6. Oversigning doesn't create a competitive advantage so what's the big deal.
This couldn't be any further from the truth, especially within the last several years. Over the last several years the ability for coaches to evaluate players has decreased; the NCAA continues to decrease the amount of contact coaches can have with players (mainly out of fear of recruiting violations) which is making it hard for them to evaluate talent. In addition, the NCAA continues to place more and more restrictions on the amount of time coaches can spend with players during spring and fall training camps and during the off season. The net result is college football has become less about developing talent and more about mining for the next "sure thing" 5 star recruit.
When you oversign you have access to more opportunities to find that "sure thing" whether it be from landing a 5 star recruit or taking a chance on a borderline guy who turns out to be a stud. It's a numbers game and obviously, given that most of the top tier schools can attract top tier talent, the more of it that you can go through to find the ones you really want the better you will be.
Nick Saban and Les Miles have used oversigning as the backbone of building National Championship teams over the last decade. If you look at the chart below and look at the number of players signed by Saban (who had the highest average) and Tressel (who had the lowest average), in the years that Saban was in college football he signed roughly 193 recruits; Tressel signed roughly 142 in those same years. That is a difference of 51 recruiting opportunities over the same period of time. Any change there might be a couple more good players in that list of 51? If the difference were 5-10 I don't think we could point at this being an issue, but 51?