re: Bama passed Texas in teh recruiting rankings

quote:

---

I think this is a huge reason for disparity on the field as well. Honestly, how many of those kids, if the classes at Bama, LSU, Arky, UF Aub etc. all filled up do you think would end up at a Michigan State or a Purdue?

---

quote:

---

Explain, I don't understand.

---

I believe he is saying that if we would only sign a few players the northern schools would have a chance to get the better leftovers.

William Ming...now that's a name I haven't heard in a while. Whatever happened with him?

I'm assuming he's still on scholly???

Has there ever been a bigger 5-star bust than Tyler Love?

I'll admit Saban stretches this rule as much as anybody, but most schools use this same practice to some degree.

If you want to win, you need as many good players as possible. There are always going to be injuries, frick up players, and academic casualties.

Nobody that does what they're supposed to do ever gets pushed out. Saban awards scholarships to walk-ons just about every year. These walk-ons are less talented than most of the guys he gets accused of "forcing out".

I see no problem with yanking the scholarships of those that aren't putting for the effort on the practice field or in the classroom.

If you're going to argue that Saban is just over-signing and cutting the bad players, then you need to look at the talent level of people that have transferred and compare them to the walk-ons who have been awarded scholarships.

Just an observation but has anyone else noticed that USC has 22 commits but only has 15 schollys for this year. They must have alot of open slots from players leaving...........I know, off topic, not SEC.

"Never understood why people think an athletic scholarship is a tenured position."

maybe if you had ever signed an athletic scholarship somewhere you would. scholarships can not be reduced based upon athletic performance. off field situations for sure can lead to this but performance or lack there of NO.

Sorry had to do something real in life for a while.

When you sign an athletic scholarship, it should be a binding contract between the university and the student for 4 (5) years.

When those guys are transferring to schools like North Dakota State, they are doing so because there are roster spots open. My argument is that if schools didn't over recruit, those kids would never have to go to schools like those mentioned above, and could go to other BCS conferences and play meaningful minutes.

Now, in no way am I saying that this is only the school's fault, the athlete has to be to blame as well (why would you go to a school with 5 stud RBs like USC or OSU when you could go to Indiana/Vandy and be seen from day 1 as the premier guy.

Now, I'm not sure about if these kids "qualify" and if that is the problem then that is a whole new issue

quote:

---

Adrian Hubbard

---

Has apparently been showing his arse, almost led to a beatdown from teammates. Take it FWIW, but some think he's on the list to go.

quote:

---

scholarships can not be reduced based upon athletic performance. off field situations for sure can lead to this but performance or lack there of NO.

---

I guess you don't know that all athletic scholarships are given on a one year basis and renewed after that. Obviously, they should almost always be renewed, but they don't have to be.

What happens if you're on an academic scholarship and make bad grades?

quote:

---

When you sign an athletic scholarship, it should be a binding contract between the university and the student for 4 (5) years.

---

I disagree. Why should they get to keep a scholarship if they're frick ups? You don't get to keep an academic scholarship if you're a frick up.