cfmalloy
| Favorite team: | |
| Location: | |
| Biography: | |
| Interests: | |
| Occupation: | |
| Number of Posts: | 97 |
| Registered on: | 4/15/2017 |
| Online Status: | Not Online |
Recent Posts
Message
Noah Cain - Something happening tomorrow
Posted by cfmalloy on 7/28/18 at 8:26 pm
Anyone know what’s happening with Noah Cain tomorrow at 7:00pm ?
Probably a shortened top school list, but it would be great to pick up an early commitment.
[link=( https://mobile.twitter.com/therealnoahcain/status/1023363436904939520)]
https://mobile.twitter.com/therealnoahcain/status/1023363436904939520[/link]
Probably a shortened top school list, but it would be great to pick up an early commitment.
[link=( https://mobile.twitter.com/therealnoahcain/status/1023363436904939520)]
https://mobile.twitter.com/therealnoahcain/status/1023363436904939520[/link]
2
re: Dandy Don clearing up the new signing rules
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/23/18 at 6:28 pm
quote:
Posted by Indiana Tiger on 1/23/18 at 7:31 am to cfmalloy
quote:
Correct, I agree. Absolutely. Plus, Seth Stewart withdrew before the season started, he gets to be replaced, and Jefferson signed late - as in outside the 2017 counting period window, albeit after the new annual count/year-long counting window kicked in ... starting with the 2018 class (Not the 2017 class that he was a part of). There were 5 EEs last year)2017) and 3 EEs in 2016 (when not all the 25 were used either, adding to the cumulative back counter credit carryforward. And transfers not previously on scholarship count but transfers previously on scholarship are NOT "initial counters" and do not count against the annual cap limit of 25 initial counters. They do count against the overall cap limit of 85 counters which is cumulative with initial/first time counters and prior counters, but that's a different cap limit.
quote:
They did not totally change the rule, they modified parts of it. They changed the counting window from a 5 month limited window to the entire year. They did not change the definition of "initial counter" - get your head wrapped around that.
Your mistake is that you think initial counters actually matter in this discussion. In this regard the compliance guy is guilty of using sloppy language too. As you point out initial counter is defined with specific meaning in the manual. The manual also states all the limits you mentioned. But there is one little problem. Because of a new rule, they don't count initial counters for this purpose.
Here is the new rule from a previous post: (15.5.1.9.1).What they count now are signings, not initial counters. Because initial counters can never be greater than the number of signings, the latter reaches the defined limit first and is thus controlling. In this context references to initial counter could be deleted from the manual (there may be a reason for it in other circumstances but that would take a thorough review).
There are only three exceptions in the new rule:
o if Lindsey Scott Jr returned to LSU, he wouldn't count because this would be his 2nd signing with LSU
o the 2+ year walk on
o The rare kid whose college career is over before he shows up due to some unfortunate circumstances. About 10 yrs or so ago LSU signed a kid who injured his neck. We kept him on scholarship. I think after he graduated he gave football a go and maybe played for the Saints.
They don't have 3 separate caps, only 2, the initial counters and overall counters.
Initial counters and signees are the same thing. It serves no purpose whatsoever to have 2 caps covering the same subject matter with the sole distinction being whether they sign or not. Initial signer, initial counter, are the same thing. Otherwise, it's a distinction without a difference. It's the only way to rationally harmonize both rules together that are otherwise inconsistent.
re: What about JUCO Transfer QB, Malik Henry ??
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/23/18 at 6:14 pm
quote:
What about JUCO Transfer QB, Malik Henry ?? by Indiana Tiger
quote:
No, YOU and LSU compliance don't know how to read.
I read the rules. I've practiced law for 27 years, I think I can comprehend an NCAA rule - even if it is poorly written.
But you go ahead, believe what you want. I believe what I read.
I'm gonna try this one more time. While there is a lot of overlap, an initial counter and a signer are not equivalent. There are different rules for both. Both are limited to 25 max. A signer is anyone who signs a promise of or an award of a scholarship and they count as soon as they sign and it is accepted. Even if they never show up and attend class, they still count towards the 25 signer limit (with a few exceptions and they ain't the ones you list).
Given that you know all about the initial counter exceptions, it should be clear to you that there are more signers than initial counters. This means that the signer limit will always control the max number you can sign. It's sort of like the alternative min tax; doesn't matter how many deductions you have, you owe the min.
BTW: I wouldn't mention your practice by name if this is the quality of your work.
They don't have 3 caps. It serves no purpose. Signors = initial counters.
re: What about JUCO Transfer QB, Malik Henry ??
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/23/18 at 2:34 pm
quote:
YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE RULES!!! HE COUNTS!!!
No, YOU and LSU compliance don't know how to read.
I read the rules. I've practiced law for 27 years, I think I can comprehend an NCAA rule - even if it is poorly written.
But you go ahead, believe what you want. I believe what I read.
re: What about JUCO Transfer QB, Malik Henry ??
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/23/18 at 2:05 pm
In a new pass happy offense as a #3 depth QB ?
If it allows LSU to sign 2 CBs and skip an initial counter QB ....
re: What about JUCO Transfer QB, Malik Henry ??
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/23/18 at 2:02 pm
quote:
We would have to bump someone to have room to take him. Would you take him over Surtain, Joseph, Foster or Goodrich?
Wrong, He's not an initial counter, he is a transfer.
The version of the rules being circulated as a result of the Dandy Don's interview is just plain wrong. Its scary that came from LSU compliance.
What about JUCO Transfer QB, Malik Henry ??
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/23/18 at 7:56 am
re: Dandy Don clearing up the new signing rules
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/23/18 at 1:29 am
quote:
Dandy Don clearing up the new signing rules by Indiana Tiger
The ambiguity in the rule is due to our minds wanting to justify something different; not the rule itself. Take your bitch for example:
quote:
A kid can't be an initial counter at multiple schools. If he is correct then the word initial needs to be removed from the term. The kicker was an initial counter because he had never been on scholarship. Therefore he is being "counted" for the first time or initially.
It is manifestly obvious that the rule is written from the perspective of an individual school. The limit is 25, not 3200 or whatever 25 times the number of FBS schools is. If the rule meant to exclude someone who signed anywhere else, it would have to say anywhere else like it explicitly does for walk ons of 2+ years.
The rule is pretty clear when you get your head straight. Anyone who signs a promise of or an award of a scholarship counts, except for those explicitly excluded.
They did not totally change the rule, they modified parts of it. They changed the counting window from a 5 month limited window to the entire year. They did not change the definition of "initial counter" - get your head wrapped around that.
re: Dandy Don clearing up the new signing rules
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/23/18 at 1:12 am
quote:
Dandy Don clearing up the new signing rules by lsufanva
I know this guy is supposed to be one that knows but I still believe hes incorrect about the transfers. I've poured over many articles and explanations, while also reading the rule numerous times and the way he explains the transfers as initial counters is not how the rule reads. A kid can't be an initial counter at multiple schools. If he is correct then the word initial needs to be removed from the term. The kicker was an initial counter because he had never been on scholarship. Therefore he is being "counted" for the first time or initially.
Correct, I agree. Absolutely.
Plus, Seth Stewart withdrew before the season started, he gets to be replaced, and Jefferson signed late - as in outside the 2017 counting period window, albeit after the new annual count/year-long counting window kicked in ... starting with the 2018 class (Not the 2017 class that he was a part of). There were 5 EEs last year)2017) and 3 EEs in 2016 (when not all the 25 were used either, adding to the cumulative back counter credit carryforward.
And transfers not previously on scholarship count but transfers previously on scholarship are NOT "initial counters" and do not count against the annual cap limit of 25 initial counters. They do count against the overall cap limit of 85 counters which is cumulative with initial/first time counters and prior counters, but that's a different cap limit.
re: Patrick Surtain
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/22/18 at 11:05 pm
JR & SR ?
SR to be the new SAFs coach ???
re: Kelvin Joseph canceled remaining visits
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/22/18 at 5:17 am
A couple of the SAFs will be playing a hybrid SAF/LB spot, nickel & time LB / in the box SAFs....
Look at the big ones to do this, Kelvin Joseph included.
re: Rick Neuheisel on Surtain recruitment
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/22/18 at 5:10 am
Hey, Neuheisel, what's the matter with you ? Are you stupid or something ?
re: Does anyone on this board know if we can take 4
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/22/18 at 5:04 am
Everyone says we only have 4 spots left and committed Kelvin Joseph has one of them, Patrick Surtain, JR has another, and, if he wants it, JaMarr Chase has another, leaving two guys vying for 1 remaining spot, QB James Foster and CB/ATH Mario Goodrich.
But I think LSU actually has 1 or 2 or 3, at a minimum, back counter spots they could use to add numbers to this class. Compliance sees it another way, unfortunately. They need to pull their heads out of the sand, imo.
re: Foster over Goodrich for the following reasons
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/22/18 at 4:56 am
If it boils down to a choice between Goodrich and Chase, a CB and a WR, based on relative needs, you are absolutely correct.
But man this is a sad situation, that does not have to be, if the compliance department does it's job properly, effectively.
Truth be told, LSU could back count and take Surtain, Joseph, Goodrich, Chase, and Foster, and a couple more as well, like another OT from the likes of Dylan Wonnum, Richard Gouraige, Nicholas Petit-Frere or William Barnes, and/or could add a top tier DT like Michael Thompson or a top tier LB (which is also needed), or they could have taken Justin Watkins, Glean Beal, or take a chance on grades with Pooka, Joiner, or Michael Williams. But compliance has their heads in the wrong spot right now.
re: Foster over Goodrich for the following reasons
Posted by cfmalloy on 1/22/18 at 4:36 am
LSU needs a second CB right now, immediate need, more than a depth QB.
LSU can use a series of high quality walk on QBs to compete for the third man up job (heck, Baker Mayfield proved a walk on can start, take you to the NCPs and win a Heisman), but unless Foster is a likely starter like the Daniels kid, LSU needs a starter capable quality CB more than a depth QB and it's even better if he can play WR at a high level also.
LSU lost 2 starting CBs early to the NFL who must be replaced. LSU almost always signs more than 3 DBs. This year LSU will sign, at most, only 3 DBs. And the 2019 class overall at CB is not as deep, quality-wise, as is the 2018 class. There will be more teams chasing fewer prospects, unlike this year unlike this year when LSU has turned away top10 DBs to this point.
The compliance department screwed this year's class up, big time.
LSU can also recruit it's existing QBs to all stay for at least 1 more year. They missed that opportunity already at CB, twice over.
LSU could also, possibly, recruit former LSU QB, Lindsey Scott, to return to LSU after a year of solid starter PT in JUCO and winning a JUCO NC. LSU has multiple options at QB, but only this one option to fill this spot on the NSD prospects signing grid, at CB.
LSU can use a series of high quality walk on QBs to compete for the third man up job (heck, Baker Mayfield proved a walk on can start, take you to the NCPs and win a Heisman), but unless Foster is a likely starter like the Daniels kid, LSU needs a starter capable quality CB more than a depth QB and it's even better if he can play WR at a high level also.
LSU lost 2 starting CBs early to the NFL who must be replaced. LSU almost always signs more than 3 DBs. This year LSU will sign, at most, only 3 DBs. And the 2019 class overall at CB is not as deep, quality-wise, as is the 2018 class. There will be more teams chasing fewer prospects, unlike this year unlike this year when LSU has turned away top10 DBs to this point.
The compliance department screwed this year's class up, big time.
LSU can also recruit it's existing QBs to all stay for at least 1 more year. They missed that opportunity already at CB, twice over.
LSU could also, possibly, recruit former LSU QB, Lindsey Scott, to return to LSU after a year of solid starter PT in JUCO and winning a JUCO NC. LSU has multiple options at QB, but only this one option to fill this spot on the NSD prospects signing grid, at CB.
re: At the end of the day Can LSU fit Pooka and Joiner in the class?
Posted by cfmalloy on 12/17/17 at 3:27 am
quote:
geauxengineering LSU Fan Baton Rouge Member since Jul 2015 85 posts re: At the end of the day Can LSU fit Pooka and Joiner in the class?Posted on 12/16/17 at 4:09 pm to Random LSU Hero pooka has grade problems. We finish with: 1. Surtain 2. Marshall 3. Joiner 4. Joseph 5. last spot (Cook, Beal, etc) if we are fortunate to lose Washington, that opens up others as possibilities.
Joiner allegedly has grade/academic qualification issues too.
Pooka is a lot like Justin Watkins, only smaller, and both are like Provens only smaller.
If Watkins goes to Alabama, then we may be able to take Pooka, if he wants in at LSU (he says he is firm to Kansas though). But if Watkins goes elsewhere, and Whop wants in (provided he's not already committed), then we may have to pick between Whop and Pooka, but maybe not, maybe we get both.
If Marshall goes elsewhere, then we might get Pooka and Whop and Watkins ... and Joiner, which makes me smile.
LSU really can't lose.
re: Visitors This Weekend In BR + 1 croot signing early
Posted by cfmalloy on 12/17/17 at 3:00 am
quote:
Bjorn Cyborg Visitors This Weekend In BR + 1 croot signing early At what point does a player become a 3-star, 4-star, or 5-star? Where do you draw the line? If LSU (or anyone) evaluates, offers and takes a commitment from a 2 or 3 star, and then later during his senior year they player is elevated to a 4-star, then did LSU offer a 2 star or a 4 star? My main issue with stars is that, with offer lists being a factor, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. Sure, Alabama gets mostly 4 and 5 stars. But if those players commit somewhere else, what are their rankings? It's kind of a rigged system.
Totally agree.
Alabama commits get ranked higher, so do Ohio St recruits and UGA recruits.
re: Visitors This Weekend In BR + 1 croot signing early
Posted by cfmalloy on 12/17/17 at 2:51 am
quote:
stopitnow1 Visitors This Weekend In BR + 1 croot signing early quote: You guys need to stop watching stars. Stars mean shite! Only reason Williams isnt thought of in a higher regard is because he also plays on offensive side of ball. All defense in college. Tell that to fl. That was the horse's mindset too... Tell that to the teams that are consistantly vying for a national championship. I bet they would have to disagree with you. Yes there are more 3 stars in the nfl than 4 and 5 stars but that is simply because there are more 2 and 3 stars coming out of highschool. Im sure you can name a bunch of 3 stars who ended up being superstars, and I can name a bunch of 4 and 5 stars. I doubt this kid is going to be the next tyrann mathieu.
Since they play different positions, that's a certainty.
But he will be good, a star. And we need him, badly. He can play either side of the ball, like Devin White. If Beckwith & White had a baby, t would be Williams. :) His ranking is way underrated, like many guys in this class, a good to great class.
re: Weak-Side Defensive End Recruits
Posted by cfmalloy on 12/17/17 at 2:29 am
quote:
167back Weak-Side Defensive End Recruits If you checkout the combined LSU vs bama defensive signees for the '16 and '17 recruiting cycles you will see that the tigers have out recruited them.
True this.
re: Weak-Side Defensive End Recruits
Posted by cfmalloy on 12/17/17 at 2:23 am
quote:
lsufanva Weak-Side Defensive End Recruits Considering in our defense most WDE stand up and play OLB, we are in good shape with the guys in campus and in this class currently. How many do we really need?
We need to replace who we lose, plus 1 or 2, if possible, over the next few years, but at least replace 5 this year, at a minimum. Presently, we have Clark, Baskerville, Cherry (all LBs/OLBs), plus arguably Moore and Scott, but the latter 2 might end up being larger 5 tech DEs in a 3-4. The same goes for Mike Williams. But Aranda has used the bigger guys with success on the outside. Williams would arguably make LB #6, but we may lose Moore to qualifications, some have said.
If Mike Williams, Scott, and Moore are all LBs, we are good, numbers wise. If we lose Moore, or if any of those 3 end up too large (or slow) to play LB/OLB, then we may be short in the LB corps - probably why we are still recruiting Andres Fox and Andrew Chatfield, still in contact with Merlin Robertson, Bumper Pool, and maybe a few others.
Popular
29
