Ok, after looking at wiki, i realized that's the 2011-2012 handbook they are linking and with a bit of searching, was able to pull up the new one (unfortunately I can't copy it easily bc it's a pdf). It appears you are correct on the 25 signees. It also added another addendum about EEs (which is the primary way around the rule for non-SEC schools as EEs don't count at all towards the 25).

However it doesn't change the basic premise which is true that the SEC rule does not allow you to get that spot back for non-qualifiers and you do in other conferences. There is no harm in TCU signing him and no damage done if he doesn't qualify because they can then use that spot for an EE next January. LSU could not.

This post was edited on 2/20/13 at 11:56 pm

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by MOT

Member since Jul 2006

28023 posts

Posted on 2/21/13 at 12:15 am to tmc94

quote:
It also added another addendum about EEs (which is the primary way around the rule for non-SEC schools as EEs don't count at all towards the 25).

The addendum states they do not count in the signee limit as long as they count back to the previous initial counter limit. Example: If a January 2013 early enrollee does not count back, then they count toward the 2013 signee limit. If they count back to the 2012 initial counter limit, then they do not count against the 2013 signee limit.

quote:

However it doesn't change the basic premise which is true that the SEC rule does not allow you to get that spot back for non-qualifiers and you do in other conferences.

They all have the same signee limit of 25 now so the risk is the same. If he doesn't qualify at TCU it simply goes down as a wasted spot as one of their possible 25 signees in 2013, the same as it would at LSU, Oregon, Boise, Duke, or anyone else in Division I.

2 ...

Report Post

LSU Recruiting - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board