Albama Arkansas Auburn Florida Georgia Kentucky LSU Mississippi State Missouri Ole-Miss USC Tennessee Texas A&M Vanderbilt
Latest News

Drawing The Battle Lines In The SEC’s Upcoming Oversigning Fight

The practice of oversigning has become a hot button issue in college football.  It’s also the grenade lobbed most oftenat the SEC by supporters, coaches and even commissioners of other conferences.

In the eyes of the football world, the Southeastern Conference is the clear leader when it comes to signing more players than a roster has room for… and then asking some of those players — after the fact — to either delay enrollment or go elsewhere.

With the SEC’s advantages in talent pool, coaching acumen and monster budgets/facilities, count among those who feel the league could nix the practice and still be wildly successful.  After all, if oversigning were that big of an advantage, Houston Nutt and Steve Spurrier would be competing for national titles right alongside Nick Saban.  And they’re not. 

Still, the SEC’s five-straight national titles will be used as proof positive that oversigning is the key to success.  And when the SEC Meetings begin in Destin in a few weeks, you can be sure those schools in favor of oversigning will be making that point both loudly and clearly.

Tony Barnhart of wrote earlier this week that he doesn’t believe this spring’s battle over roster spots will lead to any major changes in the SEC’s rulebook.  “There are too many coaches in the SEC who don’t want to give up that power.”  As usual, he’s right about that.  But of the league’s 12 schools, who would be for and who would be against a more stringent signing day cap?  And can we be sure how all 12 schools would vote if it came to such a point this spring?

Below are some guesses as to how each SEC institution — and the commissioner’s office — views the practice of oversigning.  Some have made their feelings quite clear already.

The Commissioner’s Take

Mike Slive recently told Mike Herndon of The Mobile Press-Register that this spring’s discussions will center on more than just oversigning.  “It’s a question of looking at all these issues that comprise how teams develop their ultimate roster.  We have put together a group of our athletic directors who have been working on this now for several months and we anticipate looking at their report in Destin, when we do our business.  We expect the First Amendment to be alive and well in Destin and I actually anticipate that we would do something more than we have done up to now.”

Slive is nearing the end of his reign.  His contract expires next summer and he will be 72.  He has already overseen what he himself has called the SEC’s “golden age.”  What better way to cement his legacy than to help take away one of the greatest attack points other conferences use against the SEC?  And if you think Slive doesn’t have some pull, you haven’t been paying attention these past few years. 

Pay heed to that final sentence: “I actually anticipate that we would do something more than we have done up to now.”  Does that mean an overall nixing of oversigning?  It’s probably way too soon for that, but you should probably expect some changes to be made at the spring meetings.


This would be a pro-oversigning vote.  Saban has been held up as one of the leaders in the oversigning frenzy.  He refuses to give reporters clear information on who is being redshirted, grayshirted, etc, and then uses that withheld information to defend his practices. 

“When you look at the numbers without knowing all the facts and internal information, I think that is a little premature and unfair.”  So said the man who withholds all that internal information back in February.

“I really don’t know what everybody is so up in arms about,” he also said in February.  “This is something that people have done in college football for a long time and it’s not illegal.”  That’s true.  It’s only frowned upon my most schools outside the Southeastern United States.

Alabama would be a “No.”


Bobby Petrino is the most popular man in the state of Arkansas today.  He has turned the Razorbacks into a national player and he’s done so in three short years. 

In March he told The Wall Street Journal: “I don’t see (oversigning) as a bad thing unless you’re being dishonest or waiting until the last minute, which eliminates (players’) visit opportunities with other schools.”

According to — a website that does its best to track programs’ roster numbers — the Hogs finished fourth in the nation this year in the number of oversignees… behind only LSU, Alabama and Ole Miss.

Arkansas — most likely — would be a “No.”


According to, AU has inked 113 signees over the past four years.  That’s an average of more than 28 signees per signing class.

According to, the Tigers signed more players between 2002 and 2010 than any other SEC school.

Now, if Auburn’s administration came to believe that oversigning benefits Bama more than it does the Tigers, AU would probably vote “Yes” on making changes.

But with history as a guide, Auburn would most likely be a “No” vote.


This is a definite “Yes” vote.  In February, President Bernie Machen went so far as to write in an editorial in Sports Illustrated: “These schools play roulette with the lives of talented young people.  If they run out of scholarships, too bad.  The letter-of-intent signed by the university the previous February is voided.  Technically, it’s legal to do this.  Morally, it is reprehensible.”

Will Muschamp might be an acorn from Saban’s tree, but he doesn’t yet have the clout to sway UF’s president on this matter.  “Again, at Florida, we don’t grayshirt,” the new coach said recently.  “That’s not something that we do; it’s not a policy of ours.  We don’t place students; that’s not a policy of ours.  That’s not something that I’m going to cross that bridge on right now because it’s not something that we do or is part of what we’re going to do.”

Florida would be a “Yes.”  (Of course, Florida also happens to sit on top of the SEC’s deepest talent pool.)


Mark Richt is no fan of oversigning kids and then backing out on those scholarship promises.  In February he said: “Our intention is to have integrity when we offer a kid and be able to follow through.” 

Just this week, he said that oversigning is “an awful thing to do, I think it’s the wrong thing to do.”

New UGA athletic director agrees with his head coach.  He has said that he’s in favor of new legislation that would curtail the practice in the SEC.  “It’s just the right thing to do,” he said in February.

Georgia would be a “Yes” vote for change.


The Wildcats have been at the middle of the SEC pack when it comes to oversigning since 2002, according to 

Also, UK actually welcomed in Elliott Porter who lost his spot at LSU last year.  However, Porter later transferred back to Baton Rouge.

While the jury is out on Joker Phillips, AD Mitch Barnhart might have tipped his hand when he defended John Calipari’s right to come in and blow up many of Billy Gillispie’s players and commitments upon his arrival in Lexington.

In 2009, Barnhart said his new coach was honest with Gillispie’s guys, telling them whether or not they fit into his plans.  “We have a spot for you or we can help you go someplace else.”  Nice.

While Barnhart sounds like a man who’d have no issue with oversigning, it’s way too soon to know the feelings of incoming UK president Eli Capilouto, who was just tabbed for that position.

All that said, Kentucky is not a state that is deep in college football talent.  If UK administrators believe the Alabamas and LSUs hold an advantage over the Cats through oversigning, it’s likely they would favor a true signing day cap.

For now, we’ll tag Kentucky as a very loose “Yes.


Like Saban, Miles is viewed as a leader of the oversigning movement.  The Porter situation mentioned above touched off a national debate on the topic.’s Gregg Doyel even referred to Miles as “a bad guy” in a column last August (though Porter’s eventual return to LSU might take some air out of that balloon).

It’s safe to include LSU as a definite “No” vote.

Mississippi State

From 2002 through 2010, Mississippi State ranked second in the SEC only to Auburn in terms of signed prospects, averaging 27.44 per class.  In February, Dan Mullen and State finished 9th in the country in oversigns according to

Interestingly, Mullen complained about oversigning this past February when several Bulldog recruits went elsewhere at the last minute.  “You hear about how unethical some of those things are.  It’s hard for me to tell our guys that we’re going to be men of our word, and then I’m not a man of my word during the recruiting process of these young men.”

As long as Houston Nutt is passing out schollys to Ole Miss like business cards, expect MSU to be a “No” vote for changes.

Ole Miss

Nutt actually drove the SEC to cap recruiting classes — in theory — at 28 after he inked an astounding 37 players in his 2009 UM class.  After the fact, Nutt apologized for causing any embarrassment for the league and said that he knew ahead of time that several of his signees would be going the junior college route.  That didn’t stop America from pointing fingers at Nutt, Ole Miss and the SEC.

CBSSports’ Doyel may have called Miles “a bad guy,” but he said Nutt is “the worst serial offender” of grayshirting.  Fans will no doubt say, “Who cares what Doyel wrote?” but sports fans across the country do read him.  And that hurts the SEC’s image.

In his defense, Nutt said in February: “I’ve never had one parent come to me and say, ‘Coach Nutt really deceived me by saying, ‘Here’s a scholarship.  And then say, peekabo, uh-oh, you don’t have one.’”  But Ole Miss led the nation in oversigning this past year according to’s numbers.  And oddly enough, the Rebels are still expected to be under the scholarship limit this fall.

Mississippi would be a solid “No.”

South Carolina

Steve Spurrier made the most surprising comment regarding oversigning that we’ve seen to date when he told The Wall Street Journal that oversigning is very helpful to the SEC’s cause… thus validating every barb tossed at the league by outsiders.

Spurrier said that the practice is necessary in his state because so many players from South Carolina come from underprivileged backgrounds.  (Apparently recruiting players from better schools with better grades is not an option.)

The Ol’ Ball Coach went so far as to say that the Big Ten has actually made a mistake by trying harder to curb oversigning.  “I think that really hurts them a lot.  They end up giving scholarships to a lot of walk-ons.”

That’s just amazing.  And his handling of Lorenzo Mauldin also took a toll on Spurrier’s reputation.

While the school’s administration appears to have stepped on Spurrier’s toes regarding Stephen Garcia’s most recent suspension, it’s hard to imagine them at this point — with Carolina on the verge of its greatest success — undercutting their coach on the recruiting trail.

South Carolina would vote “No.”


Derek Dooley does not have a talent-rich state in which to recruit.  And while he is a Saban accolyte and he did inherit a program very low on bodies, he has not shown himself to be an oversigner yet.  As a program, Tennessee ranked ninth in the SEC from ’02 to ’10 in overall signees.

New Tennessee president Joe DiPietro and new chancellor Jimmy Cheek are too new to the mix to figure out where they stand on the controversial practice.  But if Dooley were ever going to bring in 30, 31 or 32 recruits, the past two years would have been the time to do it.  And he didn’t.

Tennessee — we think — would vote “Yes.”


Really?  Do you need some background on this one?

Vandy has signed fewer players than anyone in the SEC over the past decade.  With its academic requirements, VU is more often struggling to find guys who fit than it is looking for ways to tuck players into junior colleges.

Vandy is at a disadvantage in the nation’s toughest conference to begin with.  If the Commodores feel that putting a hard cap on oversignees will help close the gap between themselves and their conference mates, they would back such a move.

Vanderbilt would vote “Yes.”


We aren’t trying to give you a definitive view on who would support and who would oppose a movement to cap oversigning in the Southeastern Conference.  We’re simply looking for a ballpark guide as to who has previously made their feelings known.

And we’re also certain that many coaches and administrators — at different times — have probably sent mixed signals over the years.

But our initial impressions show that the SEC West schools (plus South Carolina) would likely be in favor of keeping the status quo while the five remaining East Division schools would probably favor a hard limit on 28 signees per year.  That’s 28 period, not 28 plus back-counting.

The SEC’s commissioner sounds like a man who expects something to be done in Destin.  The question is, who can be swayed to move from the “do nothing” crowd to the “do something” crowd?

UPDATESlive has prepared legislation on oversigning, Seth Emerson of The Columbus Ledger-Enquirer and The Macon Telegraph reports today.

“There will be action because (the proposals) will come forth as proposed legislation for the presidents, the ADs and the other groups to opine on.  But I feel good about them,” Slive said.  “So I think the goal is to make sure that our prospective student-athletes are treated in a way that is as they should be treated, like students are treated.  And I think this package does that.”

Slive did not give away what the package includes specifically, saying only that it will address “roster management.”

Get ready for Destin, folks. 



Consequently, this is the same way that Saban says he does it - and I've never seen any of his recruits say otherwise (and have seen some confirm). What they need to do is stop the instances like the Porter case where the coach has to approach a kid late in the summer and ask him to grayshirt. That is wrong and shouldn't happen. They need to institute a policy where the recruit must sign a letter explaining the grayshirt offer before NSD and if he doesn't, the school can't grayshirt him. That would clear up most of the problems with this issue while still allowing these teams to keep a full roster through summer attrition that is going to happen


One other thing, I've seen the oversigning site you keep referring to. The list there is far from complete or even accurate. It focuses far too much on the SEC (thus the reason the SEC seems to be the worst offenders) and largely ignores events outside of the south east. It is a good site for what it is, but it should not be taken as factual or complete.


The question that should be asked is not should they allow oversigning, but rather are they doing it responsively? You said that Richt said that "oversigning is 'an awful thing to do, I think it’s the wrong thing to do.'" This is not accurate to what he actually said. He made that statement about forcing a kid to grayshirt late in the summer. From the article that you linked he also said, "Not that we haven’t grayshirted, or talked to guys about grayshirting,” Richt added. “If you tell five of those guys, ‘Hey we’ve got 20 spaces. I can sign 25. There’s a good chance that by (the time) school starts there’ll be room for you, because of attrition that happens every year everywhere you go. If there’s space for you, you come in with your class. If there’s not space for you, are you willing to come in in January?" That quote was even in nice bold letters, yet you missed it. What he is describing is exactly oversigning, but doing so responsibly - meaning that he is informing the recruit ahead of time and not offering him if he is not willing to do it.


oversigning would be alright if it went by what an earlier post said it happened because players werent going to qualify.but that is just not the case,some coaches do it cause they want to get rid of guys on the team who arnt playing alot or something like that.six have left arkansas recently because they were told to because they were not going to be a starter or a key link in the chain,i believe that for every player oversigned ,the coaxh should be fined three times what a four year scolly cost,and the school ten times the cost of a scolly,that way it would stop alot of oversigning.


It MSU's case, the oversigning took place under Croom. Mullen signed 28 in '09(before the rule) and 25 in '10. As of signing day 2011, 48 of those 53 players were still with the program, and one of the 5 who wasn't had to go juco because of grades and will be on campus this summer. I doubt there are many SEC schools retaining that many of their signees. This year, he signed 22, with one of them having to go JuCo for academics, and he had 22 roster spots to give. He has also already told fans to expect a smaller class next year due to the small number of seniors on this team. People seem to not want to like coach Mullen, but he doesn't run players off, doesn't sign kids unless he is going to give them a roster spot, and tells them up front they will have to earn playing time.

The right rev nutt however has only 18 players left from his 37 man 'Nutt rule' class, and from his 22 man '10 class 13 remain. That's what happens when you take recruits from your rival by telling them they'll start as freshmen. He even told Brassell (wr south panola) who was committed to MSU, that he would play both ways at Tsun next year. Class.


There is at least one fundamental fallacy underlying your post. It's one that permeates and distorts a lot of the discussion on this issue.

For starters, you can't make judgments about how a school will "vote" based purely on number of players they've signed. For example, Auburn may have signed more players than any SEC school between 2002 and 2010, but that doesn't tell you anything unless you know what kind of attrition they had (e.g., in the Tony Franklin and Tommy Tuberville coaching transitions), where spots opened up because players left early, how many players they signed with the mutual understanding they wouldn't be able to make grades and would have to go to juco, etc. The numbers also really don't tell you anything at all about whether a school is employing deception or unfair practices. That's what "investigative journalists" are supposed to be for...

Getting to the bigger picture, couching this debate as "Pro-Oversigning vs. Anti-Oversigning" is a bit like describing someone as being "Pro-Gun" or "Anti-Gun." You can think guns are great and everyone should own one, you can think they're terrible and should all be banned, but most people fall somewhere in the middle -- maybe you dislike guns but believe the 2nd Amendment protects the right to own them, you like guns for hunting but believe certain weapons ought to be banned, you support some kind of background check or waiting period policy, etc. The point is, the way this oversigning debate often gets portrayed badly misses the complexities of the issue, and your post similarly conveys little information about what actually is going to be addressed down in Destin and what each school will likely advocate for.

I get that you're a blogger, so I'm not singling you out for distorting the picture, because obviously you're not alone in this and the mainstream media really deserve most of the criticism for making it a yes/no, black/white issue. I do think the way this issue gets portrayed points to a broader tendency in sports journalism to oversimplify subject matter, which I think is a disservice to sports fans because, for better or worse, the way it's presented shapes public opinion.



I believe we make it very clear -- we even state in the piece -- that we're trying to give you a big picture snapshot of the lay of the land on this upcoming debate.

If I wanted to -- or had time to -- put together a piece detailing all of the subtle differences between oversigning, grayshirting, doing so legitimately, doing so dishonestly, it would fill a book.

If you want to buy a book on the subject, feel free. But if you want an idea of how the league's schools might feel heading into this debate, the post above is the best one you're going to find.

Thanks for reading,


Over signing is a largely media created event. The schools know pretty damn well who has no chance of qualifying and they plan accordingly.

Whoever decided that a kid with no chance to qualify was being wronged by being given the ability to sign a college scholarship did not know much what they were talking about.

I am a Carolina fan, and USC has never been in a posiiton where it could not enroll all the qualified and accepted into the University players in its class.

The fact remains that If Mauldin had remained committed to South Carolina and then went on to qualify, he would be enrolling this summer with the rest of his class. Of course, the odds of his qualifying are not particularly high and South Carolina had a plan for him at prep school when he didn't qualify.

In his case the rule limiting the new rule limiting the number of LOIs resulted in his choosing another situation that will probably be less advantageous to him. It forced the schools to pick which likely non-qualifiers that they allow to sign and which ones they would not. I do not really see the point in the rule.

Houston Nutt's ballyhooed class -- didn't all the qualified players enroll in school? I'm not really sure what was so bad about signing no chance qualifiers to LOIs.


Media created. Hmmm. Then I'm surprised several other conferences in the country took steps to curtail oversigning years ago, before it became a media story.

But, never let the facts get in the way of an opportunity to blame the media for something.



  1. [...] Slive is 72 and is looking to cement his legacy” stuff that John Pennington pitches here (the Tony Barnhart column just about writes itself, doesn’t it?), but who’s to say that [...]

Follow Us On:
Mobile MrSEC