Oversigning Recruits

[PraetorianND]

COLLEGE ATHLETES' RIGHTS: Some athletes lose their single-year scholarships to better players | al.com

The problem, according to critics, is that coaches run some players off to make room for the next one simply because of lack of talent, not because of any failing in academics or behavior. In some cases -- infrequent ones -- it's done by not renewing the scholarship. In other cases, it's less direct -- a coach telling a player he won't see much action and encouraging him to transfer to get more playing time elsewhere. Running off players occurs most frequently when a new coach is hired.

"With the one-year scholarship, they have the right to terminate without cause," said Bailey, the head of Reform the NCAA. "And the real cause is the player is not as good as they thought he was."

The pulling of scholarships is hard to document, said Ramogi Huma, president of the California-based National College Players Association, another athletes advocacy group.

His group determined that 22 percent of eligible Division I basketball players did not return after the 2008 season, but he said it could not determine the reason each athlete did not return.

"It is tough, because it happens behind closed doors and a lot of coaches 'help' players transfer to smaller schools. And for the players, there's still a stigma to being labeled not good enough," Huma said.

"I've had kids coming in to my office crying because I've told them I'm not renewing their scholarship," Bowden said. "I have to make decisions here I never had to make at Auburn."

Taking a scholarship away is tough, Bowden said.

"You can't take your conscience out of it or your morality out of it," he said. "I try to make the decision and then see how they (the players) react. If it's a hardship for the player, I'll usually change my mind."

The bolded part is where I have a problem.... A kid who "just isn't good enough" now either has to a) figure out a way to pay for school himself (if it's a private or out of state school that might be impossible), b) transfer and have to sit out a year, or c) quit.

Now I get what you're saying, if he's not good enough why does he deserve a scholarship? The answer requires taking a step back from what it means to have a job in the workforce at will. This is college sports, not pro. These kids go to school to get an EDUCATION; they play football on the side. This is not a job and it shouldn't be treated like one. If he's simply not good enough maybe you need to reevaluate your scouting and do a better job picking kids who can cut it. Generally kids go to colleges with the intention of graduating from that college. Coaches who sell their school and say you're going to get XYZ diploma should have a commitment to that kid, just like the kid has a commitment to the school/team. Now, if they're breaking the rules, getting in trouble etc, ok. If not, give them their scholly.

I already know you're going to disagree with everything I've said, and that's fine. Just know that I, and most of the country, think it's incredibly unethical and reprehensible. The fact that the vast majority think it's wrong, and a small collection of people who are fans of SEC sports are basically the only ones who don't think it's wrong should concern you.

 

[irishroo]

Just watch

College Football Players left without scholarships due to over-recruitment - Outside the Lines - YouTube

 

[Buster Bluth]

Why can't we just make the scholarship limit 100, and you can only sign 25 annually. No early-enrollee tricks, no attrition factors. You get 25 annually to sign and if they leave or flunk out, that's likely to be your fault as a program and 100% your fault for bringing them in.

 

[irish1958]

^
Buster: stop being logical. This is the NCAA after all.

 

[Bishop2b5]

Why can't we just make the scholarship limit 100, and you can only sign 25 annually. No early-enrollee tricks, no attrition factors. You get 25 annually to sign and if they leave or flunk out, that's likely to be your fault as a program and 100% your fault for bringing them in.

Again, there seems to be a huge misunderstanding about EE's. There are no early enrollee tricks. Other than on this board, I've never heard anyone anywhere complain about EE's. There's nothing remotely underhanded, unethical, questionable, or any sort of unfair competitive advantage with EE's. There's nothing about EE's to complain about. EE's have nothing to do with grayshirting, oversigning, roster management, or anything else along those lines. They don't give you extra players, extra eligibility, cost anyone else a scholarship, or anything else like that. EE's are a completely positive thing for all concerned and something to strive towards, encourage, and be proud of.

All an EE is, is a player who is part of your upcoming signing class in February, counts against that class' 25 scholarships, has worked hard to graduate HS a semester early, and enrolls at your school and starts classes in January (or in the spring if you're on the quarter system) instead of the following summer or fall like most other new recruits. It rewards the player for working hard enough in HS to graduate early, lets him start classes and get acclimated to college life in January instead of having to start college life AND football practice at the same time in August, and lets him go through spring training so that he's already experienced and knowledgeable about your system when fall practice starts in August. It also encourages colleges to recruit kids who are smart enough and will work hard enough in HS to graduate early and be eligible for early entry into college.

Using Bama as an example, we'll sign 25 new recruits in a couple of weeks on NSD. Nine of those 25 players took extra classes in HS, went to summer school, worked hard to make sure they took all the required classes and made good grades, graduated in December, and the NCAA has already declared them academically qualified. Instead of enrolling this upcoming August or September with the rest of their signing class, they've already enrolled and started classes a couple of weeks ago. A school is allowed to go ahead and award them an athletic scholarship and pay for school even though they haven't actually signed on NSD yet. The NCAA rule is that the moment they set foot in their first class and you've paid for that class, they have essentially signed, they're committed to you, you've committed a scholarship to them, and they are officially part of your upcoming class that will sign a few weeks later and count as one of that class' 25.

 

[woolybug25]

I have always felt that they should go to a 4 year agreement with players. Keep the limit at 85, but allow all schools to sign as many players as they want. If a player isn't good enough to make the 85 roster, then they can choose to take advantage of a free full ride to the school or simply transfer. If they aren't on the 85 roster, they cant be part of the team. No practice, no participating in any football activities.

That way, all schools are on the same page and kids aren't getting screwed out of a free education.

 

[phgreek]

I have always felt that they should go to a 4 year agreement with players. Keep the limit at 85, but allow all schools to sign as many players as they want. If a player isn't good enough to make the 85 roster, then they can choose to take advantage of a free full ride to the school or simply transfer. If they aren't on the 85 roster, they cant be part of the team. No practice, no participating in any football activities.

That way, all schools are on the same page and kids aren't getting screwed out of a free education.

What would be of parody and competition then? As well if you play it out, I still see institutions who have shown the ability to manage both academics and football on the short end here, primarily because when this arms race escalates, 300 kids a year can't get into ND.

I like a grad rate based system. If you graduate 85% of your players you get 85 Scholies...if you graduate 99%, you get 99 Scholies. it fixes alot of issues, and puts academics square in the middle of the fight for football supremacy.

 

[Rack Em]

What would be of parody and competition then? As well if you play it out, I still see institutions who have shown the ability to manage both academics and football on the short end here, primarily because when this arms race escalates, 300 kids a year can't get into ND.

I like a grad rate based system. If you graduate 85% of your players you get 85 Scholies...if you graduate 99%, you get 99 Scholies. it fixes alot of issues, and puts academics square in the middle of the fight for football supremacy.

But also runs the risk of universities just passing students along through easy majors to get more scholarships.

 

[phgreek]

But also runs the risk of universities just passing students along through easy majors to get more scholarships.

...I think they do that now

 

[Anchorman]

But also runs the risk of universities just passing students along through easy majors to get more scholarships.

I think you would find that in football players in every program migrate towards what are perceived as 'easier' majors already

 

[phgreek]

What would be of parody and competition then? As well if you play it out, I still see institutions who have shown the ability to manage both academics and football on the short end here, primarily because when this arms race escalates, 300 kids a year can't get into ND.

I like a grad rate based system. If you graduate 85% of your players you get 85 Scholies...if you graduate 99%, you get 99 Scholies. it fixes alot of issues, and puts academics square in the middle of the fight for football supremacy.

Edit: meant parity...brain not on today

 

[Buster Bluth]

Again, there seems to be a huge misunderstanding about EE's. There are no early enrollee tricks. Other than on this board, I've never heard anyone anywhere complain about EE's. There's nothing remotely underhanded, unethical, questionable, or any sort of unfair competitive advantage with EE's. There's nothing about EE's to complain about. EE's have nothing to do with grayshirting, oversigning, roster management, or anything else along those lines. They don't give you extra players, extra eligibility, cost anyone else a scholarship, or anything else like that. EE's are a completely positive thing for all concerned and something to strive towards, encourage, and be proud of.

I didn't say that EE's shouldn't be allowed. I said that the tricks with them shouldn't be available.

Don't act like EE'ing isn't a popular way to get them on the previous year's class (if you choose). It's how these programs sign 35 kids. It's silly.

You can EE your entire damn class, just don't get tricky with assigning some to X year and some to Y year. You get 25 every year, period.

 

[woolybug25]

What would be of parody and competition then? As well if you play it out, I still see institutions who have shown the ability to manage both academics and football on the short end here, primarily because when this arms race escalates, 300 kids a year can't get into ND.

I like a grad rate based system. If you graduate 85% of your players you get 85 Scholies...if you graduate 99%, you get 99 Scholies. it fixes alot of issues, and puts academics square in the middle of the fight for football supremacy.

We would lose out on a kid that cant get into ND academically either way, so I don't know what you mean by that. The issue we have is that we cannot cut players off of our squad like the SEC currently are. We could sign a 35 person class filled with 4-5 star kids this very year if scholarship limits didn't apply. We don't do this because we honor the scholarships we give them, but don't get to remove them from our roster if they don't pan out.

It sounds like you are arguing that you want a system that benefits Notre Dame in particular instead of a system that protects young men from oversigning. It would be great if a system benefited us, but I just want a system that is fair. We probably would still not sign as many kids as the other schools, but we would be able to not have to pass on kids because of limits. So we would be able to build that same kind of depth. If a kid chooses to play at Bama, they shouldn't have to lose their scholarship if he is cut. The choice to get a lessor quality education is a choice that is theirs.

 

[phgreek]

We would lose out on a kid that cant get into ND academically either way, so I don't know what you mean by that.

Yes ND would miss out on kids...there is a finite # of players that schools w/ academic standards could get in the doors...but raising the limits for everyone doesn't help deal with the advantage certain schools enjoy right now...it legalizes their advantage while, giving no relative benefit to schools with standards. Sure ND could have some more kids...but I think the arms race would be on...and the same issue holds good schools back...smaller pool...and whats worse than setting up a system enabling a kid to go to a god awful academic institution, not playing, and not graduating...I'm not in on that deal

The issue we have is that we cannot cut players off of our squad like the SEC currently are. We could sign a 35 person class filled with 4-5 star kids this very year if scholarship limits didn't apply. We don't do this because we honor the scholarships we give them, but don't get to remove them from our roster if they don't pan out.

I understand how ND does business...But to simply raise limits concentrates the talent at a few schools and kills the parity on the field thats emerged over the last 30 years. Further I think recruiting, by its nature, is trying to draw classified resources from a limited source...while I like 4 year requirements on scholies...I don't like schools with total dysfunctional ties between academics and Football to get MORE of the high end of the limited resource, even if they have a 4 year scholarship...what I want are policies that force academic performance upward....

It sounds like you are arguing that you want a system that benefits Notre Dame in particular instead of a system that protects young men from oversigning.

yea...you got me...its homerism to think academics should be the center of the discussion, and might be used to lift the overall NCAA grad rate performance...sure my approach may drive an advantage to Northwestern, Stanford, and ND, not because they are better quality schools, but because they have forced the ballance...make their kids gradtuate...it serves the NCAA mission to tie this type of roster advantage to academics. Further if all exceeded 85% grad rate, MORE opportunities would be available to HS kids...more opportunity in an environment PROVEN to balance eductaion and football...and MORE likely to lead to a degree for all participants, and less likely to systematically concentrate all the talent at 4 schools

It would be great if a system benefited us, but I just want a system that is fair.
The system should benefit those who show they can ballance academics and football.

We probably would still not sign as many kids as the other schools, but we would be able to not have to pass on kids because of limits.
Probably so...but at what point are those kids taking up seats at notre dame that may well have gone to someone else...See, if they can't be on the field, but they got to ND because of football...how many of those do you want...I understand that happens due to injury at times...but to invite it...I don't know. Not saying football players couldn't get in anyway...I'm saying lay that football kid's academic docier next to another's, w/o football involved...so how many kids who'd make the academic cut are we willing to send packing...

So we would be able to build that same kind of depth. If a kid chooses to play at Bama, they shouldn't have to lose their scholarship if he is cut. The choice to get a lessor quality education is a choice that is theirs.

Yes quality should be a choice...I realize certain kids want an art degree...cool...I agree...but if you could force the issue such that whatever they choose for quality in education, they are at least expected, proded, goaded to finish..or it hurts the team's future...why not do it?

 

[Bishop2b5]

I didn't say that EE's shouldn't be allowed. I said that the tricks with them shouldn't be available.

Don't act like EE'ing isn't a popular way to get them on the previous year's class (if you choose). It's how these programs sign 35 kids. It's silly.

You can EE your entire damn class, just don't get tricky with assigning some to X year and some to Y year. You get 25 every year, period.

I think you have a misconception or misunderstanding about EE's, and are confusing some very different subjects. There aren't any tricks. EE's don't have anything to do with signing 35 players in a class. There isn't any slight of hand or roster manipulation involved, and EE's have no more to do with oversigning than any other recruit. They are EXACTLY like any other recruit, count the same, treated the same, have the same effect on your numbers, etc, etc. The ONLY difference is that they enroll a semester early because they graduated HS early.

An EE isn't a way for a team to sign extra players, juggle their numbers, increase a player's eligibility, or oversign a class. It has absolutely nothing to do with any of those things. An EE is a part of your upcoming recruiting class exactly the same as any other player you sign on NSD. He just effectively commits a few weeks beforehand and can go ahead and start attending class. He counts towards that signing class EXACTLY the same as if he'd waited a few weeks to sign on NSD and started classes the following fall like most other recruits.

EE's have nothing to do with signing 35 players. You can sign 25 new recruits per year. If you don't use all 25 of those scholarships one year, you can use the remaining ones the following year. If you only signed 15 last year, you have 10 left over and you can sign 35 this year. You aren't getting any extra scholarships or players. Which of those 35 new members of your upcoming class you count against last year's class or this year's is totally meaningless and irrelevant. You have 35 scholarships to give this year, period.

You don't have to have scholarships remaining from the previous year's class to have EE's. They weren't part of last year's class. They weren't on your campus or on the team last year. They're just kids who are part of your upcoming class who are starting college a semester early. Bama has 25 scholarships for new recruits this year. We have 9 EE's that started classes 3 weeks ago. We'll sign 16 other new recruits on NSD in a couple of weeks.

 

[irishroo]

An EE isn't a way for a team to sign extra players, juggle their numbers, increase a player's eligibility, or oversign a class. It has absolutely nothing to do with any of those things. An EE is a part of your upcoming recruiting class exactly the same as any other player you sign on NSD. He just effectively commits a few weeks beforehand and can go ahead and start attending class. He counts towards that signing class EXACTLY the same as if he'd waited a few weeks to sign on NSD and started classes the following fall like most other recruits.

This is just flat out not true. EEs count towards last year's recruiting class. Not saying it give any sort of advantage because schools still do have to be under that 85 scholarship limit, but it does essentially make the SEC rule of only signing 28 kids per class useless (see: Texas A&M). Check this article for some more info:

Oversigning controversy: Early enrollment lets schools get around NCAA limits | al.com

 

[Bogtrotter07]

I cannot read this thread, as I am currently reading War and Peace in one Parallel universe, and The Maltese Falcon in another. Can anybody tell me if anything is solved, and if anyone successfully defended the honor of their football factory in this thread?

 

[Bishop2b5]

This is just flat out not true. EEs count towards last year's recruiting class. Not saying it give any sort of advantage because schools still do have to be under that 85 scholarship limit, but it does essentially make the SEC rule of only signing 28 kids per class useless (see: Texas A&M). Check this article for some more info:

Oversigning controversy: Early enrollment lets schools get around NCAA limits | al.com

Herndon's article you quoted is almost 2 years old and there was a rule change last year that makes it outdated and no longer valid (and I was unaware of part of that rule change and thus mistaken about one point of my argument). There was never a time when you could bring in EE's and not have them count against any signing class and thus give you a way to get a lot of extra players (Herndon's article is unclear on this and leads the reader to believe EE's could be used that way. They couldn't.)

Up until a year ago (and this is where I was mistaken), if you had scholarships remaining from your previous recruiting class, you could use them this year to bring in more than 25 new recruits (e.g., if you only used 22 scholarships with last year's class, you could use those 3 remaining scholarships to sign 28 this year). The new rule now says you can only use those leftover scholarships from last year on EE's. If you don't use them on EE's, you lose them.

However, EE's don't have to count against a previous class' scholarships if you don't have any remaining from the previous year. If you don't, the EE simply counts toward your upcoming class' 25 just like any other new recruit - he's just starting classes a few months early. Whether you have EE's or not, count them against a previous class or not, or save some of your scholarships from one year to use the next, you're still only getting a maximum of 50 new players between those two classes. With the new rule put in place last year, all the EE does is keep you from wasting one of your 25 scholarships you didn't use last year. Otherwise, he's no different than any of your other new recruits you sign on NSD except that he starts classes in January instead of September.

And BTW, ND has 5 EE's this year... and that's a completely positive thing! It's not a shady practice or unethical way to manipulate your roster numbers. It's a reward for kids who worked especially hard in HS to graduate a semester early, gives them a few extra months to learn your playbook and gain experience with your program, and lets them adjust to college life without having to handle being on their own for the first time AND being overwhelmed with fall football practice at the same time.

 

[irishroo]

Herndon's article you quoted is almost 2 years old and there was a rule change last year that makes it outdated and no longer valid (and I was unaware of part of that rule change and thus mistaken about one point of my argument). There was never a time when you could bring in EE's and not have them count against any signing class and thus give you a way to get a lot of extra players (Herndon's article is unclear on this and leads the reader to believe EE's could be used that way. They couldn't.)

Up until a year ago (and this is where I was mistaken), if you had scholarships remaining from your previous recruiting class, you could use them this year to bring in more than 25 new recruits (e.g., if you only used 22 scholarships with last year's class, you could use those 3 remaining scholarships to sign 28 this year). The new rule now says you can only use those leftover scholarships from last year on EE's. If you don't use them on EE's, you lose them.

However, EE's don't have to count against a previous class' scholarships if you don't have any remaining from the previous year. If you don't, the EE simply counts toward your upcoming class' 25 just like any other new recruit - he's just starting classes a few months early. Whether you have EE's or not, count them against a previous class or not, or save some of your scholarships from one year to use the next, you're still only getting a maximum of 50 new players between those two classes. With the new rule put in place last year, all the EE does is keep you from wasting one of your 25 scholarships you didn't use last year. Otherwise, he's no different than any of your other new recruits you sign on NSD except that he starts classes in January instead of September.

And BTW, ND has 5 EE's this year... and that's a completely positive thing! It's not a shady practice or unethical way to manipulate your roster numbers. It's a reward for kids who worked especially hard in HS to graduate a semester early, gives them a few extra months to learn your playbook and gain experience with your program, and lets them adjust to college life without having to handle being on their own for the first time AND being overwhelmed with fall football practice at the same time.

I was not aware of the rule change. Good to know, sorry for the mistake. I agree it's not a shady practice at all I have no problem with early enrollment. At the end of the day it all comes down to the 85 scholarship limit, and I don't think early enrollment violates either the letter or the spirit of that rule (whereas I believe oversigning violates the spirit).

 

[Bishop2b5]

I was not aware of the rule change. Good to know, sorry for the mistake. I agree it's not a shady practice at all I have no problem with early enrollment. At the end of the day it all comes down to the 85 scholarship limit, and I don't think early enrollment violates either the letter or the spirit of that rule (whereas I believe oversigning violates the spirit).

No problem. I wasn't aware of the rule change either until I started checking this morning and found I'd been mistaken too about a couple of my points. I totally agree with you - EE's don't violate the letter or the spirit of fair competition rules and are a very positive thing. It's a nice reward for the player for working hard in HS, helps jumpstart his college athletic career, and encourages coaches to recruit smarter and harder-working players who are willing to do what it takes to become an EE.

With the extra semester in school and their demonstrated willingness to work hard in the class room in order to graduate HS early, EE's are much more likely to succeed in college and graduate. Gunner Kiel was an EE last year for you guys and TJ Yeldon was an EE for us. Nearly 1/3 of our starting lineup this past season were former EE's. Tebow, Matt Barkley, RGIII, Phillip Rivers, and several other well-known players who were standouts on the field and in the class room were EE's.

 

[Rack Em]

I just did some checking on Bama's class this year. OL Bradley Bozeman sat down with the Alabama coaching staff last week and "decided" to take a grayshirt this year. What's the catch? He tore his ACL back in September. Surprise, surprise. But wait, there's more. He claims that his recovery is ahead of schedule and he's running full strength. Here's the article.

Click here to find out why Nick Saban is a huge POS

But don't worry, here's Bozeman's statement from the 247 article: "Right now I think that it is the best decision for me. I just want to take this time and focus on getting my knee ready so I can be there in January ready to go. I am going to try and take classes at Alabama this fall, but if that does not work out we will regroup and get things figured out."

Hmmm so let me get this straight. Bozeman commits in June of 2011 per his 247 profile. He gets injured 3 months after that. And right before signing day when Bama looks good with other recruits like Vanderdoes, Vonn Bell, Alvin Kamara, Montravius Adams, Reuben Foster, and Dee Liner the guy with the torn ACL gets cut. Oh and they just landed A'Shawn Robinson, a 5 OL? Sounds like classic Saban and SEC oversigning/cutting tactics.

SOMEONE FREAKING EXPLAIN THIS TO ME!

Come on Bishop. You've trolled here for awhile trying to **** us all off by being an SEC apologist. What am I missing here? Or do I have it all right and your coaching staff is full of scumbags? Do tell, Bishop. Do tell.

 

[IrishLax]

Isn't Bozeman the second kid to grayshirt? If the kid wants to do it then I'm not one to judge... what I think is silly is that these kids expect to get that scholarship their next year and the vast majority of them don't.

 

[Ironman8]

Isn't Bozeman the second kid to grayshirt? If the kid wants to do it then I'm not one to judge... what I think is silly is that these kids expect to get that scholarship their next year and the vast majority of them don't.

He is referencing the same article I posted two weeks ago. Bozeman was who I posted about in this thread.

If was truly a mutual decision, which it easily could have been, I applaud both parties for finding what they wanted and coming to a mutually beneficial decision. I just hope, for the kid's sake, he wasn't pressured into it because of his injury. It has happened before, and it leads to unhappy endings more often than not.

 

[Kak7304]

Isn't Bozeman the second kid to grayshirt? If the kid wants to do it then I'm not one to judge... what I think is silly is that these kids expect to get that scholarship their next year and the vast majority of them don't.

After reading the article about Bozeman, he states WE decided to grayshirt. I think Saban strongly persuaded him to do so and didn't give him any other options if he were to stay at Bama.

 

[IrishLax]

He is referencing the same article I posted two weeks ago. Bozeman was who I posted about in this thread.

If was truly a mutual decision, which it easily could have been, I applaud both parties for finding what they wanted and coming to a mutually beneficial decision. I just hope, for the kid's sake, he wasn't pressured into it because of his injury. It has happened before, and it leads to unhappy endings more often than not.

Gotcha thanks. And yeah... that's where I stand on things. I have an issue with getting kids to sign a LOI and then being like "woups, you need to grayshirt" but if you sit down with them a month+ beforehand and come to a mutual decision my blood pressure isn't going to go up over it.

 

[Rack Em]

After reading the article about Bozeman, he states WE decided to grayshirt. I think Saban strongly persuaded him to do so and didn't give him any other options if he were to stay at Bama.

Winner. Those are my thoughts.

 

[Bishop2b5]

I just did some checking on Bama's class this year. OL Bradley Bozeman sat down with the Alabama coaching staff last week and "decided" to take a grayshirt this year. What's the catch? He tore his ACL back in September. Surprise, surprise. But wait, there's more. He claims that his recovery is ahead of schedule and he's running full strength. Here's the article.

Click here to find out why Nick Saban is a huge POS

But don't worry, here's Bozeman's statement from the 247 article: "Right now I think that it is the best decision for me. I just want to take this time and focus on getting my knee ready so I can be there in January ready to go. I am going to try and take classes at Alabama this fall, but if that does not work out we will regroup and get things figured out."

Hmmm so let me get this straight. Bozeman commits in June of 2011 per his 247 profile. He gets injured 3 months after that. And right before signing day when Bama looks good with other recruits like Vanderdoes, Vonn Bell, Alvin Kamara, Montravius Adams, Reuben Foster, and Dee Liner the guy with the torn ACL gets cut. Oh and they just landed A'Shawn Robinson, a 5 OL? Sounds like classic Saban and SEC oversigning/cutting tactics.

SOMEONE FREAKING EXPLAIN THIS TO ME!

Come on Bishop. You've trolled here for awhile trying to **** us all off by being an SEC apologist. What am I missing here? Or do I have it all right and your coaching staff is full of scumbags? Do tell, Bishop. Do tell.

The kid didn't get his scholarship pulled "right before signing day." He was told months ago he'd probably need to grayshirt. Dude, you're just determined to twist this into something it simply isn't and find something to justify your hatred of Bama or the SEC, no matter the facts. If you want to hate, that's your business, but why spin and twist and distort to justify it? Nobody's screwing this kid over or yanking a scholarship away from him at the last minute. Bozeman and his family have decided that taking a year off to rehab his knee and still having 5 years to play 4 is better for him in the long run than using one of those years redshirting this fall.

If he'd been told he was going to get a scholly next week and then at the last minute it got pulled and he was told he'd have to grayshirt, I'd be with you on this, but that's just not what happened. He's known for months he was probably going to grayshirt. He had plenty of time to look elsewhere. Heck, he got several offers from other schools and still decided he'd stick with Bama and take a grayshirt. This kid isn't getting screwed or misled. He's making a good decision that will give him a year to fully rehab his knee, and then still have all five years left to play four. He and his family were fully informed, he had plenty of other options, and they made this decision based on what they feel is best (and it probably is best for him). You tell me where the problem is, or how Saban's screwing him over.

 

[irishtrain]

These kids and their families are so culturally locked in to this guy and what it represents for them that they would do anything to be part of his football team. Its like that thru the entire sec but at alabama its much like brainwashing from the old USSR. 'Can I get an arm and sickel here boys'. If a family has a boy who played football at alabama he's looked upon as teasured son of the family/city/state etc. Its why Saban went there/he knew he would be a little Napoleon. The guy is smart/cunning/not to be crossed. Gotta give him that but I would not like to live in his world. Great shaper of young men my @$#. From oversigning to loading up with non student athletes from junior college to having fans in the alabama family taking care of these guys when needed. Its all fair game to this program. They bend the rules to the exact inch of the system and they are professional football. They will never be caught doing anything against the rules because they are the rules. This guy is backed by a total state of compliance both on and off the field. The entire state would have nothing to be connected with if it wouldnt be for alabama football . Shame on the NCAA for letting their rules be so without teeth that this program can even exist. Its not college football its PFS. (pro football south)

 

[Bishop2b5]

These kids and their families are so culturally locked in to this guy and what it represents for them that they would do anything to be part of his football team. Its like that thru the entire sec but at alabama its much like brainwashing from the old USSR. 'Can I get an arm and sickel here boys'. If a family has a boy who played football at alabama he's looked upon as teasured son of the family/city/state etc. Its why Saban went there/he knew he would be a little Napoleon. The guy is smart/cunning/not to be crossed. Gotta give him that but I would not like to live in his world. Great shaper of young men my @$#. From oversigning to loading up with non student athletes from junior college to having fans in the alabama family taking care of these guys when needed. Its all fair game to this program. They bend the rules to the exact inch of the system and they are professional football. They will never be caught doing anything against the rules because they are the rules. This guy is backed by a total state of compliance both on and off the field. The entire state would have nothing to be connected with if it wouldnt be for alabama football . Shame on the NCAA for letting their rules be so without teeth that this program can even exist. Its not college football its PFS. (pro football south)

Wow. I feel sorry for you if you really believe any of what you just wrote. Whatever your reason for needing to believe all that and rant about it, best of luck to you. You need it.

Everybody's entitled to his own opinion. Nobody is entitled to his own facts.

 

[NDhoosier]

bishop, it doesnt matter when the kid knew about the greyshirt. People on this website do not like the concept of greyshirting to begin with.