Oversigning

[Red Five]

I don't think so. I think you are only allowed to over-sign up to 88 on signing day. You do have to be down to 85 by fall but you can't have more than 88 on signing day.

I'm having trouble finding it spelled out exactly but here's an article from the OWH that pretty much says that (from last year):

As the World-Herald's scholarship distribution chart shows, NU has 72 of 85 scholarships filled. The Big Ten allows schools to sign three players over the 85-man scholarship limit. That presumes the attrition that tends to happen every offseason or the possibility that one or more of the signees won’t academically qualify.

“All these coaches are like, ‘Well, I’d like to take one more guy, it’d be great if I could have one more,’” Gunderson said. “But I have to tell them ‘Well, that’s not possible, guys.’ Coach Riley is really good about that. He’ll pull me aside. We’ve got all the boards downstairs and, ‘OK, here’s the spots, how do we want to fill them, and here’s the candidates.’ So I think we’ll go to 19.”

The Big Ten rules are a change from what Riley and Co. dealt with at Oregon State. There, teams got 25 scholarships to offer each cycle and didn’t have to necessarily fit within 88 on signing day. In the Big Ten, “88 is 88,” Gunderson said.

I have always interpreted like this. You can only have 88 on signing day. Then you have to be at 85 by fall camp

 

[SouthLincoln Husker]

I don't think so. I think you are only allowed to over-sign up to 88 on signing day. You do have to be down to 85 by fall but you can't have more than 88 on signing day.

I'm having trouble finding it spelled out exactly but here's an article from the OWH that pretty much says that (from last year):

As the World-Herald's scholarship distribution chart shows, NU has 72 of 85 scholarships filled. The Big Ten allows schools to sign three players over the 85-man scholarship limit. That presumes the attrition that tends to happen every offseason or the possibility that one or more of the signees won’t academically qualify.

“All these coaches are like, ‘Well, I’d like to take one more guy, it’d be great if I could have one more,’” Gunderson said. “But I have to tell them ‘Well, that’s not possible, guys.’ Coach Riley is really good about that. He’ll pull me aside. We’ve got all the boards downstairs and, ‘OK, here’s the spots, how do we want to fill them, and here’s the candidates.’ So I think we’ll go to 19.”

The Big Ten rules are a change from what Riley and Co. dealt with at Oregon State. There, teams got 25 scholarships to offer each cycle and didn’t have to necessarily fit within 88 on signing day. In the Big Ten, “88 is 88,” Gunderson said.

I have always interpreted like this. You can only have 88 on signing day. Then you have to be at 85 by fall camp

The 88 on signing day is a Big Ten rule and we have to be to 85 by first day of fall practice!

 

[BigRedBuster]

That's interesting. I've never seen the rule interpreted like that.

So....let's say you are a new coach and you know there are 10 guys on your team that just don't like you and your staff. They aren't happy and it's just best they move on. You have tried your hardest to keep them and make them happy. You honestly didn't "run them off". BUT, they don't leave till after the spring semester. And....let's say you have 16 graduating seniors.

You are SOL. You are not allowed to replace those guys (that you KNOW are leaving). The most you can sign is 19 and so you KNOW you are going to go into the fall with less than 80 scholarship players and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Interesting.

I guess your only option is to make sure you get rid of those guys before signing day.

 

[Atbone95]

That's interesting. I've never seen the rule interpreted like that.

So....let's say you are a new coach and you know there are 10 guys on your team that just don't like you and your staff. They aren't happy and it's just best they move on. You have tried your hardest to keep them and make them happy. You honestly didn't "run them off". BUT, they don't leave till after the spring semester. And....let's say you have 16 graduating seniors.

You are SOL. You are not allowed to replace those guys (that you KNOW are leaving). The most you can sign is 19 and so you KNOW you are going to go into the fall with less than 80 scholarship players and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Interesting.

I guess your only option is to make sure you get rid of those guys before signing day.

This was my point (and why I thought the rule worked the other way). Is a coach really just SOL? Give those scholarships to a walk-on for the year or something? There has to be protections to prevent that happening to a coach.

 

[caveman99]

I don't think so. I think you are only allowed to over-sign up to 88 on signing day. You do have to be down to 85 by fall but you can't have more than 88 on signing day.

I'm having trouble finding it spelled out exactly but here's an article from the OWH that pretty much says that (from last year):

As the World-Herald's scholarship distribution chart shows, NU has 72 of 85 scholarships filled. The Big Ten allows schools to sign three players over the 85-man scholarship limit. That presumes the attrition that tends to happen every offseason or the possibility that one or more of the signees wont academically qualify.

All these coaches are like, Well, Id like to take one more guy, itd be great if I could have one more, Gunderson said. But I have to tell them Well, thats not possible, guys. Coach Riley is really good about that. Hell pull me aside. Weve got all the boards downstairs and, OK, heres the spots, how do we want to fill them, and heres the candidates. So I think well go to 19.

The Big Ten rules are a change from what Riley and Co. dealt with at Oregon State. There, teams got 25 scholarships to offer each cycle and didnt have to necessarily fit within 88 on signing day. In the Big Ten, 88 is 88, Gunderson said.

Thanks Mav, I thought I was going crazy for awhile. Sounds like a whole lot of attrition will happen at Michigan in the next week or 2 before their 2nd semester starts then.

 

[RedDenver]

That's interesting. I've never seen the rule interpreted like that.

So....let's say you are a new coach and you know there are 10 guys on your team that just don't like you and your staff. They aren't happy and it's just best they move on. You have tried your hardest to keep them and make them happy. You honestly didn't "run them off". BUT, they don't leave till after the spring semester. And....let's say you have 16 graduating seniors.

You are SOL. You are not allowed to replace those guys (that you KNOW are leaving). The most you can sign is 19 and so you KNOW you are going to go into the fall with less than 80 scholarship players and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Interesting.

I guess your only option is to make sure you get rid of those guys before signing day.

This was my point (and why I thought the rule worked the other way). Is a coach really just SOL? Give those scholarships to a walk-on for the year or something? There has to be protections to prevent that happening to a coach.

The rule is to protect the players, not the coaches. This helps minimize the practice to signing players and then come fall camp telling them there aren't enough scholarships.

This also helps prevent coaches from running players off during the spring and summer.

 

[BigRedBuster]

That's interesting. I've never seen the rule interpreted like that.

So....let's say you are a new coach and you know there are 10 guys on your team that just don't like you and your staff. They aren't happy and it's just best they move on. You have tried your hardest to keep them and make them happy. You honestly didn't "run them off". BUT, they don't leave till after the spring semester. And....let's say you have 16 graduating seniors.

You are SOL. You are not allowed to replace those guys (that you KNOW are leaving). The most you can sign is 19 and so you KNOW you are going to go into the fall with less than 80 scholarship players and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Interesting.

I guess your only option is to make sure you get rid of those guys before signing day.

This was my point (and why I thought the rule worked the other way). Is a coach really just SOL? Give those scholarships to a walk-on for the year or something? There has to be protections to prevent that happening to a coach.

The rule is to protect the players, not the coaches. This helps minimize the practice to signing players and then come fall camp telling them there aren't enough scholarships.

This also helps prevent coaches from running players off during the spring and summer.

Yes, but the rule needs to be able to be managed.

 

[MinnwiscowaSker]

That's interesting. I've never seen the rule interpreted like that.

So....let's say you are a new coach and you know there are 10 guys on your team that just don't like you and your staff. They aren't happy and it's just best they move on. You have tried your hardest to keep them and make them happy. You honestly didn't "run them off". BUT, they don't leave till after the spring semester. And....let's say you have 16 graduating seniors.

You are SOL. You are not allowed to replace those guys (that you KNOW are leaving). The most you can sign is 19 and so you KNOW you are going to go into the fall with less than 80 scholarship players and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Interesting.

I guess your only option is to make sure you get rid of those guys before signing day.

This was my point (and why I thought the rule worked the other way). Is a coach really just SOL? Give those scholarships to a walk-on for the year or something? There has to be protections to prevent that happening to a coach.

The rule is to protect the players, not the coaches. This helps minimize the practice to signing players and then come fall camp telling them there aren't enough scholarships.

This also helps prevent coaches from running players off during the spring and summer.

Yes, but the rule needs to be able to be managed.

If 10 guys leave in the spring when they're first getting to know you they probably aren't high quality people or you're not a high quality person as a coach. If either of those are the reason, I'm not upset.

 

[BigRedBuster]

That's interesting. I've never seen the rule interpreted like that.

So....let's say you are a new coach and you know there are 10 guys on your team that just don't like you and your staff. They aren't happy and it's just best they move on. You have tried your hardest to keep them and make them happy. You honestly didn't "run them off". BUT, they don't leave till after the spring semester. And....let's say you have 16 graduating seniors.

You are SOL. You are not allowed to replace those guys (that you KNOW are leaving). The most you can sign is 19 and so you KNOW you are going to go into the fall with less than 80 scholarship players and there is absolutely nothing you can do about it.

Interesting.

I guess your only option is to make sure you get rid of those guys before signing day.

This was my point (and why I thought the rule worked the other way). Is a coach really just SOL? Give those scholarships to a walk-on for the year or something? There has to be protections to prevent that happening to a coach.

The rule is to protect the players, not the coaches. This helps minimize the practice to signing players and then come fall camp telling them there aren't enough scholarships.

This also helps prevent coaches from running players off during the spring and summer.

Yes, but the rule needs to be able to be managed.

If 10 guys leave in the spring when they're first getting to know you they probably aren't high quality people or you're not a high quality person as a coach. If either of those are the reason, I'm not upset.

I don't have a problem with this rule. However, I would even be more comfortable with this if this was an NCAA rule and not just Big Ten.

If Ol Miss can sign 28 guys per class and wait till spring and summer to balance out who is going to be there in the fall but Nebraska can't, that puts us at a disadvantage.

And, if you are fine with that, then don't complain when Ol' Miss has a better team than we do.

 

[swmohusker]

Merge to new thread?

 

[huskerhill]

Merge to new thread?

One could only hope... Tangents on topics that few care about seems to be norm heading into signing day

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Nebraska is about to have several "transfers" or kids leaving the team over the weekend, is that correct?

Depending on the number, what's the projection on our class size? 20?

 

[BigRedBuster]

I've seen 23-24 tossed around.

 

[Mavric]

Right now we have five open spots (assuming all the former walk-ons are renewed) plus can oversign by three.

So eight plus however many leave added to our current 15.

23-26 if we can fill them all.

 

[Dr. Strangelove]

Right now we have five open spots (assuming all the former walk-ons are renewed) plus can oversign by three.

So eight plus however many leave added to our current 15.

23-26 if we can fill them all.

So, 17 seniors plus Collins leaving is 18. A number of kids, up to 5, transferring/leaving the program this weekend puts us at 23. If Nebraska wants, they can oversign by 3 in order to get to 26.

Personally, I'm in favor of not oversigning this season unless those recruits are worth it. The stress on the current roster, to take a total of 26, would be severe particularly when we consider that Nebraska seemed to have very little depth at most positions IMO. Whatever the case, I'm glad Riley is taking the high road on this one. Unlike Harbaugh running kids off... disgusting.