Glabra Posted December 19, 2010 Share Posted December 19, 2010 If you're not bending the rules, you're not trying Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 If you're not bending the rules, you're not trying The SEC is clearly the worst perpetrator but clearly they are not the only BCS conference involved in this terrible practice. Your topic title is somewhat misleading and disingenuous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted December 20, 2010 Author Share Posted December 20, 2010 The SEC is clearly the worst perpetrator but clearly they are not the only BCS conference involved in this terrible practice. Your topic title is somewhat misleading and disingenuous. , That's priceless. Whatever makes SEC fans feel better about their league's scumbag practices. Of course, it's just been brought to national limelight by OTL, but has been going on for a long time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 , That's priceless. Whatever makes SEC fans feel better about their league's scumbag practices. Of course, it's just been brought to national limelight by OTL, but has been going on for a long time. Am I incorrect in anything I posted? Please point out, specifically, where I posted something incorrect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted December 20, 2010 Author Share Posted December 20, 2010 Am I incorrect in anything I posted? Please point out, specifically, where I posted something incorrect. As the piece illustrates, the SEC is and had been at the bleeding edge of this sick practice. The 'everyone does it, we just happen to be the leaders of the pack' defense doesn't cut it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 If you're not bending the rules, you're not trying I can say that most LSU fans were led to believe that QB Chris Garrett chose to leave. I saw it happen last season as well. LSU offered and received several verbal commitments from players attending last year's LSU football camp back in June 2009. Come signing date LSU did not honor all those verbal offers and left at least two players scrambling to sign with other teams on national signign day. My question is if a player like Chris Garrett does not get his scholarship renewed does he still have to sit out a year if he transfers to another DIv I school? I'm guessing the answer is yes he does have to sit out a season unless he transfers to a D1 AA school. Seems quite unfair. And how about a kid who gets injuried where he is not quite the same player as he once was. Do all schools offer those kids medical scholarships? Don'tt think so. Totally unfair to the student athlete especially ones that are near graduation at some high price Universities since most probably can't even afford one year of the cost of education. If College programs want to continue this practice then maybe they should allow the student athlete the option of shopping himself around each season to either improve his education or playing time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 As the piece illustrates, the SEC is and had been at the bleeding edge of this sick practice. The 'everyone does it, we just happen to be the leaders of the pack' defense doesn't cut it. I was not defending the SEC, I was only pointing out that your topic title was misleading and disingenuous. From your link: Avg Recruits Signed 2007-2011 SEC - 103 Big 12 - 97 Big East - 92 Pac 10 - 90 ACC - 89 Big 10 - 86 As you can see, every major conference is guilty to some extent of what I have previously termed, a "terrible practice." Every conference. Clearly, the SEC is the most serious offender, but not by that much over the Big 12. Show me where what I posted was incorrect. I was kind enough to show you where your topic title was misleading and disingenuous. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted December 20, 2010 Author Share Posted December 20, 2010 I was not defending the SEC, I was only pointing out that your topic title was misleading and disingenuous. From your link: Avg Recruits Signed 2007-2011 SEC - 103 Big 12 - 97 Big East - 92 Pac 10 - 90 ACC - 89 Big 10 - 86 As you can see, every major conference is guilty to some extent of what I have previously termed, a "terrible practice." Every conference. Clearly, the SEC is the most serious offender, but not by that much over the Big 12. Show me where what I posted was incorrect. I was kind enough to show you where your topic title was misleading and disingenuous. Your statement that my title was disingenuous is incorrect. The essence of the story fits in perfectly with a long-standing pattern of behavior by people involved with this league (most penalized in history by the NCAA, every school has been on probation since '85, multiple BLOCKBUSTER pay-for-play scandals). In any case, if it make you feel any better, I'll ask Big John to change the title of my post to 'SEC leads the way in hideous scholarship management practices'. Doesn't take away from the crux of the issue, that the most competitive, best conference in the land holds that distinction in no small measure due to the willingness of its affiliates to sell their souls. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 Your statement that my title was disingenuous is incorrect. The essence of the story fits in perfectly with a long-standing pattern of behavior by people involved with this league (most penalized in history by the NCAA, every school has been on probation since '85, multiple BLOCKBUSTER pay-for-play scandals). In any case, if it make you feel any better, I'll ask Big John to change the title of my post to 'SEC leads the way in hideous scholarship management practices'. Doesn't take away from the crux of the issue, that the most competitive, best conference in the land holds that distinction in no small measure due to the willingness of its affiliates to sell their souls. I'm not disputing your contention that the SEC is the most guilty in this practice. I never said I was. I don't think you can point to any of my statements and assert, "Look, untateve is defending/rationalizing the terrible practices of the SEC." But, as the numbers from the story you linked to noted, the Big 12 averages only six less recruits signed per year than the SEC. Every other major conference also routinely engages in this practice. The SEC is clearly the leader over the last four years. I simply asserted that it was misleading to title a post that the SEC is the only one guilty. This is clearly a horrendous practice that fks over student-athletes to the benefit of the college football team and the coach. I am unsure how coaches who do this can look at themselves in the mirror. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
untateve Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 You also posted: "the crux of the issue, that the most competitive, best conference in the land holds that distinction in no small measure due to the willingness of its affiliates to sell their souls." Is that really the crux of the issue? Isn't the crux of the issue that student-athletes, nationwide, are taken advantage of, used, and discarded like garbage by universities/coaches that care more about winning than simply human decency? Maybe we just view this issue differently. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted December 20, 2010 Author Share Posted December 20, 2010 Maybe we just view this issue differently. Perhaps. It irks me though, as illustrated by Houston Nutt's comments in that piece, how these guys can be so brazen in their disregard of ethics. To me, it seems fueled by the ultra-competitiveness of this league and the elevated importance of CFB in the South. BTW, the Big-10 has strict rules in place to prohibit oversignings. Not sure if their overage by 1 (86 vs 85) is attributed to some technicality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 Maybe the coaches just have a hard time saying "No" to all the players dying to be part of a SEC program... I guess other conferences don't have the recruits flocking to them the way the SEC does, overall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 It is really sick. The whole system is built to use the players. Coaches are paid mad money to put a winning team on the field regardless of how they do it. Worst case, they get the program in trouble and either get bought out or merely have to live on the millions they earned on the backs of these kids. Then, in a few years, they resurface elsewhere for millions again. Unless they land a cushy gig with a network. Meanwhile, whatever kids get caught up in the mess end up being thrown to the scrap heap. But heaven forbid these kids should be paid a stipend for their part in the industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theprofessor Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 Maybe the coaches just have a hard time saying "No" to all the players dying to be part of a SEC program... I guess other conferences don't have the recruits flocking to them the way the SEC does, overall. I'm sure that's it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEC=UGA Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 I'm sure that's it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted December 20, 2010 Author Share Posted December 20, 2010 Maybe the coaches just have a hard time saying "No" to all the players dying to be part of a SEC program... I guess other conferences don't have the recruits flocking to them the way the SEC does, overall Ironically, UGA is the ONE SEC program that steers clear of the mud and DOESN'T indulge in oversigning. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 There's such an easy solution to this. Don't allow it. Worst case scenario for the schools? You bring in 85 guys and lose some because they don't qualify. So, maybe you only end up with 80 guys who are talented enough to be offered a scholarship to you school. So? Deal with it. NFL teams managed with 50 something players. I'm pretty sure you can scrape by with only 80. I just don't see why it is more important to not leave a team scrambling to fill a scholarship spot because the 3rd string LT didn't pass his SAT on the 4th try then it is to not put the kids through this. Especially if we're going to restrict the degree to which kids can move from school to school. If it's not working for the kid, they're screwed. They've got to sit out a year or go to JC. If it's not working for the school? See ya. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted December 20, 2010 Author Share Posted December 20, 2010 There's such an easy solution to this. Don't allow it. Worst case scenario for the schools? You bring in 85 guys and lose some because they don't qualify. So, maybe you only end up with 80 guys who are talented enough to be offered a scholarship to you school. So? Deal with it. NFL teams managed with 50 something players. I'm pretty sure you can scrape by with only 80. I just don't see why it is more important to not leave a team scrambling to fill a scholarship spot because the 3rd string LT didn't pass his SAT on the 4th try then it is to not put the kids through this. Especially if we're going to restrict the degree to which kids can move from school to school. If it's not working for the kid, they're screwed. They've got to sit out a year or go to JC. If it's not working for the school? See ya. For the schools, it's more than just the ability to cover for non-qualifiers. It also enables them to Josh Gordon out existing members on the team just because they found someone better. It basically turns CFB into the NFL. Cut the guys that aren't panning out, or, worse yet, greyshirt them even without an opportunity to prove themselves, just because you happened to find someone better late in the recruiting cycle. Saban wouldn't have been able to get Mark Ingram and Julio Jones had he not been over-signing! ! That's a hugh competitive advantage! Another manifestation of this is that players are sometimes forced to take a 'medical scholarship', ie, they get hurt but can potentially recover and play, but the coaches don't really want them. So they still keep the scholly, just can't be on the team Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 For the schools, it's more than just the ability to cover for non-qualifiers. It also enables them to Josh Gordon out existing members on the team just because they found someone better. It basically turns CFB into the NFL. Cut the guys that aren't panning out, or, worse yet, greyshirt them even without an opportunity to prove themselves, just because you happened to find someone better late in the recruiting cycle. Saban wouldn't have been able to get Mark Ingram and Julio Jones had he not been over-signing! ! That's a hugh competitive advantage! Another manifestation of this is that players are sometimes forced to take a 'medical scholarship', ie, they get hurt but can potentially recover and play, but the coaches don't really want them. So they still keep the scholly, just can't be on the team Well, I guess I care about Saban being able to get those guys than I do that kids aren't constantly getting the short end of the stick. Besides, as a whole, it's a wash. So, they wouldn't be at Bama. So? They'd be somewhere, that's for sure. So the game as a whole would still be as good. All this means is that coaches would be less inclined to offer scholarships to the kind of marginal talent that is being led to believe they have a spot at these schools and let them find a spot at the next level down. Maybe this QB who got dropped by LSU was good enough to catch on at a school better than NW St but, because of how this went down was sort of stuck with them. Maybe if LSU just would have passed on him to begin with, he would have ended up at UCF or something like that. Ultimately, either way you end up with the same number of kids under scholarship, but the kids don't go through this BS just so poor Les can make sure that he can have is cake and eat it too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glabra Posted December 20, 2010 Author Share Posted December 20, 2010 Well, I guess I care about Saban being able to get those guys than I do that kids aren't constantly getting the short end of the stick. Besides, as a whole, it's a wash. So, they wouldn't be at Bama. So? They'd be somewhere, that's for sure. So the game as a whole would still be as good. All this means is that coaches would be less inclined to offer scholarships to the kind of marginal talent that is being led to believe they have a spot at these schools and let them find a spot at the next level down. Maybe this QB who got dropped by LSU was good enough to catch on at a school better than NW St but, because of how this went down was sort of stuck with them. Maybe if LSU just would have passed on him to begin with, he would have ended up at UCF or something like that. Ultimately, either way you end up with the same number of kids under scholarship, but the kids don't go through this BS just so poor Les can make sure that he can have is cake and eat it too. I'm not justifying the practice. Just illustrating that there's more to this devious practice than just schools' ability to cover for academic qualifying casualties Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 Perhaps. It irks me though, as illustrated by Houston Nutt's comments in that piece, how these guys can be so brazen in their disregard of ethics. To me, it seems fueled by the ultra-competitiveness of this league and the elevated importance of CFB in the South. BTW, the Big-10 has strict rules in place to prohibit oversignings. Not sure if their overage by 1 (86 vs 85) is attributed to some technicality. There is no denying the importance of CFB is a Southern thang and it's reflected on the scoreboard. Here are the stats I found from another site. In 2009, the SEC went 6-4 in bowl games. In 2008, the SEC ended up 6-2; 7-2 in 2007. That 19-8 bowl record in the past three years is the best record of all the conferences and the most bowl wins ever by one conference over three years. Oh, and the SEC won the National Championships each of those years, as well as the prior year (2006). So, how'd the Big Ten do? This past year (2009) they went 4-3. In 2008 they were 1-6. In 2007 they were 3-5. So, a cumulative record of 8-14 over the past three years. Note that Ohio State lost both the '06 and '07 Championship Games to Florida and LSU. Over the past two bowl seasons; the SEC is a cumulative 13-5; the Big Ten 5-10. And, interestingly, the Big Ten is 3-3 vs the SEC and 2-7 versus everyone else! Not sure what to make of that stat. SEC teams are 33-20 vs the Big Ten in bowl games 1930 - 2007. Through 2009, the SEC leads the Big Ten with a 67-48-2 all-time record. The SEC has a .581 winning percentage versus the Big Ten.. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 There is no denying the importance of CFB is a Southern thang and it's reflected on the scoreboard. Here are the stats I found from another site. In 2009, the SEC went 6-4 in bowl games. In 2008, the SEC ended up 6-2; 7-2 in 2007. That 19-8 bowl record in the past three years is the best record of all the conferences and the most bowl wins ever by one conference over three years. Oh, and the SEC won the National Championships each of those years, as well as the prior year (2006). So, how'd the Big Ten do? This past year (2009) they went 4-3. In 2008 they were 1-6. In 2007 they were 3-5. So, a cumulative record of 8-14 over the past three years. Note that Ohio State lost both the '06 and '07 Championship Games to Florida and LSU. Over the past two bowl seasons; the SEC is a cumulative 13-5; the Big Ten 5-10. And, interestingly, the Big Ten is 3-3 vs the SEC and 2-7 versus everyone else! Not sure what to make of that stat. SEC teams are 33-20 vs the Big Ten in bowl games 1930 - 2007. Through 2009, the SEC leads the Big Ten with a 67-48-2 all-time record. The SEC has a .581 winning percentage versus the Big Ten.. So, I'm trying to figure out where you're going with this. That at least the SEC got their money's worth for being the worst offenders? That's good, I guess. A whole lot better than if they were the worst offenders and sucked anyway. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 (edited) So, I'm trying to figure out where you're going with this. That at least the SEC got their money's worth for being the worst offenders? That's good, I guess. A whole lot better than if they were the worst offenders and sucked anyway. The point I'm attempting to make is that oversigning is not a SEC problem but a NCAA problem. So why pick on the SEC for taking the most advantage of the rules. How many times have we heard Brian complain about the SEC Championship game and how it's all about the $$$? Now look who is attemptng to put together their own conference championship? Look I don't like what is happening to the student athlete but the problem needs to be addressed at the NCAA level. If not, I can almost guarantee you the Big 10 will once again follow the lead of the SEC and start oversigning players themselves. Edited December 20, 2010 by Rockerbraves Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
detlef Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 The point I'm attempting to make is that oversigning is not a SEC problem but a NCAA problem. So why pick on the SEC for taking the most advantage of the rules. How many times have we heard Brian complain about the SEC Championship game and how it's all about the $$$? Now look who is attemptng to put together their own conference championship? Look I don't like what is happening to the student athlete but the problem needs to be addressed at the NCAA level. If not, I can almost guarantee you the Big 10 will once again follow the lead of the SEC and start oversigning players themselves. Well that was about the lamest way you could have chosen to prove that it's larger spread problem than just the SEC. What it looked like to me was, the SEC is under attack for being sleazy. Quick post a bunch of stats that show they always win. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rockerbraves Posted December 20, 2010 Share Posted December 20, 2010 Well that was about the lamest way you could have chosen to prove that it's larger spread problem than just the SEC. What it looked like to me was, the SEC is under attack for being sleazy. Quick post a bunch of stats that show they always win. Didn't the video also show the Big 10 was the conference that took the least advantage of the rules? Hence the comparison. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.