Snake Oil on the Recruiting Trail

Or... It's ~~the economy~~ recruiting, stupid!

Earlier today, FanHouse's own Brian Cook took aim at the nefarious dealings of the most evil man in college football: Nick Saban. It turns out that Saban is so unethical and dirty that he had the nerve to sign more than 25 players to his recruiting class, in excess of the NCAA imposed limit.

He then introduced third-hand evidence from an unnamed source (in an article behind a for-pay wall) claiming that some universities can make athletes qualify or not depending on whether they needed them too. "Jesus. That's truly filthy." Cook opined. While he never explicitly stated that Saban was engaged in the questionable practice, the implication is certainly there: using the practice of fudging qualifications to explain why Alabama's over-signings are actually hurting someone.

Around six guys who are playing for Alabama now or expect to be in the fall are going to be told to get bent by the time fall practice rolls around. . . . Some might argue that no one's really hurt by the practice of oversigning, but this shocking assertion from Bruce Feldman's latest post argues otherwise.

Now, Mr. Cook doesn't strike me as someone clueless about the way the world works with respect to recruiting, but it's worth taking a look at some of his comments.

Some ink was spilled complaining about how the recruiting rankings are crap because of over-signing. One is certainly entitled to that opinion, but to suggest that a one-recruit class with a five-star athlete is better than a class with 25 4-star athletes is pretty silly, and using the star-average metric leads to exactly that sort of silliness. Nevertheless, ranking recruiting is a frivolous pursuit to keep us busy while the lesser sports are conducting their seasons and it's hardly worth spending a lot of time debating which metrics are the best.

So, with that out of the way, let's get to the important stuff.

It's difficult to contemplate anyone supporting the qualifying of prospects who shouldn't be, or disqualifying those who shouldn't be disqualified. That said, the problem is not over-signing, it's the qualification process. The fact that the system can be gamed means that the system should be fixed. Over-signing is only one reason a coach might want to manipulate his qualifications. Obviously, absent any problems with the cap, a coach will want every single player he recruited to qualify. I'd guess we can all agree that if there is an academic qualification process, it should be followed and it should be uniformly applied to every prospective athlete.

Brian's post may have led some readers to believe that few teams actually over-sign recruits, or that Saban is one of the most egregious of the over-signers. Here are some numbers to put that in context: 28 D-IA teams signed more than 25 recruits in 2008. In other words, nearly a quarter of all teams over-signed. Only one conference (the WAC) had no teams that over-signed players. Nine teams signed 30 or more players and Army signed a whopping 37, 12 more than the 25-scholarship limit. Even Troy got into the act with 33 signees.

It's also not unique to the 2008 recruiting year. Clearly Brian didn't like having his team's coach called out, and he went to bat for Coach Rodriguez, defending him against the "snake oil" comment made by Purdue's Joe Tiller. Now he's saying that over-signing is what a real snake oil salesman would do, so let's take a look at Coach Rodriguez's recruiting numbers at WVU. In the six seasons from 2002-2007, Rodriguez signed fewer than 25 only twice (2004 and 2006), and on two occasions signed 33 (2002 and 2005). He signed 25 and 28 in 2003 and 2007 respectively. So, in 6 years of recruiting, Rodriguez sold snake oil (to use Cook's metaphor) half of the time.

So if, indeed, Saban is a bad person for over-signing these players, there are a lot of bad people in college football and Cook, if he were trying to be fair, should be leveling the same criticism at the likes of Troy, Army, and even his own beloved Rodriguez. (Of course, for a guy so interested in coaching ethics, he's written surprisingly little about the ethics of Rodriguez trying to weasel out of his contract buy-out after bolting for Ann Arbor, but that's another topic for another day.)

Back to the point: I would argue that over-signing isn't really a problem at all. Last year, Auburn greatly over-signed... but when August rolled around, they had exactly the right number of scholarshipped players on their roster. There are a lot of things that can lead to this sort of shrinkage. Academic disqualification, medical problems, early entries, team dismissals for rules violations, anything like that can change the numbers on a coach or a team, and over-signing is necessary to allow for these sorts of contingencies. These are the reasons why so many programs over-sign recruits.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

2-13-2008 @ 3:01PM

Skapanza said...

It's easy to say that star average is a bogus metric when you compare 25 4-stars to 1 5-star, but since we're talking classes with around 20 players at least (exclusively between 19 and 32 in the top 25 recruiters) star average makes a little more sense. It's certainly not as insane of a metric as you insist on making it, Pete, with the irrational outlier of a team with 1 5-star recruit.

2-13-2008 @ 3:06PM

Pete Holiday said...

The problem with the metric exists regardless of whether we're talking about like-sized groups of recruits or disparate groups. It is more exaggerated with disparate sized groups, which highlights the real problem with the metric: quantity DOES matter.

If you want to adjust for a 25 man class, how do you do that? Do you cut the best players? the worst ones? What if 5 of the 7 extras enroll in the spring and count against last year's scholarship limit?

The average is just a poor metric. A better idea would be to wait until august and re-evaluate the recruiting class with only those who ended up making the team and qualifying.

The recruiting rankings are a metric for potential: it's pretty clear that if you have MORE signees you have a greater potential than a team with the save star-average but fewer players.

2-13-2008 @ 4:33PM

bamavicki said...

Scout does re-rank the classes in September and has for the last 4 years. This should help clear up questions on oversigning - http://recruiting.scout.com/2/727350.html
Some people have to think up something bad to say about Alabama and/or Coach Saban. It's called jealousy. ROLL TIDE!!

2-13-2008 @ 6:24PM

GCS said...

Way to miss the point of Brian's article and focus on points that you can refute. It's not that teams over sign recruits. Spring enrollees and grayshirts allow teams to do this on occasion. If you can maneuver things so the math works, no big deal.

The big issue is that Alabama has no room in the 85 scholarship limit for all the extra people. Alabama is going to have to hope that a ton of recruits don't qualify, or else just start revoking scholarships for people currently on the team (or people from this class they decide that they don't really need). Way to follow through on the promise of an education.

Taking promised scholarships away from student-athletes is the "nefarious" action here. That's why Miami and all those other schools are being given a pass. They have room for all the people they signed. Alabama doesn't.

2-13-2008 @ 7:06PM

Joel said...

If Saban's really yanking scholarships from people, he'll pay for it in next year's recruiting cycle. I think recruits take a rather dim view of that, and you can bet that the coaches he's recruiting against will make sure the recruits know.

2-13-2008 @ 7:50PM

It doesn't matter if you have room in the 85 scholarship cap... you can't bring on more than 25 kids. You could have 10 players on scholarship, you still can't have 35 new people come august. All of those teams that over-sign will have to revoke scholarships if they guess wrong and more people qualify than they can accept. It's a fact of life, and the athletic departments are very good with their math. (It's also not as if the qualification process is pure guesswork)

Spring enrollments are the only ones you need cap room for, and I don't think Alabama is anticipating having any of those. The rest are either going to qualify or they're not, and in no case will they be allowed to take on more than 25 players, so there really aren't any points that can't be refuted here, but I appreciate your comment all the same.

2-13-2008 @ 7:57PM

G said...

"Of course, for a guy so interested in coaching ethics, he's written surprisingly little about the ethics of Rodriguez trying to weasel out of his contract buy-out after bolting for Ann Arbor, but that's another topic for another day."

Actually, you may want to check out Brian's blog. You know, MGoBlog, the little thing he did before coming to write for FanHouse. Over there, he's had plenty to say about the entire Rodriguez situation, including the propriety of Rodriguez's position that he doesn't owe the whole $4mm.

By the way, the only reason a person would even think to characterize the situation as you have - regarding Rodriguez trying to "weasel" out of his contract - would be if you had evidence that Rodriguez is lying about the circumstances of his departure and/or WVU is telling the complete truth. Based on what the university has said about the alleged "shredded documents" and what couldn't possibly be true of any major state university with a modicum of information security protocols, I can't understand why you'd assume such evidence exists.

Care to provide some? Or would you like to retract your just-as-cheap-as-Brian's-shot-concerning-Saban's-oversigning cheap shot now?

2-13-2008 @ 8:15PM

bama12 said...

Practically every program in the country has oversigned at some point over the last 5 years. Bama signed 31. 2 of them will enroll in January and bring the number to 29, 4 over the limit. 2 current Bama players will likely be put on medical scholarships due to a heart condition in one player and diabetes in another and this brings the number to 27. Its highly likely that at least 2 of Bama's recruits will not qualify academically so we arrive at the number of 25. Add to that the fact that probably 1 or 2 players will either give up football, transfer because of lack of playing time, get booted for legal problems or arrests, etc. and its not at all unreasonable that Bama could actually end up with less than 25 new recruits come September. Auburn signed 33 last year but through the attrition process only 25 or fewer reported. I remember a few years ago Georgia signed only 19 but of those only 12 ended up qualifying academically. Its just common sense that at least 3 or 4 out of a group of 29 will not qualify academically. This reporter simply has it in for Nick Saban. What on earth did Saban ever do that was so evil? Oh, that's right. He changed his mind and took another job. I guess that truly qualifies as evil.

2-14-2008 @ 10:06AM

Drakoi1 said...

pete= stupid, CGS= correct. Way to write an entire article about 'not the point' dumbass.

2-14-2008 @ 10:21AM

Jeff said...

@ Bamavicki:

Yeah, wow, we sure are jealous of Alabama. I hope my team goes 7-6 next year, has a giant a$$hole for a coach and is a shell of it's former self over the next 10 seasons.

2-14-2008 @ 1:49PM

Hey, Jeff, I wouldn't go throwing stones considering you'll lost to Appalachian State and your new coach is a pretty big jerk in his own right. By the way, since you missed the point, I was referring to jealousy over the #1 recruiting class. I admit living through the past 10 years has been hard, but the future looks bright. One last thing, Bo was good, but I'll take the Bear and our past(good and bad) any day.

2-14-2008 @ 2:58PM

johnny said...

Hey Petey-pete:

Your response to GCS shows that you're *still* not getting the point, even after the nice people in this comments section tried to get it through your thick skull.

You say that the point is that no class can have more than 25 kids in it, even if there are only 10 players on scholarship. That's technically right. But kids who enroll in January can be counted against the previous year's limit.

Now, the problem with Bama is that they've got over 30 kids who signed letters of intent, but not enough spots to take them EVEN IF EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE KIDS ENROLLS IN JANUARY (in that scenario, the coaches would be able to count as many as possible towards last year's class).

Brian links to an analysis by a Bama fan, which gives a scenario in which a reasonable number of the kids Saban signed enroll in January, a reasonable number don't make it academically, and a reasonable number of people already on the team aren't asked to return - and even after all that, Bama is still waaaaaay short on spots. That's not true of Miami - they might be able to fit everyone in (at least, nobody who I know of has analyzed their situation). There's pretty much no way that Bama can fit everyone. That was what the article was about.

Now, one way to refute Brian's article would be to say that the Bama dude's analysis was wrong, and that Bama can reasonably fit everyone in. You didn't do that. Another way to go would be to say that this sort of thing happens all the time - lots of schools sign kids who they have no room for. You didn't do that either (just saying that schools sign more than 25 in a class isn't saying they don't have room for all the kids. Remember, if you enroll in January you can count against the previous year's class). Do you have any evidence that RichRod (or other coaches who oversigned) kicked out students currently enrolled to make way for new ones? Or told students who had qualified that they couldn't come? That's the scenario faced by Bama this recruiting year.

2-14-2008 @ 3:43PM

Gayle's article is not "number crunching" as Cook suggests, it's all worst-case speculation.

The conclusion was that, worst case scenario, Saban ends up with a team of 91 "scholarshipped" players. So, for all of this hand-wringing to be even remotely legitimate, you have to think that there aren't going to be 6 players who either greyshirt, fail to qualify, or leave the team.

There are two other options as well: 1) some of them have the grades to get academic scholarships instead of athletic scholarships for their freshman year or 2) Saban extended offers to some of them on the condition that they'd be willing to walk-on for a year or two just to have a shot.

There's also the possibility that some players currently on the team will not be on the team come August for any number of reasons... rules violations, failure to meet the conditioning standards, transfer, etc.

So, while it's fun to throw rocks at coaches you don't like in FEBRUARY, none of this even matters until August. If, come August, Saban has to revoke the scholarship of one or more players who have worked hard, kept their noses clean, and represented the University well, I will join you in criticizing that, but I don't think I'm going to have that problem. After all, Saban knows recruiting as well or better than anyone in the country, including you, me, and even Brian Cook.

2-15-2008 @ 10:27PM

Sam said...

Bamavickie...most high school recruits today could not even tell you who the "Bear" was and could probably care less.

2-16-2008 @ 10:42AM

Really, Sam? How do you explain 4* Jerrell Harris pulling out the Houndstooth hat this year or 5* Andre Smith doing the same thing in 2006?

2-17-2008 @ 10:05AM

David In Bama said...

Some of you guys the recruits and their parents little or no credit about their knowledge about the recruiting process and scholarship situations. Believe me it has been explained to them and they know what to expect. I am sorry they don't bother to let people like Brian know the whole situation. If the kids do what is expected of them then they will have a scholarship. That includes the gray shirts, red shirts, fr., so., jr., and seniors.

Like most, if they don't do what is expected of them they will lose their benefits. Just like most of us will lose our benefits if we do not do what is expected of us at our workplace. Sorry Brian, but that's life.

2-18-2008 @ 12:24PM

LD said...

It's quite telling that so many Michigan/Cook supporters are simply incapable of commenting without patronizing us poor, uneducated peasants. It's like Ann Arbor is stuck in a condescending liberal timeloop from 1966. Unless you can point out one ... ONE!!! ... example where Alabama has cheated, misled, or otherwise oiled some snake vis-a-vis this particular recruiting class, you have no argument. Not kinda, not maybe, ZERO. So, if you have zero argument, stop posting.

2-18-2008 @ 12:47PM

LD, on behalf of the FanHouse I have to ask that you stop asking people with no argument to stop commenting. Do you realize how much traffic we'd lose?