Why does scout say 29?

Submitted by itself on

On Scout's front page the headline reads "Best guess recruiting class : Getting to 29" ... I thought the magic number was 28?

The 28 count includes Witty, Furman, Grimes and Murphy with one extra spot being a possible Sean Parker.
Where's the extra spot coming from? Brandon Smith bailing? Or is this a typo on their part?

http://michigan.scout.com/

Huntington Wolverine

December 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 PM ^

Is Warren out as a result of declaring for the draft or do we know he's been in contact with an agent (which would guarantee he's out)?

I guess I'm asking if a kid could be drafted but opt to stay if it wasn't high enough as long as they haven't been in contact with the money or the slime.

Beavis

December 22nd, 2009 at 4:37 PM ^

I'd throw Torrian Wilson in there instead.

Just dropped Stanford.

Loves academics (Michigan the best academic school left)

Aunt and Uncle in Michigan (big M fans)

ONLY guard in this class (huge selling point IMO)

Yeah.. I think he'll end up blue. Or at least I hope so.

pistonsfan133

December 22nd, 2009 at 3:17 PM ^

Ya there was an article in the News Paper today with an interview from RR and he said they could only sign 25, so I dont know if he just didnt want to get into it or what, but they asked him the question how many incoming freshman will you take and he said a full class of 25.

Wolverine96

December 22nd, 2009 at 3:24 PM ^

of recruits that can sign a LOI in Feb. No matter how many more guys leave the program we cannot go above 28. 29 is either a typo or incorrect information on their part.

leftrare

December 22nd, 2009 at 3:58 PM ^

We did have it all figured out, modaddy. To a tee. With a bow on it. You should get in touch with Rich Rod right away and straighten him out. He must be distracted and is not focusing on recruiting.

Wolverine96

December 22nd, 2009 at 3:52 PM ^

Though I am reasonably sure that we cannot backdate Witty's scholarship. If we were able to and the number was 29, then one recruit would lose a year of eligibility because his scholarship would have started at the beginning of the 2009 football season.

Wolverine96

December 22nd, 2009 at 3:40 PM ^

but we had 21 recruits sign LOI's so at most 4 could count against that class. But there would also have to be enough scholarships available to not go above 85 for the 2009-10 academic year. 3 guys at most will be able to count against the 25 max for the 2009-10 academic year.

ldoublee

December 22nd, 2009 at 3:46 PM ^

Only 1 guy can be backdated. The 85 scholarship rule in regard to backdating refers to the amount of scholarships at the beginning of LAST season. Apparently when adding 4-year scholarship team members + walkons who were awarded 1-year deals we were at 84 scholarships. Therefore, we can backdate 1 guy this year.

For simplicity sake, let's assume that's Witty since he should have been last year anyway.

That leaves us with 25 kids who we can enroll and 28 that we can "sign". That means 3 would either go the prep school route (grades), greyshirt (grades/talent?), or go elsewhere.

That's how it breaks down.

Wolverine96

December 22nd, 2009 at 3:57 PM ^

...we are currently at 84 scholarships for the 2009-10 academic year?

If that is the case and we cannot sign 28 guys to LOI's and have 3 enroll early counting against the 2009-10 academic year, then we should not have given out the one-year scholarships to walk-ons.

me

December 22nd, 2009 at 5:06 PM ^

according to Scout

And the handing out of scholarships may have been a result of the compliance department not understanding Big Ten rules and thinking that the backdating rule had changed

the fume

December 22nd, 2009 at 8:13 PM ^

what if there's a full 85, and now you get 5 recruits that want to enroll early. That'd make it 90 for 1 semester....but that's still legal apparently? Or can they not enroll early?

And if/once you let them enroll early and go over 85 for a semester....what's really the difference if they count to 2009 or 2010 for the initial limit?

GRBluefan

December 22nd, 2009 at 3:50 PM ^

if we signed 31 guys in February, but we backdated 9 of them to last year, while simultaneously carrying forward 4 of the redshirts from last year to this class. Let's just assume that we get 6 early enrollees, and we 'force' 2 more guys to greyshirt. If it then turns out that 2 of this years class are non-qualifiers, but we can also perhaps get 3 or 4 of the lower rated guys to accept preferred walk-on status with the chance at securing full scholarships in the fall.

Does this get us where we need to be?

jbibiza

December 22nd, 2009 at 4:18 PM ^

1) We had only 21 recruits last year so we can back date 4 early enrollees from this class to that one.
Subtotal: 4
2) We can sign 25 that count toward this year's class. Subtotal: 25
3) 4 from the January enrollees (counted as last year's) plus 25 counted toward the "normal" class of 2010 = Grand Total 29.
4) The only other limitation is the TOTAL scholarship number of 85.
5) So we can definitely sign 29 in this class provided that by August we have no more than 85 total on scholarship.

Speculation on staying within the 85 limit:
If B. Smith transfers then we fit within the 85 assuming that the 5th year guys discussed in previous posts are not asked back (Wright& Cone) and all previous walk-ons are taken off scholarship. If Smith stays (which I prefer) then Adam Patterson is likely to be the other 5th year odd-man-out as he has failed to produce. There is also the rumored possibility that some of the 29 in this class may not qualify; then there is the chance that Boo Boo will come back; then there is possible attrition; etc., etc., etc.

J. Lichty

December 22nd, 2009 at 5:38 PM ^

a key Big Ten Rule - a 28 limit on signees of LOIs, and an NCAA rule of 25 enrollees. You can count 3 of them in the previous class if they enroll early and the last class could have accomodated them within the 25 enrollees. We enrolled 21, therefore we can accomodate three early enrollees.

Witty counts toward 2010 for LOI's although can count toward the 2009 class for the 25 limit.

We cannot sign 29 scholarship players for 2010 regardless of Witty.

SysMark

December 22nd, 2009 at 6:38 PM ^

I'm guessing RR has a big old white board in some secret room where he's got this all figured out. Probably even spending a lot of excess hours on it. I think we are going to be okay.

OregonWolverine

December 22nd, 2009 at 7:32 PM ^

It's funny how much anxiety this LOI limit causes me, and apparently lots of other MGoBlog patrons. Because, given how many decommits we had last year, it's very possible come February we'll be frantically trying to figure out how we'll sign a full class. Not trying to jinx us or anything, just sayin'.

J. Lichty

December 22nd, 2009 at 10:53 PM ^

- the bigger thing that could affect the class right now is academic qualifying. Two players right now are considered to be on shaky ground - Drake and Kinnard.

Its likely that is where we could see some commits beyond the 28. Hopefully if Drake and Kinnard do not qualify they go the prep school or witty route and join the 2011 class, but with the restocking that needs to be done this year, RR cannot afford to leave two spots on the cutting room floor and all 28 must be in camp this summer.

Witty and Turner left a big hole at cb by not qualifying and qualifying late respectively - RR will not let that happen again if he can fill the spots with other players who he thinks can help the team.

Blue in Yarmouth

December 23rd, 2009 at 9:06 AM ^

through reading this thread and the vast number of similar threads over the past few months that a lot of people are still unclear as to what the rules on this topic are.

My plea would be that those people please stop talking as if their opinion on the matter is absolute fact instead of the what they have interpretted from reading a few threads on various other boards.

There have been very few people who have actually done any substantial research on this subject and one of them is umhero. He searched NCAA rules, which have not changed. The big ten rules have not changed either according to his research and a quote from some top guy in compliance at the big ten (who was quoted on this blog).

You can "back date" (as we call it, though he phrased it differently stating that the term "back date" isn't appropriate)recruits who enrole early. We had 21 last year so 4 can count toward last year if there is enough room in the 85 scollie limit. Saying we had 84 last year can not be accurate when all the attrition is taken into account.I believe the actual numbers were something like 72 after you account for Boo Boo and the myraid of other losses. Also B. Smith and Warren would be subtracted from that total.

All evidence has shown that there IS a 28 max limit per year of LOI's a team can accept regardless of if you are below the 85 schollie limit. I am therefore, not sure what scout is talking about in saying 29.

I can say that many on this site, Sam Webb, Scout and countless others have been wrong about this in the past. Even Tom VH got misleading information from a person in UM compliance a short time ago. My point is scout has been WAY wrong before, so don't put too much stock in what they say in this case.

All the substanial evidence we have been given by people who have actually DONE research on the topic says we CAN count 4 toward last years class which explains why what RR and CO. are doing right now (in terms of recruiting) makes perfect sense. I'm reasonably sure that if we could only take 25 period, end of story, that RR and the boys would have cooled it on the recruiting trail.

I want to be clear that this is only MY interpretation of the rules and not gospel. However, I am basing my interpretation on research that was done and shared, a compliance person from the B10 who quoted the rules on this site and the general concensus on this board.

Blue in Yarmouth

December 23rd, 2009 at 10:18 AM ^

I don't think any of the walkons have been given scholarships at this point.

This is purely speculation on my part, but if I were a coach, I wouldn't be handing out scholarships to my walk-ons until after the recruiting class was finalized and I saw what the scholarship breakdown looked like.

This is just what I would do though, so RR may do things different obviously. It simply wouldn't make sense to me to hand out scholarships to walkons before you completed your recruiting class and saw how many (if any) scholarships were going unused.

me

December 23rd, 2009 at 12:42 PM ^

Here's an article about Kovacs not getting one because there were no more available. And here is the important note in there:

With Michigan under the 85-scholarship limit, Rodriguez gave one-year grants to several upperclassmen at the start of the year. Many went to seniors who'll graduate in December, thus freeing up the grant for incoming freshmen who want to enroll early.

I agree with your analysis above but this is the missing piece of the equation: how many walkons got scholarships.

http://www.annarbor.com/sports/next-up-for-jordan-kovacs-a-scholarship/

Blue in Yarmouth

January 5th, 2010 at 1:41 PM ^

I think you have answered that question.

If scholarships are to walkons are given out at the beginning of the year, than they haven't been given out yet. They will be given out before the season starts, at which time RR will know if he has any extra to give out.

It doesn't say all in the qoute but it says many were given to seniors so most of the ones he gave out last year will re-open for this class. At least this is what it sounds like to me.

buck1973

December 24th, 2009 at 3:16 AM ^

If a player enrolls mid year, he is not permitted to sign a National Letter of Intent.

"Under the terms of the National Letter of Intent program, a written award of athletics aid for the entire academic year must accompany a National Letter of Intent. Accordingly, the National Letter of Intent program does not allow for prospective student-athletes enrolling at midyear to sign a National Letter of Intent."

http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect/nli/NLI/Frequently+Asked+Questions/…

Perhaps this is where Scout is getting the number 29. Michigan could have 29 new players counting those who enroll early and the 28 or less who sign an NLI.