December 8th, 2009 at 5:18 PM ^

Finally some good news.

If we get Hankins, Ash, Parker, Furman, and one more guy - that puts us at 28.

I would expect, then that 1-3 players would decommit and we'd still land at 27 or 28 players in this class.

With more than 3 players already enrolling early, we can get the 28.

This is awesome.


December 8th, 2009 at 5:26 PM ^

Is it possible to get a specific quote from the article with respect to our ability to count EE's against last year's 25 scholarship limit? Normally I wouldn't ask but since the cat appears to be out of the bag with respect to the article's content and since it would clear things up immensely, maybe somebody could post a sentence or two where this is covered.


December 8th, 2009 at 5:30 PM ^

because that's not what it says. Nothing has changed. The Big ten rule is still that you can sign 28 but only 25 can enroll. And EE's do not count back, they still count towards the current 25 enrollee limit. This is the same as has been reported.


December 8th, 2009 at 6:15 PM ^

This is what I thought all along, but figured if enough people were disagreeing/negging that I must have missed something behind the paywall. Thanks for clarifying things.


December 8th, 2009 at 7:28 PM ^

I'm not an expert so I wanted to stay out of this ... but ... in your version, did the B10 add a rule saying that backdating EEs is not allowed? Because, according the the other guys in this thread, the NCAA did not prohibit backdating the EE.

So, if the B10 lets us sign 28, what's stopping us from backdating three of them?

My understanding of the confusion was that the B10 rule only allowed us to SIGN 25, thereby effectively preventing us from backdating - if we can only sign 25, then what's the point of backdating? So, backdating wasn't actually prohibited, just made irrelvant.

Now we find out that the B10 allows us to sign 28, after all. But why can't we backdate 3 of them? Is that a new B10 rule?


December 8th, 2009 at 7:33 PM ^

they have done away with backdating of EE's. And yes it is different than the NCAA rules. I am no expert either just relaying that both sites are working under this assumption. Both have allegedly confirmed this with compliance, just like TomVH did.

So as it stands, UM can sign 28 in February but better shed three of those guys by September. That likely involves those three enrolling in January 2011.


December 8th, 2009 at 7:47 PM ^

This makes so little sense.

So basically you're saying the only thing that has changed from previous years is that the B10 no longer allows back dating.

And yet, the B10 will allow signing 28 and shedding 3 by September. How the hell does that promote their goals? If anything, it encourages shadyness.



December 8th, 2009 at 7:53 PM ^

very little makes sense about the rule. Not only does it not seem to accomplish their goals but it also puts the teams at a pretty decent disadvantage compared to other leagues.

And again, this understanding could be wrong as no one has ever posted the text of the actual rule, the rule number, or anything like that. But this is how the sites are reporting the situation as it stands today.


December 8th, 2009 at 10:10 PM ^

about the scholies. However, I was under the impression that this unstated rule limited LOI's to 25. If the article states that they can sign 28 to scholies, that is "news". If it says they offer 28 but only sign 25, then that's probably not "news".

The relevant question is whether there is or is not a new rule which eliminates early enrolls counting toward 2009. I have yet to see the rule. Allegedly, compliance has confirmed for Tom VH and Sam Webb.

But, I'm not buyin' that, especially given the numbers we're going after. Unless we expect that at least 2 or 3 current recruits are going to decommit.


December 8th, 2009 at 7:57 PM ^

The fact that Big Ten teams can sign 28 players to LOI's is actually a fairly recent LIMITATION. The SEC is just now implementing a similar rule this year. In the recent past, SEC teams regularly signed 30+ member classes knowing full well that a large chunk would not qualify so that they could still operate safely under the NCAA-wide 25 scholarship limit.

Now the Big Ten is apparently going a step further by prohibiting the backdating of scholarships so that pretty much under no circumstances can you enroll more than 25 scholarship players in a given year.

Signing a few more guys than you can/plan on enrolling is actually pretty standard practice, it just hasn't happened much here at Michigan because we have rarely had the full 25 scholarships available in recent recruiting years.


December 8th, 2009 at 9:18 PM ^

here you go...i should add this to the op:

"At this point it is mostly good news with remaining targets, which brings up the question of how many more spots will Michigan fill. Counting Adrian Witty, they have 23 prospects coming in either this January or June. It looks all but certain that they will go over the 25 number. The Big Ten allows them to over sign by three, so 28 is the absolute ceiling for this class."


December 8th, 2009 at 5:54 PM ^

To all of those saying that this was a great post:

The reason it's a great post is that all the information was basically paraphrased from a Rivals premium post. Apparently all you have to do to make a "great post" is take an entire article, paraphrase it, and spit it back out in your own words.


December 8th, 2009 at 9:19 PM ^

twenty-three commitments, five spots left, let's hear some guesses...

1) grimes, 2) furman, 3) hankins, 4) parker, 5) ash, 6) wilson...and we lose at least one.


December 8th, 2009 at 8:38 PM ^

Gholston lighting off to Alabama would be absolutely perfect. We would (probably) never have to play him, and Sparty would be down their most prized target. Oh, I hope it happens.


December 8th, 2009 at 11:53 PM ^

I'm still confused, here's the simplest way I can ask what I want to know. If someone has a definitive answer, I'd be very appreciative.

If we receive 28 letters of intent from kids this coming signing day and none of them fall to the wayside (grades/etc.), will all 28 of them be able to put on the pads and be members of the team or will only 25 of them be able to do that?

Blue in Yarmouth

December 9th, 2009 at 8:20 AM ^

Neither I, nor anyone on this site has a definitive answer for you. I say that because all that has been thrown about is "I heard this" and "I heard that".

Even Tom VH has not seen it written. He spoke to a woman in compliance that said Big 10 schools can no longer count EE's toward the previous years class.

If this is the case, then the fact that you can accept 28 LOI's does not change the fact that only 25 can actually suit up in September. So regardless whether they come in Jan. or September, only 25 of the 28 can suit up (if this rule change has actually taken place).

My post may sound skeptical, and it is. I have not seen anyone here, or anywhewre else, link to a specific rule. We have only heard what someone told someone else. I find it very bizarre and considered a massive fail for the Big 10, that they would institute a new rule and not have any information about it anywhere.

Anyway, sorry I couldn't be more help, but at least now you know what the "rule" is if it actually changed.