When Brian first brought to light Saban's Alabama over-recruiting, I, like most, vociferously criticized Saban, for al the reasons we know. But after reading Misopogon's wonderful series, and given that for whatever reason we seem to have a higher than average attrition rate that is only continuing, the question I pose is, should we partially re-evaluate this position? I mean, for years we've recruited fewer players than we needed, and more left than we could afford. I sure wish we could add a couple of guys to this years class--that is if the recent struggles haven't turned off any prospects.
Support MGoBlog: buy stuff at Amazon
Given high attrition rates, should we over-recruit?
November 8th, 2009 at 5:27 PM
#1
Given high attrition rates, should we over-recruit?
November 8th, 2009 at 5:44 PM
#2
I wouldn't like to make it a permament feature
But I feel like this year we should easily sign over 25 maybe even around 30 and get as many kids to enroll early as possible (that we can). So that we'll have 5 kids enroll early to count on the schollies for this year and then recruit another 25 after that.
I think that there is no way that we'll only take 25 this year.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:46 PM
#3
I don't know that we need to
I don't know that we need to over-recruit. Rodriguez's first full class hasn't lost anyone (unless you count Witty, who's supposedly enrolling in January). All the guys we've lost have been Lloyd Carr recruits except Taylor Hill.
So far we have 20 commitments. We could possibly take 27 or 28 guys in this recruiting cycle. I think that's plenty.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:48 PM
#4
Yeah, I hope Bouje is right
Yeah, I hope Bouje is right about that.
I think the problem most people have with Saban's recruiting tactics is that he recruits not merely to account for normal attrition, but he recruits so many kids that there are not enough schollies available for all the kids he signed, so, some of the kids he signs get screwed over because there aren't enough schollies to give to all of them. The way Saban recruits, attrition is not merely accounted for, but it's actually caused by the way he recruits.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:51 PM
#5
I really think they need to.
I really think they need to. That have what 20 guys right now? I hope they get at least 27-30 especially since there's no depth on defense at all.
And what's wrong with Nick Saban over-recruiting? I mean I don't like the guy, but over-recruiting is never a bad thing, unless they don't end up getting a scholarship after all. That would suck.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:54 PM
#6
The problem is that if you
The problem is that if you have 20 slots and recruit 30 guys, then 10 guys have to end up without a scholarship. You might get a few guys who would normally depart (flunk out, give up on football, etc.), but then you have shady dealings where suddenly a redshirt sophomore who's buried on the bench gets cut from the team in order to make room for an incoming freshman with more upside.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:05 PM
#7
but with all the transfers
but with all the transfers and guys leaving for various reasons this past year shouldn't there be some extra?
November 8th, 2009 at 6:15 PM
#8
Yes, but probably topping
Yes, but probably topping somewhere in the range of 26-28 and not 30+ like Saban.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:26 PM
#9
yes
That's not what we mean by over-recruiting.
When we're talking about over-recruiting, we're talking about offering more scholarships than we have slots. For example, accepting 30 letters of intent when we only have 24 available scholarships is over-recruiting.
Accepting 24 LOIs for 24 slots is just...recruiting.
November 8th, 2009 at 5:52 PM
#10
If we have only 69 recruited
If we have only 69 recruited scholarship players, and 16 (?) are seniors, then we can bring in more than 25 without resorting to Sabanesque chicanery. We'd be crazy not to do so. We just need to get a few to enroll early to count against last year's class.
Given our low scholarship numbers, I don't think anyone should complain about us offering 3-star guys, either. A 3-star kid is still probably far superior to a walk-on in talent, and we need as many players as we can get.
November 8th, 2009 at 6:31 PM
#11
Isn't there a limit of 25
Isn't there a limit of 25 kids maximum per recruiting class for the BigTen?
November 8th, 2009 at 6:45 PM
#12
I believe it is 28, but if we
I believe it is 28, but if we do what bouje is talking about, and let early enrollees count towards this year's class, does that let us go over 28?
November 8th, 2009 at 7:01 PM
#13
You can sign 28 players per
You can sign 28 players per class, but can enroll no more than 25 in September. However, early enrollees count against the previous year's class for both figures. So if we get some early enrollees, we'll have a ton of space.
November 8th, 2009 at 8:00 PM
#14
If anything, I wish we would
If anything, I wish we would just overrecruit defensive players. Like if the next class has 25 players, then 15 of them be on defense.
I feel like doing that for the next 2 years would help our defense in a big way.
November 8th, 2009 at 8:19 PM
#15
I have a feeling that the
I have a feeling that the remainder of this class (save perhaps an offensive lineman) will be defensive.
And for the 2011 class, so far 15 of the 24 kids we've offered are defensive players.
November 8th, 2009 at 8:53 PM
#16
Overrecruit, no.. sign as much as we legally can? yes.
We have one advantage in that we have so many slots left over from the 2009 class, that our strategy needs to be to get as many early enrollee's as possible, even if they're the lower ceiling but can be contributing 3 star types. Then we can load up to the max 28 in the 2010 class with the traditional come in summer types.
November 8th, 2009 at 9:27 PM
#17
Another question
Who in this class has been talking that they are coming early?
