best wishes
The Impact of Alabama's Oversigning
Filed under:
Yes, I am clearly desperate for football to begin.
The Alabama recruiting abuses have always deeply troubled me, and I very much enjoy when Brian takes them to task. Despite those efforts, I still think the issue is under-exposed.
Alabama cheats*. Alabama’s cheating is more effective and has far greater impact than any conventional cheating one might consider, such as paying recruits or bribing officials. Alabama is playing with a significantly expanded roster. It would be akin to a 30 man roster for the Red Wings with no salary restrictions on the top end. Or John Beilein being able to work with 17 scholarships for an extended period of time. Those who point out that teams that oversign still have to trim down to the 85 scholarship limit apparently refuse to acknowledge it is the marginal players who will be “trimmed”; the best players will remain. For those who reject the expanded roster analogy, then perhaps it is similar to having a developmental squad from which budding stars can be promoted and to which disappointments can be demoted and eventually “let go.”
I have developed nothing new here, just restated a problem we’ve all discussed before. What is missing is the full impact of oversigning.
As a refresher, here are the last four classes for Alabama and Michigan.
Alabama oversigned by 22 players and Michigan undersigned by 1. I don’t care about any individual stories – players who didn’t make the grade, players who changed their minds, players abducted by Andromedans. Doesn’t matter. The reality is that those stories, those excuses have to be there because of the oversigning. The stories do not create oversigning, oversigning creates the stories.
That is a twenty-three player advantage over the last four years. A whole class, consisting of four 5 star players, ten 4 star players and nine 3 star players.
What would Michigan be like today if they had at their disposal the cream of an additional crop? Let’s put faces and names on such a class. Given that Michigan has only had five 5 star players over the last four years, we’ll need four of those. I drew lots and William Campbell was the odd man out. Next, we need ten 4 star players, or 2.5 per year (to spread the tenure of the players out over the four classes). Since I can’t cut a player in half, I went 3, 2, 3, 2, taking the best and worst 4 star from each class and the middle-ranked 4 star for the classes where an extra player was needed (if an even number, I flipped a coin). I needed nine 3 stars or two per class with one extra coming from the class with the most three stars, again top, bottom and middle when needed.
Here’s your class:
These would be additional players in the system over the last four years. The names are a reference point – envision an identical player of equal skill that would be part of the team. Sort of like the mgoblog YMRMFSPA.
Now, what would having that additional talent do to our two deep?
By my crude analysis, that would be an additional five starters for the 2009 team with three more breaking into the two deep. Feel free to disagree here and suggest other combinations.
I admit I have Mallet-clone starting over Tate. That may produce some debate; however, a highly-rated, five star veteran, even if not a prototype spread QB, surely would get the nod to start this season. Look at the center of the OLine! Schilling, Molk and Boren-clone with Schilling-clone backing up both guard positions. Very nice. I give the Matthews-clone the nod over Hemmingway, but the wisdom of two possession receiver types is open for debate.
On defense, we are a good sight better. If we keep the 3 traditional linemen the same, we now have Graham-clone as the Deathbacker. Is he too big for that role? Then we can move him to DT and have Van Bergen backup, which might bring another clone into service with the LB corps. A DLine of Graham, Martin, Graham-clone is frightening. We have Ezeh-clone backing himself up in the middle, which supplies nice depth. At the corners, we have the two Warrens starting with the two Cissokos backing them up, which, in my opinion, makes for the deepest set of corners in the conference, and one of the top CB groups in the nation. Our nickel and dime packages would be lethal.
No real help at the Safety position because we are drawing on our own history here!
From a distance, on offense I see a powerful, very deep interior OLine to clear the way for Minor Rage, and a veteran QB with an intriguing backup. On defense, I likely see a front four of Graham, Van Bergen, Martin, with Graham-clone at Deathbacker, which is downright fearsome; two players rated as preseason All Big 10 selections in the front four. And I see an all world CB group with four guys who would probably start on any team in the Big 10.
Maybe Alabama is on to something after all.
* As does any team that egregiously oversigns.
The Alabama recruiting abuses have always deeply troubled me, and I very much enjoy when Brian takes them to task. Despite those efforts, I still think the issue is under-exposed.
Alabama cheats*. Alabama’s cheating is more effective and has far greater impact than any conventional cheating one might consider, such as paying recruits or bribing officials. Alabama is playing with a significantly expanded roster. It would be akin to a 30 man roster for the Red Wings with no salary restrictions on the top end. Or John Beilein being able to work with 17 scholarships for an extended period of time. Those who point out that teams that oversign still have to trim down to the 85 scholarship limit apparently refuse to acknowledge it is the marginal players who will be “trimmed”; the best players will remain. For those who reject the expanded roster analogy, then perhaps it is similar to having a developmental squad from which budding stars can be promoted and to which disappointments can be demoted and eventually “let go.”
I have developed nothing new here, just restated a problem we’ve all discussed before. What is missing is the full impact of oversigning.
As a refresher, here are the last four classes for Alabama and Michigan.
Alabama oversigned by 22 players and Michigan undersigned by 1. I don’t care about any individual stories – players who didn’t make the grade, players who changed their minds, players abducted by Andromedans. Doesn’t matter. The reality is that those stories, those excuses have to be there because of the oversigning. The stories do not create oversigning, oversigning creates the stories.
That is a twenty-three player advantage over the last four years. A whole class, consisting of four 5 star players, ten 4 star players and nine 3 star players.
What would Michigan be like today if they had at their disposal the cream of an additional crop? Let’s put faces and names on such a class. Given that Michigan has only had five 5 star players over the last four years, we’ll need four of those. I drew lots and William Campbell was the odd man out. Next, we need ten 4 star players, or 2.5 per year (to spread the tenure of the players out over the four classes). Since I can’t cut a player in half, I went 3, 2, 3, 2, taking the best and worst 4 star from each class and the middle-ranked 4 star for the classes where an extra player was needed (if an even number, I flipped a coin). I needed nine 3 stars or two per class with one extra coming from the class with the most three stars, again top, bottom and middle when needed.
Here’s your class:
These would be additional players in the system over the last four years. The names are a reference point – envision an identical player of equal skill that would be part of the team. Sort of like the mgoblog YMRMFSPA.
Now, what would having that additional talent do to our two deep?
By my crude analysis, that would be an additional five starters for the 2009 team with three more breaking into the two deep. Feel free to disagree here and suggest other combinations.
I admit I have Mallet-clone starting over Tate. That may produce some debate; however, a highly-rated, five star veteran, even if not a prototype spread QB, surely would get the nod to start this season. Look at the center of the OLine! Schilling, Molk and Boren-clone with Schilling-clone backing up both guard positions. Very nice. I give the Matthews-clone the nod over Hemmingway, but the wisdom of two possession receiver types is open for debate.
On defense, we are a good sight better. If we keep the 3 traditional linemen the same, we now have Graham-clone as the Deathbacker. Is he too big for that role? Then we can move him to DT and have Van Bergen backup, which might bring another clone into service with the LB corps. A DLine of Graham, Martin, Graham-clone is frightening. We have Ezeh-clone backing himself up in the middle, which supplies nice depth. At the corners, we have the two Warrens starting with the two Cissokos backing them up, which, in my opinion, makes for the deepest set of corners in the conference, and one of the top CB groups in the nation. Our nickel and dime packages would be lethal.
No real help at the Safety position because we are drawing on our own history here!
From a distance, on offense I see a powerful, very deep interior OLine to clear the way for Minor Rage, and a veteran QB with an intriguing backup. On defense, I likely see a front four of Graham, Van Bergen, Martin, with Graham-clone at Deathbacker, which is downright fearsome; two players rated as preseason All Big 10 selections in the front four. And I see an all world CB group with four guys who would probably start on any team in the Big 10.
Maybe Alabama is on to something after all.
* As does any team that egregiously oversigns.
July 31st, 2009 at 8:58 PM | 
Dude...
Deep.
Dude...
Deep.
July 31st, 2009 at 9:12 PM |
Interesting post, but
Interesting post, but
Doesn't this assume an infinite supply of talent, clones as you say? Isn't the impact on other teams really: 1. Alabama's oversigning takes kids away from other schools were they could turn into players, and 2. 'bama has many more players in their program and more tickets in the lottery. Not to mention that oversigning is unfair to the kids.
I am so with you on desparate for football to start thing. It is getting closer - my tickets came in the mail the other day.
"Thank You Team 132!"
July 31st, 2009 at 9:20 PM |
Yes, it assumes that and our
Yes, it assumes that and our
Yes, it assumes that and our ability to actually recruit all those additional high-level players. For the purpose of getting a feel for what advantage Alabama has, I guess I am assuming we could get the talent for the sake of discussion.
"Fear. Columbus is rank with it. Let us ease their pain."
August 1st, 2009 at 12:02 AM |
You assume that above, but
You assume that above, but
You assume that above, but even if every additional player was a middle-of-the-road 3-star, the effect would still be enormous. SOME of those 3-stars will pan out Mike Hart style, even if most of them don't. So your analysis is only slightly overstated at worst.
It's like Saban is doing in his perverse way what RR is trying to do legitimately with the walk-on program. The advantages to Saban's method are obvious.
It's Hucklebee deep and Davis close and Leach under center...
August 11th, 2009 at 1:48 PM |
Taking account
Taking account
You're also not taking into account what the recruiting would be like the 5th year after all the inflated win totals from the continuous culling of players. If we pulled a Yost and went 55-1-1 over 5 years, what do you think we could get from the recruits available out there.
The recruiting slogan would be 'Come play for us and win the NC EVERY year.'
Wasting away in Ohio, a Wolverine in a sea of red and grey
August 2nd, 2009 at 2:30 AM |
Assumed Infinite Talent
Assumed Infinite Talent
It doesn't necessarily assume more talent. Back before the 85 scholarship limit, the criticism was that the major schools stockpiled talent, not necessarily utilizing all of it, at the expense of smaller schools.
This is essentially what Alabama is doing on an individual basis.
Excellent, EXCELLENT, post. This puts a great analysis on what I've intuitively considered for a long time. As stated, this is an even bigger problem than people realize.
July 31st, 2009 at 9:15 PM |
Yes, I am clearly desperate for football to begin.
Yes, I am clearly desperate for football to begin.
With a first sentence like that, it had to be obsessively awesome and complete with color-coded charts full of data that supports your assertion.
I hadn't really considered the implications of oversigning as cheating via expanded roster and more as general douchebaggery, but now I know the horrible truth. Forrest Gump would be ashamed. Nice work and a deserved +1 for the post.
I've been called a "hockey valkyrie" by those who don't know me.
Follow the Children of Yost now, worry about how to keep the ladies at bay later: http://twitter.com/#!
July 31st, 2009 at 9:22 PM |
Nice
Nice
This is very impressive. I'd say most everyone on this blog is well aware of oversigning and how it negatively impacts a select number of recruits every year (i.e. those that get effectively cut). But I haven't seen an analysis like this which is attempting to show how it positively impacts the school that does it. I never even thought of quantifying oversigning like this so it's very impressive and really shows why someone would want to do this.
I feel like it must be a house of cards to some extent. Yes, oversigning certainly gives you a better chance of winning if this analysis is indicative of what would really happen (and I think it reasonably is), but eventually those lower rated players must catch on that they might get cut from the team. I'd think eventually they'd start going somewhere else. And I don't care how good a team is, just to fill its roster it has to take some of those lower rated players (and then hope that they turn into the Pat Whites and Mike Harts of the recruiting world).
One nitpick though, I noticed that you think the second Boren would stay. I highly doubt that he would since I think cloning might be against traditional family values.
July 31st, 2009 at 9:24 PM |
One nitpick though, I noticed
One nitpick though, I noticed
One nitpick though, I noticed that you think the second Boren would stay. I highly doubt that he would since I think cloning might be against traditional family values.
I knew the prominent role of the Boren-clone would result in some mischief. +1
"Fear. Columbus is rank with it. Let us ease their pain."
July 31st, 2009 at 9:56 PM |
Surprise
Surprise
I was just surprised that I was the first person to point it out.
July 31st, 2009 at 9:57 PM |
Damn dude. Nice.
Damn dude. Nice.
Damn dude. Nice.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:42 PM |
I never thought of over
I never thought of over
I never thought of over signing this way before, well done. It's incredible to think that they've signed an ENTIRE CLASS more than Michigan over the last 4 years and for some reason that's not a big deal to the NCAA.
No question, Jim.
July 31st, 2009 at 10:52 PM |
Be Careful
Be Careful
Be Careful MDan. Any more rhetoric like this is liable to get the Roll Bama Roll Mafia out after you. That is, if they havent strapped a Moonshine Cocktail underneath your car already.
Otherwise, awesome diary.
July 31st, 2009 at 11:13 PM |
Extremely good diary. Very,
Extremely good diary. Very,
Extremely good diary. Very, very well done.
I have one question though, would Michigan be able to pull in a class quite as good as that?
July 31st, 2009 at 11:24 PM |
Probably not. But Alabama has
Probably not. But Alabama has
Probably not. But Alabama has and I wanted a sense of what that means position by position with players that I know.
"Fear. Columbus is rank with it. Let us ease their pain."
August 1st, 2009 at 8:42 AM |
Yes, that is what I gathered
Yes, that is what I gathered
Yes, that is what I gathered from the diary as a whole. Fantastic job, this was the best way of analyzing the benefits of oversigning that I've seen. Excellent work.
August 1st, 2009 at 11:32 AM |
I think UM could be as good as Bama
I think UM could be as good as Bama
in recruiting like this. We have hung with them and if you remember that recruiting classes with Rivals and Scout use number of recruits as a strong variable in overall rankings instead of the avg star per recruit variable. This is why SEC teams dominate recruiting boards because they are taking 28-30 players vs 25 for other sonverences
NC is doing the same thing now as well.
If you subtract 4 players from Bamas classes every year you will get a class that is not nearly as highly ranked as they have shown.
It would actually be interesting to analyze your fictional extra class taking from Bamas signings and plug it into scout or rivals and see where the new rankings would show up.
"Deserve to Win!"
August 1st, 2009 at 12:37 PM |
But why does the SEC rool and
But why does the SEC rool and
But why does the SEC rool and everyone else is teh suxxor?
not just "douchey" MGoBlog user, but now TRUSTED MGoBlog user
August 2nd, 2009 at 12:05 AM |
at the risk of sounding cliched...
at the risk of sounding cliched...
"Well dern it Jim Bob; it's that gol dang esh ee see speed!"
August 1st, 2009 at 11:28 AM |
It's interesting to think
It's interesting to think
It's interesting to think about, especially in light of this year's deficiency of higher rated recruits. At least Holmes Onwukaife would be happy.
August 1st, 2009 at 12:00 PM |
The Onwukaife case is an
The Onwukaife case is an
The Onwukaife case is an excellent example of the differing approach to recruiting by Michigan. Do you think Saban would have turned him away? He would have Holmes believing he was going to be starting ahead of those other five Deathbackers he just signed.
When you think about it, this is a staggeringly unlevel playing field.
"Fear. Columbus is rank with it. Let us ease their pain."
July 31st, 2009 at 11:21 PM |
nice post
nice post
The hypothetical depth and competition for postions would incredibly impact the 2-deep. Also imagine that instead of Boren and Schilling backup clones, we were able to recruit more position specific, ie a 5* LT and 4* RT...the effect of this over-recruiting would/has produce extremely positive results on the field.
Great post +1
August 1st, 2009 at 12:19 AM |
Nice.
Nice.
Nice.
August 1st, 2009 at 12:22 AM |
What is REALLY disturbing...
What is REALLY disturbing...
Over the four year span of recruting that you examined, Alabama recruited 23 more players than us. What I just realized is that with the new rule of a limit of 28 to every class, Alabama still outrecruits us by NINETEEN PLAYERS over the four year span.
Can some one please tell me the new rule will be effective?
August 1st, 2009 at 7:50 AM |
Cosmetic effect only
Cosmetic effect only
Cosmetic effect only. Purely done to stop the negative PR the SEC was receiving. Most SEC teams will now just sign 28 every year (which would amount to 112 players in a 4 year span, more than what Bama took in MDan's example)and still continue their "slash-and-burn" style of roster thinning to remove the "dead weight" from each of those 28 man classes who don't produce by year 2.
We ARE Michigan....COME GET SOME!!!
August 1st, 2009 at 2:40 AM |
Yeah. That was a really cool
Yeah. That was a really cool
Yeah. That was a really cool way to look at what Saban is getting away with. I always knew that they had a few more players to pick and choose from with over signing, but I had no freaking clue it was so many.
I just hope this doesn't become the norm for everyone else in a few years.
There are no corners in space.
August 1st, 2009 at 12:08 PM |
It's amazing that the NCAA
It's amazing that the NCAA
It's amazing that the NCAA knows all this and does nothing serious. The only reason that most universities don't do this is because the coaches actually give a damn about the players. They devote their lives to developing young athletes and do not make a mockery of their chosen career by using teenagers like raw material, like the plastic pellets they pour into machines I see on How It's Made.
"Fear. Columbus is rank with it. Let us ease their pain."
August 11th, 2009 at 4:30 PM |
...
...
If you would take the time to look at what Saban actually does for his players, then I might respect what you say. Saban cares a lot for his players. He wants all of them to succeed. He not only wants them to succeed athletically, but he wants them to succeed academically. I believe that since Saban has been at Alabama, the average GPA of the team has risen. That's absolutely heartless right there... He's also set up scholarships to help out needy kids (who don't play sports) have a college education. Jerk..
If you actually look at it for yourself instead of eating up whatever Cook and others on here say, you might find that Saban just knows how many he needs to recruit for the next year. The players that have transferred could simply read the writing on the wall (if I stay here, about all I'll ever do is help out on special teams). So they choose to transfer to get more playing time. Others have left because they've violated team rules. Is Saban heartless by letting players go because they couldn't follow the rules?
August 11th, 2009 at 5:07 PM |
I'm sure that Saban is not
I'm sure that Saban is not
I'm sure that Saban is not devil, and perhaps MGoblog is being a bit rough on him, but the fact remains that he consistently over-recruits and then must cull his ranks before each season begins. You say that Saban is just recruiting for the space, but then how do you justify the rather large number of athletes who transfer out because of playing time or who are removed for violating team rules? Either he's recruiting a large number of stop-gap players whom he never expects to utilize, or he is recruiting an abnormally large number of players who run afoul of his rules (and may I add, conveniently when space is needed for new recruits). Defend your team all you want, but if you saw a team consistently recruiting 4-5 kids more than they have scholarships available at the time, you would be justified in wondering how they can accomplish that.
And for the record, people in Michigan remember Saban at MSU, and while I'm sure he has done some good for Alabama, I think it is telling that he has burned quite a few bridges at every stop he has made.
August 11th, 2009 at 8:09 PM |
But it's not just 4-5 more
But it's not just 4-5 more
But it's not just 4-5 more than he has room for (which is bad enough as is), it's more like a dozen. Fucking ridiculous.
not just "douchey" MGoBlog user, but now TRUSTED MGoBlog user
August 15th, 2009 at 5:50 PM |
Spare me. Eighteen players
Spare me. Eighteen players
Spare me. Eighteen players have left this year. Saint Saban's halo needs polishing.
"Fear. Columbus is rank with it. Let us ease their pain."
August 1st, 2009 at 6:56 AM |
Just think if Texas over
Just think if Texas over
Just think if Texas over recruited like Alabama. That would be scary. The way they complete their class the day after the previous years signing day.
August 1st, 2009 at 8:45 AM |
Interesting and informative analysis
Interesting and informative analysis
I haven't followed this issue like most have here, so my big question has probably been covered long ago. At any one time — today, or the first day of the season — does Alabama have more than 85 guys on scholarship? If they don't, then are all the extra players officially regarded as walk-ons?
I understand why the other coaches in the SEC aren't bitching, since they're all doing a similar sort of thing, just perhaps not as egregiously. What I'm curious about is why coaches in other conferences, especially the southern non-BCS conferences, aren't bitching up a storm, especially since the "marginal" players being dumped every year would probably be very attractive to programs like Southern Miss, Memphis, UAB, and the like.
It would take an enormous amount of time to research, but it would be interesting to find out just where all the dumped players ended up. How many go on to other D1A programs? D1AA? JC? How many end up straggling back to their small home towns in Alabama, dreams crushed, and never set foot on a college campus again?
I'm also curious about what Alabama's graduation rate has been the last several years.
Did Saban do the same thing at LSU?
August 1st, 2009 at 11:27 AM |
yes they had more than 85
yes they had more than 85
They work through the numbers and use spring practice as basically tryouts for early enrollee freshman and see what they actually have.
This year they have seen 2 starters "leave" the program because the younger talent was better.
This is not an Alabama only problem. It is an SEC rule not the exception with those programs.
I do believe that Alabama needs to trim 3-5 people yet before school starts.
"Deserve to Win!"
August 1st, 2009 at 12:19 PM |
You wonder why Alabama's APR
You wonder why Alabama's APR
You wonder why Alabama's APR isn't death.
"Fear. Columbus is rank with it. Let us ease their pain."
August 11th, 2009 at 4:51 PM |
Alabama has a great graduation rate
Alabama has a great graduation rate
Alabama's APR has improved with Saban as head coach! It's better than Michigan's.
August 1st, 2009 at 10:31 AM |
It also helps in this way
It also helps in this way
1. Michigan does not oversign. Then both expected and unexpected things happen - non-qualifiers, etc... For example, last year - lose two lbs before the year whether voluntary or not. Now the class is less than full, impacting depth, causing big impacts make negative headlines...
2. Alabama oversigns. Then both expected and unexpected happen - non-qualifiers, etc... Alabama makes its numbers for a full class, depth chart full, competition and glory come the evil one's way...
- Dutch
August 1st, 2009 at 12:26 PM |
Excellent point. One could
Excellent point. One could
Excellent point. One could even make a rational argument for oversigning by a couple players each year (and perhaps that's why the weak NCAA first effort at controlling this picked the number 28). And I think I would be fine with that, although it would be simpler and far more above board to just limit signees to the number of scholarships available.
"Fear. Columbus is rank with it. Let us ease their pain."
August 1st, 2009 at 11:16 AM |
Wow
Wow
Its kind of like NASCAR. If you are not cheating, you are not trying, as they say.
The innocense of college football is slipping away faster than the integrity of politicians in Detroit.
Time wounds all heels. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UwGXMryTbwE
August 1st, 2009 at 12:44 PM |
Can't help myself
Can't help myself
Innocence.
Edit: intended as a reply to Elno above.
not just "douchey" MGoBlog user, but now TRUSTED MGoBlog user
August 1st, 2009 at 12:43 PM |
Excellent diary.
Excellent diary.
Excellent diary.
not just "douchey" MGoBlog user, but now TRUSTED MGoBlog user
August 1st, 2009 at 1:39 PM |
Fantastic
Fantastic
The reality is that those stories, those excuses have to be there because of the oversigning. The stories do not create oversigning, oversigning creates the stories.
This is exactly correct. The rest is also right on. Very good stuff
Trust me, I know what I'm doing
August 1st, 2009 at 1:41 PM |
I can't even conceive of thinking about a football issue
I can't even conceive of thinking about a football issue
this deeply and for that amount of time/effort. You are a better fan than I.
"Everyone gets dumped Gabe. Let me give you some advice: a little coverup on your Adams Apple will make it appear smaller. Which will make you appear less like a transvestite."
August 1st, 2009 at 2:29 PM |
Excellent work
Excellent work
and fairly shocking to see it put this way.
The first step to correcting a problem is to recognize that one exists. Seems to me the real tragedy here is that the 'Bama fanbase doesn't even see oversigning as a problem. Whereas, it's heartening to see that everyone who's commented so far seems to agree that this is WRONG. No one's yet said "that's just how it is" or "if they can do it then we should," and that's something I think we can be proud of.
Anyway, great post.
Also, MDan - re: your quote: Why would you quote the leader of the ultimately vanquished bad guys regarding invading Columbus? Wouldn't that make Tressel into Gandalf and Pryor into Aragorn? Wouldn't a better analogy be Ann Arbor rank with fear, Schembechlerian football the beautiful but decaying White City, and Rodriguez Theoden riding in at dawn with slot receiver electron Rohirrim to crush the Buckeye orcs? (Apologies to the jocks on the board for the LOTR obsession.)
August 1st, 2009 at 10:45 PM |
WolverBean:
Whoa. I never
WolverBean:
Whoa. I never
WolverBean:
Whoa. I never thought of it that way. Now I am seriously depressed.
"Fear. Columbus is rank with it. Let us ease their pain."
August 2nd, 2009 at 12:08 AM |
Or we could have a
Or we could have a
Or we could have a counter-factual scenario where the orcs just go in there and massacre them? Just an idea.
August 2nd, 2009 at 10:31 AM |
Eh
Eh
I think there are quite a few LOTR uber-fans on this board. Myself included; though the movie != the book.
not just "douchey" MGoBlog user, but now TRUSTED MGoBlog user
August 1st, 2009 at 3:03 PM |
Awesome diary. I never
Awesome diary. I never
Awesome diary. I never thought about over signing in that way. Very interesting.
August 1st, 2009 at 3:49 PM |
Sigh...
Sigh...
For every time I've heard a CBS or ESPN announcer say something to the ring of:
"But the SEC is so much better because their depth chart is so much deeper than other schools!"
And reading this diary you understand why this is possible under the current rules...
When will the television media begin to pay attention to this monstrosity?
August 2nd, 2009 at 2:35 AM |
Desmond Howard
Desmond Howard
If anybody knows Desmond, this would be a great opportunity for him to do some serious investigative reporting.
Oh...wait. ESPN doesn't want ANY of their anchors doing investigative reporting. Unless it is Herbstreit screwing up the Les Miles thing.
Dude...
Deep.