PSU joining B1G in offering 4-Year Scholarships?
by joefromboalsburg on Feb 2, 2012 4:20 PM EST
Email
PrintThis article in the Cleveland Plain Dealer claims that most schools in the B1G have begun offering 4-year scholarships.
http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.ssf/2012/01/big_ten_offering_recruits_secu.html
Does anyone know if PSU is one of the schools doing this?
BCS National Champion Rule-Bender Alabama has managed to sign 27 recruits this year, making it the only 'school' in the country to have exceeded the 25-recruit limit intended by NCAA rules for five consecutive years. That run is even more impressive than the SEC-dominated BCS farce. LSU even managed to hold itself back to 25 recruits in one of the last five years!
B1G ten teams, at the other end of the spectrum, have been hell-bent-for-compliance under the 85 total, 25 annual limits. Now, Jim Delaney is showing his leadership abilities again in encouraging B1G schools to grant 4-year scholarships, instead of the 1-year deals required by the NCAA. The man continues to make the B1G proud.
Giving Alabama some credit, it has come a long way from the 1930 to 1945 period, when approximately 3000 freshmen football scholarships were offered. That's right, 200 per year for 15 years. They used to brag about their farm system being better than the New York Yankees, and throw hundreds of players out of school each year.
Also, give Alabama credit for improving over the debacle in 1963 when Georgia Tech left the SEC in disgust, because Bobby Dodd refused to compete against a school that would not stay in compliance with the 140 scholarship limit for football/baseball combined then in effect.
The unbalanced playing field in big-time football continues to get worse, and ESPN and the media celebrate it every day of the year.
History tells us that Alabama, and the rest of the SEC, just can't help themselves. Somebody has got to go down there and do it for them. It will take the NCAA to enforce compliance with decent recruiting practices for this situation to change. The SEC, and their stool-pigeon lackeys on ESPN are not capable of doing this good for themselves.
Meanwhile, I look forward to learning that PSU has taken Delaney's lead in this 4-year scholarship matter. Unfortunately, it will affect the B1G very little, since that is standard practice in this Conference of Universities. It is the Football Factory Conferences that need to be changed, starting with the SEC.
For the Glory of the B1G!
Joe from Boalsburg
Aww, look at you. You created a Fanpost! Any content from a premium site that requires a subscription will be deleted once we catch wind of it. If you simply want to share a link, quote, or video, please consider using Fanshots instead. Thanks.
39 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I will venture to guess
Who is going to open the 2012 season preseason #1. Absolutely ridiculous, that is all I can say, just absolutely ridiculous that this is not called a competative advantage.
Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose - Janis Joplin
I can not express too you
The amount of disgust at the SEC I feel on a daily basis, but I look at it this way they give out these scholarships and yet these kids can’t even graduate while we graduate at what did I see last time 75% rate for our student athletes. At least I can feel proud in knowing that we at PSU and the B1G are smarter then the SEC (I’ll just revive that north v south thing right here… subliminally.)
Publicity is like poison; it doesn't hurt unless you swallow it.
Joe Paterno
PSU is signing the kids to 4 years
Confirmed by Jeff Nelson the other night, all 19 recruits signed 4-year scholarship offers.
As far as I know, Indiana, Purdue and Minnesota were the only B1G schools not doing this — not sure what their reasoning is, but as far as I know neither of those schools (or PSU for that matter) have ever had a problem committing to their student-athletes.
Miami signed 33.
However, you neglect to show the early enrollees, which don’t count in this year’s class. Alabama, Miami, and the other schools that I’m aware of that technically went over 25 were actually under the limit when you look at the rules.
Penn State had one early enrollee, and has had more in the past. Criticize the SEC/Alabama when they undertake questionable recruiting practices, but this isn’t one of them.
And yes, Penn State is offering four-year scholarships.
___
Black Shoe Diaries
SBN - Pittsburgh
Success With Honor
the early enrolee thing is kinda BS as well
if EVERY YEAR for the past 5 years they were over 25 schollies.
So this year they are over 25, but some of them don’t count this year, they should have counted for last year. Ok, that’ll happen occasionally, I’ll give them a pass. So let’s add them onto last year’s total. Oh last year they were also over 25? Well, take away the players who enrolled early last year and put them in the previous year’s class, and add this year’s early enrollees onto last year.
And sure, maybe ever year they get the numbers to work, but only by throwing kids out for other shady recruiting practices.
Maybe this isn’t specifically a “shady recruiting practice” but it is a method used to obfuscate other shady practices.
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 3, 2012 9:21 AM EST up reply actions
There is no way that 5 x 27 = 85 unless you dump 50 players.
Which is the average number of Alabama players who will, between the Feb 15 signing date and August start of the season will do one of the following:
1) Get Thrown Off The Team
2) Get Transferred to a complicit JUCO
3) Flunk out of school
4) Leave after being told they will never play a single down.
They cannot change themselves. They must be led to the promised land by righteous indignators!
Son of an Infidel.....Eater of Vegetables!
by joefromboalsburg on Feb 3, 2012 1:13 PM EST up reply actions
They could also graduate. Or jump to the NFL early.
Look, I’m not condoning every practice the SEC uses in recruiting. But fudging the numbers goes both ways. You using 5 as your multiplier assumes every player uses a redshirt year. What about the player, like Justin Brown, that will leave the program after four years with no redshirt? Or the player, like Honeybadger, that jumps to the NFL early. Those play a role in filling spots as well.
___
Black Shoe Diaries
SBN - Pittsburgh
Success With Honor
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 3, 2012 2:41 PM EST up reply actions
Jeff, take a look at the Bowl Games this year to see how this plays into winning or losing.
I had an earlier post where all bowl games this year were checked out vs. the number of scholarships granted during the last five years. 80% of the winners had granted more scholarships than their opponents! 80%!
This is not aluminum-foil sky-is-falling stuff. It is a clear and present competitive advantage.
The rest of the details are for apologists. Unless, of course, you subscribe to the idiotic premise that southern boys are bigger and faster than northern boys and boys west of the Mississippi river.
The SEC wins because they are not playing the same game.
Son of an Infidel.....Eater of Vegetables!
by joefromboalsburg on Feb 3, 2012 7:19 PM EST up reply actions
This is a jump.
80% of the winners had granted more scholarships than their opponents! 80%!
As was noted in your blog which was posted everywhere…
"Maybe" the winning programs are getting better recruits who are less likely to red shirt, opening more roster spots?
"Maybe" the winning programs are better, attracting more athletes willing to grey-shirt?
"Maybe" the winning programs are more willing to give a 2nd chance to athletes with problem personal and/or academic backgrounds leading to a higher early departure rate?
"Maybe" the worse few recruits signed in each signing class doesn’t make that much difference?
Over signing needs some new rules to protect the athlete, but…
"Maybe" over signing isn’t the determining factor in winning, and…
"Maybe" over signing is not nearly the major issue it is made out to be?
…because not only is over signing not the only reason for the 80% you cite, it isn’t even the best reason.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
It is not a jump, it is a fact.
You have an OPINION that MAYBE this correlation is a coincidence.
The FACT is that the correlation is TRUE for this season.
The FACT is that the practice is widespread, particularly in the SEC, particularly with BAMA, LSU, and AUBURN.
The FACT is that the SEC has dominated the playing field for the last six years.
My OPINION is that I cannot ignore the FACTS.
Son of an Infidel.....Eater of Vegetables!
by joefromboalsburg on Feb 4, 2012 9:47 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Nobody is asking you to ignore any facts.
I do question your ability to differentiate the causes from the effects.
Both the 80% winning percentage and signing more athletes are the expected results of:
Getting better recruits who are less likely to red shirt.
Having better programs.
Giving a 2nd chance to teenagers with problems in their personal and academic backgrounds.
It is doubtful the few lowest recruits in each class were the determining factor in the game outcomes – in most cases it was less than 2 recruits a year difference. In lost cases (such as UF over tOSU) there was more significant factors at work.
I suspect in most cases, the winning team averaged better recruits across the board, not just the additional players (such as OU over Iowa).
The existence of a correlation doesn’t mean that 1 lead to the other these are both the expected results of other causes.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
So, the SEC signs more scholarships because they are better?
Sorry, Pro, I just don’t get that.
Time will tell. Eventually, Bama and the SEC will be forced to apply the spirit of the rules.
In the meantime, Roll Tide.
Son of an Infidel.....Eater of Vegetables!
by joefromboalsburg on Feb 5, 2012 5:56 PM EST up reply actions
This is false
So, the SEC signs more scholarships because they are better?
I never claimed this. I never spoke to the quality of the recruiting classes on a conference level.
If you have to rephrase to comments of the OP for your point to be relevant, you don’t have a relevant point.
I do claim better programs are more likely to attract better athletes – nothing revolutionary here.
I do claim a willingness to accept recruits with personal or academic problems increases the pool of prospects, which increases the chances of signing better classes – nothing revolutionary here.
These do contribute to the following…
I do claim programs who red shirt fewer generally award more scholarships – nothing revolutionary here.
I do claim better athletes are more likely to leave for the pros before they use all of their eligibility (including red shirts) – nothing revolutionary here.
I do claim that an observed correlation does not equate to 1 being the cause and the other the effect, such as the example correlation of people who have luxury homes are more likely to have luxury cars – nothing revolutionary here.
I do claim that the number of signed recruits is not the determining factor in the game results you noted.
I do claim the number of signed recruits and winning are both results of other factors, not that 1 causes the other.
I do claim your belief that a correlation shows 1 caused the other is faulty reasoning – nothing revolutionary here.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
I wonder
When Alabama early enrolled these recruits did they actually have those available, because of guys that didn’t make the grades, or did they run guys off to make room?
We Are!!!!!!
Now that is an argument you can look into.
Using the EE process to make room is entirely legal and used by almost everyone. How they made room for the EEs is a different story.
___
Black Shoe Diaries
SBN - Pittsburgh
Success With Honor
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 3, 2012 9:10 AM EST up reply actions
Jeff, the problem is that it is all legal.
Scholarships are one-year deals. No start, no scholarship, sayonara!
Also, you do not have to be within the 85 player limit for the period between February and August. So, sign 27 to 30 players every year, and just make sure you dump 10 players, some new, some upperclassmen, before the season starts.
Here are some average numbers for you. OSU, PSU and Bama for the last five years. OSU 19, PSU 21, BAMA, 27
If all players were limited to 4 years, these numbers would be 21 per year. With some going 5, they are closer to 19 or so. All schools have some players who drop out, transfer, or even die. But 10 per year is a number that is only for the likes of BAMA, OLE MISS, LSU, et al. ( OK State is also one of the bad boys. Note their rise in competitiveness.)
Son of an Infidel.....Eater of Vegetables!
by joefromboalsburg on Feb 3, 2012 7:29 PM EST up reply actions
No need to run guys off for green shirts.
Green shirts who enroll full time in January can be signed under the previous class if there is room under the yearly 25 and total 85 scholarship limit, or they can be enrolled with the current class.
The NCAA actually encourages green shirting.
The downside of this is that unused scholarships used to go to walk-ons, but in the future will be held for green shirts.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Then,
if they already hit their 25 limit the year before. EE would count against current year, because they signed more then 25 for 5 straight years, unless some of the guys don’t make it in academically. Still seems like they are gaming the system for advantage. Not that it’s against the rules, but something that makes me unconfortable with.
We Are!!!!!!
Your accounting is correct...
Kind of …provided they have room under the 85 total limit. The number signed in other years (such as 5 straight years) is irrelevant.
unless some of the guys don’t make it in academically.If an existing player doesn’t make it, he is dropped from the 85 total count. If a new recruit doesn’t, he doesn’t count against either limit.
Still seems like they are gaming the system for advantage.It is available and currently (or soon to be) used by everyone with the NCAAs blessing.
It is to the athlete’s benefit, providing some with scholarship opportunities they wouldn’t have otherwise, giving them a head start on training and development, gives them more time to get their degree, and provides them with a chance to acclimate to college life before starting football practice.
Not that it’s against the rules, but something that makes me uncomfortable with.If over signing opponents are truly acting out of concern for the athletes as they claim (and not looking to justify a shot at another program or conference), this isn’t an area to be uncomfortable with.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
A lot of what I have read ignores a very important aspect of the 4 year scholarship.
An article I read indicated that, not only is scholarship length a choice now from year to year, but it is a choice from player to player. I know some schools have said that every player signed a four year scholarship, however, did every school that gave them out confirm that every player signed them? For example, if you wanted to offer four and five star recruits 4 year scholarships you could, but you could also offer two and three star recruits in the same class one year scholarships. I think we need to take a careful look at deployment of this new device before we praise it.
"Today we have experienced a great loss. This loss is incomparable to what we gained from coach Paterno." - Mike Wallace
The benefit of the 4 year scholarship limit isn't a curb to oversigning...
…it is the ethical treatment of athletes. If an athlete gets cut and doesn’t transfer, his education is still covered.
Many programs even go beyond this – after the scholly runs out, tOSU offers free tuition for life until an athlete receives his bachelor’s degree provided he leaves in good standing (nd not disciplinary reasons, etc.).
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
that is actually the coolest thing I have ever heard
about OSU
All of our comments are irrelevant - LetsGoPSU
So, um, it looks like you've amassed 2534 credits. Don't you think it is time to graduate?
by The JuggerNitt on Feb 5, 2012 2:05 AM EST up reply actions
If he timed it right...
…he could receive his diploma and spend the night partying over a keg he bought with his 1st Social Security check!
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
For the more lucrative programs, awarding 4 year schollies isn't an issue...
…the athlete can still be cut from the varsity squad – his scholarship becomes a general grant provided he completely separates (no longer enjoys any additional privileges over the typical student).
This is another issue to separate the big programs from the little sisters of the poor where having to budget non-athletic scholarships becomes a burden.
Even this is overstated, as most players cut from the roster complete their eligibility elsewhere sparing the program their educational expenses.
For the big programs like Alabama, a 4 year scholarship requirement has no effect on recruiting, but it does alleviate many of the ethical issues brought up by groups like oversigning.com (or whatever the sites are).
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
Excellent point.
Give oversigning.com a look. There are several very interesting background pieces, and they do take the time to identify the details of who, what, when, where, and why each player is no longer with the teams in question.
There is no question that Ohio State or the B1G is at a competitive disadvantage with the top of the SEC. Oversigning is a major factor, not a minor coincidence.
Of course, nobody knows what the competitive situation would be like if the SEC strictly enforced 85/25. Maybe the results would be the same, but I doubt it.
Son of an Infidel.....Eater of Vegetables!
by joefromboalsburg on Feb 4, 2012 9:56 AM EST up reply actions
Did we oversign in 2011?
According to the “Oversigning Cup” we oversigned by 1 player in 2011. There’s a link to thread on Lions 24/7 that discusses it, but doesn’t seem to close our actual scholarship # at signing day and how we got to 85 in August.
http://oversigning.com/testing/index.php/the-oversigning-cup/
Does anyone have a recollection of how this resolved?
We did oversign, I was actually the one that wrote that original L247 thread.
But that also depends on your definition of oversigning. If you think oversigning occurs the moment the offers go out to players, then we oversigned. However, if you look at that L247 thread I wrote, three of the underlying players left the team before the 2011 season, and one recruit never qualified. So that took our 86 scholarships and reduced it to 82.
___
Black Shoe Diaries
SBN - Pittsburgh
Success With Honor
by Jeff Junstrom on Feb 4, 2012 1:37 PM EST up reply actions
Thanks.
So our place on the 2011 Oversigning Cup standings is based on the instant signing day #’s and not so much the knowledge of why we signed 16 and the circumstances that would get us to 85 (or less).
Seems there are “two” types of oversigning:
A. Slimy: purposely sign more than you have schollies for and find a way to make 67 +30=85
B. Legit: sign more than you are publicly known to have and you will get to 85 by legit/ethical circumstances known by the program prior to signing.
The current roster on gopsusports has around 120 players on it and since we don’t have an official list from the athletic dept of who is on scholarship and who is not I can see it being difficult to add up 85- unless you’re REALLY into keeping track of who signed and when – even then there is going to be some guesswork I think.
It's not that hard to keep track.
PSU has a large walk-on roster to man foreign teams. These are not scholarship players.
Keeping track is simple. Read the paper. Local media do an excellent job of reporting the comings and goings of football players’ scholarship status.
Scholarships accepted by Freshmen on Signing Day are not counted against your 85 total. The 85 total ‘count’ must be reached by the first day of the season, some time in August. So expect that the difference between the signing numbers and your graduation/gone to the NFL numbers to be made up by departures.
The Turk visits 7 to10 young men between now and August in most teams in the SEC. The most common is being asked to leave, in exchange for a recommendation to a complicit JUCO. However, there is natural attrition at all schools for kids who are homesick or flunk out, so deviation on or around the 85 number in the B1G is normal, but the ‘non-scheduled departures’ are once in a while, instead of 10 per year.
Son of an Infidel.....Eater of Vegetables!
by joefromboalsburg on Feb 4, 2012 3:54 PM EST up reply actions
Allow me to admit that I am just not motivated enough to do the leg work to keep track of our scholarship count on my own. I know the ~40 walk-on scout team players are non-scholarship. My point above is that we are only on that 2011 list because of some technical definition and NOT because we are SEC shady.
I’m out of state and have been for 8 years, my local media rams all things Michigan and Michigan State down my throat. Up until recently, the only local PSU coverage I got was when we played UofM or MSU and that is biased, now it’s all negative JS stuff. I used to read the ESPN blog for my PSU coverage, and the occasional PA online newspaper article. I’ve bailed on ESPiN. BSD is now my primary source for PSU sports (I wish I had discovered this years ago – I have been thoroughly impressed).
For simplicity, ease of reference and transparency (Erickson’s favorite word) it would be nice to have some indication on the official PSU posted roster who is currently on scholarship and who is not. I’m not asking/expecting this to be updated every time someone leaves, just post an accurate list when August practice starts. Keep the previous 5 years available and it would be simple to figure out who graduated, who jumped to the NFL, and who left for other reasons.
You are touching on a main sticking point in the over signing discussion...
…what exactly defines over signing?
As with many topics in NCAAF, it frequently becomes a case of applying a label and standards where the practices of others are evil examples of over signing, our practices are common and ethical.
For example, some point to grey shirting, but even the NCAA endorses the practice in many circumstances.
The answer for many sites is to skip creating a definition and address the problems directly by championing reforms in 2 areas:
1. Full and early disclosure to the recruits, and full and early notification to athletes that will be cut from the roster.
2. Guaranteeing a full 4/5 year scholarship as long as the athlete is in good standing in terms of academics and conduct, even if he is cut from the roster.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
completely agree
This issue is as prime of an example as any where the NCAA is ineffective in its current policy/rules. Like it or not, Nick Saban’s yearly exercise in making 30=21 is not breaking any actual NCAA rules. He’s taking advantage of very accessible loop holes. I don’t agree with it, and I am happy Penn State doesn’t treat kids like stock that you buy and sell based on their returns. We are stuck with this until the NCAA or conferences step up and make effective rules with consequences.
Last year when the oversigning topic came up I wished Joe Paterno would be asked about it in a press conference – if he spoke, his voice on this would have been heard. As I remember it was Joe who basically made instant replay happen in the Big Ten. He was the one guy left of the old school who could and would speak and make something positive happen. For this and many other reasons Joe will be missed. Instead we have Bret Bielema whining that he legitimately lost one recruit to a conference rival.
Yes, there is a legitimate question.
Oversigning is a major factor, not a minor coincidence.
This is an assumption not supported by the facts, not a fact in itself.
Signing large number of recruits and winning are both the expected results of other causes.
Your claim that 1 leads to the other is akin to claiming owning a luxury car contributes to owning a luxury home, when in reality both are the expected result of earning a high salary.
Sophistry can make a result appear as a cause, but this is an illusion.
The reasons that lead to success on the field and the signing of more recruits
would still lead to success on the field with fewer recruits.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
????
Give oversigning.com a look.
Since I referenced them, I obviously gave them a look.
There are several very interesting background pieces, and they do take the time to identify the details of who, what, when, where, and why each player is no longer with the teams in question.This would be quite a trick, considering that the programs frequently protect athletes dismissed for academic and disciplinary action by never noting the reason.
Of course, nobody knows what the competitive situation would be like if the SEC strictly enforced 85/25. Maybe the results would be the same, but I doubt it.You will find the 85/25 strictly enforced as it is an NCAA requirement…
…unlerss you redefine the 85/25 limit to support your own claims.
If you have to redefine to rules to make your claim valid, you don’t have a valid claim.
That’s why these sites have moved past the definition – their cause has being abused by fans using it to downplay the accomplishments of other programs.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
So, I guess you do not agree with my point of view.
Peace.
Meanwhile, I suggest checking oversigning.com to see who has been offering more scholarships prior to making any wagers on games next yer.
Son of an Infidel.....Eater of Vegetables!
by joefromboalsburg on Feb 5, 2012 6:12 PM EST up reply actions
It isn't just your POV I disagree with.
So, I guess you do not agree with my point of view.
I disagree with your faulty reasoning that the existence of a correlation means 1 lead to the other, neglecting that both are results of other factors.
Sophistry can make a result appear as a cause, but this is an illusion.
The reasons that lead to success on the field and the signing of more recruits
would still lead to success on the field with fewer recruits.
Meanwhile, I suggest checking oversigning.com to see who has been offering more scholarships prior to making any wagers on games next yer.If I am going to bet, the bet will be based on more than the number of scholarships awarded over the last decade.
There were more pertinent factors in the game results you reference than the quantity of awarded scholarships.
The median difference in awarded scholarships comes out to 1.3 scholarships/year – this was not the determining factor in the game outcomes, or in the quality of the athletes on the field…
…(Iowa would need far more than another 1.3 athletes/year to catch up with the quality of the athletes Oklahoma fielded.
Proud proponent of the 52 team Uber Conference
One solution
Some have defended the over-signing by certain teams by making the claim that some of the players wound up not being academically eligible therefore even though they offered schollies to 35 kids, only 25 of them wound up being eligible so it was fine. How about they adjust the rules in 2 ways: 1) you do it like the Big Ten and can only offer as many scholarships as you actually have. 2) Once you offer (and sign) a kid to a schollie, that is it. You don’t get a do-over if they wind up not being academically eligible. Sure, if a kid is borderline then you can reserve that schollie and wait until he is eligible before offering, but once you offer (and it is accepted) that is it. This will really make schools think twice before focusing on the athlete portion of “student athlete” over the student part.
Some will probably claim that this will screw borderline kids out of a good education, but I find it hard to believe that some schools won’t reserve that schollie, even if they are lower tier. Plus, if the high school kid knows he’ll have to make the grades he might actually care. Heck, maybe allow the recruiting schools to offer tutoring help (not sure how this would fall under giving gifts or whatever, but maybe they could make an exemption. I mean it isn’t like the kid is getting a car or anything, just the opportunity to learn better. Or maybe there could be a blanket NCAA-offered tutoring service to remove school specific affiliations.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
SHOP THE BLACK SHOE DIARIES STORE
