Maikhail Miller dont need no heppin...
- Thread starter chew1095
- Start date
asked to look elsewhere. It probably won't but this could all backfire on them if they don't manage it well. I'm sure some coaches and parents are not going to be too happy about some of the disappointments that are about to be dished out. "Our word is good as long as someone better doesn't become available".
I think it'sinevitable that it's going to backfire when there are way too many kids who were promisedscholarshipsa whileback, and when the times comes there isn't room for all of them, and they get booted. <div>coach66 said:
</div><div>This kinds of reminds me about a quote I heard that was similar to the one you just wrote...It was about marriage and "today's" perception of it... "Til death do us part, or until I find somebody better looking, I do."
</div>
If you had to honor any scholarship you sent in the mail as an immediate offer, then you couldn't offer more than 28 without having potential to go over the limit.
I don't know the numbers, but I'm guessing most schools send out more than 100 "offers" each year, unless they have a process of waiting until really late in the game to make an offer.
If you had to honor all of those offers if the player chose to come, then that means you would have a lot harder time getting the numbers game right.
In this case, Brunetti coming made Miller less important for this class. He's had a grayshirt offer for a while to my understanding. Collins Moore I don't think we given the news that he would have to grayshirt until last weekend on his visit. Both are considering some last minute immediate offers.
It's an ugly system, but I don't know how you fix it. Our problem the past 3 classes has been that in the final month before signing day we've hit on a higher percentage of our top prospects remaining on the board than you would normally expect, which has forced us to offer grayshirts to some others. I'd rather have that problem then the problem we had in 2007 when we failed on so many prospects that we undersigned the class, but that's going to happen when you aren't sure how many of your final prospects are going to end up signing.
In 2007 for instance, I believe we had 5 or 6 spots we could still fill, and we had just over 10 prospects left on the board that we were heavily pursuing. We ended up signing only 1. Had we hit a really high percentage, like 8 or 9 of them, we'd have had a numbers problem the other way. I don't know how you fix that problem.
I don't know the numbers, but I'm guessing most schools send out more than 100 "offers" each year, unless they have a process of waiting until really late in the game to make an offer.
If you had to honor all of those offers if the player chose to come, then that means you would have a lot harder time getting the numbers game right.
In this case, Brunetti coming made Miller less important for this class. He's had a grayshirt offer for a while to my understanding. Collins Moore I don't think we given the news that he would have to grayshirt until last weekend on his visit. Both are considering some last minute immediate offers.
It's an ugly system, but I don't know how you fix it. Our problem the past 3 classes has been that in the final month before signing day we've hit on a higher percentage of our top prospects remaining on the board than you would normally expect, which has forced us to offer grayshirts to some others. I'd rather have that problem then the problem we had in 2007 when we failed on so many prospects that we undersigned the class, but that's going to happen when you aren't sure how many of your final prospects are going to end up signing.
In 2007 for instance, I believe we had 5 or 6 spots we could still fill, and we had just over 10 prospects left on the board that we were heavily pursuing. We ended up signing only 1. Had we hit a really high percentage, like 8 or 9 of them, we'd have had a numbers problem the other way. I don't know how you fix that problem.
This won't ever backfire Puerto that people never think its going to be their scholarship take. Ie Chris garret
Have an early signing period in July. Or better yet, just eliminate signing day altogether. That's a radical proposal, but it would solve a lot of problems in recruiting. There'd be no such thing as "committed." A recruit would either be signed or undecided. So schools wouldn't have to worry about how many offers to make to get the numbers right because they'd know what the numbers were at all times.
Whatwas the original purpose around thewhole idea? Just letkids sign wherever they want to sign, whenever they want to sign. If a school gives a scholarship offer and wants to commit, the school gets the choice to accept or not. But once they accept it's binding on both parties.patdog said:
With an early signing period the only caveat I'd have is that a kid can get out of the LOI if the HeadCoach leaves the school. But that would be the once exception I'd propose.
I've always been a proponent for that. That way the coaches know in advance which of these early commits are really serious or not, and they can focus energies on other players.
The problem I'd see with not having a signing day is that you need to have some sort of end limit on when you can sign, otherwise you leave the option that a lot of players could just enjoy the ride and keep it open for a long time if they are good enough that coaches are willing to wait.
You can poke a lot of holes in the current system, but I think you could poke holes in most any solution. I just don't know that there is a perfect way to do it, unless you just get rid of all limits and let schools offer as many scholarships as they want, like they used to do.
The problem I'd see with not having a signing day is that you need to have some sort of end limit on when you can sign, otherwise you leave the option that a lot of players could just enjoy the ride and keep it open for a long time if they are good enough that coaches are willing to wait.
You can poke a lot of holes in the current system, but I think you could poke holes in most any solution. I just don't know that there is a perfect way to do it, unless you just get rid of all limits and let schools offer as many scholarships as they want, like they used to do.
there has to be some accountability somewhere by the universities. Univeristies were founded to provide educational opportunities and to me sports (mostly college football) are using universities as a front for a business. That being said atheletics usually are the front door to a university and how people come to know them. Ye ole double edged sword.
This is a good idea, & would lend ethics to the recruiting procedure.
But the problem is Signing Day (and the 6 weeks leading up to Signing Day) is a huge, multi-million dollar scam that is too profitable to discard.
As long as professional scam artists likeJamie Newberg feeda constant diet of ******** to paying suckers like Goat Holder II & olemissdydamn, there is no way in hell the current, corrupt system will ever change.
Just say a kid is eligible to sign after the final school day of his junior year, and they may take four, and only four, official visits anytime after his junior year. You offer and the kid signs and that is it, both parties are bound for one year. If a head coach loses his job or moves, then the agreement is null and void.
And Alex Williams, Tim Simon, Jesse Grandy, DT Shackelford, Bobby Massie, Mike Marry, Corey Gaines, Joel Kight, and Ja-Mes Logan, but again my point still stands.
That year as I recall, we had I believe 20 of our top prospects still undecided with 2 weeks left in the process. 16 of those players chose to sign with us.
How are you supposed to plan for closing that way if many of those guys are truly undecided and not even giving you a read on where they are going to go?
As long as you have limits, you're going to have issues with coaches trying to make numbers work.
If you suck at closing and you don't get many of your final prospects, you don't have to worry about working out the numbers. That, or if you get the majority of your top guys to commit early and stay that way.
That year as I recall, we had I believe 20 of our top prospects still undecided with 2 weeks left in the process. 16 of those players chose to sign with us.
How are you supposed to plan for closing that way if many of those guys are truly undecided and not even giving you a read on where they are going to go?
As long as you have limits, you're going to have issues with coaches trying to make numbers work.
If you suck at closing and you don't get many of your final prospects, you don't have to worry about working out the numbers. That, or if you get the majority of your top guys to commit early and stay that way.
They burn a bridge somewhere. They a are burning a lot of bridges in a short amount of time, too.
It's all going to catch up with them.
It's all going to catch up with them.
It was some jewfrowed boy from AR. All of our other greyshirts have come in and received substantial playing time. Maybe things will catch up to us in 10 years.
They greyshirted, or in Whigham's case, sat out a semester. All 3 played a good number of snaps in 2010.
From the 2008 class, I believe AJ Hawkins greyshirted. He started at center all year this year.
Did we have anyone from the 2010 class have to grayshirt? I can't remember now. Will Denny and Mike Thomas I believe signed and walked on.
As I said before, if you're going to have a good number of players on the board in the final days before signing day, you're going to run the risk of either undersigning or oversigning and having to ask people to greyshirt. It's impossible to play the numbers game, especially if most of the guys remaining are guys at the top of your list.
You're going to have to go back and let some guys know that they may have to sit a semester if certain players come. That's what we've obviously done with Moore and Miller. It sucks for them, but for the sake of the program I'd rather have us have that problem then have the problem where we can't get enough players to come and we end up leaving scholarships on the table.
From the 2008 class, I believe AJ Hawkins greyshirted. He started at center all year this year.
Did we have anyone from the 2010 class have to grayshirt? I can't remember now. Will Denny and Mike Thomas I believe signed and walked on.
As I said before, if you're going to have a good number of players on the board in the final days before signing day, you're going to run the risk of either undersigning or oversigning and having to ask people to greyshirt. It's impossible to play the numbers game, especially if most of the guys remaining are guys at the top of your list.
You're going to have to go back and let some guys know that they may have to sit a semester if certain players come. That's what we've obviously done with Moore and Miller. It sucks for them, but for the sake of the program I'd rather have us have that problem then have the problem where we can't get enough players to come and we end up leaving scholarships on the table.
I believe schollies should be held like contracts. If the school ends a scholly with a player, "tough luck, kid", but if the kid tries to break, he/she must suffer by sitting out a year. No accountability. The same accountability with a coach's contract should be held with a player's. He/she should go play to the best of their ability and make the grades. "Ability" is subjective, but so is coaching. No difference. Schools are definitely helping other schools out when they cut players or oversign and thus screw recruits. I've vented. I'm done. Thank you and good day.
RonnyAtmosphere said:
I would LOVE to have an early signing day. That would give them two big times of the year to scam people. Especially since the summer is a fairly dead period for those sites.
The coaches would be the ones that would have to go along with it, and are probably why there is only one signing period as it is for football.
Some may disagree, but I think the oversigning rule is ridiculous. If you can sign 40, then do it. The fact is only two numbers matter....25 and 85.
IMO, Ole Miss and State, with the JUCO's instate could really benefit from a sign and place situation. They could really forge relationships with these schools by sending them players they otherwise might not get. Sign kids from OOS, place them @ MS JUCO's where the coaches can protect them from other schools, and you basically have built-in feeder schools.
The fact is teams can only bring 25 guys in on scholly, assuming there is room in the 85. If you sign more and they qualify, you are screwed. That has yet to happen to Ole Miss, so I would say that Houston has done a great job managing that. When it becomes an issue of some qualifiers not getting the scholarship they were promised, THAT is where it becomes an issue. Until that happens, I trust the coaches to work the numbers out.
Last thing I will say is this....Ole Miss is getting pounded here for having too many kids, and having to come back last minute and tell kids they don't have an offer. First, that isn't true. That has only come up with one kid, and there is more to the story than is public. Two, would you rather be in the situation Ole Miss is....telling some good players no because you don't have room, or be in the situation State is....filling the last 8-10 slots with guys you wouldn't talk to a month ago? This is big business, and it's cut throat. Everyone outside of Tuscaloosa blast Saban for the "medical redshirts", but if he were my coach, I could learn to live with it as long as he keeps winning like he does.
IMO, Ole Miss and State, with the JUCO's instate could really benefit from a sign and place situation. They could really forge relationships with these schools by sending them players they otherwise might not get. Sign kids from OOS, place them @ MS JUCO's where the coaches can protect them from other schools, and you basically have built-in feeder schools.
The fact is teams can only bring 25 guys in on scholly, assuming there is room in the 85. If you sign more and they qualify, you are screwed. That has yet to happen to Ole Miss, so I would say that Houston has done a great job managing that. When it becomes an issue of some qualifiers not getting the scholarship they were promised, THAT is where it becomes an issue. Until that happens, I trust the coaches to work the numbers out.
Last thing I will say is this....Ole Miss is getting pounded here for having too many kids, and having to come back last minute and tell kids they don't have an offer. First, that isn't true. That has only come up with one kid, and there is more to the story than is public. Two, would you rather be in the situation Ole Miss is....telling some good players no because you don't have room, or be in the situation State is....filling the last 8-10 slots with guys you wouldn't talk to a month ago? This is big business, and it's cut throat. Everyone outside of Tuscaloosa blast Saban for the "medical redshirts", but if he were my coach, I could learn to live with it as long as he keeps winning like he does.
and that is what do you do when a kid suffers an injury that will likely remove his contributions to your school for 2 years or more? I understand he could redshirt and provide minimal playing time redshirt freshman year but that could hurt when the position you are signing is in need of immediate playing time.
pDigital32Dawg said:
for when that happens to a player. Basically, they keep their scholarship- as far as I understand. They could do something similar for recruits in that category.
If the NCAA made that the case, it could be a motivator for some players to commit early.