Florida President Bernie Machen calls out other SEC presidents that allow oversigning

[swampmonster]

Ha, so recruiting a kid with character flaws and past arrests does not reflect on the coach/school who recruited him. haha

a coach IS punished, he loses a scholarship for a year. Why should a coach be punished for FOUR years for one mistake in evaluation?

Last time I checked they are called STUDENT-athletes. The coach is paid millions of dollars to be a expert evaluator. I fail to see why the individual punished in the process is the unpaid student-athlete.

As for criminal past, obviously it must not be too serious or the potential recruit would be in jail and therefore inelgible.

[Bama_Man]

Why limit it to that? Why not pull scholarships from kids that are injured for more than half the season? I mean, they're not contributing like you thought, so might as well kick them to the curb. Saban would love that option.

wow. how did you get ANY of that out of my post?? I never suggested anything like that.

[Just Some Hog Dude]

Last time I checked they are called STUDENT-athletes. The coach is paid millions of dollars to be a expert evaluator. I fail to see why the individual punished in the process is the unpaid student-athlete.

As for criminal past, obviously it must not be too serious or the potential recruit would be in jail and therefore inelgible.

They are paid. College is very expensive these days.

[Bama_Man]

Every university does, I agree. I can see both sides of the scholarship argument here, but the down side of one has a much worse cost for our society as a whole than the downside of the other. I try to see the big picture here, not just UGA's picture.

I get that you can't have 20 guys on your team that cannot play at this level, but there has to be some middle ground other than cutting them and kicking them out. Perhaps if they can't play and they are removed from the team, they go on academic scholarship so long as they can maintain the grades? I am not so much worried about cutting kids from the team that cannot handle the competition, I am worried about those same kids not being able to get the education that they probably planned the rest of their lives around afterward. That is what isn't fair. If they can't play football at this level and they can't make the grades to stay in school and on 'ship, then they probably shouldn't have been recruited to the school in the first place, and furthermore, the HC at that school probably already knew that.

Well, I know that any kid at Alabama who takes a medical continues to receive free education and the same perks they got as a player.

But I also believe that if a kid is asked to leave after a year, he has numerous options. I do not believe Alabama would stop a kid from going to a smaller school to try and play. If they cant cut it in the SEC, they have all sorts of options. What cuts it at Alabama and McNeese State are two very different things, and a kid could have a very successful career at the lower level and maybe still make the NFL.
I just dont see why these kids deserve to be treated that much better than the regular population. Thats what this boils down to, these kids are so used to getting every break possible so they are very surprised when they are treated like regular people.

I understand it takes a lot of skill to be a great football player, but that doesnt earn them the right to be treated THAT much better than regular students or others.

and IIRC, if a kid transfers down a level, he doesnt have to sit out a year and can play immediately. Or they can go the JC route for a year or two, then try to get back to an elite school. Its not as if they dotn have options.

[Bama_Man]

Last time I checked they are called STUDENT-athletes. The coach is paid millions of dollars to be a expert evaluator. I fail to see why the individual punished in the process is the unpaid student-athlete.

As for criminal past, obviously it must not be too serious or the potential recruit would be in jail and therefore inelgible.

unpaid is very misleading. these kids receive hundreds and hundreds of thousands of dollars in education, room, food, etc..
and you said it yourself, these kids are student-ATHLETES. its a two part equation. It entails academic performance AND athletic performance. So if they arent living up to their billing as a student-athlete, in either regard (grades or on field performance) why should they get a free pass?

and the last part is simply not true. many kids have been given all sorts of chances because they are elite ballplayers.

Hello, Chris Rainey!

This isn't the NFL.

No, but its the next step. The kids should have to at least be aware they have to earn their scholarship. HS is the bottom level, and kids usually arent cut from HS teams. It doesnt happen often in college, but I cant see the harm in PREPARING these kids for the next level. They get a full year to prove they deserve their scholarship. The NFL is completely different.


And ive asked this a few times but no one has responded;

If a coach misses on ONE kid in his evaluations, why should he be punished for FOUR years?

[swampmonster]

They are paid. College is very expensive these days.

Compared to the coaches? LOL.

[IveyLeaguer]

I guess these tards are just going to ignore the point I made about Georgia and Florida producing tons more d-1 prospects than the other SEC states thus allowing them to be more selective and thus negating the motivation for oversigning.

I don't know if I'm a "tard", but I'll try to address it.

If anything, Dude from Arkansas, I would think the lack of oversigning in the East, generally, would help other schools. To address Florida and Georgia specifically, it's true that there's a lot of talent in both states (moreso in Florida, not per capita, but because of the much greater population). While that's an enviable thing to have, it's not like you get to cherry pick and just leave the leftovers for somebody else.

Almost every school in the country recruits Florida and Georgia. Georgia, especially, is heavily recruited by all the southern schools, especially SEC schools, because of it's central geographic location, bordered by 5 football states. Florida gets hit big, too, but it has a much larger player base, and therefore absorbs the hits better than Georgia.

I'm not downplaying the advantage of a first class in-state recruiting base, but just pointing out it's not as easy as it might seem. For example, Georgia, assuming it closes on its top targets this week, will sign most of the top players in Georgia for the first time in years.

Needless to say, it would be much easier on Florida and Georgia if they practiced oversigning. And it would be a HUGE advantage, given their respective talent bases. One or two players a year can have a big impact for a program. And 6 to 8 players/year can have even more of an impact.

But Florida doesn't oversign and neither does Georgia (the same for the other East schools, though USC & Kentucky are borderline, the last numbers I saw). If you don't oversign, it requires a lot of restraint. If you stand behind your offers (I know Georgia does and believe Florida does) then you are not offering that many recruits. You are forced to manage your numbers and slots ALL DURING THE RECRUITING YEAR, throughout the entire process. It's a ton more work and a lots of tough decisions. You are forced to make decisions and evaluations earlier, often before the senior year. And STICK TO THOSE DECISIONS. The risk factor is much higher. It's much easier to make a mistake. Much easier.

You don't have the luxury of oversigning, and then doing whatever it takes to make things fit (Saban to press last spring ... "IT WILL BE MANAGED", and it's none of your business how we do it). And on top of that, you don't get to correct your mistakes from one, two & three years ago by replacing them with elite recruits.

There's more to the restraint that is forced on a program by applying integrity to the rules, but you get the idea.

But the point I really want to make is this ... places like Georgia and Florida actually help Arkansas and the other SEC schools by not oversigning. Quite simply, because of the restraint forced upon the numbers and the resulting limited offers, it leaves more good players in play for the competition. More top players that Georgia is not on, and more top players that Florida is not on. All because they don't oversign.

It's schools like Auburn, Alabama and LSU, who are after more top players/year on average, because of oversigning, and who SIGN more players on an annual basis, because of oversigning, that really hurts a school like Arkansas and the Mississippi schools.

Combined, I would guess the 3 of them take some 20-30 great HS players out of play, away from the consideration of you guys further West. Every year. Because they practice oversigning.

I could go on. But when oversigning is finally addressed, and the playing field is finally leveled through the closing of the loopholes, and that WILL happen, it's gonna be better for every school, except those who profited the most from putting their integrity aside and exploiting the rules.

And it'll be a helluva lot better deal for the recruits and their families.

So you see, when something is finally done about oversigning, you guys will be cheering over there.

[IveyLeaguer]

If a kid or his parents dont do their homework, why should we feel sorry for them?

It's been addressed already.

[Bama_Man]

I don't know if I'm a "tard", but I'll try to address it.

If anything, Dude, I would think the lack of oversigning in the East, generally, would help other schools. To address Florida and Georgia specifically, it's true that there's a lot of talent in both states (moreso in Florida, not per capita, but because of the much greater population). While that's an enviable thing to have, it's not like you get to cherry pick and just leave the leftovers for somebody else.

Almost every school in the country recruits Florida and Georgia. Georgia, especially, is heavily recruited by all the southern schools, especially SEC schools, because of it's central geographic location, bordered by 5 states. Florida gets hit big, too, but it has a much larger player base, and therefore absorbs the hits better than Georgia.

I'm not downplaying the advantage of a first class in-state recruiting base, but just pointing out it's not as easy as it might seem. For example, Georgia, assuming it closes on its top targets this week, will sign most of the top players in Georgia for the first time in years.

Needless to say, it would be much easier on Florida and Georgia if they practiced oversigning. And it would be a HUGE advantage, given their respective talent bases.

But Florida doesn't oversign and neither does Georgia (the same for the other East schools, though USC is somewhat borderline, the last numbers I saw). If you don't oversign, it requires a lot of restraint. If you stand behind your offers (I know Georgia does and believe Florida does) then you are not offering that many recruits. You are forced to manage your numbers and slots ALL DURING THE RECRUITING YEAR, throughout the entire process. It's a ton of more work and tough decisions. It's much easier to make mistakes.

You don't have the luxury of oversigning, and then doing whatever it takes to make things fit (Saban to press last spring ... "IT WILL BE MANAGED", and it's none of your business how we do it). And you don't get to correct your mistakes from one, two & three years ago by replacing them with elite recruits.

Anyway, there's more to the necessary restraint but you get the point.

But the point I really want to make is this ... places like Georgia and Florida actually help Arkansas and the other SEC schools by not oversigning. Quite simply, because the numbers already force the numbers restraint and the offers are limited, it leaves more good players in play for the competition. More top players that Georgia is not on, and more top players that Florida is not on, all because they don't oversign.

It's schools like Auburn, Alabama and LSU, who are after more top players/year on average, because of oversigning, and who SIGN more players on an annual basis, because of oversigning, that really hurts a school like Arkansas and the Mississippi schools.

Combined, I would guess the 3 of them take some 20-30 elite players out of play, away from the consideration of you guys further West. Every year. Because they oversign.

I could go on. But when oversigning is finally addressed, and the playing field is finally leveled through the closing of the loopholes, and that WILL happen, it's gonna be better for every school, except those who profited the most from exploiting the loopholes.

And it'll be a helluva lot better deal for the recruits and their families.

So you see, when something is finally done about oversigning, you guys will be cheering over there.

Can I ask you something? I just want a yes or no answer.

Is it right for a kid who is simply unable to perform at the SEC level to receive four free years of school when he contributes absolutely nothing in the field for which he was given a scholarship in the first place? Is being a decent athlete in high school enough of a factor to give a kid four free years of schooling, room, board, etc.. at LSU?

[swampmonster]

many kids have been given all sorts of chances because they are elite ballplayers.

Hello, Chris Rainey!

You'll have to demonstrate the "all sorts of chances" Rainey has received, if you plan to use him as your example. The fact is many kids in this age group are given second chances THROUGHOUT society.

The kids should have to at least be aware they have to earn their scholarship.

If the kid does everything asked of him, he is "earning his scholarship".

Just because some new flavor of the month recruit shows up is not adequate cause to cut his scholarship. The fact is the coach cuts kid "A" many times before kid "B" even produces. It's all a projection.

The entire process is sleazy on the coaches part.