How many more recruits can we sign?

Donate To GopherHole
K

Killjoy

Active member
Joined
Jan 10, 2011
Messages
5,062
Reaction score
0
Points
36
There seems to be a lot of confusion about the number of recruits we can sign this year. It is actually quite simple. All you need to do is apply the follow NCAA rules for FBS schools to determine how many you may sign for the year. The first rule is that in no case may you have more than 85 players on scholarship. The second rule is that you may not sign more than 25 players to scholarships in one year. Excluded from this total are any JC players that sign and begin school in the winter/spring period. They are considered to be signed during that year and therefore do not count against that fall’s number.

So where does the Gophers stand as far as available scholarships available for this fall? Right now it is unclear how many players the Gophers will loose from transfers etc. but I believe it is safe to say that we will not have to worry about having 85 players on scholarship this fall. This means that the limiting factor for Gophers this fall will be the maximum 25 annual scholarships.
So let’s do the math. Presently the Gophers presently have 22 players who have either signed or have given verbal commitments. Of these 22, four are signed JC transfers who will be beginning school next week and therefore do count against the 25 max this fall. In addition, the transfer kicker will be starting next week and therefore will not count against the 25 max. We don’t know is whether Campion and Jones will be enrolling to begin classes next week but let’s assume that they don’t. Therefore the present number of recruits that we have that will account against the 25 maximum is 22 minus 4 JC transfers minus 1 other transfer equals 17 recruits that count against the 25 maximum. This means we could sign 8 more recruits assuming that we wouldn’t exceed the 85 maximum. I suspect that Kill is not going to sign players just to meet the maximum. It is always nice to be able to reward walk-ons later.
 


8 seems to high

I thought there was a maximum number to the early JC transfer rule, something like no more than 3 total. I hope you are correct, I really like what I'm seeing from Kill in his short time here. Also love the fact we are going for smaller quick off the line DE's and smaller quick CB. This team looked so slow on D during Brewster term that it wil be nice to see some players flying around again. TCU showed that speed can beat size.
 


aren't some of those listed on that grid

walk ons. Or are the walk ons on that list excluded from the numbers at the top?
 



Killjoy said:
There seems to be a lot of confusion about the number of recruits we can sign this year. It is actually quite simple. All you need to do is apply the follow NCAA rules for FBS schools to determine how many you may sign for the year. The first rule is that in no case may you have more than 85 players on scholarship. The second rule is that you may not sign more than 25 players to scholarships in one year. Excluded from this total are any JC players that sign and begin school in the winter/spring period. They are considered to be signed during that year and therefore do not count against that fall’s number.

So where does the Gophers stand as far as available scholarships available for this fall? Right now it is unclear how many players the Gophers will loose from transfers etc. but I believe it is safe to say that we will not have to worry about having 85 players on scholarship this fall. This means that the limiting factor for Gophers this fall will be the maximum 25 annual scholarships.
So let’s do the math. Presently the Gophers presently have 22 players who have either signed or have given verbal commitments. Of these 22, four are signed JC transfers who will be beginning school next week and therefore do count against the 25 max this fall. In addition, the transfer kicker will be starting next week and therefore will not count against the 25 max. We don’t know is whether Campion and Jones will be enrolling to begin classes next week but let’s assume that they don’t. Therefore the present number of recruits that we have that will account against the 25 maximum is 22 minus 4 JC transfers minus 1 other transfer equals 17 recruits that count against the 25 maximum. This means we could sign 8 more recruits assuming that we wouldn’t exceed the 85 maximum. I suspect that Kill is not going to sign players just to meet the maximum. It is always nice to be able to reward walk-ons later.
Click to expand...

A few things:

1) Please cite the rule that you are allowed a theoretically-unlimited number of JC transfers in the spring. I can't believe that there is any way this is true.

2) Who is the "one other transfer" you reference in your math? EDIT: I realize now that you were referring to Hawthorne.

3) I think your "25 is the limiting factor rather than 85" is a bit presumptuous, as others have already stated in this thread.
 

GopherBeef said:
According the the Gopher Football scholarship grid, we have 79 scholarships committed for next year (the grid currently lists 81, but still has Rohr and Haughton-James included). So, we have six to give if no one else leaves.


http://robb.dominodeveloper.net/members/robb/gopherroster.nsf/rosterFB

Also, to whoever created and maintains the scholarship grid-thanks and great work!
Click to expand...

I have never been sure how accruate this scholarship board is but it appears that it should be close. What is unknown is will there be any further transfers from the team or grade problems that could affect this number. Also, does anybody know if there is an “official” scholarship sites that can be accessed for this, please let me know.

What is confusing is that Kill has implied that it is going to take a couple of years to get to a full scholarship level. He may be referring to what he would consider the right mix of positions and the quality of the scholarships players. Does anybody have an opinion on what he trying to tell us or why he is saying this?

One of the advantages of having signed four JC transfer is that the number of scholarships players we have for the 2012 class has increased from 9 to 13. This bubble of a small number of scholarship players in this year is going to be a challenge for Kill to deal with but the addition of four more scholarships in this year should help.
 

I was led to believe that 3 of the 4 JC admittees actually apply to 2010, due to their January admissions and don't count toward the 25 max. Are you saying this in a different way?

That would mean 21 current commits-3=18. We can sign 7 more guys to get to 25. Those 7-Hawthorne (transfer) = 6.

Six more open schollies? Is math not my long suit?
 



dpodoll68 said:
A few things:

1) Please cite the rule that you are allowed a theoretically-unlimited number of JC transfers in the spring. I can't believe that there is any way this is true.

2) Who is the "one other transfer" you reference in your math? EDIT: I realize now that you were referring to Hawthorne.

3) I think your "25 is the limiting factor rather than 85" is a bit presumptuous, as others have already stated in this thread.
Click to expand...

I should clarify what I met by the JC transfer rule for spring transfer. They do count but they are counted in spring academic year not the fall academic year.

As far as point number 3 you are partially correct if the scholarship board numbers are correct. Excluding the JC transfers the scholarship board lists 59 scholarship players. This would leaves 26scholarship available. Thus they could sign 26 players plus the amount of people that transfer or leave school because of academic problems. That is one of the reasons why schools over sign (gray shirts) to deal with this problem. The SEC schools are notorious in their use of gray shirts. But that is a discussion in itself.
 

highwayman said:
I was led to believe that 3 of the 4 JC admittees actually apply to 2010, due to their January admissions and don't count toward the 25 max. Are you saying this in a different way?

That would mean 21 current commits-3=18. We can sign 7 more guys to get to 25. Those 7-Hawthorne (transfer) = 6.

Six more open schollies? Is math not my long suit?
Click to expand...

I am getting to understand why this can be so confusing. The question that needs to be answered is "How many scholarship players will we be returning this fall"? Depending on what this number is your math may or may not be correct. If we still are at or below 85 scholarships in total, then you would be correct.
 

highwayman said:
I was led to believe that 3 of the 4 JC admittees actually apply to 2010, due to their January admissions and don't count toward the 25 max. Are you saying this in a different way?

That would mean 21 current commits-3=18. We can sign 7 more guys to get to 25. Those 7-Hawthorne (transfer) = 6.

Six more open schollies? Is math not my long suit?
Click to expand...

That's the math I've been working with. I swear you could major in college football recruiting and scholarships. *&^!#*&^!#*&^!#*&^!# is confusing.
 

I also thought the Big 10 allowed the over signing of 3 scholarships above the available number. Let's say there were 25 slots available, which means we can sign 28. From what I understand, this rul is to help compensate for the loss of new players that for some reason or another don't get into school.
 



GopherBeef said:
Also, to whoever created and maintains the scholarship grid-thanks and great work!
Click to expand...
I maintain the grid, the poster Robb is the one who wrote the code to make updating it very easy. It's a lot to keep track of so if you find errors be sure and let me know.


SDGopherFan said:
I thought there was a maximum number to the early JC transfer rule, something like no more than 3 total.
Click to expand...
I believe this is correct; you can only count a maximum of 3 January enrolees back to a prior year's class. The caveat is you can only do that if you were 3 short of 25 scholarships last year. In 2010 we signed 26 guys, but I think 4 of them didn't qualify leaving us with 22 heading into fall. Since we were 3 short of 25, that allows us to count the maximum of 3 back to last year.

I think Highway man is correct on his math

18 unsigned commitments or transfers
+ 4 signed Jucos (Rabe, Crawford, Harris, Osunde)

22 total
- 3 counting to last year's class

19 current for 2011 class
= 6 remaining for 2011

Also if there are no more transfers or defections then 6 more commitments would put us at 85 scholarship players for next fall. This is probably pretty unlikely though, I'm sure we'll lose at least a couple more players before the start of next season.
 

Where are you guys getting 22 from? There are currently 21 verbal commits.
 

cduff said:
I maintain the grid, the poster Robb is the one who wrote the code to make updating it very easy. It's a lot to keep track of so if you find errors be sure and let me know.



I believe this is correct; you can only count a maximum of 3 January enrolees back to a prior year's class. The caveat is you can only do that if you were 3 short of 25 scholarships last year. In 2010 we signed 26 guys, but I think 4 of them didn't qualify leaving us with 22 heading into fall. Since we were 3 short of 25, that allows us to count the maximum of 3 back to last year.

I think Highway man is correct on his math

18 unsigned commitments or transfers
+ 4 signed Jucos (Rabe, Crawford, Harris, Osunde)

22 total
- 3 counting to last year's class

19 current for 2011 class
= 6 remaining for 2011

Also if there are no more transfers or defections then 6 more commitments would put us at 85 scholarship players for next fall. This is probably pretty unlikely though, I'm sure we'll lose at least a couple more players before the start of next season.
Click to expand...

Unless I am counting wrong, there were 26 verbals last year and 3 did not make it in so we should have 25 + 2 this year (assuming we don't hit 85 before then).
 



We can count 2 Jucos back this year meaning that this class is limited to bringing in 27. Technically we can oversign that number by 3 to hit 30. However, the 27 still stands as the number that can join us this year so if everybody makes grades we would have to ask a few players to grayshirt and join us in January of 2012. Also, transfers (the kicker) count against those numbers.
 

cduff said:
In 2010 we signed 26 guys, but I think 4 of them didn't qualify leaving us with 22 heading into fall. Since we were 3 short of 25, that allows us to count the maximum of 3 back to last year.
Click to expand...

Who are the 4 non-qualifiers? I've noted Hill, Thornton, and Tillman in the past, but I can't say for sure who the 4th would be? Tatum? I noticed he was never registered for Fall 2010.
 

grunkiejr said:
We can count 2 Jucos back this year meaning that this class is limited to bringing in 27. Technically we can oversign that number by 3 to hit 30. However, the 27 still stands as the number that can join us this year so if everybody makes grades we would have to ask a few players to grayshirt and join us in January of 2012. Also, transfers (the kicker) count against those numbers.
Click to expand...

Are you sure about the transfers? If so, how was Beal accounted for?
 

WAGopher said:
I also thought the Big 10 allowed the over signing of 3 scholarships above the available number. Let's say there were 25 slots available, which means we can sign 28. From what I understand, this rul is to help compensate for the loss of new players that for some reason or another don't get into school.
Click to expand...

That is my understanding also. It appears that the SEC allows unlimited over signings which has been abused by the schools. The players end up suffering the consequences of this.
 


harrys ghost said:
Are you sure about the transfers? If so, how was Beal accounted for?
Click to expand...

Not 100% but I'm pretty confident. The count is for "initial grant in aid" and for us that is our initial grant in aid to him. If transfers didn't count you'd see a school like USC being very aggressive on the transfer front because it would be a loophole for them to circumvent the probation that limits them to a 15 person signing class.

IIRC he was here for spring practice so we can count him back to 2009. Now that I think about that we may actually have another spot. 26 commits to 2010's class - 3 that never showed up (Hill, Thornton, Tillman) - C. Lewis that can count back to 2009 (a 20 person class) = 22. Obviously none of that included Beal who doesn't show up on our signing list on Rivals but would receive the same treatment as C. Lewis by counting back to 2009.
 

grunkiejr said:
Not 100% but I'm pretty confident. The count is for "initial grant in aid" and for us that is our initial grant in aid to him. If transfers didn't count you'd see a school like USC being very aggressive on the transfer front because it would be a loophole for them to circumvent the probation that limits them to a 15 person signing class.

IIRC he was here for spring practice so we can count him back to 2009. Now that I think about that we may actually have another spot. 26 commits to 2010's class - 3 that never showed up (Hill, Thornton, Tillman) - C. Lewis that can count back to 2009 (a 20 person class) = 22. Obviously none of that included Beal who doesn't show up on our signing list on Rivals but would receive the same treatment as C. Lewis by counting back to 2009.
Click to expand...

I really don't know the answer but, as for transfers being a potential "loophole", they still have to sit for a year (generally) and still count against the 85 while sitting (I believe).
 

dpodoll68 said:
Who are the 4 non-qualifiers? I've noted Hill, Thornton, and Tillman in the past, but I can't say for sure who the 4th would be? Tatum? I noticed he was never registered for Fall 2010.
Click to expand...

I think there are only 3 non-qualifiers: Hill, Thornton and Tillman. If Tatum enrolled for summer that still counts against us (see: Coleman enrolling at BC and then still having to sit out a transfer year even though he never suited up at BC). However, C. Lewis should be able to be counted back to 2009 (unless we used our full allotment of 82 scholarships -due to APR restrictions-in 2009) so the 22 could be accurate.

Edit: Now that I think of it, I'm not sure what the heck is going on with Devon Wright either. I've never heard a straight answer on what happened with him this fall.
 

harrys ghost said:
I really don't know the answer but, as for transfers being a potential "loophole", they still have to sit for a year (generally) and still count against the 85 while sitting (I believe).
Click to expand...

They do. But when the NCAA puts teams on probation they limit total scholarships & initial grants in aid. The limit is 75 total and 15 per class (25-10) for those 3 years. If you could circumvent the initial grant in aid by bringing in transfers it would defeat the purpose of the initial grant in aid restriction.
 

grunkiejr said:
They do. But when the NCAA puts teams on probation they limit total scholarships & initial grants in aid. The limit is 75 total and 15 per class (25-10) for those 3 years. If you could circumvent the initial grant in aid by bringing in transfers it would defeat the purpose of the initial grant in aid restriction.
Click to expand...

Not exactly if they are bringing the overall limit down to 75. How about walk-ons?

You may be right but I am not buying your argument. :)
 

was campion in last years class?

how does he affect anything? Did he enroll at the U at all? was he considered a non-qualifier, I don't remember but I haven't seen his name listed on this thread yet.
 

grunkiejr said:
We can count 2 Jucos back this year meaning that this class is limited to bringing in 27. Technically we can oversign that number by 3 to hit 30. However, the 27 still stands as the number that can join us this year so if everybody makes grades we would have to ask a few players to grayshirt and join us in January of 2012. Also, transfers (the kicker) count against those numbers.
Click to expand...

Thank You! I have been trying to get clarity on this and have not been able to find a complete source on the rules. I have tried goggling this subject and have only found the basic rules. With your clarification on the Juco rules and the oversigning rules my calculation of where we stand today is as follows: We presently have (Before spring semester) 59 players on scholarship which means that we have 26 slots that are open. This is one more than the maximum that you are allowed to sign in an academic year but is not a problem since we have signed 4 Juco players that will begin school next week. Two of these players can be counted as 2010 recruits per the Juco transfer rules since they are starting school during the 2010 academic year. This will bring the total present "2010" scholarships up to 61 which means that we then have 24 scholarships (85-61) still available for "2011". We have already allocated 20 slots to the remaining 20 "2011" signed or verbals that we have so far. With the allowed oversign of 3 players we can therefore sign up to 7 more players. I hope this is right but remember the number of players that we presently have on scholarship could change very soon when we find out we show up to class next week.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom