Started By
Message
re: NCAA wants to change scholy limit from 85 to 80
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:22 pm to diddydirtyAubie
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:22 pm to diddydirtyAubie
quote:When did DIII start giving scholarships?
Only the kids who are currently getting Division III scholarships.
0
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:23 pm to CoolHand
quote:
The NCAA working group WILL recommend cutting FBS football scholarships from 85 to 80, beginning in 2014.”
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:24 pm to dapado33
quote:
I'd like that for a lot of reasons, but I imagine the cheating would become unbearable fairly quickly.
It's not like there would no longer be a governing body. A new one would be formed but we could then stop pretending that Wyoming plays the same game that Michigan does.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:26 pm to diddydirtyAubie
quote:
smaller schools are trying to save money. this is how they are doing it...by eliminating 5 scholarships.
Yep and they will have to find a way to save money if the NCAA is going to mandate they pay 2 grand to every student athlete on campus. Only about 15-20 programs in the nation break even or make money on college athletics.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:32 pm to Alahunter
quote:It's more than that because the rule would also reduce the 126 FCS schools' limit from 63 to 60. So 126 * 3 = another 378 people who lose their free education.
Let's see... 120 FBS schools x 5 schollys each = 600 people not going to college that may otherwise have.
This post was edited on 1/13/12 at 3:33 pm
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:33 pm to CoolHand
quote:Seems fair since baseball is only about 11.5. Seems like they would also have to adjust the size of the signing classes commensurately but that would be to logical (and we are talking about the NCAA here).
NCAA wants to change scholy limit from 85 to 80
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:36 pm to CoolHand
So the NCAA wants less ppl to get free educations? Ppl that otherwise might not be able to afford it? I'm sure that'll go over real well.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:36 pm to Monticello
quote:Yeah, but I think it would be even worse than the NCAA when it comes to having the ability to enforce its rules.
It's not like there would no longer be a governing body. A new one would be formed but we could then stop pretending that Wyoming plays the same game that Michigan does.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:38 pm to Diamondawg
quote:
So they've went from unlimited schollies in the 70's, to 105, to 95, 85, and now 80? If it hasn't solved the 'problem' yet, maybe it isn't the solution. Maybe when these other schools start devoting the time, money, and resources(not to mention fan support) that most of the SEC schools do, they'll achieve this magical 'parity'. Everyone want's a trophy, but they don't want to do the work.
Maybe the solution is to treat it like T-ball and call everyone a winner for showing up.
you have my vote as SECr representative to teh NCAA on this topic. clear and concise
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:40 pm to Smoke Ring
quote:
It doesn't hurt everyone equally--it hurts the recruiting powerhouses the most. They have the most capability of stockpliling elite talent.
In the old days, schools like Texas and 'Bama used to sign like 150 kids, many just to keep them away from other schools.
The fewer scholarship numbers, the more likely parity is ...
Exactly. There are 4*s that are good special teams and role player guys at the elite programs that would now go to other schools and likely make a big impact. It also makes it more difficult to offer a low 4* that could turn into a great player. A guy like Troy Smith may not have made OSU's roster if there were 80 instead of 85 scholarships, because he wasn't extremely highly regarded coming out of HS and was the last offer in his class. He may have went somewhere like Iowa or something otherwise.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:40 pm to crimsonsaint
quote:Maybe people could label this legislation as racist if someone points out that most of the athletes are black and that cutting scholarships means that less black athletes would receive a free education. I don't think that's the intent of the legislation (and the first athletes to get cut would probably be all the white ones
So the NCAA wants less ppl to get free educations? Ppl that otherwise might not be able to afford it? I'm sure that'll go over real well.
), but I bet that simply suggesting racist motivations would prevent the rule from being passed.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:41 pm to CoolHand
what was the scholly limit before it was cut to 85?
i forget.
i forget.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:45 pm to Smoke Green
No limit to 105 to 95 to 85. I'm not sure when the changes happened though.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:47 pm to dapado33
No limit to 105 was in the early 70's IIRC.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:52 pm to CoolHand
quote:
Looks like NCAA is tired of SEC dominance.
Sounds more like another bullshite Title IX action to me. I'd like to know what their reasoning is though.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:54 pm to CoolHand
You'll see more oversigning rules come into play as well. A lot of heat out there for the SEC right now and it is only gaining steam.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:54 pm to Robot Santa
quote:They want to increase parity....the lower the scholarship limit, the less the powerhouses can hoard all the good players.
Sounds more like another bullshite Title IX action to me. I'd like to know what their reasoning is though.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 3:59 pm to RollTideRockStar
quote:
What happened to this sport being a way to give kids an education?
What happened to allowing kids in school that cannot even form a proper sentence (applies to almost all schools).
I cringe when most SEC players are handed a microphone.
Posted on 1/13/12 at 4:00 pm to dapado33
quote:
the less the powerhouses can hoard all the good players.
We can thank The Bear for this and his track scholarships. No?
Posted on 1/13/12 at 4:00 pm to CoolHand
The limit should be between 100-125, not going in the other direction.
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News