Huge Recruiting News- The 28 Limit

[TideWarrior]

Actually per the NCAA-if a player that walks on receives a scholarship it will cont against that current class unless he was not recruited by the school. So lets say a player from the state of Alabama was recruited by 7 schools only but UT was not one of them. If the kid decided to show for UT fall camp as a walkon, when classes started then they could give him a scholarship and it would only count towards the 85 not the current class. But at any time if UT recrutied him than he would count against the current class.

 

[TideWarrior]

Academic scholarships count towards the 85 but they do not count towards the current class totals. Some people believe they do not but if that was the case schools like UGA would go over the 85 limit every year. In GA any student who gets accepted to the school go to school for free do to the hope fund there funded by the Lotto. Also schollys given in another sport for duel sport athletes will count against football first even if it was for baseball it would count against the football roster.

 

[Lord Vader]

This staff, IMO, doesn't want to get into the business of sending prospects to PREP or JUCO. They need guys that can make it to campus and contribute now. Maybe 4-5 years down the line when they get things really rolling, they can do that. Pete Carrol doesn't do that, and IMO neither will Kiffin. Kiffin is Carrol's mini-me, and that's cool with me.

Well then, they might as well go ahead and drop Broussard's commitment. It's about mathmatically impossible for him to make it in. Not to mention Meline is in serious question and Delvin is not looking great...

We sign 30...

 

[g8terh8ter_eric]

Well then, they might as well go ahead and drop Broussard's commitment. It's about mathmatically impossible for him to make it in. Not to mention Meline is in serious question and Delvin is not looking great...

We sign 30...

So, if we sign 30, then we still can only get 27 in school. Like I said, this staff doesn't want to get into that game because it's not something that they really want to do and I gave the perfect example of that with USC and the fact that's where Kiffin and O came from. Will they always get everyone in?? No, of course not. I can almost guarantee you though that they know they are going to have some serious number issues coming up in the next few classes and the fact that they don't need to over commit themselves to prospects because they are going to get in trouble with a couple or more by telling them they can get here. Now, as far as greyshirting goes, all that does it hurt next year's class if they try and get more than MAYBE 1 or 2 prospects to do so. Greyshirting is not something that is wildly popular because it hurts the next class's numbers and can cause crunches as well.

The thing everyone needs to remember is, trust the staff. Whether they sign 30 or 26, doesn't matter because they know how and who will more than likely be getting in. So, people really need to stop worrying about numbers, because they cannot enroll more than 27, so anything over is irrelevant other than greyshirts.

 

[Sabanocchio]

Remember guys, we can ONLY get 27 total in school and that is back counting 2 (Montori Hughes is not listed by Rivals for last years class which makes 23 signees). We may sign a couple more guys in case something happens to someone with grades or something, but don't look for 30. I think it will be more like 28 at the max 29.

I actually agree with Eric here. (now that you have your numbers straight after our PM war ) I don't think we sign 30 players. We CAN sign 30 and we will if we get some top tier guys that want to commit to us, but it's much more likely we sign around 27 to 29 and leave some breathing room under the 85 limit. That's what stops you from loading up in every class more than the 25 number. You sign 25 players every year and that's 100 players on scholarship at a time. Something's got to give somewhere.

 

[Sabanocchio]

So, if we sign 30, then we still can only get 27 in school. Like I said, this staff doesn't want to get into that game because it's not something that they really want to do and I gave the perfect example of that with USC and the fact that's where Kiffin and O came from. Will they always get everyone in?? No, of course not. I can almost guarantee you though that they know they are going to have some serious number issues coming up in the next few classes and the fact that they don't need to over commit themselves to prospects because they are going to get in trouble with a couple or more by telling them they can get here. Now, as far as greyshirting goes, all that does it hurt next year's class if they try and get more than MAYBE 1 or 2 prospects to do so. Greyshirting is not something that is wildly popular because it hurts the next class's numbers and can cause crunches as well.

The thing everyone needs to remember is, trust the staff. Whether they sign 30 or 26, doesn't matter because they know how and who will more than likely be getting in. So, people really need to stop worrying about numbers, because they cannot enroll more than 27, so anything over is irrelevant other than greyshirts.

You're wrong about not wanting to go the JuCo route. Orgeron was very interested in signing and placing players and recruiting JuCo players while at Ole Miss. We are not in a position to turn down an impact player because he didn't make the grades the first try.

 

[Lord Vader]

Maybe Kiffin could do like Saban. Saban doesn't renew scholarships to everyone. He takes them from players who aren't good enough and gives them to recruits. There is a reason Bama signs monster classes every year and still stays under the 85 limit. Saban is ruthless...

 

[g8terh8ter_eric]

You're wrong about not wanting to go the JuCo route. Orgeron was very interested in signing and placing players and recruiting JuCo players while at Ole Miss. We are not in a position to turn down an impact player because he didn't make the grades the first try.

Ole Miss very different than UT as far as the JUCO's go. We have never signed that many because we typically filled our holes and didn't have to go that route. We did place a few, but it's not as many as everyone is making it seem. Even if we do, we may or may not rerecruit those players the next cycle. The only reason we have to hit that route at this point in time is the fact that we have so many holes to fill and need guys who have some type of college experience and won't have the learning curve a HS recruit does.

 

[g8terh8ter_eric]

Maybe Kiffin could do like Saban. Saban doesn't renew scholarships to everyone. He takes them from players who aren't good enough and gives them to recruits. There is a reason Bama signs monster classes every year and still stays under the 85 limit. Saban is ruthless...

We are going to be more apt to go the USC route. Sign smaller classes with better players down the road.

 

[Sabanocchio]

Ole Miss very different than UT as far as the JUCO's go. We have never signed that many because we typically filled our holes and didn't have to go that route. We did place a few, but it's not as many as everyone is making it seem. Even if we do, we may or may not rerecruit those players the next cycle. The only reason we have to hit that route at this point in time is the fact that we have so many holes to fill and need guys who have some type of college experience and won't have the learning curve a HS recruit does.

We've signed and placed as many as anyone over the years, Eric. You really don't know what the coaches are going to do down the road in terms of signing and placing and recruiting the JuCo ranks. You develop holes at certain positions. Sometimes the best way to fill that hole is to bring in a JuCo guy that is ready to play -- see DeAngelo Willingham and Nevin McKenzie. I agree it's much more likely that we sign JuCo players now than in the future due to our depth, but it's not out of the realm of possibility that we sign and place or recruit JuCo in the future. I'd say that's pretty likely. Especially if they think a guy can play and help them out.

The only thing that may hinder the possibility of signing and placing guys in the future is this stupid 28 rule. You definitely are more pressed than ever to sign guys that are going to qualify.

 

[kevol80]

Maybe Kiffin could do like Saban. Saban doesn't renew scholarships to everyone. He takes them from players who aren't good enough and gives them to recruits. There is a reason Bama signs monster classes every year and still stays under the 85 limit. Saban is ruthless...

Wow. I'm a little surprised that there isn't some kind of rule against this.

 

[Gannon Goodson]

We are going to be more apt to go the USC route. Sign smaller classes with better players down the road.

Ding, ding, ding.

When you think about it, there's no reason to have 85 players on sholarship. Even if we're three deep at every position, plus a few kickers, you're still looking at around 70 scholly's.

This staff will load up and then pick and choose when we get to that point. It could be a few years, but we'll get there.

 

[Sabanocchio]

Wow. I'm a little surprised that there isn't some kind of rule against this.

It hurts your APR if the player leaves school and they can take away scholarships in the future.

 

[TideWarrior]

Wow. I'm a little surprised that there isn't some kind of rule against this.

Don't let LV mislead you. Every player has to renew their scholarship with the school by July 1. If the school or coaching staff decides to not renew the scholarship it has be to written why when turned in. In accordance to NCAA rules a student can not have scholarship not renewed because of their playing ability or contribution. Only if the player has violated team or school rules such as issues in the classroom or issues regarding team violations and involvement with the police or etc. If a player feels that the school unjustly took their scholarship they can appeal it and demonstrate so they will be back. The NCAA will hammer a school for yanking scholarships from player because the coach wanted to replace them with a better player and needed to get under the 85 cap.

Two players that did not return for us were starters or atleast started games for us in 2008. Saban is ruthless because he will not let a player go and do anything he wants and disciplines them all. Just like Kiffin that got rid of dead weight, coaches have to demonstrate they are in charge not the players.

 

[TideWarrior]

To address some of the questions asked:

15.3.4.3 Reduction or Cancellation Not Permitted. Institutional financial aid based in any degree on
athletics ability may not be reduced or canceled during the period of its award:

(a) On the basis of a student-athlete’s athletics ability, performance or contribution to a team’s success;
(b) Because of an injury, illness, or physical or mental medical condition (except as permitted pursuant to
Bylaw 15.3.4.2); or (Revised: 1/14/08)
(c) For any other athletics reason.

15.3.4.3.1 Athletically Related Condition Prohibition. An institution may not set forth an athletically
related condition (e.g., financial aid contingent upon specified performance or playing a specific position) that would permit the institution to reduce or cancel the student-athlete’s financial aid during the
period of the award if the conditions are not satisfied. (Adopted: 1/16/93, Revised: 1/11/94)

This is regarding a player leaving but can not backcount into their award for the previous year:

15.3.4.2 Reduction or Cancellation Permitted. Institutional financial aid based in any degree on athletics
ability may be reduced or canceled during the period of the award if the recipient: (Revised: 1/11/94, 1/10/95)

(a) Renders himself or herself ineligible for intercollegiate competition;
(b) Fraudulently misrepresents any information on an application, letter of intent or financial aid agreement
(see Bylaw 15.3.4.2.3);
(c) Engages in serious misconduct warranting substantial disciplinary penalty (see Bylaw 15.3.4.2.4); or
(d) Voluntarily (on his or her own initiative) withdraws from a sport at any time for personal reasons; however,
the recipient’s financial aid may not be awarded to another student-athlete in the academic term
in which the aid was reduced or canceled. A student-athlete’s request for written permission to contact
another four-year collegiate institution regarding a possible transfer does not constitute a voluntary withdrawal.
(Revised: 1/10/92, 1/11/94, 1/10/95, 1/9/96, 12/13/05, 9/11/07)

 

[TideWarrior]

We had a few students voluntarily leave, but we could not back count into their spots.

We also had two players who were not starters but had already graduated and received their degrees and their aid was not renewed and they were considered to leave voluntarily. Maybe that is what LV meant as ruthless.:dance2:

 

[I-CUP Insider]

Don't let LV mislead you. Every player has to renew their scholarship with the school by July 1. If the school or coaching staff decides to not renew the scholarship it has be to written why when turned in. In accordance to NCAA rules a student can not have scholarship not renewed because of their playing ability or contribution. Only if the player has violated team or school rules such as issues in the classroom or issues regarding team violations and involvement with the police or etc. If a player feels that the school unjustly took their scholarship they can appeal it and demonstrate so they will be back. The NCAA will hammer a school for yanking scholarships from player because the coach wanted to replace them with a better player and needed to get under the 85 cap.

Two players that did not return for us were starters or atleast started games for us in 2008. Saban is ruthless because he will not let a player go and do anything he wants and disciplines them all. Just like Kiffin that got rid of dead weight, coaches have to demonstrate they are in charge not the players.

Where have you read this? The bylaws mentioned in your other post are in regards to reductions and cancelations of athletic aid which has already been supplied: Institutional financial aid based in any degree on athletics ability may not be reduced or canceled during the period of its award.

This addresses Renewals and Nonrenewals:

15.3.5.1 Institutional Obligation. The renewal of institutional financial aid based in any degree on athletics
ability shall be made on or before July 1 prior to the academic year in which it is to be effective. The institution shall promptly notify in writing each student-athlete who received an award the previous academic year and who has eligibility remaining in the sport in which financial aid was awarded the previous academic year (under Bylaw 14.2) whether the grant has been renewed or not renewed for the ensuing academic year. Notification of financial aid renewals and nonrenewals must come from the institution’s regular financial aid authority and not from the institution’s athletics department. (Revised: 1/10/95)

15.3.5.2 Reconsideration of Nonrenewal. It is permissible for an institution that has notified a student athlete
that he or she will not be provided institutional financial aid for the next academic year subsequently to award financial aid to that student-athlete.

Past recipients of athletic aid will have the opportunity for a hearing, but I haven't seen anything that states their scholarship can't be nonrenewed on the grounds of their athletic ability. Plus, many decide to transfer without ever taking the opportunity to be heard. I think the APR is the only deterant for these type of practices.

UT will have about 63 scholarship players return next year. I anticipate 5 or more won't see their scholarships renewed for 2010.

 

[Sabanocchio]

Where have you read this? The bylaws mentioned in your other post are in regards to reductions and cancelations of athletic aid which has already been supplied: Institutional financial aid based in any degree on athletics ability may not be reduced or canceled during the period of its award.

This addresses Renewals and Nonrenewals:

15.3.5.1 Institutional Obligation. The renewal of institutional financial aid based in any degree on athletics
ability shall be made on or before July 1 prior to the academic year in which it is to be effective. The institution shall promptly notify in writing each student-athlete who received an award the previous academic year and who has eligibility remaining in the sport in which financial aid was awarded the previous academic year (under Bylaw 14.2) whether the grant has been renewed or not renewed for the ensuing academic year. Notification of financial aid renewals and nonrenewals must come from the institution’s regular financial aid authority and not from the institution’s athletics department. (Revised: 1/10/95)

15.3.5.2 Reconsideration of Nonrenewal. It is permissible for an institution that has notified a student athlete
that he or she will not be provided institutional financial aid for the next academic year subsequently to award financial aid to that student-athlete.

Past recipients of athletic aid will have the opportunity for a hearing, but I haven't seen anything that states their scholarship can't be nonrenewed on the grounds of their athletic ability. Plus, many decide to transfer without ever taking the opportunity to be heard. I think the APR is the only deterant for these type of practices.

UT will have about 63 scholarship players return next year. I anticipate 5 or more won't see their scholarships renewed for 2010.

What you posted doesn't come anywhere near close to addressing the issue. It talks about when a student-athlete doesn't have their aid renewed, but not the whys or why nots behind it. What TW posted clearly says:

Institutional financial aid based in any degree on
athletics ability may not be reduced or canceled during the period of its award:

(a) On the basis of a student-athlete’s athletics ability, performance or contribution to a team’s success;

The period of award is 4 years. Yes, you have to renew it every year, but it's pretty clear that you cannot take it away from a student unless there are:

issues in the classroom or issues regarding team violations and involvement with the police or etc.

It's pretty clear, dude. I think your point of contention is that a period of award is one year when it is in fact the whole of the time it takes for the student to complete their degree.

 

[I-CUP Insider]

"It's pretty clear, dude. I think your point of contention is that a period of award is one year when it is in fact the whole of the time it takes for the student to complete their degree."

Yeah, that is what I was thinking...hmm

 

[Sabanocchio]

"It's pretty clear, dude. I think your point of contention is that a period of award is one year when it is in fact the whole of the time it takes for the student to complete their degree."

Yeah, that is what I was thinking...hmm

I'm pretty sure that that is correct. The period of award is 4 years. Otherwise, you're not bound by anything at all other than APR. That couldn't possibly be the case.

Now you can bet your bottom dollar that if a guy that isn't seeing the field a lot has any sort of slip up whatsoever, Saban's pushing him out the door as fast as he can put someone in his place. It may not help you immediately but it will the next year.

 

[I-CUP Insider]

15.02.7 Period of Award. The period of award begins when the student-athlete receives any benefits as a part of the student’s grant-in-aid on the first day of classes for a particular academic term, or the first day of practice, whichever is earlier, until the conclusion of the period set forth in the financial aid agreement. An athletics grant-in-aid shall not be awarded in excess of one academic year.

 

[Sabanocchio]

Hmmm...

 

[I-CUP Insider]

If I'm reading that correctly, the period set forth in the financial aid agreement is written in. So, yeah, a 4 year term is probably used for LOI signees. Walk-ons and others will agree to different conditions.

 

[I-CUP Insider]

The meaning behind that last sentence is throwing me off

 

[miraclemax]

15.02.7 Period of Award. The period of award begins when the student-athlete receives any benefits as a part of the student’s grant-in-aid on the first day of classes for a particular academic term, or the first day of practice, whichever is earlier, until the conclusion of the period set forth in the financial aid agreement. An athletics grant-in-aid shall not be awarded in excess of one academic year.

True....the school has no obligation to renew the scholarship for ensuing years. They just have to watch the PR...it can come back to bite you in later years.

Saban just cuts the school money out from under these kids and pursuing the degree can be jeopardized. That's cold.