USF following in Bama's footsteps

Submitted by BlueBulls on
Per Dr. Saturday: http://www2.tbo.com/content/2009/aug/07/usf-academic-committee-rejects-… They aren't as big of a program so it hasn't gotten as much coverage, but Brian had alluded to USF's oversigning in the past. It seems as though they are using academics as a way to get rid of players from their 29 man class. Even though the players get through the NCAA clearinghouse and are told everything is ok, they are sent to a review board within USF that ends up denying them. It's not too big of an issue though because they were given an unconditional release by USF. They've got at least 3 or 4 days until camp begins. I'm guessing this guy lands on his feet.
MGoBoard
2010 recruiting
oversigning recruiting Alabama Saban
USF

Tater

August 10th, 2009 at 12:21 PM ^

Ironically enough, USF's standards are that high, IF YOU ARE NOT AN ATHLETE. According to a St Pete Times article (sorry, no link; it was months ago), the school has become "overcrowded" to a point where some applicants with 4.0's are being turned down. If the standards for everyone else applied to the athletic department, they wouldn't win a game in football or basketball. As we all know, though, standards for athletes are slightly different than for the rest of the student body at most schools, especially in revenue sports.

Joined: 08/13/2008

MGoPoints: 30584

eric jay

August 10th, 2009 at 12:43 PM ^

I dont have a problem with this so long as all of the recruits have to go through this academic committee. If they are funneling certain recruits through it... thats shady and it should be stopped or expanded to all student athletes. The article doesnt make it clear if all of the recruits needed to pass the committee.

Joined: 11/11/2008

MGoPoints: 1

BlueBulls

August 10th, 2009 at 1:02 PM ^

For the record, there was another article about this a couple months ago that made the process seem a lot shadier, but I can't find it. BUT... Even if they all go through the committee, they were given offers to play at the school that I'm sure didn't have anything written on them about another committee that would judge their academics. As long as they're eligible, they should be given the chance to play. There wasn't any news about this happening when they didn't oversign. Even if you say that it's ok that they go through this committee, there's no way anyone can defend the manner and timing of the decision. Camps start in 2 days. School starts in less than a month. If this decision was based on grades, they could have ruled on it 2 months ago. This is all about getting rid of players bc of oversigning.

Joined: 04/06/2009

MGoPoints: 137

wile_e8

August 10th, 2009 at 1:12 PM ^

For the record, there was another article about this a couple months ago that made the process seem a lot shadier, but I can't find it. Just need to look in the right spot. Brian wrote about the last NCAA eligible player to get rejected from USF a few months ago: Link The requisite "You don't know for sure that oversigning is reason!" reply from Capstone Report is linked in the comments. As if that that is the point. The question here is "Would he have been rejected if they weren't oversigned?"

Joined: 06/30/2008

MGoPoints: 7381