forums

Derick Hunter

Ethnicsands said:
Interesting find. The article does say that, but it doesnt cite the source of the rule. I couldnt find the rule on the ncaa site. i am not saying the article is wrong, but it would be interesting to understand where that is laid out. I don’t understand, in any case, why anyone would bother cap the number of kids who can be counted back, since there isn’t any way to game the system with count backs. The 25 initial counter rule still applies, and the 85 scholarship rule still applies. For a school operating at 85, moreover, you have to graduate kids midyear to even award new scholarships (irrespective of whether they count back or forward). There is no incentive to play under 85. There is every incentive to graduate kids. Seems like a dumb rule to limit count backs or even worry about them. But there are lots of dumb rules, so that wouldn’t be a surprise.
Click to expand...


So now that you realize your interpretation of the rule was stupid, you want to call the rule stupid. Brilliant.

You can sign 25 per year. Kids have 5 years of to play. Assuming redshirts, that is a roster of 125. You are capped at 85. You, literally, have 40 spots to handle exceptions to these assumptions.

Lots of other schools manage their rosters. It's not impossible, stop acting like it is. Stop acting like Miami is being "punished" for "graduating football players".

We are not being punished at this current time. We are recovering from the prior punishments from the NCAA and Al Golden inflicting his incompetence on us.

But all of this magical math that guys do every year to get us to a recruiting class of 30 or more needs to stop.
 
Advertisement
If you look at this kid's twitter, it's a joke, even for a high school kid. He's constantly reaching out to national recruiting guys like Warren and Wiltfong. He got into it with one Canes fan that I saw sometime last week iirc. Kid wants to enjoy the process, but if he's having issues with grades, I doubt he ends up at any school and winds up in JUCO. Defensive linemen with this type of attitude rarely work out. I'm all for the staff for ceasing any contact with this kid, and it has absolutely nothing to do with him throwing the U upside down.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
So now that you realize your interpretation of the rule was stupid, you want to call the rule stupid. Brilliant.

You can sign 25 per year. Kids have 5 years of to play. Assuming redshirts, that is a roster of 125. You are capped at 85. You, literally, have 40 spots to handle exceptions to these assumptions.

Lots of other schools manage their rosters. It's not impossible, stop acting like it is. Stop acting like Miami is being "punished" for "graduating football players".

We are not being punished at this current time. We are recovering from the prior punishments from the NCAA and Al Golden inflicting his incompetence on us.

But all of this magical math that guys do every year to get us to a recruiting class of 30 or more needs to stop.
Click to expand...
You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. The question was whether there is a limit of 5 initial counters who can cou;t back in any given midyear enrollment cycle. I asked where this rule is laid out, as I couldn’t find it. Someone responded by posting an article that mentions the point without explanation or source. I found a different article ln new recruiting rules that did not state this point. If it is really the rule, I’m sure there is an NCAA statement making the point. I just haven’t found that NCAA statement yet.

The significant new rule change is kids now count when the sign an LOI even if they don’t enroll. That is a big change.
 
Paranos said:
He explained in UGA article that he committed to Miami to mkae his dad happy but in the end he has to do what makes him happy and that is playing for UGA.

Here is the article
https://www.dawgnation.com/football...even-more-interesting-than-his-rambo-nickname

So this tomfoolery from him as to be expected, in the end he will cash an $EC bagman check an his dad will be transfered to a walmart near athens or go work for Homedepot (big time UGA boosters).

GO Canes
Click to expand...
Hope UGA drops his *** . Going out of his way to disrespect UM , I don’t get it .
 
Advertisement
Lots of twitter chatter at him and about this. Seems like the claim is he didn't post it but someone else did....IDK
 
Hoyacane1620 said:
Lots of twitter chatter at him and about this. Seems like the claim is he didn't post it but someone else did....IDK
Click to expand...

Who cares? He still did it. He has been a clown for a long time. The kid has about every “bust” indicator you can have. I don’t get why we even waste our time with him.
 
Ethnicsands said:
You seem to have a reading comprehension problem. The question was whether there is a limit of 5 initial counters who can cou;t back in any given midyear enrollment cycle. I asked where this rule is laid out, as I couldn’t find it. Someone responded by posting an article that mentions the point without explanation or source. I found a different article ln new recruiting rules that did not state this point. If it is really the rule, I’m sure there is an NCAA statement making the point. I just haven’t found that NCAA statement yet.

The significant new rule change is kids now count when the sign an LOI even if they don’t enroll. That is a big change.
Click to expand...



You compound your cluelessness with even more stupid posts.

You write things, and then seem to forget that you wrote them. Yes, you criticized the rules. Yes, you can't seem to research the rules, so you ask others to provide you with citations. Then you seem to read things, yet you can't understand what you just read.

If there is any "rule change", it is simply to address OVERSIGNING. You can't tease 50 kids with LoIs and then hope that 20 of them fail to qualify. The rule says that if you sign a kid who FAILS TO QUALIFY, then you can't just enroll another player later.

Miami has not had that problem. The IC rules are basically what they always have been. Here's an article that clearly describes the early enrollment issue, and if you don't believe the author, you can ask him for an NCAA rules citation.

https://247sports.com/Article/Colle...-Explaining-the-tweaked-25-man-rule-112220845

The truth is, there are plenty of posters on this board who act like they know how to apply this rule, but don't. They also don't know who counts as an IC (it includes transfers, late signees, etc.). People continue to think we have all these early enrollment spots to use, but we don't. I tried to explain to people that we gave up IC spots when we self-reduced on scholarships before the NCAA hit us with the final penalties, but people forget these things.

Anyhow, we aren't going to sign 28 or 30. Maybe 26 or 27. Probably less.

The new rule is going to insure that every program steers clear of academically risky kids (unless they are 5 stars), and there is probably going to be a hot "Ray Lewis market" to get available kids in May or June who eventually manage to qualify.
 
Advertisement
Well then **** this kid!

Pull his ship now!

100%

It will do us more good to do this, then to "have a chance" to land him.
 
Advertisement
Hunter needs to have a convo with this man

7842522.webp
 
Advertisement
I’ve been telling you guys to quit being keefed by keef jr. He was never coming.

Dude is an attention ***** that probably can’t spell his name.

I’m pretty sure he had the same amount of sacks as my boxers last year.
 
TheOriginalCane said:
You compound your cluelessness with even more stupid posts.

You write things, and then seem to forget that you wrote them. Yes, you criticized the rules. Yes, you can't seem to research the rules, so you ask others to provide you with citations. Then you seem to read things, yet you can't understand what you just read.

If there is any "rule change", it is simply to address OVERSIGNING. You can't tease 50 kids with LoIs and then hope that 20 of them fail to qualify. The rule says that if you sign a kid who FAILS TO QUALIFY, then you can't just enroll another player later.

Miami has not had that problem. The IC rules are basically what they always have been. Here's an article that clearly describes the early enrollment issue, and if you don't believe the author, you can ask him for an NCAA rules citation.

https://247sports.com/Article/Colle...-Explaining-the-tweaked-25-man-rule-112220845

The truth is, there are plenty of posters on this board who act like they know how to apply this rule, but don't. They also don't know who counts as an IC (it includes transfers, late signees, etc.). People continue to think we have all these early enrollment spots to use, but we don't. I tried to explain to people that we gave up IC spots when we self-reduced on scholarships before the NCAA hit us with the final penalties, but people forget these things.

Anyhow, we aren't going to sign 28 or 30. Maybe 26 or 27. Probably less.

The new rule is going to insure that every program steers clear of academically risky kids (unless they are 5 stars), and there is probably going to be a hot "Ray Lewis market" to get available kids in May or June who eventually manage to qualify.
Click to expand...
I really don't get what you are arguing about.
Anyone that signs a NLI, whether they qualify or not, counts as an IC, and thats been the case for at least like 5 years now.

And You know you can agree that 28 is the max (with 3 being backcounted) while also agreeing that 25-26 is the most likely class size we end up with, right? One is our Max class size, the other is the Most Likely class size. This isn't an either or. Both are true.....now if someone is saying we could sign 29 or 30+, then yeah, thats BS for sure.

Secondly this 5 EE's being backcounted limit thing sounds false. If that were true how does ANY school sign 31 or more players in a year? They wouldn't be able to. I mean that only happens once in a blue moon (because its not smart to sign 30+ in a class), but unless thats a new rule, there have definitely been a couple schools who have signed over 30 since 2016.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top