The AlabamaGameday Interview: Brian Cook

Unless you’ve been under a rock for a week, you’re aware of the controversy that arose when AOL Fanhouse blogger Brian Cook posted a column criticizing the practice of oversigning recruits, and singled out Nick Saban for the harshest criticism.

Alabama bloggers were quick to come to Saban’s defense, and fans on both sides ratcheted up the rhetoric. We decided to go right to the source, and spoke to Cook Saturday evening.

So I guess you’ve learned it doesn’t take much to get Bama fans in an uproar. Has the response been more than you expected?
That’s a fair assessment. From the initial Fanhouse post, yes. I think every Tide blog out there had some sort of post on it.

When youre a fan, its hard to be objective.
Some of the secondary reaction is no doubt due to the inflammatory nature of the posting getting batted back and forth. I don’t think the original post was too bad, but the tone of the first wave of response irritated me, and resulted in a riposte from me that was impolite at best, which then resulted in yet more inflammation. Obviously I’ve contributed to the tenor of the little internet firestorm; I somehow doubt that if SMQB had tackled the question it would end up with so many F-bombs getting thrown around.

You think we’re being too sensitive?
I don’t know about too sensitive. I do think there is an air of ‘the lady protesting too much’ around the response.

That’s Shakespeare, Auburn fans. In your column, you mention the criticism of Rodriguez by Joe Tiller. You also note Miami signed more players than Bama. So why single out Saban, other than the instant blowback it automatically gets?
I wasn’t trying for blowback; having had no contact with the Bama fanbase previously, I had no idea that there would be such blowback.

The reason Alabama got handled roughly in the Fanhouse post was because I came across that Tim Gayle article that clearly spelled out Bama’s upcoming roster crunch, which seems extreme. A point often lost is that going over the NCAA’s limit of 25 kids per recruiting class isn’t a big deal to me. It’s the mandatory attrition imposed by going over the 85 cap. I don’t know that Miami has done that. Given the recruitment of Martavious Odoms, who Miami offered a track scholarship instead of a football one for his first year, I don’t think they have.
This is not an issue exclusive to Alabama, but this latest Saban class is this year’s best exemplar of uncomfortably large classes.

But by mentioning that Miami stretched the rules even further, it sounds like youre going out of your way to hit Saban. Alabama fans who listen to Colin Cowherd types – guys with an ax to grind – this sounds like more of the same.
My problem is with large-scale oversigning, not necessarily Saban. If Miami’s got a similar situation then I have the same problem with them. No one has suggested that, however. [ed note: the exact quote from Cook’s article is: “Only Miami managed to stretch the boundaries of the rule further, signing 33.”] And without someone like Gayle pointing out Miami’s situation I can’t make that assertion.

Saban has a year under his belt with this team. I’m sure there are guys he doesn’t feel measure up. Do you see a problem with opening up spots by not renewing scholarships?
Yeah, I do. I know scholarships are technically renewed year-to-year, but in practice kids attend college with the expectation they will be given four years to play and get a degree, if they put in the effort expected of them and stay clear of the law. Many players are poor kids who are the first in their families to go to college. Without the scholarship and the structure of the team, they are unlikely to be able to afford to continue their education, and even if they could many of these kids are barely able to get by, even with the dedicated efforts of tutors. Sure, Saban didn’t promise them anything, but the previous coach did, and more importantly so did the university. This is not a business. If it was a business, the players should be paid. With amateurism comes responsibilities on the part of the player and the part of the program. Cutting kids without reason violates that responsibility.

Players are not cut without reason. They received a scholarship in the first place because of their athletic ability. And I don’t think you can even say ‘technically.’ A college athlete knows going in that he’s got to work to stay on the team and to contribute.

I think a lot of people, myself included, hate that college football has become a minor league system for the NFL, but it’s not that the players are doe-eyed innocents. They play the system, too.
Play the system how?

By shopping for schools based on their ability to raise their draft status, or by leaving early for the draft, among other things. Not that I wouldn’t leave for the money too, but if it’s a four-year commitment, then its a commitment in both direction.
The guys who are worried about leaving early for the draft are not the guys who are going to be affected by this, and when players break the commitment they’ve made to a school they’re penalized a year of eligibility. Schools have no equivalent punishment.

It’s irrelevant whether they’re affected; the point is, either its a four-year contract, as you said, or its not.
The relative power levels here make any claim on the part of a school who feels exploited because a kid they offered a scholarship isn’t panning out… well…
Jesus, this could be the difference in this kid getting a college degree or not.

We probably don’t want to go down the road of how many of those degrees are actually being used.
The all-loving Tide family will probably find a job somewhere for the backup guard who walked on senior day. Maybe not so much for the guy who transferred to Jackson State after three years because he had to.

I don’t find the four-year contract thing particularly compelling since the schools have all the power here. They’ve already got anyone who wants to play in the NFL locked into a monopolistic prep league and the schools make millions of dollars off their undercompensated labor. And we’re talking about unversities here, organizations that operate on a different level than ‘eat the weak.’ They’re supposed to have ideals that they uphold, and that not screwing up a kid’s plans is amongst them.

I assume your concern for the well-being of the exploited athletes extends to any kids Coach Rod might cut after spring practice this year.
I expect a few transfers from kids who no longer fit the system, but there won’t be any cuts. Michigan is already going into 2008 with two or three open scholarships. When a player voluntarily leaves it’s different.

So Saban cuts, and Coach Rod allows transfers?
You don’t see a difference between the two situations?

I’m saying youre assuming the worst motives for Saban, and the best for Rodriguez.
I think there’s an obvious difference here: if Brandon Minor wants to be the #4 RB in the spread offense for the next two years, Michigan will let him do that and get his degree. If he wants to transfer somewhere else and play, he can do that. Alabama’s in a situation where a number of people must be off the team next year, voluntary and justified or not.

But again, you’re assuming that they’ll simply be thrown overboard. To the contrary, some will receive medical scholarships, others academic, yet others come in on Bryant scholarships, and maybe one or two pay their way.
I do think it’s unlikely that Alabama can find enough players to get down to 85 without doing something unpleasant to someone. Remember the numbers here already take several medical scholarships into account. And frankly, if there are members of the football team getting scholarships and not counting against the 85, the NCAA needs to step in and halt that.

In the Big Ten you can oversign by at most three, and you have to explain where the scholarship is coming from. That should be national policy, if not something stricter.

I wouldn’t have a problem with that; but again, you assume nefarious motives on the part of Alabama. I can’t say I really disagree with you that oversigning is something that should be minimized. My only real objection to your column was that it seemed like another example of someone deflecting criticism of their own program by piling on Nick Saban.
Ironically, if there’s anyone out there who can understand how irritating a nonstop barrage of idiotic criticism about your coach is, it’s me. I probably shouldn’t have mentioned Rodriguez at all. And I should have phrased the criticism more generally. I have no doubt this is a common practice across college football and Saban is just one of many guys doing this sort of thing; he just happened to be the guy in the spotlight because of the #1 class and the Gayle article.

I accept your apology on behalf of the state of Alabama. It’ll be something if Alabama and Michigan face each other in a bowl this year.
I’d work on your extra points if that happens.

You guys probably want to work on kick protection yourselves.