No one has the balls to do it, but it could be beneficial. In the recent past we were limited to signing in the teens one year because we had reached our limit of 85 scholarship players. I'm sure there were several quality recruits we had to turn down that year. It is a down year in LA this year, but most predict a better class next year. We should get about 5 or 6 more great recruits in this class and then the pickings are slim from LA and the probability of signing great out of state talent is not good. Why not close the books 1 or 2 short instead of oversigning to reach our usual 27 or 28. Coaches never want to do this because they want everyone they can to protect their jobs right now, but Miles just signed an extension. I think the long term good of the program would be better served to forgo 1or 2 players so that we don't miss out on a few studs next year, etc. Winning, or at least reaching the title game, will undoubtedly help recruiting in the future so great talent should want ot come here in the future. Does any coach in college have the guts to undersign by choice in down years? Is there anyone else with Lesticles?
There is always attrition. People flunk out, fail to qualify, or transfer every year. People look for greener pastures and someone always gets homesick and quits. Someone always gets injured and quits football. Sometimes the coach dismisses a player (five dismissed this year). It's better to have too many bodies than too few. Coaches always oversign for this reason.
It's not that no coach has the balls to do it, it's that coaches are too intelligent to do it. If we undersign this year, then we will have to award those scholarships to walk-on players, specifically walk-on players with one year of eligibility left. We may have 1 or 2 that fit that discription & deserve it. Regardless of what Rivals has our guys rated, the coaching staff likes the players that we have committed & are recruiting. A bird in the hand is worth 2 in the bush. Think of it this way. If you undersign, you under-develop. Because taking a kid next year instead of this year means your team is that much younger, that much more inexperienced, and one year with that much less depth.
To my knowledge, it is not a rule. But walk-ons are important to a program's success & letting scholarships sit out there un-used is a slap in their face.
I'm not making a statement that walk-ons aren't important to a program, but I do disagree with the statement if you have room and don't sign 25 you should award one. There are exceptions. Each and every program has players leave and go to other programs. The ones that decide not to drop a division, walk-on, and sit a year would deserve one of those scholly's. Secondly, when you have players that play in a 1AA program and decide to walk on is another situation if they can play at this level. Other than that, I think most coaches will hold onto those schollys so they can sign December grads and back count them towards the last class.
