Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: NCAA changes....

  1. #1

    NCAA changes....

    http://coachingsearch.com/article?a=...tions-and-more

    Can't remember if this has been discussed here before.

    25 scholies a year? so the 85 football scholies overall assumes some players have dropped fb along the way?

    No two a days...hmmm. Cal has had them in the past haven't we?

  2. #2
    Overall I like the changes. Am I allowed to agree with the NCAA on this site?

  3. #3
    I assume the 25/year schollie rule is to prevent schools (common in the SEC) of offering more schollies than they have? Maybe its designed to prevent schools from pushing kids out to make room and/or encouraging medical retirments.

    Problem is some schools - like Cal next year - have more than 25 openings due to inbalanced classes. Also, Cal has higher than typical attrition due to grad transfers.

    I thinks its a good rule, but there needs to be flexibility for schools or, at a minimum, it needs to be phased in over time. Also, if you loose a grad transfer (i.e., the university is doing its job), replacement of that player shouldn't count against the limit.

  4. #4
    I agree BG. I think there will be individual appeals for unique cases re: the 25 rule.

  5. #5
    25 scholarships per year is plenty when athletes take 4-5 years to graduate.
    When a student athlete graduates with remaining eligibility and leaves the school, I agree the
    total should be increased above 25. I also think all LOIs should have to have a matching scholarship before they are binding.
    No scholarships left? No LOIs accepted. That might keep some schools in the SEC from accepting an LOI then
    kicking a kid off the team at opening of training camp.

    Quote Originally Posted by BearGoggles View Post
    I assume the 25/year schollie rule is to prevent schools (common in the SEC) of offering more schollies than they have? Maybe its designed to prevent schools from pushing kids out to make room and/or encouraging medical retirments.

    Problem is some schools - like Cal next year - have more than 25 openings due to inbalanced classes. Also, Cal has higher than typical attrition due to grad transfers.

    I thinks its a good rule, but there needs to be flexibility for schools or, at a minimum, it needs to be phased in over time. Also, if you loose a grad transfer (i.e., the university is doing its job), replacement of that player shouldn't count against the limit.

  6. #6
    Why does a sport where 2 deep is 44 players need so many scholarships? Since the whole Title 9 payback is based on this uniqueness, football scholarships should be reduced.

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by oskigobears View Post
    http://coachingsearch.com/article?a=...tions-and-more

    Can't remember if this has been discussed here before.

    25 scholies a year? so the 85 football scholies overall assumes some players have dropped fb along the way?

    No two a days...hmmm. Cal has had them in the past haven't we?
    I think the most important change may be early signing period. This would seem to protect both the school (won't have to worry about late flipping) and the athlete (won't have to worry about last minute drops).

    I always thought that the annual limit was 25, but that schools were allowed to designate some to the prior year (if less than 25) by having them enroll early or the following year by having them greyshirt. Is that what's changing?

  8. #8
    Quote Originally Posted by GB54 View Post
    Why does a sport where 2 deep is 44 players need so many scholarships? Since the whole Title 9 payback is based on this uniqueness, football scholarships should be reduced.
    For one, you have no idea who you sign will make the two deep. If you had 44 scholarships, you better be damn accurate on the kids you sign. Plus there wouldn't be as much competition for playing time. And second... Money. Football generates a helluva lot more than women's lacrosse.

  9. #9
    Golden Bear Vandalus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Oakland Ice City
    Posts
    5,363
    Quote Originally Posted by GB54 View Post
    Why does a sport where 2 deep is 44 players need so many scholarships? Since the whole Title 9 payback is based on this uniqueness, football scholarships should be reduced.
    What about special teams?

  10. #10
    I think it should be 70. 3 deep + 4 for special teams.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •