wallpaper-640x480.jpg


One out of four puppies is not aware of what your comment means.
 
Upvote 0
I agree there are some differences. But you and deety had a long exchange about how the stakes, uncertainty and non binding verbals compel a coach to engage in such 'make sure we're full on signing day' actions or risk his job, team, program, etc.

That was what seemed to be drawing directly from this thread.
 
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye;1870802; said:
Hey Mistah Saban-man come tally me commitments
NLOID come an' me wan sign more
Red shirt, gray shirt, no shirt, bunch!
NLOID come an' me wan sign more
Click to expand...

nick-saban.jpg

One Trophe' Two Trophe', tree, four FIVE!!!!

NLOID come an'me wan sign more....
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
Gatorubet;1870947; said:
83857112.jpg


One Trophe' Two Trophe', tree, four FIVE!!!!

NLOID come an'me wan sign more....
Click to expand...

EDIT: The pic wasn't showing up, so I assumed you were talking Florida's three national titles in football and two national titles in basketball. After thinking a bit, I came to the conclusion that you were talking about the Southern Ethical Cheaters five straight BCS titles, so I removed my initial response...
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
MililaniBuckeye;1870948; said:
EDIT: The pic wasn't showing up, so I assumed you were talking Florida's three national titles in football and two national titles in basketball. After thinking a bit, I came to the conclusion that you were talking about the Southern Ethical Cheaters five straight BCS titles, so I removed my initial response...
Click to expand...

That's OK. Nobody could have imagined that... :p
 
Upvote 0
jwinslow;1869794; said:
"I'm of the laissez faire philosophy that all is fair in love and recruiting," said Scout.com National Editor Allen Wallace. "It's easy to sit back and say oversigning should not be allowed if it's not your job. But ... these guys are paid millions and millions of dollars to protect their team. You're asking him to put his moral obligation to the player above his obligation to the school."
Click to expand...
this was the quote I was referring to, and I do not recall smoov taking a similar stance
Gatorubet;1865888; said:
Quote:

Originally Posted by Deety

I understand the concern - neither the school nor the players necessarily have to make formal what they've been promising on NLOID, making it a horrible mess all around. I consider that a valid concern, but a side issue to the basic principle involved.
All due respect, kids getting to hurt a program's signing class is not a side issue. One can mourn the good old days of "pure" college athletics if one wants. And one can pretend to ignore (here I am referring to Steve's post) the impact of millions of dollars in revenue to a school that finances their entire athletic department from football revenues, the impact of SEC and Big-10 and Texas and Notre Dame TV deals, and the fact that fans are still fans who want to win. Only now coaches don't risk possible unemployment and a return to high school coaching and subbing as a driver's ed instructor, they risk millions of dollars a year personally if they do not succeed.


So again, you can decry the fact that college athletics is not the pure form of, say, the Ivy league...but much of the good old days was far worse than anything going on today, and the historical truth is that when Brown and Yale were competing for national titles they did it using far more corrupt methods than anything seen now.


And I am not saying "we've always had cheating so we can cheat now". Far from it. I am saying that it is now a billion dollar industry as well as "dear old State Tech U". And today it is unreasonable - given the stakes and careers and money involved - to expect a 3 to 4 million dollar a year coach to allow one's recruiting class to be shredded purely because some kids stiffed you, and some kids flunked their finals, and for that coach to say "so what if if screws your program, too damn bad." And I am again saying that it is not OK to cheat or lie or fabricate injuries or force kids to leave. And I am again saying that it is not unreasonable to use honest estimates of the number of no-quals and red-shirts and grey shirts and transfers and quitters to obtain a good faith estimate of how many kids you can accept LOIs from that you think will actually enroll.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0
Gatorubet;1866093; said:
Seeing as how several of my posts addressed a number of ideas on how to institute rules to prevent oversigning abuse, your statement in bold is either willfully ignorant (if you were unaware of that), or meant to be intentionally provocative (if you were). Either way, what you say lacks merit on its face.

You can say you addressed it, but the preponderance of posts which align with the Pro-SEC side of the argument belies the above statement.


Because at the time I was discussing this with a bunch of folks at once, and there was little in your post to make me want to stop and address it when there were more interesting side issues to tallk about. Talk has died down, so I'm happy to address your post. You say "no evidence". If I did, I meant it as I have in all other facets of the discussion: to mean "no convincing evidence of statistical correlation between or within programs." Look at the mighty tOSU. Number 10 on the signing scale in the Big-10. Mighty Purdue and Minnie beat you every year by signing four more kids. That is forty per team over ten years. They must kick your ass, right? You all blow this off as if it has no bearing on the subject. We have talked it to death.

Oversigning doesn't make you a national champion, it just makes you better than you would have been without it. LSU, Alabama and Auburn sure used it to help win a National Championship though.



(Rightly or wrongly I reduced the rest of your post to this in the interest of brevity)

To start, your prior post used Dareus to show how oversigning was an advantage. To be fair, you were also responding to me saying that our D-line guys (the area where I think the SEC has the greatest advantage over other conferences) were likely not the last guys signed. Now, since the SEC has 12 teams, and we have the luxury to look back over ten years of classes at four BCSNC wining programs to prove your point, you found Darius. More accurately, the oversigning site did, and you pointed out that he was the 30th verbal to Bama. The site - and you - took that to mean that Darius would not have been signed but for oversigning. Both you and that site like to work backward - to make a conclusion and then find reasons to support it. You are both the antithesis of the scientific method. So as much as it annoys you to have your assumptions looked at critically (and I get that answering your sloppy logic with actual analysis might be deemed "lawyer talk"), I'm gonna go there.
Click to expand...

Isn't it scientific to be sure. But it doesn't mean its wrong. It doesn't annoy me to look at things critically; in fact the reason why we are discussing oversigning is it is being looked at critically. And Slive can posture all he wants about how the SEC is out in front of this, produced a rule that other conferences are following, etc, but people who follow this shady practice know he's been tacitly condoning it as a means to an end until pressured publically.

The fact remains that Alabama could take a 30th commitment because it knew it could run off enough players to get him on the team. The fact remains that if they weren't allowed to take 30 (or more) kids then some of the players on the field for the national championship game wouldn't have been playing for them. I can't prove that any Dlineman in these games would not have been the players that didn't make a recruiting class. But that is part of where the dirtiness lies; you can't prove a single person wouldn't have made the recruiting class but you know for a fact that oversigning allowed for kids to make it. Your SEC coaches such know that too. And logic would tell you that some of these kids would be d lineman.

But perhaps you'd like to argue somehow that for the SEC oversigning only works for positions outside of Dline. But yeah, there is no sloppy logic in that, is there?
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top