Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Signing Class Limit for the footballz about to increase to 32....

  1. #1
    TheDynastyIsDead TUSK's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Location
    In your head.
    Posts
    13,203
    vCash
    1000619

    Signing Class Limit for the footballz about to increase to 32....

    Shite 'bout to get real...

    Under the recommendation, schools can sign 25 new players while gaining additional signee spots for each player who transfers out of their program?up to a limit of seven, sources tell Sports Illustrated. The transferring player must have left academically eligible. For instance, a school that loses five players to the portal can sign 30 new players. A school that loses 10 players to the portal can sign 32 new signees.

    https://www.si.com/college/2021/09/2...-transfers-nil


    inB4 Shotgun mentions what a "terrible product" NCAA football is.....
    "It is not courage to resist TUSK; It is courage to accept TUSK."

    No.


    Easy there buddy. Tusk is...well Tusk is Tusk. Tireddawg 12.20.17

  2. #2
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    I think this is just a one year deal. No big deal if so.

    The 85 will still stand though, so, if Bama is going to consistently sign more than 25, they're going to have to go next level on processing players or see players they think are pretty good hit the portal.

    If it's a long term deal, it's just not good for the sport. No way no how.
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    15,986
    vCash
    2510
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    I think this is just a one year deal. No big deal if so.

    The 85 will still stand though, so, if Bama is going to consistently sign more than 25, they're going to have to go next level on processing players or see players they think are pretty good hit the portal.

    If it's a long term deal, it's just not good for the sport. No way no how.
    We better hope this is a one year deal. That's all I can say. Even as a one year deal, this is a horrible decision.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    4,100
    vCash
    3200
    I get torn on this one because the Portal has the propensity to destroy a program that changes coaches or has a quick fall from grace.

    One thing I think needs to happen is a deadline for the portal entry to not lose a year of eligibility. Maybe that?s as early as December 31 so schools can decide how to fill spots they are losing.

    This is complicated as you don?t want to be encouraging schools to process players either. Schools are going to be much more willing to take on character risk if they know they could essentially cut them after a year and get to replace them .

    There has to be a way to box this in and make it reasonable for all parties.

  5. #5
    Senior Member Maroonthirteen's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    6,007
    vCash
    4388
    Oh boy..... the sunbelt is going to lose about 7 players to a certain SEC school. **

  6. #6
    Senior Member bulldawg28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5,449
    vCash
    3700
    We'll get our share of players if we learn to recruit better.

  7. #7
    Senior Member BulldogBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    The Maxyard
    Posts
    10,324
    vCash
    44696
    If they want parity they should be going in the other direction.

    College football desperately needs to reduce scholarship players to 72-73 and sign no more than 21-22 per year.

    Give other schollies to baseball and maybe 1-2 to other sports.
    The Liberation will not be televised--- when it arrives like lightning in the skies!

  8. #8
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by bulldawg28 View Post
    We'll get our share of players if we learn to recruit better.
    We don't have room under the 85. This won't help us at all this season, unless we start processing players
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    271
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by BulldogBear View Post
    If they want parity they should be going in the other direction.

    College football desperately needs to reduce scholarship players to 72-73 and sign no more than 21-22 per year.

    Give other schollies to baseball and maybe 1-2 to other sports.
    You guys that want parity so we can somehow play Bama closer need to think about how that works against us. Parity also works to help the USMs and the Memphis schools to bring them closer to equal with us.

  10. #10
    Senior Member Dawgology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    6,274
    vCash
    52525
    Quote Originally Posted by Sienfield View Post
    You guys that want parity so we can somehow play Bama closer need to think about how that works against us. Parity also works to help the USMs and the Memphis schools to bring them closer to equal with us.
    That is kind of the definition of parity

  11. #11
    Senior Member Dawgology's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    6,274
    vCash
    52525
    Quote Originally Posted by bulldawg28 View Post
    We'll get our share of players if we learn to recruit better.
    Until the younger generation of boosters take over I don?t know that there will be much change in recruiting

  12. #12
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Sienfield View Post
    You guys that want parity so we can somehow play Bama closer need to think about how that works against us. Parity also works to help the USMs and the Memphis schools to bring them closer to equal with us.
    Who cares about USM & Memphis? It's about competing for championships, not worrying about who your worst loss is
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  13. #13
    Senior Member ShotgunDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Posts
    37,276
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by Dawgology View Post
    Until the younger generation of boosters take over I don?t know that there will be much change in recruiting
    I think a group of boosters that grew up in the recruiting ranking era will have a better idea how this works
    CAN'T PUT A SADDLE ON A MUSTANG

    Quit Your Bi$&$&?!, He's Not Going to Run the Ball More

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Posts
    11,845
    vCash
    3400
    Quote Originally Posted by Irondawg View Post
    I get torn on this one because the Portal has the propensity to destroy a program that changes coaches or has a quick fall from grace.

    One thing I think needs to happen is a deadline for the portal entry to not lose a year of eligibility. Maybe that?s as early as December 31 so schools can decide how to fill spots they are losing.

    This is complicated as you don?t want to be encouraging schools to process players either. Schools are going to be much more willing to take on character risk if they know they could essentially cut them after a year and get to replace them .

    There has to be a way to box this in and make it reasonable for all parties.
    This is definitely going to encourage schools to not just process them, but pull their scholarships and try to get them to transfer to another school through the portal so that they can get an extra scholarship. Saban's Medical processing or whatever they call it where the player stops playing because of "injury" but keeps their scholarship won't get them an extra spot.

  15. #15
    Senior Member bulldawg28's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    5,449
    vCash
    3700
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    We don't have room under the 85. This won't help us at all this season, unless we start processing players
    Lol leave it to Leach. If or when we lose more games he'll make sure it happens.

  16. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Posts
    271
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by ShotgunDawg View Post
    Who cares about USM & Memphis? It's about competing for championships, not worrying about who your worst loss is
    We can't compete for championships if we don't beat the USMs and Memphis teams. You already forgot last Saturday? When was the last time we played for a football championship? When was the last time we lost to Memphis but go ahead with your narrative about championships.

  17. #17
    Senior Member Apoplectic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Posts
    1,532
    vCash
    3200
    Going to have to make S/S a four year commitment for the athletes to avoid saban processing

  18. #18
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2014
    Posts
    8,627
    vCash
    3100
    Quote Originally Posted by BulldogBear View Post
    If they want parity they should be going in the other direction.

    College football desperately needs to reduce scholarship players to 72-73 and sign no more than 21-22 per year.

    Give other schollies to baseball and maybe 1-2 to other sports.
    Saban probably pitched a temper tantrum at a press conference so they said here Nick we'll give you 7 more schollies.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Disclaimer: Elitedawgs is a privately owned and operated forum that is managed by alumni of Mississippi State University. This website is in no way affiliated with the Mississippi State University, The Southeastern Conference (SEC) or the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA). The views and opinions expressed herein are strictly those of the post author and may not reflect the views of other members of this forum or elitedawgs.com. The interactive nature of the elitedawgs.com forums makes it impossible for elitedawgs.com to assume responsibility for any of the content posted at this site. Ideas, thoughts, suggestion, comments, opinions, advice and observations made by participants at elitedawgs.com are not endorsed by elitedawgs.com
Elitedawgs: A Mississippi State Fan Forum, Mississippi State Football, Mississippi State Basketball, Mississippi State Baseball, Mississippi State Athletics. Mississippi State message board.