 |
| Bob Donnan/US Progressive |
After filtering through all the seemingly silly changes in the saga of over-signing players—seriously, what good is a reduction in the signing numbers if SEC coaches can still adjust the way they count players each season—the only real change worth nothing is the grad-exception rule.
In short, the situation that took place last season with Jeremiah Masoli—and this season with former Georgia player, Logan Gray—will no longer be allowed to take place. The reason for this change, said SEC President, Mike Slive, is because "We're not interested in athletes coming for the purpose of one year and then moving on"...Yeah, okay.
What he should have done was amended his statement to say "We're not interested in our football athletes coming in for the purpose of one year and then moving on". Trust me, if some of them could, they would, but Slive realizes that isn't an option in college football. That said, most of this statement is just rhetoric—rhetoric that has already been called out upon by several news outlets.
That said, I have no intention of belaboring that point again here as my only real question is why the grad-exception rule mattered at all?
I mean, honestly, I had no problem seeing Logan Gray transfer once he graduated. He spent the better part of his career as a second option at Georgia and he deserved a shot at more playing time. If not in Athens, then wherever he was needed. So, good luck to him!
However, the Masoli transfer did irk me a bit because he was, for lack of a better word, a criminal. I'm not altogether certain he deserverd the privilege of playing anywhere in Division I football after his numerous missteps with the law—but that's just me.
So, if Slive were looking to make a statement, perhaps it should have been wrapped in something with more moral fortitude. Say, for instance, any athlete who has been charged and convicted of a serious criminal offense (i.e. robbery, drug possession, or assault), and decides to transfer under the grad-exception rule, is given a nine month probation period at his school of choice.
During that probationary period, he is not allowed to play in any games or participate in any activities that represent the university or their athletics program. If he can stay clear of any offenses during that n time frame, then he is to be granted his full eligibility and allowed to play the following season.
That would make sense—to me.
However, this holier-than-thou declaration of the SEC not being interested in the one-and-done athlete just comes off as hypocritical and asinine. Of course, by now, I am used to such idiocy by college football's "leaders".
The new rule doesn't take effect until October, so Auburn would still be able to sign Russell Wilson if that want him. However, after that point, there are no more freebies for the athlete who is looking for a fresh start, more playing time, or a better way to increase his national spotlight and I'm not altogether sure if the message Slive sends here is really one worth disseminating—whatever that message is truly supposed to be.
