how does a/m have 34 recruits?

[Soonerjeepman]

ok, a/m has 34, georgia 30...wth? how is that even right. Thought the most anyone could sign was 25 in one yr with total of 85.

[boomersooner28]

Yaaaa, I am not 100% sure but I do know it is an SEC thing. Gray shirts/attrition/etc...I dunno. Saban has mastered over-recruiting and everyone in the SEC has followed suit.

[boomersooner28]

I did find this article:
http://collegefootball.about.com/od/rulesofthegame/a/Oversigning-College-Footballs-Hidden-Problem.htm

"Oversigning" occurs when a coach recruits and signs more players than he's allowed to have under NCAA rules. When those coaches find themselves with more than the allowable 85 scholarship players, they have to find some way to get back under the limit--and that's where the trouble starts.

Back in August, LSU coach Les Miles came under fire for his handling of freshman Elliott Porter--a kid who, after signing his national letter of intent in February and enrolling at school in June, was eventually told that if he wanted to remain at LSU, he'd have to take "greyshirt" year (in other words, remain on the team without a scholarship). The reason? Miles didn't have a scholarship to give him. Porter, offended by Miles' request, has since transferred to Kentucky.

Miles is hardly alone, of course. Houston Nutt of Ole Miss has been criticized for his use of the practice. So, too, has Alabama's Nick Saban.

Even still, nothing has changed, and while the NCAA limit on scholarships remains in tact, there is no rule specifically targeted at oversigning. It is the stated goal of Oversigning.com--a new blog dedicated to the investigation of oversigning in college football--to change that.

The man responsible for the site recently agreed to answer some questions about oversigning, about his blog, and about what he'd like to see the NCAA do about the oversigning issue. He requested that we protect his anonymity. The transcript of our interview is as follows.

Can you explain why and when you launched Oversigning.com?

The site was launched on Feb. 10, 2010, shortly after National Signing Day, and it was created for the sole purpose of investigating and discussing oversigning, discovering its historical roots and to helping lead the charge to have oversigning removed from college athletics.

If you have been to the site you might have noticed the following quote at the top of the homepage: "It's none of your business. Aiight? And don't give me this stuff about the fans need to know, because they don't need to know." Looking back on how all of this started, I would have to point that quote from Nick Saban back in April of 2008 as the real catalyst for my deep interest in oversigning. That quote has always bothered me. It came from an article, written by Ian Rapoport, where Ian asked Saban directly about his scholarship numbers. Saban told Rapoport that it was none of his business.

That was the first time that I know of that Saban was called out on his practice of oversigning the roster and it was pretty apparent that he didn't take too kindly to the line of questioning. The following year, we saw Houston Nutt sign 37 players, which led to the "Huston Nutt Rule" in the SEC which limited the number of players that could be signed to 28 each year. And from then on I have followed oversigning very closely, which ultimately led to the creation of the website as I mentioned earlier.

You obviously have problems with the oversigning process, which, it should be pointed out, is actually not against NCAA rules. What, in your opinion, makes it "wrong?"

First off, I am not alone in thinking that it is wrong. As I mention on the website, Bobby Dodd and Georgia Tech had such a problem with oversigning in the SEC that they removed Georgia Tech from the SEC in the 1960s'. The Big Ten Conference has banned the practice for decades for obvious reasons. And several other coaches, such as Mark Richt, simply refuse to oversign their rosters. So it's not as if I'm alone here.

What makes it wrong is that it creates the opportunity for kids to get squeezed out and discarded. Furthermore, and more importantly, oversigning creates an environment of professionalism in a sport that is regulated by an entity (NCAA) whose mission is to safeguard student-athletes and protect their amateur status. The NCAA's mission statement is as follows: "Our purpose is to govern competition in a fair, safe, equitable and sportsmanlike manner, and to integrate intercollegiate athletics into higher education so that the educational experience of the student-athlete is paramount."

Oversigning and the issues surround it are not in line with the NCAA mission statement and they must change their recruiting by-laws in order to remove the oversigning loophole, preserve the amateur status of student-athletes and ensure that the educational [aspect] of being a student-athlete is truly paramount.

Who are the worst offenders of oversigning? I'm talking coaches, programs and conferences.

By far, the worst of the BCS conferences in terms of oversigning is the SEC, and it is not even close. SEC schools oversign their rosters more than any other conference, specifically schools such as LSU, Alabama and Ole Miss. The statistic that stands out the most is the number of times between 2002 and 2010 that SEC schools signed 25 recruits or more in back to back years: 54, as compared to the Big Ten's 18. That is staggering. We actually took a closer look at all the numbers and posted them on the site:

[tulsaoilerfan]

I thought that this loophole had been closed off?

[S.PadreIsl.Sooner]

Perhaps closed off for everyone not in the SEC, SEC, SEC!

[lexsooner]

They expect about one-third to leave after being around cadet corps members.

[Jacie]

So the idea seems to be, oversign then let attrition bring the number down to 25 or less, rather than signing 25 and winding up with fewer than 20 when all is said and done.

There is a logic in this but it puts the incoming kids on notice that the competition for a spot on the roster begins before they set a foot on the practice field.

Coaches who don't engage in this process should consider all oversigned recruits fair game since technically, some of them won't be on scholarship that first year if at all.

[Soonerfan88]

A&M only signed about 18 last year so they have many early enrollees this year, including several JUCOs. I've seen a few articles that state A&M isn't held to the hard 25 per year, no matter what rule yet because they weren't in the SEC last year.

As for Georgia, I have no idea how they have more than 25 unless they know some won't make it or have already told some to greyshirt.

[8timechamps]

Keep in mind that just because a team has X number of commits, that doesn't mean they will sign that number of recruits. If some cases, it hurts the school (with other recruits) to have so many committed. In A&M's case, it cost them a DT. Kerrick Huggins de-committed from A&M, then committed to OU, so I'm perfectly happy with A&M having too many commits.

[yermom]

seems like if you grayshirt someone they should be able to transfer without penalty if someone will give them a scholarship. that's a bunch of bull****

[Tulsa_Fireman]

What he said. There HAS to be an out like this for young men who sign LOIs and get screwed.

[Soonerjeepman]

well, that article says 28...Georgia has 30, plus a/m is exempt because they were not part of the sec last yr...still doesn't explain how they can sign more than 25, I guess the mighty sec can supersede the ncaa. I understand commits don't equal signees...in fact I was browsing an old Lindy's guide...09 I believe, and it had RJ Washington, and Jamarkus as stud incoming freshmen that will make a difference...meh.

Just find it really putting the kids in a bad place. Guess I'd rather sign the 25 and be honest with the kids.

[StoopTroup]

LOI's are going to become No Big Deal if the Schools continue to do this...

You won't see kids or local news going nuts about recruiting. As bad as recruiting is now to talk about....this makes it even worse. Imagine signing an LOI and you go Home and everyone in your little Town is going nuts about you going to a great School and then by the end of summer....you need to go to the local bank and ask for a loan for your Freshman Year....

Pretty awful.

[8timechamps]

seems like if you grayshirt someone they should be able to transfer without penalty if someone will give them a scholarship. that's a bunch of bull****


What he said. There HAS to be an out like this for young men who sign LOIs and get screwed.

Players can (and do) petition the NCAA for hardship transfer waivers, and if it's a legitimate case, they can bypass the transfer penalty. However, the NCAA expects the players to act responsibly when they are signing their LOI. If a kid decides to accept a greyshirt, then three months later, get upset because they aren't playing, it's going to be hard for the NCAA to say "no problem, we'll grant you an exception". As it should be. The folks that are advising these kids to accept a greyshirt are the ones to really blame when things go wrong.

[soonerhubs]

seems like if you grayshirt someone they should be able to transfer without penalty if someone will give them a scholarship. that's a bunch of bull****

I agree.

[trwxxa]

A&M did sign 5 JUCOs and have four kids enrolling early and count for 2012.

The limit for signing kids is still 25 and A&M still has to go with that. The change the SEC put in place is that if a kid signs an LOI but ultimately does not qualify, that scholly is lost for the year. You can not sign another kid or bring in a last minute transfer on scholorship. In addition, A&M also has a kid committed, Kohl Stewart, whose future appears to be brighter in baseball. My understanding is if he signs an LOI and then decides to pursue baseball, that scholly is lost for this year.

[OU_Sooners75]

They have 34 commits. But not all will qualify and not all wikll be able to sign with A&M.

They could greyshirt some...buut then they can't force the kid to greyshirt. So they have to handle their situation with ease.

The SEC two years ago made a rule no team can sign over 25 per year no matter if they had more than 25 schollies to give.

[OU_Sooners75]

Let me be more clear. Greyshirting a kid, I believe, has to be done before the kid signs a LOI.

It may not be that way, but that's what I've always heard.

So if the kid agrees to the grayshirt (which in my opinion the NCAA needs to do away with along with perferred walk-ons) then they can transfer without penalty, as long as the school grants the release of the LOI.

The grayshirt is paying their own way and unable to partcipate in any team activities, including practice. So they are able to transfer without penalty as long as the school releases their LOI. If they do transfer, their greyshirt year acts as the redshirt year since they hafe already started their 10 semesters to complete 4 seasons.

[yermom]

in the above story, Les Miles signed the kid in February, then after he enrolled in June he was grayshirted

[OU_Sooners75]

in the above story, Les Miles signed the kid in February, then after he enrolled in June he was grayshirted

Then its when they enroll. Because they do need to fill out their paperwork and get approved for financial aid and stuff before actually enrolling. So maybe they contacted them before letting them know of the possibility?

Idk. Like I said, grayshirts are a gray area. They shouldn't be allowed. Nor should perferred walk-ons.

A kid can express interest in a school. And a coaching staff can deem him a perferred walk-on. That's bogus too.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Let me be more clear. Greyshirting a kid, I believe, has to be done before the kid signs a LOI.

It may not be that way, but that's what I've always heard.

So if the kid agrees to the grayshirt (which in my opinion the NCAA needs to do away with along with perferred walk-ons) then they can transfer without penalty, as long as the school grants the release of the LOI.

The grayshirt is paying their own way and unable to partcipate in any team activities, including practice. So they are able to transfer without penalty as long as the school releases their LOI. If they do transfer, their greyshirt year acts as the redshirt year since they hafe already started their 10 semesters to complete 4 seasons.

The problem with the LOI is that the player has zero rights and the signing school has tons of them. Signing an LOI makes you unrecruitable by other schools that participate in the LOI program (as far as I know, only the service academies don't). However, it doesn't guarantee you a scholarship (that is granted on July 1).

[StoopTroup]

The problem with the LOI is that the player has zero rights and the signing school has tons of them. Signing an LOI makes you unrecruitable by other schools that participate in the LOI program (as far as I know, only the service academies don't). However, it doesn't guarantee you a scholarship (that is granted on July 1).

Damn Str8. Like I said....it's so bad that signing is no big deal unless your Dad was Barry Sanders and you are going to commit on ESPN after the Army All-American Game and they decide to give a 30 minute spot with Experts talking about how Oklahoma State got screwed over. :D

[OU_Sooners75]

The problem with the LOI is that the player has zero rights and the signing school has tons of them. Signing an LOI makes you unrecruitable by other schools that participate in the LOI program (as far as I know, only the service academies don't). However, it doesn't guarantee you a scholarship (that is granted on July 1).

Tis true.

Which is another thing that really gets me.

How can a school have so many outs while leaving the kid high and dry if they don't qualify or if they don't get a scholarship.

They should amend the NLOI program. If athlete signs NLOI to play a sport, then they are guaranteed a scholarship unless they fail to qualify academically. And if the school sees the athlete doesn't need a scholarship even if the athlete qualifies academically, then school is docked one scholarship for that athlete (no filling in). And athlete has the right to shop around.

Hell, there are a lot of things that need to be reformed when it comes to the recruitment of student athletes.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Tis true.

Which is another thing that really gets me.

How can a school have so many outs while leaving the kid high and dry if they don't qualify or if they don't get a scholarship.

They should amend the NLOI program. If athlete signs NLOI to play a sport, then they are guaranteed a scholarship unless they fail to qualify academically. And if the school sees the athlete doesn't need a scholarship even if the athlete qualifies academically, then school is docked one scholarship for that athlete (no filling in). And athlete has the right to shop around.

Hell, there are a lot of things that need to be reformed when it comes to the recruitment of student athletes.

Totally agree.

I also think that you shouldn't be able to use a scholarship for a new player until that class has graduated. So if you give Johnny freshman a scholly in 2012 then you can't use that scholarship on a player who hasn't been in the program for over a year until 2016. This gives more incentive to reward walkons and less incentive to cut players.

(Jucos would count 2 years in the above system)

[OU_Sooners75]

I'm a little mixed on the 4 year scholarship thing.

Some of me says its a good idea. The other says its a bad idea.

Good in the sense it guarantees a kid 4 years instead of year to year.
Bad in that if the player leaves school you can't replace them and attrition canmake a big impact on some schools that produce more underclassmen NFL prospects.

Why not make a mix? Of the 85 schollies, make 40 of them 4 years and 40 of them 1 year. The other 5, you can use to fill in need spots.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

I'm a little mixed on the 4 year scholarship thing.

Some of me says its a good idea. The other says its a bad idea.

Good in the sense it guarantees a kid 4 years instead of year to year.
Bad in that if the player leaves school you can't replace them and attrition canmake a big impact on some schools that produce more underclassmen NFL prospects.

Why not make a mix? Of the 85 schollies, make 40 of them 4 years and 40 of them 1 year. The other 5, you can use to fill in need spots.

It shouldn't matter. You can only have 85 on scholly at any one time and you can recruit up to 125 over a 5 year period. The problem is that schools with middling attrition always end up with years where they can only take 18. The problem with the SEC is that they are taking 25 every. single. year.

[OU_Sooners75]

Oh, I agree, the NCAA needs to do away with the loopholes.

If they are limiting 25/year and 85 overall, the matth don't add up.

But, then again...lol


Like I said, the entire recruiting standards need to be reformed.

[badger]

I have been told that Texas A&M has schollys left from last year (makes sense with new coach) so they can early-enroll some to count for last year's total, and not toward this year's 25.

But yes, like Johnny Football getting choice seats to see LeBron vs. the Mavs right after winning the Heisman (and shaddap aggie, I know his family's rich), it reeks of SEC chants.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Tis true.

Which is another thing that really gets me.

How can a school have so many outs while leaving the kid high and dry if they don't qualify or if they don't get a scholarship.

They should amend the NLOI program. If athlete signs NLOI to play a sport, then they are guaranteed a scholarship unless they fail to qualify academically. And if the school sees the athlete doesn't need a scholarship even if the athlete qualifies academically, then school is docked one scholarship for that athlete (no filling in). And athlete has the right to shop around.

Hell, there are a lot of things that need to be reformed when it comes to the recruitment of student athletes.

Agreed. The LOI program is hypocrisy at its worst. The only other thing I would put in there for losing a scholarship is documented personal conduct issues, but you shouldn't lose a scholarship just because you didn't turn out to be as good as the coaches thought you would.

[picasso]

Don't they field 12 players? Naturally that would require them to recruit more players per season.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

Agreed. The LOI program is hypocrisy at its worst. The only other thing I would put in there for losing a scholarship is documented personal conduct issues, but you shouldn't lose a scholarship just because you didn't turn out to be as good as the coaches thought you would.

The problem is that any loophole at all will be exploited whether it be career ending injury or personal conduct.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

The problem is that any loophole at all will be exploited whether it be career ending injury or personal conduct.

Yeah, I understand that, but there are kids that need to go due to misconduct. That why I say it should be documented. At least make the coach be scummy enough to write up false misconduct reports. We know unabashed scumbags like Lane Kiffen will have no problem with that. I'm not sure if Les Miles is that big of a scumbag.

[jkm, the stolen pifwafwi]

The problem is that if one school is doing it, the rest of the conference HAS to follow suit to keep up. Seriously, if aTm had pulled this crap while they were in the big 12 and ended up better than we were we'd be screaming bloody murder for Stoops to either follow suit or hit the road.

There is enough leeway that if you redshirt 10 recruits per class you are always going to be bumping against the 85 man limit (that is a 110 recruits in a 5 year period). Jucos are handled by the 2 year rule and give more incentive for coaches to grab a juco if they aren't sure of a high school kid's character.