Oversigning......

[bamawriter]

Since 2002, the following schools have signed more players than Alabama (and I listed the # of coaching changes since you listed that as a mitigating factor):

Auburn 253 (one coaching change)
Miss St 247 (two coaching changes)
South Carolina 242 (one coaching change)
Arkansas 239 (one coaching change)
Ole Miss 237 (two coaching changes)
Alabama 235 (two coaching changes)

So Bama signed fewer players than 5 SEC teams despite having had more, or just as many, coaching changes.

 

[hog88]

I don't have a problem with it with one exception. If a player's scholly is taken away for reasons other than academic or behavior (arrested,drugs) then they should be allowed to go elsewhere without penalty.

A free ride should not be 4 years guaranteed, the played should have to earn it year by year. They are adults and better get used to, preform or get out.

 

[VOL61]

Since 2002, the following schools have signed more players than Alabama (and I listed the # of coaching changes since you listed that as a mitigating factor):

Auburn 253 (one coaching change)
Miss St 247 (two coaching changes)
South Carolina 242 (one coaching change)
Arkansas 239 (one coaching change)
Ole Miss 237 (two coaching changes)
Alabama 235 (two coaching changes)

So Bama signed fewer players than 5 SEC teams despite having had more, or just as many, coaching changes.

From the 2008 class on this is what has been signed between those same schools.

Bama – 86
Auburn – 89
USC – 75
Miss ST – 79
Arkansas – 83
Ole Miss – 93

Bama and USC are the only two that have not changed coaches in that time period. Yet Bama signed 11 more players.

All the other schools have changed coaching staffs and Ole Miss total includes the 37 on 09 and 32 in 08. Yet Bama signed more than two of those. And are on pace this year to sign even more.

You can argue all you want but it is clear what is happening. And Slive has no excuse not to act on it.

 

[bamawriter]

From the 2008 class on this is what has been signed between those same schools.

Bama – 86
Auburn – 89
USC – 75
Miss ST – 79
Arkansas – 83
Ole Miss – 93

Bama and USC are the only two that have not changed coaches in that time period. Yet Bama signed 11 more players.

All the other schools have changed coaching staffs and Ole Miss total includes the 37 on 09 and 32 in 08. Yet Bama signed more than two of those. And are on pace this year to sign even more.

You can argue all you want but it is clear what is happening. And Slive has no excuse not to act on it.

Ole Miss has had the same coaching staff since 2008, so you're just wrong on that one.

And AU had the same coaching staff in place from 2002 to 2008, and oversigned every year. How is that Saban's fault?

Further, if you're going to argue that the change in staffs is a mitigating factor, then you need to outline the attrition that the school suffered during the staff change in order to properly mitigate the oversigning that followed. Otherwise you need to admit that Alabama should be excused for oversigning when compared to AU, Arkansas, and USCe.

 

[TUSKtimes]

cool website. I think it needs to be stopped and bravo to tressel for not doing it.

Amen. I know when I think of honesty, integrity, sportsmanship and a sense of fair play, these days, I immediately think of Tressel and the Ohio State.

 

[VOL61]

Ole Miss has had the same coaching staff since 2008, so you're just wrong on that one.

And AU had the same coaching staff in place from 2002 to 2008, and oversigned every year. How is that Saban's fault?

Further, if you're going to argue that the change in staffs is a mitigating factor, then you need to outline the attrition that the school suffered during the staff change in order to properly mitigate the oversigning that followed. Otherwise you need to admit that Alabama should be excused for oversigning when compared to AU, Arkansas, and USCe.

2008 was Nutt's first year. I am not defending Ole Miss. I pointed out above that what Bama, LSU, and Ole Miss are doing isn't right. They are as bad as Saban even though if you look at who they have signed the majority of those players are kids who couldn't get in school. They where sign and place kids.

Saban signs kids and cuts players to make room. The same with LSU. Look at the SEC THIS YEAR in recruiting. Bama is already +10 and they are not done. Ole Miss is +11. LSU is +9. No one else in the SEC including Auburn is over.

Saban doesn't have any of Shula's players left. I mean those guys are gone. He is getting rid of players he recruited. Players who he visted with in their homes and looked their parents in the eyes and told them he would look after them. These choices aren't made for the best interest of the kids. If you think they are you are insane. They are made for one reason. That is to cull out the players that don't seem to be working out to get more recruits in the door. And IMO and alot of other peoples as well it isn't right.

 

[bamawriter]

So you're all for teaching kids the lesson that they should be allowed to live off past success, and not be concerned about working to improve and making themselves better than the competition?

And here I thought that college was supposed to be about getting ready for life.

 

[TUSKtimes]

2008 was Nutt's first year. I am not defending Ole Miss. I pointed out above that what Bama, LSU, and Ole Miss are doing isn't right. They are as bad as Saban even though if you look at who they have signed the majority of those players are kids who couldn't get in school. They where sign and place kids.

Saban signs kids and cuts players to make room. The same with LSU. Look at the SEC THIS YEAR in recruiting. Bama is already +10 and they are not done. Ole Miss is +11. LSU is +9. No one else in the SEC including Auburn is over.

Saban doesn't have any of Shula's players left. I mean those guys are gone. He is getting rid of players he recruited. Players who he visted with in their homes and looked their parents in the eyes and told them he would look after them. These choices aren't made for the best interest of the kids. If you think they are you are insane. They are made for one reason. That is to cull out the players that don't seem to be working out to get more recruits in the door. And IMO and alot of other peoples as well it isn't right.

Do you think these kids understand the scholarship is for ONE year and only ONE year? Do you?

 

[VOL61]

So you're all for teaching kids the lesson that they should be allowed to live off past success, and not be concerned about working to improve and making themselves better than the competition?

And here I thought that college was supposed to be about getting ready for life.

I know when a kid commits to a program he expects that program to at least do the same. I know if it where my son I would. Again, This isn't the NFL....

Let me ask you a question. If your son was being pressured to leave to take a hardship that was bullcrap how would you feel? All of this after the guy sitting in your living room lying his a$$ off telling you how much support and guidance would be available to him.

If this is what we are teaching student athletes it is the wrong message. These kids aren't cattle. It isn't what college athletics should be about. If a kid is struggling I thought it was the coaches job to motivate him. If he can't maybe he should have done a little better on his evaluation when he recruited the guy. If the guy is disruptive or just isn't working. That is another matter.

But to just knowingly take guys you think can play knowing that if it doesn't work out you can just dump him 2 years down the line isn't right. And that is what is happening.

And as far as college teaching the kids about life. I don't know about you. But I teach my kids that loyalty means something. I teach them that if you commit to something you are damn well going to finish it. I know that isn't how life is always but having character or integrity isn't always easy. Forgive me for thinking a college football coach should have a little....

 

[bamawriter]

I know when a kid commits to a program he expects that program to at least do the same. I know if it where my son I would. Again, This isn't the NFL....

Let me ask you a question. If your son was being pressured to leave to take a hardship that was bullcrap how would you feel? All of this after the guy sitting in your living room lying his a$$ off telling you how much support and guidance would be available to him.

If this is what we are teaching student athletes it is the wrong message. These kids aren't cattle. It isn't what college athletics should be about. If a kid is struggling I thought it was the coaches job to motivate him. If he can't maybe he should have done a little better on his evaluation when he recruited the guy. If the guy is disruptive or just isn't working. That is another matter.

But to just knowingly take guys you think can play knowing that if it doesn't work out you can just dump him 2 years down the line isn't right. And that is what is happening.

And as far as college teaching the kids about life. I don't know about you. But I teach my kids that loyalty means something. I teach them that if you commit to something you are damn well going to finish it. I know that isn't how life is always but having character or integrity isn't always easy. Forgive me for thinking a college football coach should have a little....

Are you going to teach your kids that, as so soon as they get a job, they can rest on their laurels and not worry about falling behind their coworkers or competition because their employer is supposed to be "loyal" to them?

That isn't reality.

As for the kids who took a medical or hardship schollie, they were all free to leave and transfer. If they believed that they were future-pros, and that the coach was wrong in his assessment, then they didn't have to take the scholarship. They chose to do so, and got a free education for their troubles. And now those guys get to study and prepare for a field that they actually have a chance to succeed in, which they clearly could not do in professional football.

But all of this is totally an attempt on your part to deflect from the fact that you laid all of this on the feet of Nick Saban, when it was going on at other schools before he got to Alabama, and has gone on at greater levels at those schools since he got there.

And I assume you'll stop supporting Tennessee when Derek Dooley starts doing the same thing.

 

[WesternKyVol]

So you're all for teaching kids the lesson that they should be allowed to live off past success, and not be concerned about working to improve and making themselves better than the competition?

And here I thought that college was supposed to be about getting ready for life.

Are you seriously making the argument that the only kids getting cut are the lazy ones who haven't tried?

Nice spin. Way to justify the unjustifiable.

If Dooley does this too, I'll be disappointed. The lesson this teaches kids is, "You may have been part of our team/family for two years, but I don't care about you if you aren't a stud."

That's the lesson it teaches kids. Or, I should say, reinforces to kids. This type of survival of the fittest is what inner-city kids learn from the beginning. Wouldn't it be nice if colleges struck a blow against this mentality and cared for their own?

 

[WesternKyVol]

Do you think these kids understand the scholarship is for ONE year and only ONE year? Do you?

I understand that cutting a below-the poverty-line-teenager who wants an education because he didn't turn out as good as you projected is wrong. Do you?

 

[tvolsfan]

I don't mind making room for a better player, but I do hope the players know when they sign that they don't just have four guaranteed years.

 

[Vols4life]

Do you think these kids understand the scholarship is for ONE year and only ONE year? Do you?

This +100000

When you sign your NLI it is clearly stated in there!!! Then if a coach wants you back you have to sign your renewal scholarship papers again

 

[VOL61]

This +100000

When you sign your NLI it is clearly stated in there!!! Then if a coach wants you back you have to sign your renewal scholarship papers again

Yea,
I am sure these coaches are telling these kids we are going to look your scholarship every year and if you aren't cutting it we are going to pressure you to transfer to a smaller school or put you on a medical.

I am sure that is their #1 selling point in recruiting..... Give me a break.....

 

[bamawriter]

I understand that cutting a below-the poverty-line-teenager who wants an education because he didn't turn out as good as you projected is wrong. Do you?

This happened to the Porter kid at LSU, and I fully acknowledge how wrong that situation was.

But not one kid has left the Alabama football team since Saban has been there that didn't continue his free education at UA or at another school without missing a single day of class, unless the kid ran afoul of the law (see Johns, Jimmy and Elder, Jeremy).

 

[Cartervol]

I don't see why you need to defend Saban. He's clearly doing things within the rules although with a slight bow in it. He's not perceived as a warm and fuzzy guy anyway. He gets results and that's all that really matters. It's what he's paid to do and he does it well.

 

[bamawriter]

I don't see why you need to defend Saban. He's clearly doing things within the rules although with a slight bow in it. He's not perceived as a warm and fuzzy guy anyway. He gets results and that's all that really matters. It's what he's paid to do and he does it well.

I'm not so much defending Saban as responding to completely inaccurate stuff some other posters are spewing.

I don't have a problem with the practice of oversigning. It doesn't bother me unless it turns into a situation like the Porter kid at LSU. However, it is totally fair to slam the practice if you have a problem with it. But that criticism needs to be accurate, otherwise it's worthless.

 

[WesternKyVol]

I'm not so much defending Saban as responding to completely inaccurate stuff some other posters are spewing.

I don't have a problem with the practice of oversigning. It doesn't bother me unless it turns into a situation like the Porter kid at LSU. However, it is totally fair to slam the practice if you have a problem with it. But that criticism needs to be accurate, otherwise it's worthless.

Fair enough. Does Saban help place the players he cuts?

 

[bamawriter]

Fair enough. Does Saban help place the players he cuts?

If he does, it will never be made public. My assumption is that he tells kids that, if they want playing time, it would be best if they seek a transfer, as they will see very little of it at Bama. I think that's about as far as the conversation goes. But again, that's just an assumption.

 

[hog88]

I understand that cutting a below-the poverty-line-teenager who wants an education because he didn't turn out as good as you projected is wrong. Do you?

What the heck does the poverty line have to do with this. Will they not be fired from a job if they turn out not as good as projected??? They are adults and need to be treated as such regardless of family income.

Where they get screwed over is in the transfer rule, they should be able to go anywhere that will take them if cut without penalty.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Fair enough. Does Saban help place the players he cuts?

Long before the 25/85 scholly limit, Coaches from Tennessee, Bama, LSU, etc., have been placing kids in schools with more of an opportunity to compete.

The article's sole purpose is to create a poster child for this issue. So many fans who don't like the practice are now attacking the picture rather than the problem.

If it's not fair, why not expend the energy and at least waste the ink on those who have the power to change it? The universities and the NCAA can make it mandatory to guarantee all 4 years. They can take average attrition rates for all BCS conference football teams and create a ceiling and make the hard number mandatory for all schools. Maybe they have a better mouse trap than that, fine.

To make coach Saban, Miles, or SEC the poster child is particularly misleading.

 

[rjd970]

Are you going to teach your kids that, as so soon as they get a job, they can rest on their laurels and not worry about falling behind their coworkers or competition because their employer is supposed to be "loyal" to them?

That isn't reality.

As for the kids who took a medical or hardship schollie, they were all free to leave and transfer. If they believed that they were future-pros, and that the coach was wrong in his assessment, then they didn't have to take the scholarship. They chose to do so, and got a free education for their troubles. And now those guys get to study and prepare for a field that they actually have a chance to succeed in, which they clearly could not do in professional football.

But all of this is totally an attempt on your part to deflect from the fact that you laid all of this on the feet of Nick Saban, when it was going on at other schools before he got to Alabama, and has gone on at greater levels at those schools since he got there.

And I assume you'll stop supporting Tennessee when Derek Dooley starts doing the same thing.

Again, all these comparisons to jobs and employers is utter crap considering nobody is getting paid in this deal except the coaching staff, universitites, and conferences. Even counting the scholarship as payment is silly because compared to what everybody else is getting paid it is minute. If these coaches give a scholarship to a student athlete, they need to honor it. If the athlete doesn't pan out, it should be on the coaches, not the athlete to pony up for it. That is why these coaches are paid the big dollars.

We can all keep making token references to winning and what not, but the only way this should be legal is if the athlete is getting his fair share of the pie. Otherwise, the oversigning criticism is absolutely valid.

 

[bamawriter]

Again, all these comparisons to jobs and employers is utter crap considering nobody is getting paid in this deal except the coaching staff, universitites, and conferences. Even counting the scholarship as payment is silly because compared to what everybody else is getting paid it is minute. If these coaches give a scholarship to a student athlete, they need to honor it. If the athlete doesn't pan out, it should be on the coaches, not the athlete to pony up for it. That is why these coaches are paid the big dollars.

Many academic scholarships are 4 year deals, but they require the student to keep a certain GPA, certain number of hours per semester, etc.

By the same exact logic that you just laid out, if a student fails to keep his grades up, then the school should still have to pay his way. The faculty should have done a better job vetting the student before offering the schollie.

Do you recognize how stupid that sounds? Why should athletic scholarships be any different?

 

[OaklandTnVol]

It goes both ways. Players like Bryce Brown/David Oku/Aaron Douglas etc. are not held accountable when they decide to transfer or just quit the team.

How is this a similar situation?