Clearing space (and doing it more fairly) in an era of multi-year scholarships

This John Infante piece on multi-year scholarships and oversigning almost makes too much sense.  Seriously, how logical is his opening paragraph?

To say that oversigning is a major issue in college football is incorrect. Roster management is the issue, with oversigning being just one facet of the larger controversy. It would be absurdly easy to eliminate oversigning with no improvement in student-athlete welfare.

If you’re looking for an explanation about what’s behind roster management and how it might be affected by the new multi-year scholly rule, his article is pretty much a primer and definitely worth your attention, particularly as to some of the remedies he suggests.  If you think the student-athlete who gets the short end of the stick as a victim of the numbers game deserves a little more freedom, you’ll like what he proposes.

13 Comments

Filed under Recruiting, The NCAA

13 responses to “Clearing space (and doing it more fairly) in an era of multi-year scholarships

  1. The other Doug

    All the NCAA has to do is limit the number of kids a team can sign and do away with the 85 scholarship limit. That way a coach can cut anyone he wants for what ever reason, but he won’t be able to replace that person.

  2. Scorpio Jones, III

    It is interesting there is all this conversation about roster management juxtaposed with all the talk about a playoff.

  3. Always Someone Else's Fault

    I’d love to know how many kids in the B1G have appealed their scholarship cancellation and how many of those appeals were ruled in favor of the student. Some of those teams go through a lot of players.

    I would also love to see NCAA allow universities to put safeguards into place for the student-athletes who work out as students but not athletes. Why can’t the kid remain in school on scholarship but not on the roster as an official counter? It may have been a money issue initially, but don’t tell me it’s a money issue now. When Washington State is throwing $2+ mill at Mike Leach, I think they can keep a few extra butts in the undergraduate desks without bankrupting the institution.

    The 85 limit was predicated as both a financial and competitive limit. The financial side of it is increasingly becoming a non-issue for the schools with the most roster pressures. If a kid remains on scholarship and the school remains at 85, then it’s not a competitive issue, either. Kid finishes his education where he started, on scholarship. Coach gets to be a coach and make coaching decisions. It really frees Mark Richt to be both the best coach and the best person he wants to be. How often do we discuss the ways those values come into conflict? How screwed up is a system which puts those values into conflict?

    We’re not even willing to discuss the 85 limit or the inseparability of the scholarship from a roster spot. We throw out pie in the sky scenarios all the time on this subject. Why are those taboo?

  4. IveyLeaguer

    Just eliminate the 85 rule … and set the annual signing limit somewhere between 25 and 30. Problems solved.

    But it’ll never happen.

    The SEC’s action last year with the 25-limit was smoke and mirrors. They knew it didn’t address the problem and they don’t want to. The top SEC teams who practice pro-style roster management have an advantage, and they want to keep it that way.
    ~~~

  5. Cojones

    Just when you reduce the pages in the rule book, up jumps another possibility for making a bible form inherent with footnotes similar to law tomes or Federal Regulations. To make this fly, codification of all circumstances that can occur between the student, the institution and the NCAA have to be in place, with room for precedent addition through the years.

    I saw a possible fly in the ointment concerning the student-appeal process (SAP-no, this isn’t humor). The SAP can surpass/conflict with the signing date and place a hold on the roster until the SAP is satisfied. That would require a period length to the SAP that provides each increment similar to law appeals going from one court of jurisdiction to another and call for a tangled travel path between the student/Institution/NCAA (SIN-no, no, this is still serious shit) . This may call for the SAP to appeal like SIN to avoid the hold on overlap to scholarship end date (HOSED-now we are kinda easing into lol territory).

    In short, someone is going to get HOSED if the SAP appeals like SIN.

    • Dog in Fla

      “In short, someone is going to get HOSED”

      Will the hosing be done by Julie Roe Lach’s First Hose Assistant?

      • Cojones

        Paraphrasing her mentor mother ,”Somebody is going to get skinned here”.

        • Dog in Fla

          That’s just what Lane said. I wonder if Lane and OBC are going to connect this weekend before OBC’s command performance before the COI in LA.

  6. Dog in Fla

    Colorado State now has on its staff two experts on roster management/oversigning: Mr. Infante and the new head coach, Nick’s former offensive coordinator.

    • Cojones

      Could it have been a shot across the bow from Mr. Infante?

      • Dog in Fla

        Or could it be an opportunity for Mr. Infante, an assistant compliance director, who is already well-versed in the matter to gather additional intel from someone who learned from the master of roster management, oversigning and medical disqualifications.

  7. shane#1

    “Other people get to learn from their mistakes and move on. When I make a mistake I have to look at him every day at practice for the next four years.”-Coach Abe Lemons.