Oversigning: SEC Adopts 25 Player Class Limit, Centralizes Med Scholie Mgmt
The SEC Presidents have voted 12-0 to adopt the 25 player class limit proposal. Recall that earlier this week the SEC coaches voted against the proposal (an advisory vote, BTW) 12-0.
GentryEstes247 SEC has adopted 25-man limit for signing classes and will propose it nationally, Slive says. Coaches were unanimously against that.Andy_Staples SEC passed the 25-signee annual limit and closed some loopholes. Still not as strong as Big Ten's 85 hard cap, but better [than it was].
GentryEstes247 Conference office will now oversee the use of medical schloarshipsAndy_Staples SEC has voted to prohibit 7-on-7 competitions from campuses.Andy_Staples SEC banned grad student exception for players with only 1 yr of eligibility. Will keep Masoli-type transfers from happening [Doesn't go into effect until Oct 2011, so this doesn't impact Russell Wilson, et al.]
Looks like the SEC Presidents and Commissioner Slive are trying to get their ADs and HCs under a modicum of control.
GentryEstes247 Slive on league coaches: "Obviously they have their own interest to pursue ... We were able to accommodate some of their concerns."GentryEstes247 Slive: "No one wants to win more than I do, but we don't want to win at the expense of young people."HABOTN Did coaches have a problem with the 7-on-7 ban? "That was unanimous all the way," Slive said.
Of course, the devil is in the details, so we'll have to wait and see how these changes are implemented. Still, this is encouraging.
TV revenue stuff:
Andy_Staples SEC is splitting up $234 million in revenue, according to Slive.Andy_Staples Slive's response to new TV deals in other leagues: "Look-ins" written into SEC deals that allow for adjustments if market changes. (Mo $)
that puts more recruits into play for us.
That's not really the issue. The SEC was averaging something like 25 more players signed per four year period than the Big 10. That's a lot more chances to be right, although a hard cap at 85 would be nice too.
This should theoretically cut that to 13. That, in and of itself, is not as big of a deal as having SEC doctors sign off on medical issues instead of the team doctors.
I know the main issue is fairness to recruits, but it's a nice bonus to major non-SEC teams too.
SEC coaches would be against the limitation even though teams can clearly field champions with the limit makes me wonder how much of recruiting is building a good squad and how much of it is trying to prevent rival teams from doing the same. Of course, I understand that having more guys locked in allows you to hold what basically amounts to an internal try-outs amongst athletes tenatively on scholly and that this is a competitive advantage. I believe that the issuance of medical hardship schollies should be overseen by the NCAA as well.
.... if the coaches actually follow the rule
I'm not sure this would put more recruits in play for us. It would really only come up at the very end of the recruiting cycle, when SEC schools are closing in on the 25-man limit, and by that time we'll be close to our limit, too. Plus, many of the "extra" players they currently sign go to JUCOs.
Alabama won't be able to go overboard anymore, but they can still sign 25 top players each year and see who works out over the summer. This won't really change anything for Nick Saban (he signed 22 last year).
I think this really hurts schools like Ole Miss and Miss St. They'll have to make choices between academically marginal kids who are better athletes or a more stable kid with a lower ceiling. When they could sign 30, it was a lot easier to take everyone and hope the best athletes made it to school. This is going to hurt the SEC's overall strength nationally.
If they take the next step and only allow 85 players, after signing day, the playing field will be level. Averaging 25 more players each four year period allows 25 more chances to find a good player. No matter what anyone says, a lot of recruiting is a crapshoot. Better rated players definitely have better odds of success, but an average class only produces 7-8 good players. Having 40 good players by signing more is a lot better than 32 good players by signing fewer.
Great to hear. This is a victory for out of the mainstream folks like Brian who really did the digging that exposed how dirty the practice was. It doesn't hurt that coaches were publicly talking about how they needed to oversign to make up for all the academic disasters they recruited.
Tremendous. I love it when Saban has to burn the midnight oil reading the rule books to find new loopholes.
Bama can give us Demetrius Hart back now!
TOO SOON.
sorry for swearing.
Something tells me this still won't stop Saban.
OSU Busted
SEC stops oversigning
END OF DAYS!
I'm starting to think we were raptured a week ago, but we were just too caught up in the glory of the OSU mess to care !
SEC takes a small step to curb oversigning and combat bad press rather than stops oversigning. Still it's at least a positive step and the 12-0 vote over the coaches makes me smile.
It makes me long for the days when a post like that could approach triple digits of posbanging.
Without the hard limit of 85, oversigning will still be in play, just diminished some.
Agree completely. It still doesn't guarantee 4 years at school.
I agree. 25 isn't the real issue, 85 total is the real issue. 25 recruits time 5 years is 125, that is still 40 over the 85 limit. That is 40 guys leaving every five years be it medical redshirts, terminated scholarships, run ins with the law or grades, but it is 40 kids that didn't finish where they started.
I love how this is what South Carolina's President, Harry Pastides, had to say yesterday:
"We'd love the SEC to play a lead role in doing the right thing," Pastides said. "We would hope the NCAA would adopt whatever we would do. That's where our ADs and coaches are. They don't want us to be so far out in front that we're the only league that clamps down on that."
I don't know if this is just awful spin or he really believes what he is saying, but I had to chuckle a little bit. Yeah, don't get so far out in front that you actually allow 15 more signees per four-year period than the Big Ten...
2008-31
2009-37 (wtf lol)
2010-26
2011-28
You can see why this needed to happen.
CURRENT TALLY FROM 2009 OLE MISS RECRUITING CLASS
37 Players Signed Plus One Gray Shirt from Previous Class = 38
Minus Eight Players Who Failed to Qualify = 30
Gabriel Hunter, Artice Kellam, Demarcus Knight, Eric Smiley, Stephen Houston, Montez Phillips, and Mike Thomas all went to either a JUCO or post graduate school. Thomas resigned as part of the 2010 class, but is likely a gray shirt candidate this year and will count towards the 2011 class.
Willie Ferrell was released from his letter of intent and signed with Florida A&M.
Minus Three Signed to Gray Shirt Offers = 27
Mike Marry, Evan Swindall, and Cameron Wingham all received their scholarships as part of the 2010 recruiting class, but participated in bowl preparation practices.
Minus K Andrew Ritter Who Played as a Walk-On Last Year = 26
Minus RB Tim Simon Who Suffered Likely Career Ending Injury = 25
Minus Hornsby, Drummond, Barksdale and Patterson = 21
21 Players Comprising 2009 Recruiting Class
how many end in the class excuse signing that many players. The 25 scholarship count will hopefully bring greater emphasis on academics and get kids to qualify. Being able to sign that many players is an obvious advantage and is not fair to the kids.
not meant to excuse a rather disgusting act, just interesting. it just goes to show that if you have no limits you just take anyone who is willing to say yes.
btw that is the most bad ass avatar i have ever seen
So, until now did the NCAA have no limit on schollies? Were those only determined on a conference by conference basis? How exactly were the Ole Misses of the country doing this? I see mention of SEC oversigning, which implies to me that they do have limits, but I am unclear on what, if any, they are.
I guess I'd more be interested in the PAC 10, 12 or whatever they are now, as they are our Rose Bowl competition. Are we at a scholarship disadvantage to USC in addition to playing the game in their city?
I'm a little confused -- 85 is the NCAA limit on scholarships, so I don't get why we're talking about the SEC needing a "hard cap" of 85. What am I missing?
I just throw my hands up and yell "Cheaters". Good job by UF and UGA I suppose.
...it's the general practice to manage scholarships at the start of the season. So, prior to the fall (counting the incoming class), they'll have more than 85 scholarship athletes. In the B1G, you aren't allowed to do that. Caveat: A B1G team can submit a plan to the B1G office to oversign by 2 or 3 (someone check me) and get from 85+ to 85.
"SEC has voted to prohibit 7-on-7 competitions from campuses"
and thus began the construction of "the Bear Bryant Off-Campus 7-on-7 dome!"
I prefer the "introduction of sqrt(49) vs. sqrt(49) on-campus pigskin tosses."
Good by the SEC to at least reign in the abuse a bit, but you'll still see kids kicked off the team/"advised" to transfer to make room for more kids every year. One interesting effect, though, should be a drop in initial offers by the SEC schools, which may open up the region a bit more for schools like UM to gain a foothold. When teams were pulling in LOIs from 30+ kids, it was because they were also offering scholarships to far more kids and that served a barrier of sorts to states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Kids there would get their slew of offers and some of those were likely designed as placeholders/"stickers" to discourage those kids from considering out-of-region programs. Even if the schools never envisioned them as first-choices, it kept the pool open if they lost some higher-profile recuits.
But with a limit of 25 recruits, schools have to be a little more judicious with their offers, since some of those kids will commit on those offers and that reduces the available scholarships more. Sure there are loopholes - schools can rescind offers, players already on the team will be encouraged to leave, etc. - but hopefully this harder cap will mean southern schools might be slower to offer kids, which in turn will allow some northern programs to get in "early" on a kid and be able to recruit for effectively.
but what are the 7-on-7 competitions (ie, who runs them and for what purpose) and why are they banned?
Its kind of like the new AAU for football. Here is a good OTL piece on them
"While the university presidents unanimously heralded the decision, Alabama coach Nick Saban has led a handful of SEC coaches who not only accept oversigning, but can’t for the life of them understand why anybody wouldn’t love it.
“You all are creating a bad problem for everybody. You’re going to mess up kids’ opportunities by doing what you’re doing. You think you’re helping ‘em but you’re really hurting ‘em. It took one case where somebody didn’t get the right opportunity. You need to take the other 100 cases where somebody got an opportunity,” Saban said Wednesday, referring to the media’s disdain *ahem* of oversigning."
I hate the whole attitude of these coaches where they act like if they didn't give a scholarship no other school in the world would.
Saban's no idiot. He knows exactly what to say to keep Alabama fans in his corner, and to spin this unjust practice into a positive.
You're right, idiot was definitely the wrong word there. But I think you know what I meant.
I agree, but it would still take a serious dearth of critical thought (which is ubiquitous in Alabama I imagine, particularly as to their fooosball team) to buy any of it.
2 cardinal rules in business/politics/law (as far as I can decipher):
1) KYP: Know Your Personnel
2) KYA: Know Your Audience
I have no doubt that Mr. Saban understands both.
It isn't perfect but good for the presidents standing up for the right thing in the face of the coaches disagreeing with them.
Also, 7 on 7 I think is a great thing as long as it's regulated properly but since it currently isn't banning it for now is probably a good idea.
I like the idea of 7 on 7 a lot more than I do hearing things like 40 times.
Honestly, how many times do we have to see the story of the great college football receiver who goes to the NFL Combine runs slower than scouts expected then gets picked in the NFL draft later goes on to become a great NFL wide receiver and they go wow for a third round draft pick he's really productive! e.g. Mario Manningham.
So I know I'll get slammed for this since any defense of the SEC around here is unwelcome, but what exactly is the problem with allowing kids the opportunity to compete for a scholarship spot at a top athletic program?
The worst case scenario is they get beaten out for the spot and have to finance their education with student loans like the rest of us did, while still getting to be a part of the team. Or, if playing time and free education is important to them, they can transfer to a smaller program and feel good that they at least got their chance to compete with the big dogs.
This feels like nothing more than an extension of the entitlement mentality that is running rampant throughout society.