The SEC 'Houston Nutt Rule' Signing Cap of 28

[TIDE24]

Isn't the limit 28 this year? What is the penalty for violating the 28?

I was on rivals and noticed that other school has 29. I know it really doesn't mean anything until names are put on paper, it just stuck me as odd and I couldn't remember what the limit was.

 

[bamacon]

Frankly I don't see how this rule is even legal. Wouldn't the NCAA guidelines trump the SEC? What if the SEC stated the measurements for a 1st down would now be 15 yards? Would that fly? Just sayin.

 

[JeffAtlanta]

Frankly I don't see how this rule is even legal. Wouldn't the NCAA guidelines trump the SEC? What if the SEC stated the measurements for a 1st down would now be 15 yards? Would that fly? Just sayin.

It's sort of like federal vs state laws - the SEC can make rules more stringent than the NCAA but can't make them looser or contradict them.

It's not really any different than some conferences having more stringent academic requirements for athletes than the NCAA requires.

 

[Bama323]

It sounds to me like the new rule is too vague. I never had a problem with teams oversigning, because regardless they could only bring in 25 new players. I'm not sure what limiting teams to 28 is supposed to accomplish. I thought the rule was that you could only sign 28 players in a recruiting season. If you can back-count players and then sign more than 28, then that needs to be clarified.

 

[jthomas666]

It sounds to me like the new rule is too vague. I never had a problem with teams oversigning, because regardless they could only bring in 25 new players. I'm not sure what limiting teams to 28 is supposed to accomplish. I thought the rule was that you could only sign 28 players in a recruiting season. If you can back-count players and then sign more than 28, then that needs to be clarified.

The rule was passed because last year Nutt signed something like 37. His rationale that many were not going to qualify, but by signing them, he hoped to have an inside track on them coming out of JC.

 

[Bama323]

The rule was passed because last year Nutt signed something like 37. His rationale that many were not going to qualify, but by signing them, he hoped to have an inside track on them coming out of JC.

I know why it was passed, but that doesn't mean that the rule accomplishes anything. It doesn't matter if Nutt signed 50 players, he could only accept 25, so what's the point of the 28 signee limit?

Also, let's not forget that it was the Auburn AD who initiated the proposal to limit the number of signees to 28. Now, I understand that back-counting the players means that they actually count toward the 09 class, but if you add the back-counted players to the number of signees Auburn actually had in 09, then that is WAY more than 28 for 09. Like I said, the rule is too vague and needs to be clarified, otherwise some teams will gain an advantage.

 

[JeffAtlanta]

Its the back counting of scholarships and grey shirting that makes this rule almost impossible to implement.

We shouldn't be too critical of either back counting or grey shirting though, as Saban is a master of using both to make the 85/25 numbers fit each year.

 

[Bama323]

Its the back counting of scholarships and grey shirting that makes this rule almost impossible to implement.

We shouldn't be too critical of either back counting or grey shirting though, as Saban is a master of using both to make the 85/25 numbers fit each year.

Right, but the rule went into place this year, and we're not going to be over the 28 limit.

Lets say AU signs 33 this year, and 28 of those count for 2010. Now, let's say they are still under the 85 rule next year and they can back-count 3 players next year for the 2010 class.

In the above scenario, Auburn could sign 28 in 2010, and then sign 31 in 2011 by back-counting 3 players to 2010. That means that when you add the two classes together, Auburn actually signed 31 players for 2010 (28 in 2010 + 3 back-counted in 2011) when everyone else had 28.

 

[JeffAtlanta]

Right, but the rule went into place this year, and we're not going to be over the 28 limit.

We're in a much different situation than Auburn though. For some reason Auburn is well under the 85 limit and can sign a full 25. On the other hand, I think we only had something like 22 slots open.

From what I've read pieced together from reading the board, we're not going over the 28 limit because of the SEC rule, but because of the 85 total scholarship limit.

 

[Bama323]

We're in a much different situation than Auburn though. For some reason Auburn is well under the 85 limit and can sign a full 25. On the other hand, I think we only had something like 22 slots open.

From what I've read pieced together from reading the board, we're not going over the 28 limit because of the SEC rule, but because of the 85 total scholarship limit.

I guess it all works itself out in the end, but they still need to clarify the rule. As far as I know, the rule just said you can't sign over 28 for a recruiting year. The question is; if a team has 28 signees for a recruiting year, can they back-count recruits the next year so that in effect that recruiting class is greater than 28 signees, even if they are below the 85 limit? At this point, the answer seems to be yes.

 

[CrimsonTsunami]

I guess it all works itself out in the end, but they still need to clarify the rule. As far as I know, the rule just said you can't sign over 28 for a recruiting year. The question is; if a team has 28 signees for a recruiting year, can they back-count recruits the next year so that in effect that recruiting class is greater than 28 signees, even if they are below the 85 limit? At this point, the answer seems to be yes.

I agree, clarification is key. This rule seems to be a paper tiger, kind of like the auburn football program.

 

[glasscutter256]

It sounds to me like this wasn't so much of a rule as a suggestion by the SEC if there is no punishment or consequence for oversigning. The SEC hit CUM with a stiff penalty after talking about the officiating. I wonder if the SEC will dish out fines after the signing period. They can't take away scholarships. Maybe they'll make the coaches run suicides.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

What the sanctions are is a legitimate question. As I remember, they're not spelled out. It would be interesting to see if anyone would just defy the rule, but I don't expect it. I think the reason for the "Nutt Rule" was that it was a farce, bordering on fraud, to sign that many, some of them naive enough to believe that they were going to OM, when only 25 + backcounters, etc., could actually accept a scholarship...

 

[LCN]

And only 21 or 22 of those 37 signees made it in the door at Ole Miss .

You can still have as many players publicly pledged as you want but , 28 is the limit for actual signees .

 

[Fury]

I know why it was passed, but that doesn't mean that the rule accomplishes anything. It doesn't matter if Nutt signed 50 players, he could only accept 25, so what's the point of the 28 signee limit?

Also, let's not forget that it was the Auburn AD who initiated the proposal to limit the number of signees to 28. Now, I understand that back-counting the players means that they actually count toward the 09 class, but if you add the back-counted players to the number of signees Auburn actually had in 09, then that is WAY more than 28 for 09. Like I said, the rule is too vague and needs to be clarified, otherwise some teams will gain an advantage.

Regardless of who caused the rule, or who proposed it...the ENTIRE SEC voted on & approved it. I remember Saban saying he liked the rule but thought the limit should be around 30.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

And only 21 or 22 of those 37 signees made it in the door at Ole Miss .

You can still have as many players publicly pledged as you want but , 28 is the limit for actual signees .

Lance, I believe they can actually sign a LOI, but, if they don't qualify, they can't accept a scholarship. If a school signs more than the number they can grant schollys, then it's up to the school to determine whom to eliminate. If you come right down to it, it's who reports in August and actually receives a scholly. NSD is an invention of the colleges to gain some certainty. It's not enshrined in NCAA regs. What really counts is who is on campus in August, actually receiving a scholarship. We have certainly had a bunch who weren't cleared until August - and that's when they counted against the 25/85...

Edit: Another reason for the rule (which is too low by two, as Nick says) is that, if you can sign 50, obviously you're keeping guys from signing with other schools. Nutt is a fool and screwed it up for everybody...

 

[LCN]

I think it's possible they might still be able to sign too but without their papers being processed . Similar to Demerius Dareus when he signed sitting beside Marcel but was never processed or ever listed as being an actual official signee by the school . I guess "officially signed , accepted and processed" would be a better or more fitting tag

 

[TIDE-HSV]

I think it's possible they might still be able to sign too but without their papers being processed . Similar to Demerius Dareus when he signed sitting beside Marcel but was never processed or ever listed as being an actual official signee by the school . I guess "officially signed , accepted and processed" would be a better or more fitting tag

They're never "processed" until they report in August...

 

[LCN]

6 in one hand , half dozen in the other :wink: It can be Summer or Fall now for school , but their papers have to be accepted and processed (preliminary processing or whatever term would be most appropriate) by the school in order for the player to be listed as an official signee .

 

[HITIDE]

The way I understand it SEC schools can only accept 28 LOI's per year PLUS the number eligible back counters for the year before. Of course, of the 28 LIO's, only 25 can receive a scholarship (maintaining the 85 limit).
That may be what everyone has been saying but I got lost in all the hypotheticals.