Is this just the SEC getting out in front of an NCAA violation, or has the SEC set tougher rules than the NCAA here? I had no idea that this was a concern until I read this thread and the links within.
News Article: Records: LSU Slapped with Recruiting Sanctions After Prospect Backs Out of Commitment
- Thread starter RTR91
- Start date
I think your are correct. We know how competitive recruiting is today and especially in the SEC. I think it is conference's way of saying "you better be using the FAA for it's intended purpose and this to get a student athlete prepared to enroll at YOUR school and not as a way a gaining an edge in the recruiting game". In other words, coaches better feel pretty darn sure the kid is truly committed to them before they stick the FAA in front them.
Still, I think it is a bad rule. Their nothing binding student athlete to the university or vise versa in the FAA. However, coaches and the universities are assuming the risk of penalties for that additional contact with the player. I don't know if I would want to stick my neck out too far on a decision being made by a 17 or 18 year old.
Last edited:
I know many are enjoying this because it's a hated rival but this is bad for college football. It is only a matter of time before the shoe is on the other foot and we will be the ones up in arms. Unless there are details we don't know about, it's a bad move by the SEC.
As I said before, I agree that it's a bad rule. I just hope we don't have any of these agreements with recruits...
Until we know the whole story we have no idea whether this is fair / unfair, good / bad.
I think all the information needs to come out from the start when something of this nature is released to the media. All the speculation and finger pointing going on is unnecessary in my view.
We had agreements with recruits because Thompson, Harrison and Barnett all had "signing" ceremonies when they signed them.
I agree, but I'm also unsure as to where this info came from in the first place. If it was released by LSU and not the SEC, then there could be some bias there right out of the gate.
I agree. That article in the Advocate is a walking contradiction. First, they say sanctions were levied based on recruiting violations with an unknown player. Next, they detail Womack's story of signing the FAA and the fact that he was not a firm LSU commit. Later on, they state that it is unclear if any other athletes beside Womack and LSU's 4 early enrollees signed FAAs. How can it be unclear if you state that they got in trouble over an unknown player who signed an FAA?
All of the information currently out there on this is from this article which says it is from public records. It only states that LSU declined to comment. Why didn't they provide excerpts from LSU's self reporting document or the notice of sanctions from the SEC office? For a rule that could have serious ramifications, no other media outlet has picked it up to my knowldege.
I took the Advocate article to say "The recruit is unnamed, but Matt Womack is the only player we know signed a financial agreement and didn't enroll in January."
There could be another player, but no other recruit announced signing the financial agreement. Therefore, Womack is the most obvious name.
@BruceFeldmanCFB Some angst in coaching world after seeing LSU hit hard from Financial Aid signing: "If that's the true penalty, you can't sign a kid to one"
Latest threads
-
No. 1 Visits Tuscaloosa for Second Straight Week as Alabama Hosts Top-Ranked Texas A&M- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 0
-
-
I'm Declaring the Emporer has no clothes (NCAA rules implosion)- Started by BamaNation
- Replies: 14
-
Home-and-Home Series Wraps Up as Alabama Welcomes UAB on Tuesday
- Started by Diamond Tide
- Replies: 1
-
-
A huge win today at my doctor's office...- Started by uafan4life
- Replies: 4