Saban yawns.

This didn’t take long at all.

… So how is the Alabama football coach going to cope with new rules affecting roster management?

He’ll manage.

“I don’t really feel that it’s going to create any management issues that’s going to affect the quality of play,” Saban calmly said Thursday before his annual charity golf tournament that benefits his “Nick’s Kids” program. “I think it’s all good.”

SEC football coaches voted unanimously last week to keep the annual signing limit at 28 players, but university presidents and chancellors voted unanimously to cut the limit to 25.

Saban isn’t protesting the restriction.

“It’s not going to be that much of a management issue for us to be able to continue to create the same number of opportunities for young people and just try to manage it a little better,” he said.

Bernie Machen, he’s laughing at the superior intellect.

About these ads

37 Comments

Filed under Nick Saban Rules, Recruiting, SEC Football

37 responses to “Saban yawns.

  1. TennesseeDawg

    Saban can always demote players down to the AAA farm teams (North Alabama, UAB, etc.)

    • Hogbody Corleone

      Yeah dat’s it. But it’s gonna be harder. Used to be we could just tell ‘em they’re gonna have an injury and they’d request a medical. Now we really gotta kneecap ‘em, to make it look good for da conference office.

  2. Beak

    Saban then added, “I don’t have time for this shit.”

  3. IveyLeaguer

    “I don’t really feel that it’s going to create any management issues that’s going to affect the quality of play,” Saban calmly said Thursday. “I think it’s all good. It’s not going to be that much of a management issue for us to be able to continue to create the same number of opportunities for young people and just try to manage it a little better,” he said.

    Translation: “I can still keep abusing the intent of the rule by signing far more elite players than natural attrition would dictate, by manipulating the back end of my roster players in good standing off the team. The rule change did nothing to stop me. It’s not about amateur athletes who are still kids, to heck with them. It’s about winning at any cost.”

    And he’s right. There was nothing done in Destin to stop his practice.
    ~~~

    • Explain to me why encouraging kids (or whatever verb you prefer) to transfer to a different school is wrong? Why should football players receive security that no other student has? No one has been denied anything that they are owed. No one has been promised anything that wasn’t given. “Natural attrition” is something that you made up. It’s not supported by the NCAA (who actually rolled back four year scholarships in 1973 — I’m sure you can find a way to blame that on Bear Bryant if you use all the power that went into the current line of thinking and just say it’s so because no one can prove a negative).

      Millions of their classmates couldn’t afford to go to college so they got a job. And if they don’t do that job to the standard that’s expected, they will lose that job, no matter how much they just really want to work there. It’s not criminal. It’s not wrong. It’s not unfair. It’s life and no one is doing these kids any favors by stumping for measures that remove them from that reality.

      I would think it would be in the best interest of Georgia fans to stop condemning a practice that isn’t unethical in the first place so that when your next HC takes the job, he doesn’t make you all look like hypocrites.

      • IveyLeaguer

        What’s wrong is running off kids, who have done everything asked of them, just because they’re not good enough, in order to make room for more elite signees. It’s a way to run more talent through your program by getting rid of dead wood.

        Don’t even bother with the usual Bama denial. Nobody outside of Alabama is drinking that cool-aid. Nobody outside Tuscaloosa believes Saban had as many honest medicals as the rest of the League combined. Or that he didn’t run off players when he had to. A few have said as much. The numbers themselves show that much, as natural attrition can’t realistically account for them.

        All oversigners are not alike. Not all oversigners run off players in good standing. But there’s a reason Saban, and only Saban, operates in secret, using the lame excuse about concern over player privacy, which insults intelligence because everybody knows it is hogwash.

        Since you don’t understand natural attrition is, par for the course for a Bama fan, it only follows that you can’t understand un-natural attrition either, since that would be impossible, by definition. And un-natural attrition is what Saban has used to sift more talent through his program than he otherwise could have, creating an advantage over those who refuse to ethically compromise.

        And of course what Saban has done is unethical, it’s just not illegal. And so is the University of Alabama that has supported this sleazy practice. Not that anybody in Alabama cares.
        ~~~

        • Okay, I get that when you feel the need to respond but can’t actually address the question asked of you, you would resort to condescension hoping no one would notice that at no point were you actually able to define the terms of your argument, but I don’t understand the use of broad generalizations about Bama fans. I mean, I would never assume that all Georgia fans spoke in circular logic and tired cliches just because that’s been my experience with you.

          • IveyLeaguer

            My argument is clearly defined in the first post and again in the first paragraph on my second post.

            It’s Alabama who won’t answer the question. That’s why they operate in secret. They don’t want the general public to be able to follow their exact numbers and figure out what they’re doing. Saban knows very well if kids and their parents figure out their chances of finishing at Alabama are much less than at other SEC schools, because of the way he manages his roster, and that they could even be left hanging out to dry, it will hurt recruiting.

            All this has been well documented by numerous sources. I said that about Alabama fans because I have found it to be true. I’ve yet to see anyone from Alabama actually level with the issue.

            If you, Nick Saban, and other Bama people would simply admit what you are doing, as Bobby Petrino did, then I could respect that. But the cool-aid story out of Tuscaloosa is both insulting and argumentative. It’s only credible to Bama people, which is probably all they care about anyway.
            ~~~

            • Your argument is that Saban owes you something, but when he gives it to you, it must be a lie. You can’t prove it’s a lie. You just know, and I would know if I wasn’t a Bama fan. Why? Because it’s a lie. It must be. Why? Because someone else who couldn’t prove it also said it was a lie. I could just as easily say that Mark Richt ran Washaun Ealey off and it would have as much credibility as your statement.

              Three complained about the way their departure was described saying they were mischaracterized and weren’t discipline or academic cases. Of those three, two had been suspended on multiple occasions, and one struggled to qualify to get in school, missing the summer term, transferred out after his freshman season, and then failed out of the school he transferred to.

              And what’s the real problem with the medical scholarships? They didn’t fake injuries. Were the injuries bad enough that they had to quit football? Probably not in all cases, but so what? If assessing the kids after spring and deciding who gets to stay and who has to go is okay with you (as long as they tell a reporter about it — that caveat is apparently required), then how is letting the kid stay there if he chooses so bad? Not one of those kids went on to play football somewhere else. Why not? Two tried. Neither could pass a physical. Medical scholarships are something the student chooses to accept. They could transfer out just like the kids you feel sorry for at Alabama but not at Arkansas.

              Though what do I know? We’ve apparently met at some point, so you’ve got me figured out.

              • IveyLeaguer

                All those who believe Alabama had as many legitimate medical disqualifications as the rest of the League COMBINED, at a time when they needed the spots, please stand up.

                I’m not about to lay out a case, as I said it’s been done already. I know what Saban has been doing, so does the SEC office and the other coaches. Slive did address Saban’s medical abuse with a new policy the DOES have some teeth. Obviously, Slive & the Presidents didn’t care for Saban’s manipulation of medicals at all. That was crystal clear.

                The rest of the RM techniques are the same. They’ve been laid out, and Bama people respond with argumentative stories related to natural attrition. Same ole crap. As I said before, don’t even bother. Heard ‘em already.
                ~~~

                • You’re only position has been “everybody knows.” I’m guessing your’e not a lawyer. Or, if you are, that your firm is currently looking for someone better at litigation so they can let you go.

                  • Biggus Rickus

                    You’re in a comment section, not a court of law. And Saban manipulates his roster worse than most others. That you don’t care is fine, but don’t deny it.

                    • But that’s all based on biased perception and an exaggeration of the truth using selective language like “manipulates” and “abuse,” but the only thing he’s done more than others is the medical scholarships. Ivey said that s/he thought what Petrino was doing (deciding after the spring who would no longer be with the team) was okay. So now, the problem is that some of those kids at Alabama — a higher number than elsewhere — are given a scholarship to stay in school without playing football. They aren’t required to accept it. They can try to go play somewhere else — like the players cut at Arkansas — if they want. How is that worse? Or even bad? The result is more kids get an education, and it doesn’t violate the rules (it still doesn’t violate the rules, the rules are just more strict).

                      Let’s stop pretending this is about the good of the kids. It’s not. It’s about being upset at a perceived competitive advantage and your team is on the wrong side of it. Alabama football graduates as many or more kids as anyone else in the league. The kids aren’t being wronged here.

                    • Let’s stop pretending this is about the good of the kids. It’s not. It’s about being upset at a perceived competitive advantage…

                      Exactly why I dismiss so much of the complaining I read about oversigning.

                    • Mayor of Dawgtown

                      First of all you can be concerned about the players AND still be concerned about the competitive advantage. The two are not mutually exclusive. Second, there is a competitive advantage to oversigning or Saban, Petrino and now Spurrier wouldn’t be doing it. They have said as much only they have given excuses such as “inferior state high school education” to justify what they are doing. The real issue is whether it is ethical to do it or not. Basically (the medical hardship regulation aside, which I support) the only substantial accomplishment of the Slive legislation in Destin was to give cover to the abusers for at least part of their oversigning. The SEC legalized what the abusers had been doing but placed a cap on it which the abusers will undoubtedly find a way to get around.

                    • Steve: “Let’s stop pretending this is about the good of the kids. It’s not. It’s about being upset at a perceived competitive advantage…”

                      Senator Blutarsky: “Exactly why I dismiss so much of the complaining I read about oversigning.”

                      So Senator, you don’t mind being at a competitive, on-the-field disadvantage, when all your schools has done to create that disadvantage is refuse to be unethical? I find that hard to believe. Damned right I want a level playing field.

                      And the notion that the kids don’t matter is crapola, too. Nobody has said this only about the good of the kids. This is no goody, goody issue. Nevertheless, the kids do matter, or at least they should. They still matter to some SEC schools and at least to some extent, the Presidents.

                      It bothers me when a kid gets screwed. And it bothers me when my competitors use unethical means to gain an advantage over me. And there is absolutely no contradiction there whatsoever. You’re both dead wrong.

                      The attitude that we’ve progressed to the point that we’re just using the kids, that it’s really just a business, we just can’t say so publicly, IS THE PROBLEM.

                      The University of Georgia has said they want no part of that culture. And I support them.
                      ~~~

                    • And it bothers me when my competitors use unethical means to gain an advantage over me.

                      Skipping past the whole “what is ethical” question Steve raises, are you saying that you wouldn’t be bothered by roster management if it were carried out in an ethical manner?

                    • Senator Blutarsky: “Skipping past the whole ‘what is ethical’ question Steve raises, are you saying that you wouldn’t be bothered by roster management if it were carried out in an ethical manner?”

                      Of course not. Richt has always practiced RM, every school does. It’s a natural thing, the result of natural attrition.

                      One of the difficulties of this issue is defining it. ‘Oversigning’ means different things to different parties. Richt has NEVER oversigned, in the sense that Georgia defines it. In that sense, ‘oversigning’ is not defined by signing more than 25, but by signing more than you have reason to believe, considering natural attrition, will put you over the 85 limit at the August deadline.

                      That’s why Richt has occasionally signed one or two over THAT number, for example, knowing that there’s a slight possibility they could have to grayshirt, so they agree with the family up front. But Richt said he’s never had to actually do it, because the spots have always opened up, through NATURAL attrition.

                      THAT PROCESS HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE INTENT OF THE RULES, as they were structured to protect schools from NATURAL ATTRITION, and hence a competitive disadvantage. Nobody gets hurt, and the worst that can happen in a fluke year is no natural attrition occurs, and the grayshirts are activated.

                      The key difference is there is NEVER any consideration or intention to incorporate the back end of your roster (players in good standing) into your RM. If a school ‘oversigns’ by 2 or 3 (in terms of their 85), chances are they are not intending to screw kids who reside on the back end of their roster. Natural attrition usually assimilates that many.

                      But when a school signs 10 or 12 more than their 85 can accommodate, they know up front that natural attrition will not assimilate that much overage. Maybe half if they’re lucky. So then 5 or 6 spots have to be generated by some combination of grayshirt, manipulated medicals & pressured transfers (honest medicals and transfers are included in natural attrition), or flat-out non-renewals of players in otherwise GOOD STANDING. And that’s wrong.

                      But it creates a considerable competitive advantage. Not so much in the West anymore, because everybody over there’s been doing it for a while now. And no, it hasn’t always been done this way. This model is relatively new, having evolved along with the rules.

                      So the Destin meetings addressed the wrong number. A school can still sign 10 or 15 over their 85 roster limit most years, and easily stay within the 25 annual limit. The RM loophole that Saban and the rest use to screw kids has to do with the 85.

                      That’s why Saban lies to keep his ’85’ number secret. Anybody can figure within 2 or 3 what the number is. But even 2 or 3 creates a good deal of wiggle room for him.

                      BTW, Saban is only the poster boy of this issue for two reasons … he is the best at doing it, and he’s the only one who uses secrecy. There’s nothing emotional about it (I actually like Saban). So sometimes it’s easy to forget that USC and the rest of the SEC-W have gone through as many signees as Alabama, if not more.
                      ~~~

                • Mayor of Dawgtown

                  Ivey. He doesn’t get it because he thinks it’s OK to kick players to the curb when a better player comes along.

                  • In response to your other comment: You absolutely can be concerned with the kids and the competitive advantage, but the intersection of the two is not Nick Saban. Steve Spurrier and Les Miles are the only two coaches with notable abuses. Mark Richt and Nick Saban are on the same side of the fence here: neither has gray-shirted a kid who wasn’t expecting it and wasn’t aware prior to committing that the risk existed.

                    If this is supposed to get under control — whatever that means — then you don’t gate how many LOIs a school can get, you limit how many offers a school can make. You’ll never get ANY coach to agree to that, though, and that’s pretty understandable.

  4. Dog in Fla

    Saban then subtracted, “Full impulse power now, damn you!”

  5. Scott W.

    He found a way around the old rule, he’ll tweek his plan. Cheating is not a static endeavor.

  6. Ivey: You make so many suppositions, but you can’t support any of them. Coach Richt voted in favor of over-signing and has stated that he thinks over-signing is a good thing if it’s managed properly. You haven’t demonstrated that Saban has done it improperly. Saying it’s unethical doesn’t make it so. I could say it’s unethical to keep a bulldog on the sidelines, but that doesn’t make it true.

    • Steve: “Coach Richt voted in favor of over-signing and has stated that he thinks over-signing is a good thing if it’s managed properly.”

      With that statement you have shown, conclusively, that you don’t understand the issue. I’ve yet to see a Bammer that does. That’s why dialogue with any of you always nets zero.

      Steve: “You make so many suppositions, but you can’t support any of them.”

      Sorry, but I’m not stupid enough to fall into that trap. I’ve made the case, at length, in other places and so have numerous others. It’s a compelling case to anyone who isn’t biased or naive. The info is not hard to find. Anybody who wants to can see for themselves. This is just a comment section on a blog. So I’ll just continue to point out BS when I see it.
      ~~~

  7. Go Dawgs!

    Did you just go “Wrath of Khan”? Just when I thought I couldn’t love this blog any more than I already did…

  8. Ivey: You’re being inconsistent. You say you approve of what Bobby Petrino does but then harp on “natural attrition” which though you refuse to define it, context clues would indicate that it includes anyone who graduates, goes pro early, or decides they want to play elsewhere, as long as the person who wants to play elsewhere did not play for Coach Saban.

    Your definition seems to be that a scholarship is for four years implicitly, but that’s inaccurate in a very significant way. Scholarships are explicitly for one year only since the NCAA changed them in 1973 from 4 years to one year. For absolute clarity, that means that a very conscious decision was made and agreed on by the majority of the NCAA membership to award scholarships on a yearly renewable basis. I can’t conceive of a kid not knowing that at this point and there’s been no indication from anyone involved that it wasn’t understood.

    Your only sticking point with Saban is that he gives a lot of medical scholarships (something that should be encouraged at Georgia, since it benefits the kids and would “even the playing field” as you say). After that, your problem is with secrecy, but he’s never failed to get under the 85 (and I say under, because every year at least one walk-on has been given a scholarship, which indicates that there were more scholarships available than freshman coming in), and it’s difficult to believe that the SEC and NCAA have said, “You don’t want to tell us who does and doesn’t have a scholarship? Oh, okay. Move along then.”

    If you take issue with Les Miles having a kid come in for the summer and go through the workouts and all that goes along with that and then tell him he’s homeless for a semester because he miscounted, then that makes sense.

    If you take issue with Steve Spurrier for refusing the LOI on signing day of a kid who has been committed for a long time, then that makes sense as Spurrier made a miscalculation (albeit not a malicious one) and found himself with too many kids committed and had not considered a grayshirt nor had that conversation with the kid.

    But to take issue with Saban for not going public with every scholarship he’s given despite there being no outcry from those who should be offended by his practice if he was doing something unethical makes no sense.

    • OK, that’s it.

      Steve:”You’re being inconsistent. You say you approve of what Bobby Petrino does but then harp on “natural attrition” …”

      Now you’ve put words in my mouth, so this conversation is over. You’ve been coming close, but now its clear that your weren’t interested in an honest dialogue. That’s what I thought all along. I just kept giving you the benefit of the doubt just in case you just weren’t too bright. But now you’ve been caught red-handed. You were pretty good, but it was just a matter of time.

      See, I’ve never been inconsistent. Despite the fact that he used his axe in public without trying to disguise it, I despise what Bobby Petrino did this spring, and have NEVER indicated otherwise. The rest of your crapola is the same or similar. I don’t dialogue with people who deliberately twist the words of a conversation. That’s dishonest.

      So say whatever you like from here on, Bozo. I’m done with you. From now on, you’ll have to get off on somebody else.
      ~~~

      • You said that you “respect” Petrino for saying he reviews every player after spring. But you despise Saban (except when you say you like him) for saying that he talks to each of the kids after the spring. You’re splitting major hairs there, brother, but you’ve been in over your head since the moment you decided to respond, so I can forgive that.

        • Bozo: “You said that you “respect” Petrino for saying he reviews every player after spring … blah,blah, blah.”

          I didn’t say that either, Sleazeball. All wrong again. Twisted. I’m through with you. Take a hike.
          ~~~

          • Calm down. The name-calling is as inaccurate as your accusations. I’ve done nothing sleazy, nor do I wear makeup and entertain small children on basic cable.

            The word “respect” was in quotes because it was a quote of you. That was the word you used when saying that if Saban and Bama fans conducted themselves like Petrino, you would respect it. It’s a fair presumption of basic logic — perhaps too great an assumption, now that I type that out — that if you would respect Saban for acting like Petrino, you must also respect Petrino for the same action. That I mentioned your position on this repeatedly without rebuttal until I used the word “inconsistent” makes me think you feel your opinion is being disrespected more than you care about actually making your point. My intent is not to disrespect your opinion, but to get you to actually have one that you can support.

  9. LOL. Like I said already, you’re going to have to get your rocks off on somebody else, pal. You ARE a sleaze, IMHO. Your writings expose that.
    ~~~