In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 1847
Online now 1904 Record: 10904 (2/4/2012)
The place to discuss inside information, the latest rumors and scoop on the Buckeyes
Anything and everything football related that has to do with your Buckeyes
If it's football recruiting, OSU-style, it's cussed and discussed here
Talk a little Buckeye basketball with your fellow Ohio State hoopsters
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
Div. II Findlay
Maybe he just wanted to play without sitting out a year or maybe wants to give QB a shot at a smaller school?
how neat ! Findlay is about 6 minutes from my house !
good for him! i hope he stays healthy, gets his degree and enjoys a wonderfully productive life.
We keep wondering how we have space for so many people in the 2013 class.
Is it me or is UFM telling a lot if guys they will never see the field?
Do we like this approach to making room on the roster? I am a bit uncomfortable with it. It's a bit like over signing in its intent.
"Buckeye born and bred, a Buckeye 'til I'm dead"
At it's core, it is oversigning. We can't put more than 82 pounds in our 82-pound bag. That means that for every guy who goes in, one has to come out. That means getting rid of current players one way or another.
I, too, am torn. On the one hand, that's life in the real world (produce or perish); on the other, it seems very cutthroat and disingenuous to tell a kid we need him and then turn around a year or two later and tell him we don't need him anymore. I'm hoping this is just a case of weeding out the players Tressel recruited that Urban doesn't want or need and as the roster fills up with his players, we'll see less and less of it. Plus once we get back to 85, those extra 3 scholarships will help alleviate the pressure.
We knew it was coming but I can't say that I like it.
i see no reason why we shouldnt over sign in general. if other bcs conferences are allowed why cant we ? enough of complaining about over signing and lets do it ourselves !
Note: i know no one here is complaining about over signing
This post was edited by GOBUCKS16X1 15 months ago
lol, no one here's complaining about oversigning the way you're the only person who thinks mark may is a douche...
I'm not happy about it. The same thing we've all complained about with the SEC, seems to be coming home to roost. It certainly doesn't seem fair to these young men who've done nothing wrong. It's possible it was a mutual decision, but I'd really like to hear an interview with him to get his side of it to find out how he feels about the parting. How about one of our intrepid writers seek him out? Besides, he showed some talent in '11 before he got hurt.
what ever there are kids going to leave that will never play, it's best for them to leave for boht osu and for them playing if they want that. Froom what I here urban never says they have to leave just puts it out there that they aren't going to play much. He did this with Rod Smith last year, and he ended up playing. It;s the most straight forward honest way to go
I understand your point but the reality remains that we have a 9 scholarship reduction and we cannot be undermanned in any way if we hope to compete at the highest levels of college football going forward.
It's a fine line I know but if a player isn't likely to ever see the field then why waste his and this program's time? Certainly none of these three and four-star recruits came here to gray and redshirt then run onto the field before the final home game of their fifth-year to hug their coach and parents.
You come here to be an active participant. That's at least what Meyer is looking for. In this regard he's the anti Tressel. Tressel wanted recruits who'd want to be Buckeyes. Guys who'd feel honored to be Buckeyes because their only other options were to play in the MAC, YSU or the D-II levels.
That's all it is I believe.
In fact, I wonder how many more would've been cut had Meyer been hired earlier such as Wood, Domicone, etc--esp since they weren't his guys.
But like you, I don't see this being much of an issue once the scholarship reduction is over and once Meyer has a cupboard full of his recruits here.
I agree and I like this approach. It's different than just telling a kid he lost his scholly because we need room for another player. What's wrong with bringing a kid into your office and asking him how important playing time is to him, asking him how much he likes going to Ohio State as a school and not just a football program, and being honest that he might not ever see the field here. It let's the player know that he may never play here and that he still has a choice. Rod Smith was a guy who was given a choice, Kenny Guiton might have been given that choice as well if we had a 3rd string QB who knew the importance of hard work in academics as well as football. Both Kenny and Rod were challenged and both have responded tremendously well up to this point. I have no problem to this approach, or to the approach of kicking kids off the team for very questionable behavior regardless of talent level. Dom Clarke could have been a great corner here and Berry may have been a tremendous RB but they made poor decisions and had to pay. As long as we aren't kicking kids off the team that are busting their asses and that want to be here then I have no problem with it. I have no problem with telling kids that are lazy that they need to get it together or go another direction. No player should have their scholarship renewed if they aren't working hard to maintain the right to keep that scholarship. I hope the 4 year scholarships have terms that require the athletes to show up to classes, conditioning, meetings, and practices on time all the time except in cases of emergency. I do think that schools and the NCAA may pimp out football players to a certain degree but it's up to the players if they want to earn the value of their scholarship not only on the field. Players are given a couple hundred dollars a week for food, rent, and utilities, a player shouldn't need more than $1000 a month to support themselves but I think they get more than that. Work your ass off and you won't get cut is the way it should be. The SEC does it in a more slimy way that doesn't reward the hard-work and dedication, all it rewards if football talent and ability. I hope Urban can continue to develop the mentality of work hard or be left out. This mentality took us to 12-0 and hopefully can take us to multiple Big Ten and BCS/Play-off champsionships. I'd rather have a team of 3 and 4 stars that work their asses of than a team of sloppy 4 and 5 stars. Just look at How "star"-studded Bollman's last line was and how unheralded the current O-line players were out of high school and compare their performances.
I agree with the post above mine.
+1 to Crusader.To me there is a stark difference to UFM vs over-signing. The over-signing is telling kids they are going to go. At least UFM frankly discusses future.... Probably in a way few have ever been talked to.. We live in a world where everyone gets a participation trophy and unfortunately the real world is a lot tougher. How many times have we as fans just known a "sure thing or lock" only to have it not pan out from where we sit.. Do we know why? Do we for sure know the work ethic or effort each kid has put out? Do we know whether or not the individual is injury prone? If 5 star was all that mattered, Gonzo or Hawk might have ended up at Findlay.. I applaud UFM for the frankness. Young men have opportunities elsewhere for both schollies and playing time. A UFM cast-away is better talent than most coaches / recruiters ever see and if a kid has a work ethic he will excel elsewhere
How firm thy friendship O-HI-O
I've been on the fence with this for quite a while. I'm in no way in favor of forcing a kid out. But this is the exact argument the other schools have in favor of this. Telling a kid he won't get the playing time and giving him the option to transfer is what I'm questioning. I guess I don't see that being all that bad. If the kid wants to play, then at least he is told up front. I suppose if it was me, I would probably be greatful and take the option. Never know, might just tear it up somewhere else. Let's face it, Reed is gonna go nuts at Findlay. There is a great thread on TBB about this. And that is the whole premise from the schools we always call "oversigners". This was also kinda my point on that other thread I made about this. As long as nobody is forced out, is it really a bad thing?
Pretty sure this is way of life, not anti-Tressel... UFM treats players like men and makes them aspire to greatness, not mediocrity. He can do it because he has the credentials to back it up. In my mind he reminds me of Bill Parcells when he was coach of the Giants..Just daring men to be great enough to be a Giant..and like his protégé Belichick... Think Vrabel gets it? I do!
I am NOT a fan of oversigning.....I just do not see this as oversigning. If we were over signing I do not believe for a second that Underwood or Brown would be on the team. I think this is UFM telling kids some things that the kid does not want to hear. Is his goal to get them to leave, maybe maybe not. The difference as I see it is just like others said, if they want to stay and sit on the bench they can and keep their scholly, while he is telling them I seriously doubt you make it on the field. He is not trying to force them out but giving them an honest opinion and letting the kid make the choice. Now I would be mad if we went the route of telling a kid that he no longer had a scholly or come signing day tols someone like Gardner we do not have room because say we flipped D. Johnson from PA who we have rated higher. Now Gardner has to find a school with room, which he may or may not have visited. These are the issues I have with oversigning, not tellling a kid your opinion and letting him choose.
I just wanna add to my post. I'm sure I will offend some, but I have been fighting myself for quite a while now. But really this is what I believe. This is what the southeasterns have done. They didn't have the rule on signings like everyone else has. That is what has created the dynasty they have. Let's throw out any possibility of cutting kids. I think by not allowing to sign extra, it gives them a huge advantage. More then just what we see initially. That conference rule is a magnet to coaches. Makes recruiting easier and better teams gives the coach more exposure. More exposure equals more fame equals more money. Let's face it. The NFL is needing coaches right now and are looking at everyone. In the same time, the southeasterns lose no coaches voluntarily. Meanwhile, the B1G loses what 2? And BB left Whisky to go there. At the same time, Wisky goes to Utah St, and Purdue goes to Kent. So the NFL can't get their coaches, and they get one of ours. And at the same time we get who? And one of them hired an OC from BC and its Bollman. I think that shows how much that rule actually means. I guarantee after all of that was done, Slive told someone, "See! See! This is why my system works". Playing for national championships because of dominant teams, coaches that would rather be there then the NFL, controlling the college football world, and every recruit wants to go there. Recruits see this too. Go to the bright and shiny item. Bling! Huge exposure, dominating bowl games, playing on a team with all the other best recruits, big name coaches who are begging to be there. That's the bling! It all starts with the advantage they have in recruiting. I honestly feel that, since the MAC is the cradle of coaches, the B1G (with the 88 rule) is like the kindergarten of coaches. Get into the MAC, move up to the B1G, then get down south and make life easier and start competing. TV markets aside, let's compare. The B1G pulled in Rutgers and Maryland. They pulled in Missouri and TAMU, who became relevant in the first year of being there and is IMO going to run with this advantage HARD! So I'm really thinking anymore, the B1G needs to drop this whole signing rule. Sign 100 if you want! But you better be at 85 by fall camp. Plus! I like the rule about how teams have to justify players that leave. That protects the kid. They can't just cut a kid, but if he transfers because of having no chance of playing time, that is justifiable. But every attrition needs to be justified. Seriously, if the NCAA allows 85 then what happens if a team would have 10 transfers? Play with 75? What happens if a team has many transfers over the period of a few years? Can't oversign, so you just have to play with less numbers. Well its no wonder where that southeastern advantage comes from. I just don't think its all that hard to see. I just really believe the whole problem with the "irrelevant B1G" was created by themselves. And maybe its time for this rule to change.
This could be oversigning, or it could be Urban getting his "guys" in there. Remember when he got the job last year he still allowed all those that committed stay committed. He didn't pull a Tuberville or Bilema and go in and start pulling schollys. I think he wants to get the right guys ion there and if takes pushing a few out, then so be it. remember though that the BIG now gives out 4 years scholarships, so oversigning will be tough in about 2 years
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports