Fall practice is near and coaches are finalizing their rosters, thus the issue of over-signing is on the forefront of many minds once again.
Over-signing is sometimes a necessity for college coaches who have to proactively think about academic qualifications, medical hardships, and transfers of their recruits/players. It goes without saying that a coach will want to be as close as possible to the 85 roster limit when fall practice rolls around. So, often times they will consider on average how many recruits and players are typically lost after National Signing Day and over-sign to counteract that very common occurrence.
But what happens if you over-sign and not enough recruits go through medical hardship or fail to qualify? Well, much like an airline that has over sold their flight, recruits or players will be bumped and scholarships revoked. There is a rising concern for student athletes that could have signed elsewhere had they known they were on the cusp or would be the first man cut with their school of choice.
This was a hot topic amongst the SEC presidents and coaches during spring meetings. “Roster Management,” as it is often referred to, raises questions such as “Should there be a limit on scholarships each institution can offer in a given year?”, “Should recruits be guaranteed a four-year scholarship, so that they cannot be dropped mid-college-career to make room on the roster?”, “Should the roster be set further in advance than fall practice, so that cut players have the opportunity to apply elsewhere over the summer?” Currently, the SEC has voted in a 25-signee limit for its member institutions, hoping programs will choose wisely the recruits they sign. Although, it will not completely do away with over-signing, which many view as a necessity, some believe it will lead to smarter decision-making.
This will continue to be a point of discussion not only for the SEC, but for the NCAA as well. What are your thoughts? Over-signing: is it a smart philosophy by college coaches or unfair to the student athlete?
Here is my take by the way: schools should not be allowed to dramatically over-sign. How you police that, I don’t know. I understand every coach in America cringes when I say that, but if there are a crazy amount of medical hardships or players that transfer or prospects that don’t qualify, those spots should be filled by walk-ons. I find it to be a disservice to the student athlete that you can snatch his scholarship away his Junior year after you have made promises to offer a college education. And don’t give me the argument of “just like in business, if you don’t do your job you get fired.” You can’t talk out of both sides of your mouth and say “this is a scholarship opportunity and these are not ‘employees’ that is why they don’t get paid” and then use the good-ol’ “do your job” argument when you want to cut someone. When you are recruiting don’t take chances on kids with poor grades that may not qualify. Maybe that will motivate our high school athletes to take school more seriously instead of just focusing on the football ride. At the end of the day when you recruit someone, you are taking a chance on them just like they are taking a chance on you. They become a part of your TEAM, your FAMILY, so treat them as such. I have no problem with over-signing by one or two, because inevitably there will be a medical hardship or a transfer, but I don’t like to see over-signing in a gross amount. If schools want athletes to keep their commitments, they should start by keeping their own.
But, seriously, enough about my opinion. What’s yours?
