Semi OT: Oversigning proposal by the SEC

Submitted by bronxblue on

Saw this article at ESPN and didn't see it posted earlier.

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=6615533

Looks like the SEC is considering dropping the number of recruits per year from 28 to 25, which is a step in the right direction and at least seems a little closer to reality than the 30+ classes that were the norm for some programs the past couple of years.  As expected, not everyone is a fan.

Bobby Petrino:

The people that criticize oversigning, I'm not sure they understand why you do it and what it's all about and how you manage your roster and how you get to (the scholarship limit of) 85...

It's all how you manage your roster. I've always been one that oversigns, knowing that out of these six guys, three of them are going to get eligible and three are going to a junior college and then have a chance to come play for us.

Nick Saban:

[Blaming the media for the proposed change]  Y'all are creating a bad problem for everybody because you're going to mess up the kids getting opportunities by doing what you're doing. You think you're helping them, but you're really going to hurt them.

Les Miles:

[Discussing the notion of grayshirts] I have a difficult time defending the immorality of you're going to be able to go to school for free, you're just going to have to wait three months to do it.

And Mr. Oversigning himself, The "Nutter Butter" Houston Nutt:

I have a soft spot in my heart when a (high school) coach says, 'All he needs is you. He's had a few problems, but all he needs is you'...If you say 25 ... you can't make mistakes

And Mark Richt said something about managing your roster appropriately and not promising scholarships to kids you couldn't fulfill..  

It is left to the reader to ascertain which one of the coaches above was treated as Buzz Killington.

[I know the excerpts are large swaths of the article, but they were just too juicy to ignore.]

[EDIT:  Realized I didn't make the distinction clear about the voting.  They considered going down to 25, but that was shot down unanimously.  The SEC remains at a VERY flexible 28 per class]

neoavatara

June 1st, 2011 at 8:44 PM ^

that some coaches are actually campaigning against this.  Probably says a lot about how much of an advantage they think it gives them, huh?

Waters Demos

June 1st, 2011 at 8:46 PM ^

The Petrino comment is really striking to me. 

Managing your roster?  Isn't this a university?  Aren't your players student-athletes? 

Christ - he talks about it like a manager towards the end of spring training. 

They're college kids, the overwhelming majority of whom will have to earn a living outside of professional football.

readyourguard

June 1st, 2011 at 8:47 PM ^

Bobby Petrino said...

The people that criticize oversigning, I'm not sure they understand why you do it and what it's all about and how you manage your roster and how you get to (the scholarship limit of) 85. "....See, first you "promise" 115 kids and their parents that you want them more than any other kid at their position. That locks that kid up and prevents him from signing with one of our rivals. Then, you find which players are the fastest and strongest during summer workouts, ok. Finally, just before camp opens and school starts, you take the absolute best 85 guys who you think will give you the best chance to win and issue them a uniform. The remaining 30 kids? You tell them, "Sorry kid. It's a tough business and sometimes things just don't work out. Thanks for your time."

CoachW

June 1st, 2011 at 8:48 PM ^

The coaches voted unanimously to keep it at 28.  Shocker.

 

Source is an Auburn beat writer for an Alabama paper on Twitter:

HABOTN
 

4 hours ago

balashi5032

June 1st, 2011 at 8:49 PM ^

Question... if the current recruits per year is 28, and they constantly sign 30+ classes, how would dropping it to 25 make a difference?  Can someone please explain, completely genuine question.

vnperk

June 1st, 2011 at 8:56 PM ^

Nick Saban doesn't even try explain how eliminating oversigning "hurts" the kids... but I guess he is right, not giving kids the opportunity to be kicked off of teams due to roster limits really is hurting them.

jmblue

June 1st, 2011 at 10:29 PM ^

Eliminating oversigning would deny kids the right to be cut off a Nick Saban-coached team, that great character-building experience.  It's really the guys who don't get cut that miss out in the long run!

Mitch Cumstein

June 1st, 2011 at 8:59 PM ^

Is it just me or do these coaches act like there is only one university on earth that would let these kids play football and give them a scholarship.  If they didn't do it, the kids wouldn't be able to go to college.  What a crock.

Mitch Cumstein

June 1st, 2011 at 9:20 PM ^

“I don’t know that it’s a competitive advantage. I don’t necessarily know that is accurate,” said Auburn coach Gene Chizik, responding to those people who say the SEC is at a distinct advantage over other conferences that don’t allow oversigning.

“I just know it’s very difficult to try and hit a home run 100 percent of the time, signing 25 guys and expecting 25 guys to be on your campus for fall practice. I just think there is too much margin for error in there with all the variables that can happen with a student-athlete.”

So lets get this straight. You think the margin of error is too high with signing only 25 guys. Yet you think it isn't a competitive advantage to be able to sign more, when others can't? I'm pretty sure that 2nd paragraph says that the first sentence is necessarily accurate. Dumbshit.

http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/23392/sec-coaches-favor-oversigni…

Fresh Meat

June 1st, 2011 at 9:27 PM ^

The best parts are that they think it's bad they can no longer sign kids who won't get in because they can't risk it, and that the article referred to them as "trend setting."  Trend setting?  Seriously?  When will the media stop crediting the SEC with being trend setting with their scholarship limits?  They aren't, and even now they still try to justify oversigning showing the very few limits they have they don't even want.

Not to mention the article doesn't even mention the real problem, and of course none of the coaches do.  It's not the kids coming in that get screwed most of the time, its the kids who get cut because they are put on medical hardship, or forced to transfer, or just flat out kicked off the team to make room for the over signing.

jmblue

June 1st, 2011 at 10:26 PM ^

Bobby Petrino's delightful explanation:

The people that criticize oversigning, I'm not sure they understand why you do it

Could it be . . . to gain a competitive advantage by skirting the signing limit?

and what it's all about

Is it about . . . signing more players than the limit allows?

and how you manage your roster and how you get to (the scholarship limit of) 85

Could it possibly involve that newfangled concept of cutting guys off the team who aren't good enough to make room for those who are?   This sure is a head-scratcher.

Hannibal.

June 2nd, 2011 at 8:21 AM ^

Even dropping to 25 is pretty much meaningless.  That's still 125 guys in a five year span.  Nobody can do that in the Big Ten short of severe attrition.  The rule that they need to make is that on signing day, you can have no more than 85 players on scholarship + signed letters of intent.  This is what we have to conform to.