Every team is way over at one point or another. No way around it. We may be over now but that number does not include the guys who are already looking for playing time elsewhere, guys who may get in trouble with the law or break team rules, guys who get homesick, players who are unable to play anymore, players who will declare for the draft early, etc... All that has to be taken into account when signing a class not just your current roster number. That would be foolish. Imagine the outcry of fans if teams signed too few players and don't have a ton of scholarships available that are wasted for the year. While other teams are continuing to do the same things that the NCAA and SEC allows to get to the 105 team limit and 85 scholarship limit. We would have made ourselves less competitive and possibly fall from the top tier of teams in the country. That would be tough hole to crawl out from. It is basically equivalent to putting yourself on probation with scholarship reductions for no reason at all. BTW, I do not own this site or consider myself a recruiting expert. I just pass information I recieve from time to time and discuss aspects of recruiting I understand. Definetely not pursuing any careers in recruiting either. Leave the conspiracy theories out of it. If you want to discuss something beyond the topic of this thread you can send me a private message.
I think ESPN took what they could get just like they did when multiple Alabama players opened up about the same issue. They did no research beyond what Chris or Porter gave them. They don't need new Les quotes to do the research. Basically it was like what we see with many news outlets these days. They take what they can get and don't take the time to make it more than one-sided and the people who eat it up like they are watching an infomercial really have no undertanding of what is being reported before they see the segment. The people who understand the process of recruiting, NCAA/SEC rules, the timeline, etc... can spot holes with no effort. I agree there are some things the NCAA needs to do to fix the problem they created but until they make new rules covering all teams they have to live with the results. Because no team is going to allow the others to have a competitive advantage when there is no reason to do so.
This was in response to Red saying he doesn't judge football by the ratings. I took it as you making fun of the way he used the word "judge", which any southerner would've understood and found nothing funny about it. You're in FL. FL isn't the south. I've spent a couple of winters in South FL. English is most people's second language down there, and the rest of them, southern is their second location. Doesn't matter. If I'm misreading it, I apologize. But considering that Cap One thread, I don't think I'm the only one misreading it. (Read: I'm not misreading it)
Funny how you left off the smiley face after my retort to Red... also funny how you omitted his retort back which was "There's nothing wrong with the Rose Bowl, once you get past the arrogance":grin:. Most might say we were just jabbing with each other. Red also said SEC pride was a southern thing... which I fully agree with, which led to my retort of understanding that because I've lived in the south for some 40 years. If you're gonna do the "partial quote spin", you may have a future as a political wordsmith. Btw, I live about as far north in Florida as one can get. You've spent more time in south Florida than I have. I sense you didn't like it. Have you been to Houston lately? Good luck in your bowl game. As always, except should you play the Hawks, I'll be rooting for you!!
I loved S FL when I was there last. I'm just saying it ain't the 'south'. No...don't like Houston...but only because there's too many people there. Just spent 8 months in Chicago, and liked it...until winter set in. Then I had to go. Don't know how people live there during the winter. Brutal! And with you being from Iowa, I know you understand that.
I thought it was shabby reporting and a bit over the top. Of course I'm biased because I'm an LSU fan, but when Garrett transfers to I-AA Northwestern State and can't even survive there, then that should've triggered at least a red flag for this story and certainly the lead portion. If ESPN OTL had to do this story, then the kid from Miami who started and played in the majority of its games, then was sent packing because of Sentrell Henderson would've been much more appropriate. Not some third or fourth string QB at LSU. All that being said I still thought ESPN did a very poor job of reporting particularly the fact that grant-in-aid scholarships are one-year deals and not guaranteed for the four or five years an athlete may be on campus. A coach is well within his or her rights to deny renewal of that scholarship. The reasons why schollies are one-year deals was also never presented. It was one of the poorest OTL's I've ever seen. I distinctly remember Les Miles saying at the annual fish fry here in Shreveport after the spring that Chris Garrett was not doing what he needed to do to compete. LM even said, which got my attention, that Garrett told him and the Crowton that he wasn't ready to compete for the starting QB job. What coach wants to hear that from any player much less a quarterback?
I went to throw you a rep but your box was full... I love Chicago, my favorite big city, but I don't do winters anymore or July in San Francisco, same thing as the saying goes.
Good post. LSU hasn't been perfect, but its a little like if ESPN were to do a feature on the history of dunking, and focused on Clyde Drexler, when their library's full of Erving, Jordan, Wilkins, Carter, etc.
