2014 NCAA Football Thread

[MacAttack]

But that's not an unfair advantage. More desirable candidates are going to have more desirable options. There are plenty of schools that would love to have a three star player, they just may not be that player's first choice. It's one thing to say everyone deserves a fair chance based on their ability, it's another to say everyone deserves their first choice on their terms . . .

Sure it's unfair to the recruit. He could have shut that pipedream down and found elsewhere to go. State Flagship School asks 3 star recruit to gray shirt in February while he could have instead been talking to State Directional School instead and earn a scholly with them. State Directional School instead settles for a 2 star kid who committed when they could have had the 3 star kid, they just didn't know they had a chance.

 

[downtown]

But that's not an unfair advantage. More desirable candidates are going to have more desirable options. There are plenty of schools that would love to have a three star player, they just may not be that player's first choice. It's one thing to say everyone deserves a fair chance based on their ability, it's another to say everyone deserves their first choice on their terms . . .

Depends on the timing. A three star kid can get dropped by state u, and if directional U has filled up their class and they aren't willing to drop somebody else, suddenly that three star kid has to fall pretty hard. Shoot, there are kids with three star evaluations that don't get ANY FBS offers. Kids slip through the cracks.

That's too much of a risk for a three kid kid to take...they just don't have the leverage. Not signing is a smart ploy for a few dozen kids a year, but everybody else essentially has to sign that paper.

 

[ummmm........]

I am unmoved. I feel like I side with the players most of the time, but this one just doesn't really bother me

I mean, take a year off, do JC, whatever . . .

 

[JollyRoger]

do JC

So SEC grayshirts have to step the academics up a notch?

 

[ummmm........]

The proposed rule changing the ineligible receiver cushion from three yards back to one yard is meeting some predictable resistance from coaches that are exploiting the current rule. Ho hum, the drama of the offseason . . .

 

[downtown]

I am unmoved. I feel like I side with the players most of the time, but this one just doesn't really bother me

I mean, take a year off, do JC, whatever . . .

Hey, kid who almost certainly isn't going to have an NFL career, I know we promised you a college scholarship and had you shut down your recruitment options, but we changed our mind, and now we need you to uproot everything, find a way to finance a community college for a year, or postpone your studies, career, and your life for an entire year.

Nah, I think that's a bad deal. The likely early signing period will probably help alleviate some of this.

 

[MacAttack]

Forget football careers, life's too short to just take a year off, do JC, whatever . .

 

[ummmm........]

Hey, kid who almost certainly isn't going to have an NFL career, I know we promised you a college scholarship and had you shut down your recruitment options, but we changed our mind, and now we need you to uproot everything, find a way to finance a community college for a year, or postpone your studies, career, and your life for an entire year.

Nah, I think that's a bad deal. The likely early signing period will probably help alleviate some of this.

Verbal commitments shut down recruitment options? I think you're thinking of basketball . . .

Early signing periods are good though . . .

Forget football careers, life's too short to just take a year off, do JC, whatever . .

I'm the total opposite here. Life's too short to just plow straight through and get to a goal as soon as possible without exploring options. Google identity foreclosure . . .

 

[MacAttack]

Well that's painting a with a broad brush, I meant specifically on the issue of attending college, not with all of life's choices. Studies have shown (and i wish i could provide a link, but at this moment i dont have the time) that folks who do not go into college right after high school tend to not go to college at all. The percentage is also low of the amount of students who attend JC transferring into a 4 year college. If these guys have the academic prowess to attend an Ohio State, Alabama, Texas A&M, or Duke, they should start there now and not waste time fiddling at Tidewater Community College or Blinn College, not getting the best education from a world class university program. Now if this person's thing is not college they should not be wasting time going to college and pursuing another route such as a technical school or apprenticeship. If their top skill is playing football, they need to be in a program right away to make it into the NFL as soon as possible since the career spans are way too short.

 

[ummmm........]

We're kind of trending away from CFB now, but I know it's very common with Auburn and UAB for regular students to spend two years at JC and then spend the last two at the four-year school -- they get the same degree for much less money, and if they wash out at the JC level I don't think they would have fared any better by starting at the four-year instead . . .

Back on football, it's not like the schools can just screw kids over without consequence. If what y'all are describing was a regular practice, that would hurt a school with all recruits in future years and pretty much burn the bridge with that kid's specific high school permanently. It's just not smart recruiting practice . . .

If you know you want to go to school X, go ahead and sign, you're not losing anything. But if your desire is contingent on a certain coach or year of enrollment or a certain jersey number or whatever, if you sign then you deserve what you get -- you are knowingly giving up something for nothing. It's not like they're tricking you . . .

I will also say that I am a fan of giving players a lot more leeway when it comes to transferring, and that would do a lot to solve this and many other recruiting issues . . .

 

[dgfred]

Well, if a recruiter tells a kid he 'might' have to greyshirt when they are recruiting him... fine.

If the day before signing day they first hear of that... it is wrong.

A person (institution) should have to live up to their word.

 

[ummmm........]

But there's no reciprocity. If the recruit backs out on signing day he's totally unaffected, but if the school does it their reputation is damaged in future recruiting. It's not that I think it's okay for the school to do it, I just think the damage to their reputation is sufficient punishment . . .

 

[MacAttack]

damage to their reputation is sufficient punishment for negatively affecting or in other cases ruining a person's life? (i understand these are rare cases, but that is what the forum is for, right? )

 

[JollyRoger]

What is the real harm when it will only damage your reputation with potential greyshirts - aka marginal talent.

 

[ummmm........]

I think you're overestimating the effect grayshirting has on a person . . .

I also think you're only considering the players' perspective. Ideally we should want a system that is fair for the programs and the players. Right now the system is grossly imbalanced in favor of the schools, so most of the time you can just give the players whatever they want and they'd still be at a disadvantage, but to hold the schools accountable for every offered scholarship while not holding the players responsible for any 'commitments' they make seems to be a tad too much of a swing, to me . . .

 

[downtown]

FWIW, I don't think this is something that we could expect to be "regulated" by the free market here. A position coach isn't really going to care if they nuke a relationship with a high school, since their typical tenure at each school is so short...maybe three years. It's far more likely that they just straight up get fired, so they have every incentive to chase short term gains over long term decision making. The same is true for head coaches.

You have to be a total louse of a person for this to begin to catch up with you (like Bobby Petrino), but you can hurt a bunch of kids in the meantime.

In other news, A colleague of mine and I spoke to a few SEC ADs, among other people, and asked them about BYU and whether they're a "Power Five" program.

 

[ummmm........]

You didn't really address the question. Three years is a lot more accountability than the recruits have. Any accountability at all is a lot more than the recruits have . . .

 

[downtown]

I guess I don't care. The balance of power between school and athlete is hilariously unbalanced in favor of the school at every level of this process, so I don't care if a kid enacts leverage during the only time of his athletic career where he has it.

Kids flipping right at signing day are relatively rare, and typically high 3 star-5 star kids...and schools know they are taking a calculated risk in perusing.

Since regular students can decide what school they're going to up until their dorm deposits are due, it would be difficult for the NCAA to keep recruits from doing the same without further weakening their argument that in court that players are not, in fact, students. An early signing day will help (and that's coming), but if kids get less "accountability" here than the adults, that's fine with me. The adults are paid very well for that additional responsibility.

 

[ummmm........]

Yeah, the players' lack of accountability doesn't really bother me either, I just don't see it as a reason to increase the schools' accountability . . .

I suppose we just disagree on this. We should go back to talking about what a great game Alabama's offense had in the Sugar Bowl

 

[dgfred]

Several ACC commentators have said that the Irish might have an open road to the Final Four. What y'all think?