Oversigning (capacity 25, everyone welcome! maybe)

[MaliBuckeye]

Just my IMHO, but you'd think that a team that spent over $200K on recruiting services wouldn't need to oversign.

 

[Gatorubet]

No offense Gator, but you can see how it comes across when two red-flag filled articles pop up:

Slive taking a hard line stance to fight oversigning
Arkansas abusing the practice again

And you dodge both of those subjects, dig up an obscure OSU statistic (wrt the article discussions), dial up the sarcasm and change the subject to whether isolated & small oversigning prove those vague BP claims wrong.

Not until I called you on it did you actually show interest in discussing the article itself.


Do you remember where we started? When many of us claimed this was an SEC problem and you scoffed at that claim for a LONG time, as though it were an isolated thing or the byproduct of incomplete data.

No, I said you had no data showing that oversigning resulted in a statistical advantage in the "win" column - whether looking at data within a conference & between conferences. I think that is still an accurate statement, although it bugs you.

Now that there's finally substantial data showing how many different SEC teams are way over the limit, you pop in to discuss a different sub-topic.

That is totally incorrect Josh. The oversigning.com data was part of the conversation from the start. It was not "substantial data showing how many different SEC teams are way over the limit" that was lacking but now present, but whether it made a difference in any way that was at issue.

The reality is there is a major oversigning problem in the SEC. The WLOCP participants are the exception to the rule, but half of the conference doesn't just oversign, they do so at an outrageous level in both individual classes and repetition.

As for the morality of minor oversigning, I'll have to dig that up since this thread turned into a schollie guarantee thread.

No problem. Your take on my position is not exactly tracking with my memory. A lot of bandwidth was used up simply talking about mechanics of the thing. There was nonsense like people suggesting that the greater number of LOIs meant a greater number of athletes actually played for a school - I tried to explain the concept that LOIs were accepted solely to place them in JUCO - or to keep in contact with a kid who was never going to qualify.

The concept of an LOI being offered and accepted with no thought of the kid actually playing or qualifying for that school was unknown to most here.

Needless to say, there were a bazillion side issues on this thing.

Can't you just start out bashing Saban and Petrino and Nutt from the get-go so that we can find common ground from the first paragraph?

 

[Gatorubet]

Just my IMHO, but you'd think that a team that spent over $200K on recruiting services wouldn't need to oversign.

NOW you are talking about an area ripe for abuse and unethical behavior. How do you know that $$ does not get funneled to the parents by the "recruiting service" to turn the kid?

 

[Gatorubet]

Alright, my eyes are glazing over. I'll do some digging tomorrow, there's a portion from months ago that I'm trying to track down.

I won't if you won't.

 

[jwinslow]

No, I said you had no data showing that oversigning resulted in a statistical advantage in the "win" column - whether looking at data within a conference & between conferences. I think that is still an accurate statement, although it bugs you.

Spurrier said it was an advantage and is one of the biggest oversigners in the business. But we've been down that road, as well as the laughers where win totals were compared to oversigning and thus proven to not be an advantage despite the wildly incomplete data used there (and really the actual comparison doesn't exist, the south carolina without those extra 8 signees to give them the benefit of offering more talented kids who aren't qualified yet).

That is totally incorrect Josh. The oversigning.com data was part of the conversation from the start. It was not "substantial data showing how many different SEC teams are way over the limit" that was lacking but now present, but whether it made a difference in any way that was at issue.

Questioning and weakening the validity of the data was a core argument in your rebuttal. The advantages of those practices was certainly a primary topic.

Those 'we don't know the whole # story" arguments have died down considerably from you now that many media outlets have joined the hunt instead of just some random blogger on Oversigning.com. Some grab their numbers from him but others have done their own digging. Either way it's a lot harder these days to dismiss the statistics than when it was just a blog no one noticed but obsessive CFB boards.

You took that approach again with Ark, but that was because you have a character witness.

The concept of an LOI being offered and accepted with no thought of the kid actually playing or qualifying for that school was unknown to most here.

Not really. The concept of that being a valid rebuttal, particularly when said team risks being overstretched on all of those fronts almost every year, was unknown to most here.

Can't you just start out bashing Saban and Petrino and Nutt from the get-go so that we can find common ground from the first paragraph?

And Miles... and petrino...

Kiffin just hauled in a pretty large class while facing scholarship reductions. He wasn't here long enough to gauge his oversigning practices, but his track record in the ethical department is considerably worse than any of the above combined.

It seems pretty offbase to isolate the oversigners, when really the isolated teams to highlight are those not oversignign like much of the conference.

 

[jwinslow]

Entering Destin, Nutt plans to fight

OXFORD — When Ole Miss football coach Houston Nutt visits Destin, Fla., for next week’s annual meeting of Southeastern Conference coaches, athletic directors and presidents, he’ll be fighting to keep the limit of signees per year at 28, and he’ll be fighting for the league to continue to allow the practice of grayshirting.

Nutt thinks those who criticize him on grounds of oversigning just don’t get the difficulty involved in the number juggling in a college roster. “It’s a very difficult job to try to manage, to keep two, three deep at every position,” Nutt said. He says he hasn’t ‘run off’ players just to meet his numbers, isn’t dishonest and said that he doesn’t ‘non-renew’ a scholarship player unless he’s involved in disciplinary issues. But he says if a player comes to him and says his goal is to start and Nutt doesn’t see it, he might suggest that it’s not a bad idea if he goes somewhere else. When I told him critics counter that by saying coaches should be accountable for their talent evaluations, he said this: “Until you’ve done it, until you’ve actually done it, it’s one of the most difficult things, ever.”


And as for that 37, he thinks it unfairly characterizes him in a bad light. He knew going in that many of those players would go to junior college, but he felt that if he signed them initially that it might give them incentive to improve at juco — and give the Rebels an inside track two years later should they be eligible

He just thinks that 28 is a “very fair” number, and that grayshirting, as long as a school isn’t “majoring in grayshirts” is OK.

...from the comments

Kyle did not bother to mention how ESPN's Chris Low wrote "Auburn has averaged signing 29.75 players in the last four recruiting classes,
beginning with the 2007 class. Ole Miss is second (28.75), Alabama and
Mississippi State tied for third (28.25) and Arkansas tied for fifth (27.25)
" in his SEC blog today.

 

[TooTall]

SEC expected to address oversigning



Should have heard the douche they interviewed on OTL about this issue. Holy hell, he didn't have his SEC blinders on or anything. I'll try finding the link to the interview.

 

[jlb1705]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...oversigning/index.html?eref=sihp&sct=hp_wr_a2

SEC rule could curb oversigning, spark nationwide change

In January, I called the SEC's 2009 rule -- later adopted by the entire FBS membership -- toothless. This proposal has some teeth. It doesn't have the saber teeth of the Big Ten's rule, but it has some sharp canines and broad molars. It could close some loopholes, protect players from nasty surprises like the ones 2010 LSU signees Elliott Porter and Cameron Fordham received and eliminate a competitive issue within the conference between the schools that have embraced oversigning (led by Alabama, LSU and Ole Miss) and the ones that haven't (led by Florida and Georgia). Also, by reducing the total number of players schools can sign, it would reduce the annual offseason churn during which recruits who didn't pan out as expected find their scholarships revoked. Players would still get separated from their scholarships, but most would be flunk-outs or miscreants who would have been kicked off their teams anyway.

Here are the details of the proposal designed by the league's athletic directors and obtained by Marc Weiszer of the Athens (Ga.) Banner-Herald:

• No school would be allowed to sign more than 25 players in an academic year.
• Football signees who enroll in summer school would count against the scholarship total the moment they set foot on campus. (This would eliminate situations in which a player goes through summer school only to learn in late July that there is no room for him in the class.)
• The SEC office would have more oversight for medical scholarship exemptions. Some schools have complained about the amount of exemptions Alabama has used in recent years. The new rule would allow the league office to review the exemption requests.
• Early enrollees would be kept from signing a financial aid agreement until they enroll in classes. Currently, those players can sign agreements after their junior year of high school. Once they do, other SEC schools are banned from recruiting them.

 

[MaliBuckeye]

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/20...oversigning/index.html?eref=sihp&sct=hp_wr_a2

Today, the coaches voted unanimously to continue with the current rule of 28 per class.

 

[jwinslow]

Very good steps in the right direction. Kudos, Mr. slive.

Early enrollees would be kept from signing a financial aid agreement until they enroll in classes. Currently, those players can sign agreements after their junior year of high school. Once they do, other SEC schools are banned from recruiting them.

I didn't follow this, what are players "signing" ? LOIs? Or is this referring to academic or other scholarship aid ?

 

[OSU_D/]

No, I said you had no data showing that oversigning resulted in a statistical advantage in the "win" column - whether looking at data within a conference & between conferences. I think that is still an accurate statement, although it bugs you.

Back to the same old BS, SEC-friendly argument I see. Everybody knows it benefits them on the field otherwise they wouldn't do it. Hell, Nutt and Petrino are shaking b/c they can't sign 28 guys to fill 20 slots.

 

[Gatorubet]

Back to the same old BS, SEC-friendly argument I see. Everybody knows it benefits them on the field otherwise they wouldn't do it. Hell, Nutt and Petrino are shaking b/c they can't sign 28 guys to fill 20 slots.

It is hard to refute the mighty "everybody knows" card.

Also, why on earth would I want to adopt an SEC-unfriendly argument?

Again, there were many separate topics we discussed. Hopefully some folks now know that "signing" kids to LOIs for spots that both the players and the institution know will never be actually filled by that player for eligibility reasons will no longer be used in some stupid argument about how "they had 20 more players than we did over four years!!!" No we didn't. We both have the same amount enrolled no matter how many signed.

The "advantage" is if we launch sub-par kids to make room for new, better performing kids, or shadily use red shirts and "non-previously disclosed to the kids well before LOI day" gray shirts to lie to kids about their status and/or manipulate the system. That is indeed a concern. I gave several examples of "fixes" and rule tweaks to that end. "Oversigning" a few kids a season who have little or no hope of qualifying in order to encourage them and keep in contact with them - letting them know they will not have a spot unless someone changes their minds and they make grades - is no big deal to me.

 

[jwinslow]

No we didn't. We both have the same amount enrolled no matter how many signed.

That's quite false, unless you're using the royal we and only applying it to the nobility featured in the WLOCP. There's a gigantic chasm between what Georgia does and what the SEC teams west of them do.

The "advantage" is if we launch sub-par kids to make room for new, better performing kids, or shadily use red shirts and "non-previously disclosed to the kids well before LOI day" gray shirts to lie to kids about their status and/or manipulate the system.

Which means... wait for it... the ability to enroll a larger amount, not the same :p

The "advantage" is if we launch sub-par kids to make room for new, better performing kids, or shadily use red shirts and "non-previously disclosed to the kids well before LOI day" gray shirts to lie to kids about their status and/or manipulate the system. That is indeed a concern. I gave several examples of "fixes" and rule tweaks to that end. "Oversigning" a few kids a season who have little or no hope of qualifying in order to encourage them and keep in contact with them - letting them know they will not have a spot unless someone changes their minds and they make grades - is no big deal to me.

But there's no way to separate the two. You can't offer and accept too many verbals and not risk their scholarships if your projections fell short.

Unless you start telling 5+ kids that they sort of have scholarships but not really, which is going to be a very appealing and successful pitch , you're going to run into that problem.

 

[Gatorubet]

That's quite false, unless you're using the royal we and only applying it to the nobility featured in the WLOCP. There's a gigantic chasm between what Georgia does and what the SEC teams west of them do.Which means... wait for it... the ability to enroll a larger amount, not the same :p

Again Josh, there are a number of practices that are included in the broad brush term "over signing". I was referring only to the practice of getting LOIs from kids who will not qualify.

Hypothetical #1

If Team "A" were allowed 27 players, and 30 signed LOIs, three of them non-qualifiers, then only the 27 would enroll.

Team "B" accepts 27 LOIs from 27 academically qualified kids, and 27 enroll. The 3 kids from team "A"'s class go to juco and no longer are bound to Team "A". Hell, they can go to Team "B" the next year if they get grades up.

No advantage is gained by Team "A" over Team "B".

Hypothetical #2

Team "A" accepts 32 LOIs, all qualified. Coach "A" launches 3 kids for being too slow, not developing, whatever. Coach "A" red shirts 2 non-performing/hurt kids for secret and sudden medical reasons. 32 players enroll, some EEs counting to last year.

Team "B" accepts 27 LOIs from 27 academically qualified kids, and 27 enroll.

Team "A" gains an unfair advantage over team "B".

 

[jwinslow]

Team "B" accepts 27 LOIs from 27 academically qualified kids, and 27 enroll. The 3 kids from team "A"'s class go to juco and no longer are bound to Team "A". Hell, they can go to Team "B" the next year if they get grades up.

But Team A now gets the benefit of "signing" them the previous season and many players feel a sense of loyalty, even though the "loyalty" shown by Team A was not what it seemed since they didn't actually have room for them all.

Team A also gets to offer a wider variety of kids than a school that does not ignore its scholarship limits when accepting verbals & signatures.

If those extra kids don't qualify, they get a benefit and jump start on the next season. Even though they didn't qualify, they got the benefit of a chance at signing talent that was not possible without gambling player scholarships for the program's benefit.

If one of those extra kids qualify, they now get to land a prospect some would not offer due to his academics.

If many of those extra kids qualify, they get to upgrade their roster and remove some dead weight to make room.