Alabama #1 at Oversigning

[Tiger1992 999]

http://www.cbssports...tball/21733077/

Oversigning Index: On another front, it's still Alabama and everyone else

By Matt Hinton | Blogger

February 19, 2013 7:27 pm ET

• 
  
• 
  
• 
  

Saban must trim Alabama's roster by at least 10 players to adhere to the NCAA's scholarship cap. (US Presswire)

Last week, four Alabama players were arrested on felony charges, suspended indefinitely from the team and barred from campus. In Tuscaloosa, the news prompted opposite reactions.

Per standard protocol, Crimson Tide fans braced themselves for a tidal wave of schadenfreude, inevitable taunts of "Parole Tide!" and the early lead in the Fulmer Cup. At the same time, though, there was virtually none of the usual handwringing over the impact to the depth chart. This time, the offenders were utterly expendable, for reasons that had nothing to do with the fact that they happened to be backups: Not only can the defending BCS champs afford to lose a handful of potential contributors in one fell swoop, but more so than any other major college football team this spring, it actually needs to. After adding 26 new names to the roster earlier this month -- and landing again in its familiar spot atop the national recruiting rankings -- Alabama is the most oversigned outfit in the nation.

That should come as no surprise, given that Bama has consistently (and legally) operated on the edge of NCAA scholarship caps throughout Nick Saban's tenure. Ostensibly, teams are limited to 85 scholarship players on the roster at any given time. In practice, because the NCAA doesn't do a head count until the start of preseason practice in July or August, sometimes long after incoming freshmen and other newcomers have already arrived on campus, coaches can cross the line on national signing day as long as they're able to come in under the cap six months later. Yet even after a concerted crackdown on "oversigning" by the SEC over the past three years, no coach in any league overshot the mark this year with such gusto.

Eddie Lacy is one of 12 departing scholarship players from Bama's 2012 roster. (US Presswire)

Alabama wasn't very far from the line to begin with. The Crimson Tide only lost a dozen scholarship players from last year's unusually young BCS championship team, including three early departures for the NFL and a former walk-on (long snapper Carson Tinker) who was awarded a scholarship before last season, leaving them with at least 70 scholarship players scheduled to return in 2013 and a maximum of 14 available openings. Still, on signing day, Bama added almost twice that number -- including, yes, a two-star prospect from California, Cole Mazza, who is projected strictly as a long snapper. Few other schools had so few slots to fill, and the ones that did did not come close to overshooting the mark by such a distance: Relative to the competition, Saban and his staff effectively recruited as if scholarship limits do not exist.

Of course they do exist, and one way or another Alabama must toe the line by the start of preseason practice like everyone else. That can happen any number of ways, and already has: One of the 26 signees in the new class, three-star offensive lineman Bradley Bozeman, has already agreed to "grayshirt," or delay his enrollment until 2014 so as not to count against this year's scholarship cap; a few of his more touted classmates will probably be forced to follow suit. One or two others may fall short academically. As we've already seen, legal and disciplinary issues can unexpectedly thin the ranks overnight. Inevitably, some veteran backups will read the writing on the wall and decide to transfer some place with a more accommodating depth chart.

If all else fails, it comes down to making cuts, preferably in a fashion that doesn't involve actually having to say, "you're cut," which Saban adamantly denies he has ever done. The first to go are usually fifth-year seniors who are unlikely to contribute, a relatively uncontroversial move as it's common at many schools for veteran backups to bow out quietly after four years with a degree in hand. (Alabama has several candidates for this path, most notably linebacker Jonathan Atchison and defensive linemen William Ming, Anthony Orr and Chris Bonds, all members of the 2009 recruiting class who have yet to earn a letter.) Injured players may be asked to accept a medical hardship, which allows them to remain on scholarship without counting against the cap but effectively ends their career, even if the injury is not necessarily career-ending. (Saban has been criticized in the past for using the hardship more than any other coach, and by players who said they felt pressured to accept a hardship. At least one player who was released for medical reasons has gone on to play at another school, albeit on a much lower level.) Though all transfers are technically voluntary, some may come with a tacit endorsement from coaches -- only looking out for the player's best interest in getting on the field, naturally. Asking an incoming recruit to delay enrollment after he's signed a letter of intent is a last resort. But whatever it takes, there is no way around the fact that somewhere in the vicinity of a dozen players currently slated to wear the Crimson Tide uniform this fall will be culled from the roster over the next six months.

(For the record, here is a complete breakdown of Alabama's current roster by signing class, including incoming recruits in the class of 2013 and the four recently arrested players -- Brent Calloway, Tyler Hayes, D.J. Pettway and Eddie Williams -- who have been suspended from the team but not dismissed.)

No other team is facing that level of inevitable, automatic attrition. The closest to Alabama, numbers-wise, is Washington, which also lost just 12 scholarship players from last year's roster but just signed 22, bringing its unofficial scholarship count to at least 91 (not including any former walk-ons who may have earned scholarships). Among teams from the "Big Six" conferences with automatic BCS bids, current rosters indicate Virginia (90 scholarship players), Vanderbilt (89) and Oregon State (88) also have some relatively intensive trimming to do between now and August:

Assembling those numbers is not only a time-consuming exercise: It's also a quixotic one, no matter how meticulously researched, amounting to a fleeting snapshot of living organisms in a constant state of flux. Walk-ons, medical hardships and other vagaries are not easily accounted for.

In general, though, it's fair to say that recent rules changes targeting oversigning have largely paid off, especially in the SEC, whose members once dominated the genre to an extent that is no longer true across the conference as a whole. Every team beneath the top two or three on that list is well within the range of "natural" attrition, and most of them will probably end up a little below the cap once grades, legal issues and injuries have taken their toll. In several of those cases -- see Michigan, Notre Dame and Texas, for sure -- the more obsessive factions of the fan base can already predict which fifth-year seniors are likely on their way out. Oregon State has enthusiastically embraced the grayshirt under coach Mike Riley. Kentucky, now under the watch of first-year head coach Mark Stoops, can expect the usual exodus that tends to follow the arrival of a new staff. Spring practice is a reliable filter for players who fail to make a move on the depth chart and opt for a transfer.

So outside of Tuscaloosa, it looks like business as usual. No, scratch that: Inside Tuscaloosa, it looks like business as usual, too. Nick Saban is just running his business on a slightly different scale.

[Mikey 16,626]

Good article. There's no doubt that $aban is an ace at roster management. I'm looking forward to the day when Auburn has so much talented depth that several under-performers will be "processed" annually. This coming fall we'll be lucky to have 80 to work with.

Signing only 23 left us with 85 if there's no further attrition. I expect seven or eight to leave before the start of fall practice, maybe more. Then there's always the possibility that a couple of the signees won't qualify. If eight are out of the picture by the start of fall practice, we'll have only 77 to work with, about 10% short of a full roster.

Hopefully, given time Gus will correct the situation of Auburn being chronically short of having enough warm bodies.

[bwillaub 0]

Another "national title" they can claim?

[keesler 5,924]

Good article. There's no doubt that $aban is an ace at roster management. I'm looking forward to the day when Auburn has so much talented depth that several under-performers will be "processed" annually. This coming fall we'll be lucky to have 80 to work with.

Signing only 23 left us with 85 if there's no further attrition. I expect seven or eight to leave before the start of fall practice, maybe more. Then there's always the possibility that a couple of the signees won't qualify. If eight are out of the picture by the start of fall practice, we'll have only 77 to work with, about 10% short of a full roster.

Hopefully, given time Gus will correct the situation of Auburn being chronically short of having enough warm bodies.

I've been waiting for this day to arrive at AU since tubbs was booted - it hasn't happened yet!

[WhiteTiger 2]

Until we get that mindset we will have a hard time running with the big dogs.

[WarEagle10 77]

Nothing to see here.

[AU64 10,122]

Some of the over-signing is probably the result of coaching changes but all in all, if you look at the results of the teams in that list it shows that "over-signing" is a mixed bag and does not guarantee anything in the way of W-Ls. Some is probably "roster management" and some just bad recruiting decisions.

Since most of these teams have experienced mediocre results in the past few years, I suspect many schools are continually filling in their numbers with incoming freshmen and losing upper classmen to the point that they don't develop maturity or leadership on a team....like AU in the past few seasons. People don't like to excuse our performance since 2010 on the basis of youth but we lost 30 players at one time and just never have gotten back up to strength. Some stability in the coaching staff should help ...and we are starting to have a solid class of juniors now with some good seniors too.

[Dixie1860 27]

I mentioned in another thread that this spring will be very telling as to what type of leadership we can look forward to the next two years. Occasionaly someone walks in and leads from day one. That is by far the exception rather than the rule.

[TheBlueVue 177]

Until we get that mindset we will have a hard time running with the big dogs.

I not sure who you're referring to as the "big dogs". if you'll look at the teams most guilty of over signing only 1 has had much consistent success. Personally, I don't think the likes of UK, Ole Miss, Oregon State, Iowa State, Vanderbilt or Baylor are considered "big dogs" by anyone! Over signing is not the key to success and has no relationship to being a "big dog"

[bradRT 0]

Myabe Malzahn can use the over recruiting angle to nab this guy. If NCAA issues blow over, fight for Carter could come down to Bama vs Auburn

DE Prospect Lorenzo Carter

Lorenzo Carter is a 2014 recruit from Norcross, Georgia. Generally listed as a weakside defensive end, he is athletic enough to play linebacker in a 3-4 scheme.

Carter is also considered one of the top power forwards in the Georgia prep ranks. Carter has yet to express his desire to play both sports in college.

His offer list is a who’s who of college football programs: Texas, Ohio State, Michigan, USC, Notre Dame, Florida, Florida State, Alabama, Auburn, Oregon, Penn State, and Stanford have all extended early offers. Carter has yet to really cut his list.

Go SEC.

[auburn4ever 1,266]

The NCAA won'tdo anything to stop them from over signing every year.

[ellitor 33,105]

The NCAA won'tdo anything to stop them from over signing every year.

FWIW a number of SEC teams do it each year.

[TerryP 1]

The NCAA won'tdo anything to stop them from over signing every year.

FWIW a number of SEC teams do it each year.

No one oversigns in the SEC.

The SEC has its own by-laws that only allow 25 per class in Feb. It also has its by-laws which allow teams to fill spots in classes that aren't filled: back-counters. The NCAA limit of 25 per class has been in place how long?

Fact reflects the term "over-signing" was an excuse for poor performance founded in B1G country. No matter what happened in Feb. the numbers have always been equal come fall. The B1G did have a cap of 25 on their Febrauary classes and if a kid wasn't evaluated correctly (grades, etc.) they were stuck with what they had. Is that an advantage for the SEC or is that something the B1G instituted that hurt themselves in the long run? A: It depends on which side of the fence you're standing on.

If you take the numbers signed each season and add them up it would seem that a team should have those figures listed in that CSB graph. That is until you take things like kids graduating, early departures, attrition in the form of behavioral issues and medical issues.

The one thing that's also not accounted for in this blog is how many kids are actually paying their own way.

I have no idea how the numbers work out to which kids are on scholarship and which kids are not on scholarship. I gave up trying to keep track of that several years ago because there was no definitive answers to be found.

I tend to look at this under this guideline. If there were more than 85 on scholarship this would merit discussion and complaint. If there were more than 25 signed in February the same would apply. But there isn't.

I'd love to know how the roster is managed the way it has been. I'm also resigned to the point I'll likely never know.

[ellitor 33,105]

The NCAA won'tdo anything to stop them from over signing every year.

FWIW a number of SEC teams do it each year.

No one oversigns in the SEC.

The SEC has its own by-laws that only allow 25 per class in Feb. It also has its by-laws which allow teams to fill spots in classes that aren't filled: back-counters. The NCAA limit of 25 per class has been in place how long?

Fact reflects the term "over-signing" was an excuse for poor performance founded in B1G country. No matter what happened in Feb. the numbers have always been equal come fall. The B1G did have a cap of 25 on their Febrauary classes and if a kid wasn't evaluated correctly (grades, etc.) they were stuck with what they had. Is that an advantage for the SEC or is that something the B1G instituted that hurt themselves in the long run? A: It depends on which side of the fence you're standing on.

If you take the numbers signed each season and add them up it would seem that a team should have those figures listed in that CSB graph. That is until you take things like kids graduating, early departures, attrition in the form of behavioral issues and medical issues.

The one thing that's also not accounted for in this blog is how many kids are actually paying their own way.

I have no idea how the numbers work out to which kids are on scholarship and which kids are not on scholarship. I gave up trying to keep track of that several years ago because there was no definitive answers to be found.

I tend to look at this under this guideline. If there were more than 85 on scholarship this would merit discussion and complaint. If there were more than 25 signed in February the same would apply. But there isn't.

I'd love to know how the roster is managed the way it has been. I'm also resigned to the point I'll likely never know.

Outdated. The NCAA passed the same by laws for all FBS schools the year after the SEC went to 25.

[Mikey 16,626]

The NCAA won'tdo anything to stop them from over signing every year.

FWIW a number of SEC teams do it each year.

No one oversigns in the SEC.

The SEC has its own by-laws that only allow 25 per class in Feb. It also has its by-laws which allow teams to fill spots in classes that aren't filled: back-counters. The NCAA limit of 25 per class has been in place how long?

Fact reflects the term "over-signing" was an excuse for poor performance founded in B1G country. No matter what happened in Feb. the numbers have always been equal come fall. The B1G did have a cap of 25 on their Febrauary classes and if a kid wasn't evaluated correctly (grades, etc.) they were stuck with what they had. Is that an advantage for the SEC or is that something the B1G instituted that hurt themselves in the long run? A: It depends on which side of the fence you're standing on.

If you take the numbers signed each season and add them up it would seem that a team should have those figures listed in that CSB graph. That is until you take things like kids graduating, early departures, attrition in the form of behavioral issues and medical issues.

The one thing that's also not accounted for in this blog is how many kids are actually paying their own way.

I have no idea how the numbers work out to which kids are on scholarship and which kids are not on scholarship. I gave up trying to keep track of that several years ago because there was no definitive answers to be found.

I tend to look at this under this guideline. If there were more than 85 on scholarship this would merit discussion and complaint. If there were more than 25 signed in February the same would apply. But there isn't.

I'd love to know how the roster is managed the way it has been. I'm also resigned to the point I'll likely never know.

Outdated. The NCAA passed the same by laws for all FBS schools the year after the SEC went to 25.

Outdated? The fact that the NCAA adopted some of the SEC's regulations in no way invalidates what TerryP wrote above. The entire question revolves around the definition of "oversigning". In one sense, nobody oversigns if they are down to 85 on scholarship by August and they all are. In another sense virtually everybody oversigns because on signing day, adding the signees to their current roster is way above 85.

What really matters to me is that Auburn will be down to around 77 when fall practice starts. That's 10% below having a full tank and we need to get to the point where we have to "process" a couple every spring/summer to get down to 85 instead of coming up short. As it is we're going around every August looking for senior walkons to reward with a one-year scholly since we have available slots that are not filled.

[ellitor 33,105]

The NCAA won'tdo anything to stop them from over signing every year.

FWIW a number of SEC teams do it each year.

No one oversigns in the SEC.

The SEC has its own by-laws that only allow 25 per class in Feb. It also has its by-laws which allow teams to fill spots in classes that aren't filled: back-counters. The NCAA limit of 25 per class has been in place how long?

Fact reflects the term "over-signing" was an excuse for poor performance founded in B1G country. No matter what happened in Feb. the numbers have always been equal come fall. The B1G did have a cap of 25 on their Febrauary classes and if a kid wasn't evaluated correctly (grades, etc.) they were stuck with what they had. Is that an advantage for the SEC or is that something the B1G instituted that hurt themselves in the long run? A: It depends on which side of the fence you're standing on.

If you take the numbers signed each season and add them up it would seem that a team should have those figures listed in that CSB graph. That is until you take things like kids graduating, early departures, attrition in the form of behavioral issues and medical issues.

The one thing that's also not accounted for in this blog is how many kids are actually paying their own way.

I have no idea how the numbers work out to which kids are on scholarship and which kids are not on scholarship. I gave up trying to keep track of that several years ago because there was no definitive answers to be found.

I tend to look at this under this guideline. If there were more than 85 on scholarship this would merit discussion and complaint. If there were more than 25 signed in February the same would apply. But there isn't.

I'd love to know how the roster is managed the way it has been. I'm also resigned to the point I'll likely never know.

Outdated. The NCAA passed the same by laws for all FBS schools the year after the SEC went to 25.

Outdated? The fact that the NCAA adopted some of the SEC's regulations in no way invalidates what TerryP wrote above. The entire question revolves around the definition of "oversigning". In one sense, nobody oversigns if they are down to 85 on scholarship by August and they all are. In another sense virtually everybody oversigns because on signing day, adding the signees to their current roster is way above 85.

What really matters to me is that Auburn will be down to around 77 when fall practice starts. That's 10% below having a full tank and we need to get to the point where we have to "process" a couple every spring/summer to get down to 85 instead of coming up short. As it is we're going around every August looking for senior walkons to reward with a one-year scholly since we have available slots that are not filled.

Let me rephrase.. The second and third sentenses of his post was outdated. And the NCAA has not adopted some of the SEC recruiting rules. They adopted all of them and did so the year after the SEC put theirs into effect.

[TerryP 1]

The NCAA won'tdo anything to stop them from over signing every year.

FWIW a number of SEC teams do it each year.

No one oversigns in the SEC.

The SEC has its own by-laws that only allow 25 per class in Feb. It also has its by-laws which allow teams to fill spots in classes that aren't filled: back-counters. The NCAA limit of 25 per class has been in place how long?

Fact reflects the term "over-signing" was an excuse for poor performance founded in B1G country. No matter what happened in Feb. the numbers have always been equal come fall. The B1G did have a cap of 25 on their Febrauary classes and if a kid wasn't evaluated correctly (grades, etc.) they were stuck with what they had. Is that an advantage for the SEC or is that something the B1G instituted that hurt themselves in the long run? A: It depends on which side of the fence you're standing on.

If you take the numbers signed each season and add them up it would seem that a team should have those figures listed in that CSB graph. That is until you take things like kids graduating, early departures, attrition in the form of behavioral issues and medical issues.

The one thing that's also not accounted for in this blog is how many kids are actually paying their own way.

I have no idea how the numbers work out to which kids are on scholarship and which kids are not on scholarship. I gave up trying to keep track of that several years ago because there was no definitive answers to be found.

I tend to look at this under this guideline. If there were more than 85 on scholarship this would merit discussion and complaint. If there were more than 25 signed in February the same would apply. But there isn't.

I'd love to know how the roster is managed the way it has been. I'm also resigned to the point I'll likely never know.

Outdated. The NCAA passed the same by laws for all FBS schools the year after the SEC went to 25.

Irrelevant. Your comment was about SEC schools.

Outdated? Irrelevant? In the end my two points remain the same.

Is Was it an advantage for SEC teams? That's a matter of perception.

Was it an attempt to justify the lack of success the B1G has had in the BCS era? Setting aside the fact the phrase gained its popularity by the site oversigning.com—owned and operated by a self-admitted B1G fan—the evidence certainly seems to support the notion.

A case in point is the Aggies class of 2013. Where is all the outcry about a class that had 32 signatures?

IF I were one that tried to devalue others' success I might have taken the same approach as those who point to this debate. As I try to empathize with B1G fans I can see where their frustration comes from. As a conference, in the BCS era, they are a few games above .500 against the ACC. The same ACC that has won three BCS games in the last 21 years.

Michigan's Brady Hoke recently said, "I think when you look at the track record of the Big Ten, [we] play awfully good football." If that track record includes the last 21 years, they play awfully average football.