Football and other sports' scholarship limits likely rising; football to 105

[CrazyPaco]

Sources: NCAA to increase scholarships for sports, with football getting roster limit of 105 players

As part of the new revenue-sharing model, by-sport scholarship restrictions will be eliminated, and schools are permitted to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters.

sports.yahoo.com

It's just getting more and more expensive to run major D1 athletics.

 

[joefromlancaster]

The big 2 conferences will just get better. The ACC and the big12 will partially improve by this.
But the big two will eat up most of the players. as for division 2 and 3, I can see that they are totally against it.

After 3-4 years of the 105 rosters the big two will see a larger number of players leaving because of the class sizes.
This will be good for the ACC and the big 12.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Well, you certainly don't need 105 players to field a competitive football team. If Alabama wants to buy talent just to stash it away in the cupboards, so be it. Gonna be a lot of guys who take the money up front and never see and NFL paycheck because they got lost in the shuffle in college.

I'm completely on board with the idea of only offering to pay anything of any significance to about 40 guys, if possible. Allocate all of your money to the top of your roster and let the rest play for peanuts. You can't pay 1-105 what they're making elsewhere, but maybe you can pay 1-25 something respectable (including NIL).

 

[pittdan77]

It's good for the kids. More opportunities are always a good thing for them.

Wonder if the lower divisions are expanding scholarship numbers, also?

 

[pafootballguy]

It is just a step toward another division that does not include the G5 and any schools that do not want to commit the resources.

 

[Seneca_Valley]

Well, you certainly don't need 105 players to field a competitive football team. If Alabama wants to buy talent just to stash it away in the cupboards, so be it. Gonna be a lot of guys who take the money up front and never see and NFL paycheck because they got lost in the shuffle in college.

I'm completely on board with the idea of only offering to pay anything of any significance to about 40 guys, if possible. Allocate all of your money to the top of your roster and let the rest play for peanuts. You can't pay 1-105 what they're making elsewhere, but maybe you can pay 1-25 something respectable (including NIL).

105? You most certainly can get by with a 70-man roster. It is clear to me that no one is the least bit interested in reining in cost. Pity..........

 

[Upg bobcat]

Has Title IX been overturned or is it under threat?

 

[steelcurtain55.]

I'm okay with the increase even though there are major issues with it. Just make a cap of 5 Portal transfers on any current roster.

 

[ChiefJusticeMarshall]

It's good for the kids. More opportunities are always a good thing for them.

Wonder if the lower divisions are expanding scholarship numbers, also?

What kids? Not more for the real student athletes who's programs will be cut. There is nothing good about this. You have a bunch of true students, who don't have a pro chance waiting for them, don't have a big NIL warchest, but are talking medical or engineering or computer science, or math, etc.....real degrees that help society move forward now get squeezed to add a few more jocks who would never get into some of these schools otherwise, taking lame, no show majors.

**** college sports. It can go straight to hell.

 

[NKSplitter]

Proof that Johnny Majors was right.

 

[forbesfield]

It's good for the kids. More opportunities are always a good thing for them.

Wonder if the lower divisions are expanding scholarship numbers, also?

It really isn't. The guys who would be starting at the mid or lower mid-levels will be on scholarship instead at OSU or PSU or wherever, riding the bench, not getting a chance to play. Those are the guys who can really play somewhere, but nobody will ever know.

Others, who really can't play, will get some opportunity to prove that they can't play at the lesser-light programs.

Anybody who thinks this is good for Pitt or most of the ACC, or these borderline kids, is dreaming.

 

[Joe Magarac]

It really isn't. The guys who would be starting at the mid or lower mid-levels will be on scholarship instead at OSU or PSU or wherever, riding the bench, not getting a chance to play. Those are the guys who can really play somewhere, but nobody will ever know.

Others, who really can't play, will get some opportunity to prove that they can't play at the lesser-light programs.

Anybody who thinks this is good for Pitt or most of the ACC, or these borderline kids, is dreaming.

Correct.
This was the reason the NCAA reduced the scholarship limit to 85 in the first place.
The Alabamas and Ohio States would stockpile athletes, just to ride the pine so as to keep them from playing for other teams. With unlimited “illegal” money back then and, unlimited “legal” money today the same practices will be resurrected.
What was old is new again.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Sources: NCAA to increase scholarships for sports, with football getting roster limit of 105 players

As part of the new revenue-sharing model, by-sport scholarship restrictions will be eliminated, and schools are permitted to offer scholarships to the entirety of their rosters.

sports.yahoo.com

It's just getting more and more expensive to run major D1 athletics.

Good news for Pitt. Pay 60 players, most of whom will get playing time and tell kids you are an idiot of you choose to be the 105th guy at Pedo U. 105 football players is 40 too many. This is stupid but could be a positive for Pitt if they are smart.

 

[cashisking884]

It really isn't. The guys who would be starting at the mid or lower mid-levels will be on scholarship instead at OSU or PSU or wherever, riding the bench, not getting a chance to play. Those are the guys who can really play somewhere, but nobody will ever know.

Others, who really can't play, will get some opportunity to prove that they can't play at the lesser-light programs.

Anybody who thinks this is good for Pitt or most of the ACC, or these borderline kids, is dreaming.

Who are you to tell these kids what is actually in their best interest?

If your dream is to suit up for Ohio State, and the thing that stopped you from fulfilling that dream was 85 man scholarship limits, it’s a good thing you’re now able to live your dream.

Scholarship limitations were never about the best interest of the kids. Kids had no problem all piling up at Alabama. That’s what they wanted to do.

It was always about the best interest of the schools at the expense of what kids would choose to do actually do if given the choice.

 

[thebadby2]

It's good for the kids. More opportunities are always a good thing for them.

Wonder if the lower divisions are expanding scholarship numbers, also?

You know what's really good for the kids? The overall health of college athletics.

This knee jerk response that it's "good for the kids" every time we're talking about replacing a 120 year old system that worked with absurd conference realignment, pay to play, unrestricted transfers and 18 year old free agency is a joke.

 

[pittdan77]

What kids? Not more for the real student athletes who's programs will be cut. There is nothing good about this. You have a bunch of true students, who don't have a pro chance waiting for them, don't have a big NIL warchest, but are talking medical or engineering or computer science, or math, etc.....real degrees that help society move forward now get squeezed to add a few more jocks who would never get into some of these schools otherwise, taking lame, no show majors.

**** college sports. It can go straight to hell.

I don't see that as the case, at all. Kids are winning lawsuits at every turn because these schools have been hoarding the revenue the schools make off of them so something has to give. You just added 400 scholarships to power conference women's volleyball teams plus several hundred more to the lesser conferences. There's no way that's bad.

 

[pittdan77]

You know what's really good for the kids? The overall health of college athletics.

This knee jerk response that it's "good for the kids" every time we're talking about replacing a 120 year old system that worked with absurd conference realignment, pay to play, unrestricted transfers and 18 year old free agency is a joke.

With the amount of money that is getting tossed around, the kids deserve something out of it. This isn't a great move for Pitt football but all of the minor sports get a big bump from this move.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Who are you to tell these kids what is actually in their best interest?

If your dream is to suit up for Ohio State, and the thing that stopped you from fulfilling that dream was 85 man scholarship limits, it’s a good thing you’re now able to live your dream.

Scholarship limitations were never about the best interest of the kids. Kids had no problem all piling up at Alabama. That’s what they wanted to do.

It was always about the best interest of the schools at the expense of what kids would choose to do actually do if given the choice.

Having an extra 65 players on scholarship just for them to say "hey, I play for Alabama" isnt good for the kids. This reminds me of that participation trophy argument. Most of these kids will never play a meaningful down at Alabama and Ohio State but they get to tell their friends they are on the team. That is stupid. Are they going to increase basketball roster sizes to 20? Basketball players are smarter though, in that, they want to play. If they dont play, they transfer. Football players love nothing more than riding the pine.

 

[pittdan77]

It really isn't. The guys who would be starting at the mid or lower mid-levels will be on scholarship instead at OSU or PSU or wherever, riding the bench, not getting a chance to play. Those are the guys who can really play somewhere, but nobody will ever know.

Others, who really can't play, will get some opportunity to prove that they can't play at the lesser-light programs.

Anybody who thinks this is good for Pitt or most of the ACC, or these borderline kids, is dreaming.

Where a kid chooses to take his scholarship is on him. Kids know where they have their chances. It's not like they're all dumb.

I don't know if everyone understands that with PWO's, this number sort of fits with what a CFB roster really looks like. There are kids who are walking on to play at schools, or becoming grey shirts, because they want to be in that program.

 

[forbesfield]

With the amount of money that is getting tossed around, the kids deserve something out of it. This isn't a great move for Pitt football but all of the minor sports get a big bump from this move.

It's also true that at a lot of schools, the so-called minor sports will probably be cut. So there will be kids injured by all of this so that others may profit.

 

[pittdan77]

It's also true that at a lot of schools, the so-called minor sports will probably be cut. So there will be kids injured by all of this so that others may profit.

Schools will still have to maintain a certain number of sports to stay D1. This rule is about a scholarship cap, not a minimum. If a school is really hurting, they can happily cap their scholarships for each sport as they see fit. They'll probably suffer for it but that's their prerogative.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

This idea is something that has been discussed for years and isn't really much different from the Dodgers giving a guy with 5 good years left a 10-year deal while realizing they are going to be eating a lot of dead money. Ohio State and Alabama are going to be paying good money to 5th and 6th stringers in an effort to hoard talent.

Good for kids? Who knows? All depends on the kid. More scholarships available is good for them, I guess. But will some programs (MAC, Uconn, etc.) eventually fold with all these changes? Almost definitely, which will start to bring total FBS scholarship numbers back down. And will some guys rot away on the bench for $100k, as opposed to betting on themselves and having an opportunity to develop into future pros? Yep.

 

[Sean Miller Fan]

Schools will still have to maintain a certain number of sports to stay D1.

Until the B10 and SEC decide they want to get rid of that rule.

 

[thebadby2]

With the amount of money that is getting tossed around, the kids deserve something out of it. This isn't a great move for Pitt football but all of the minor sports get a big bump from this move.

With the amount of money that is getting tossed around, the kids deserve something out of it.

That I generally agree with. But IMO it should be the same "something" for every scholarship player, at every P5 school, and it shouldn't be these absurd, outrageous sums that only a chosen few command.

 

[Chem95]

IMO, what this will allow schools to do is to take 10-15 kids in the portal and still take north of 20 from the high schools. Does this help or hurt the lesser teams (non P-2 schools, like Pitt)? I think that portal numbers will go even higher. So, if Pitt is able to better adapt, in both scouting and funds available for transfers, I think that they should be OK. I think that combing the transfer market for 'late bloomers' will be a big part of success moving forward.

Some kids will be happy to be a tackling dummy at the end of the Alabama or Ohio State bench (until he get his 'ship pulled and 'asked' to transfer), some wont and will transfer out.

 

[NKSplitter]

Ohio State and Alabama are going to be paying good money to 5th and 6th stringers in an effort to hoard talent.

They will be paying good money to develop guys for a year or two until they enter the transfer portal and take their high school 4 or 5 star rating to a school that will give them immediate playing time. This will only ramp up the transfer and NIL deal scene.

 

[forbesfield]

Schools will still have to maintain a certain number of sports to stay D1. This rule is about a scholarship cap, not a minimum. If a school is really hurting, they can happily cap their scholarships for each sport as they see fit. They'll probably suffer for it but that's their prerogative.

You only need a total of 14 teams to be D-1 (7 men and 7 women). Some schools have a LOT more than that.

Or, at least, they did. I could easily see swimming, diving, fencing, and some track/field teams cut at certain schools. Those sports are cheap to run, but if each player has to get a significant check every month, some will clearly go away.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

IMO, what this will allow schools to do is to take 10-15 kids in the portal and still take north of 20 from the high schools. Does this help or hurt the lesser teams (non P-2 schools, like Pitt)? I think that portal numbers will go even higher. So, if Pitt is able to better adapt, in both scouting and funds available for transfers, I think that they should be OK. I think that combing the transfer market for 'late bloomers' will be a big part of success moving forward.

Some kids will be happy to be a tackling dummy at the end of the Alabama or Ohio State bench (until he get his 'ship pulled and 'asked' to transfer), some wont and will transfer out.

Some of the tackling dummies with have epiphanies after 2 years of earning that Alabama salary that time is running out if they ever want an actual opportunity, so Pitt will definitely be in the market for them. You just hope that this doesn't create a system where the Big 2 teams basically get first cracks at all high school talent and then we get what they choose - either by ushering them out or not giving them playing time - to discard. A salary cap would help, of course, but there will be no way to quell NIL. Even schools like Purdue and Illinois will be able to tell donors to direct all funding to NIL since the athletic departments will be able to survive on TV revenue alone.

 

[pittdan77]

With the amount of money that is getting tossed around, the kids deserve something out of it.

That I generally agree with. But IMO it should be the same "something" for every scholarship player, at every P5 school, and it shouldn't be these absurd, outrageous sums that only a chosen few command.

I view the NIL or school based distribution as a separate issue. Also have the opinion that, for the average college kid, something is better than nothing and understand that there are realities to that end of the conversation.

 

[pittdan77]

You only need a total of 14 teams to be D-1 (7 men and 7 women). Some schools have a LOT more than that.

Or, at least, they did. I could easily see swimming, diving, fencing, and some track/field teams cut at certain schools. Those sports are cheap to run, but if each player has to get a significant check every month, some will clearly go away.

As I said in another reply, NIL or any sort of school based distribution is a different problem. I don't think the kid playing a minor sport is waiting for checks when most of them aren't even on scholarship right now.

 

[pittdan77]

Some of the tackling dummies with have epiphanies after 2 years of earning that Alabama salary that time is running out if they ever want an actual opportunity, so Pitt will definitely be in the market for them. You just hope that this doesn't create a system where the Big 2 teams basically get first cracks at all high school talent and then we get what they choose - either by ushering them out or not giving them playing time - to discard. A salary cap would help, of course, but there will be no way to quell NIL. Even schools like Purdue and Illinois will be able to tell donors to direct all funding to NIL since the athletic departments will be able to survive on TV revenue alone.

Every rule will be crafted towards appeasing the Big 2 conferences so long as the NCAA is desperately trying to stay relevant.

Realistically, how long was it going to be before some 3-star that a blue blood wanted badly but didn't have a scholarship for was going to be offered NIL money to cover his schooling as a PWO? It's ridiculous to think it won't happen. Probably already is.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

Every rule will be crafted towards appeasing the Big 2 conferences so long as the NCAA is desperately trying to stay relevant.

Realistically, how long was it going to be before some 3-star that a blue blood wanted badly but didn't have a scholarship for was going to be offered NIL money to cover his schooling as a PWO? It's ridiculous to think it won't happen. Probably already is.

Davis Beville, walking on at South Carolina this season, is that guy!

Ha, but I think for the most part no one is maxed out on scholarships to a point where they really want someone badly enough but can't make the numbers work. They'll just tell someone else to clean their apartment out and be outside at such and such time to meet the driver who is taking them to the airport.

... Which is all the more reason that 105 scholarship players is hilarious. 85 is too many, much less this.

 

[cashisking884]

Having an extra 65 players on scholarship just for them to say "hey, I play for Alabama" isnt good for the kids. This reminds me of that participation trophy argument. Most of these kids will never play a meaningful down at Alabama and Ohio State but they get to tell their friends they are on the team. That is stupid. Are they going to increase basketball roster sizes to 20? Basketball players are smarter though, in that, they want to play. If they dont play, they transfer. Football players love nothing more than riding the pine.

It’s not like the participation trophy at all.

Once again: who are you to decide for somebody else what is stupid?

Stop pretending like we are doing this for the kids.
Scholarship limits might be needed. But if they are, it’s for the health of teams and the game itself. The idea being it creates somewhat more parity, and that’s good.

But that has nothing to do with the players. Much like draft and salary cap in professional sports is not for the benefit of the players.

Anytime you limit freedom of movement, you aren’t doing it for them.

People pretending like they are doing it to save these kids should stop and just be honest.

 

[CrazyPaco]

Schools will still have to maintain a certain number of sports to stay D1. This rule is about a scholarship cap, not a minimum. If a school is really hurting, they can happily cap their scholarships for each sport as they see fit. They'll probably suffer for it but that's their prerogative.

Pitt did this for decades, but when it moved to the ACC finally got everything fully funded. Hopefully, it doesn't go backwards.

 

[Chem95]

Some of the tackling dummies with have epiphanies after 2 years of earning that Alabama salary that time is running out if they ever want an actual opportunity, so Pitt will definitely be in the market for them. You just hope that this doesn't create a system where the Big 2 teams basically get first cracks at all high school talent and then we get what they choose - either by ushering them out or not giving them playing time - to discard. A salary cap would help, of course, but there will be no way to quell NIL. Even schools like Purdue and Illinois will be able to tell donors to direct all funding to NIL since the athletic departments will be able to survive on TV revenue alone.

Isn't that what we have now? The P2 will offer more money. Some will choose non-P2 schools due to proximity, affinity for coaches/campus/whatever. Maybe a few more will choose the money than before but I don't see much change there.

The main change will be the roster churn from year to year. Deion made headlines with the huge churn a few years ago..and those numbers will likely continue to be extreme (60+) but 40-50 a year from some of the P2 teams will become the new normal.

 

[pittdan77]

Davis Beville, walking on at South Carolina this season, is that guy!

Ha, but I think for the most part no one is maxed out on scholarships to a point where they really want someone badly enough but can't make the numbers work. They'll just tell someone else to clean their apartment out and be outside at such and such time to meet the driver who is taking them to the airport.

... Which is all the more reason that 105 scholarship players is hilarious. 85 is too many, much less this.

Guessing some schools will try to poach commits just to deprive them of a kid. This is classic JoePa stuff from back in the day.

The football end of this is just going to get dumb but this is a long time coming for some of the other sports that needed more scholarships.

 

[pittdan77]

Pitt did this for decades, but when it moved to the ACC finally got everything fully funded. Hopefully, it doesn't go backwards.

I agree. The money is so wild now that I don't know how it would but I don't see a few extra scholarships for some of the minor sports as overly problematic anymore.

 

[pafootballguy]

This idea is something that has been discussed for years and isn't really much different from the Dodgers giving a guy with 5 good years left a 10-year deal while realizing they are going to be eating a lot of dead money. Ohio State and Alabama are going to be paying good money to 5th and 6th stringers in an effort to hoard talent.

Good for kids? Who knows? All depends on the kid. More scholarships available is good for them, I guess. But will some programs (MAC, Uconn, etc.) eventually fold with all these changes? Almost definitely, which will start to bring total FBS scholarship numbers back down. And will some guys rot away on the bench for $100k, as opposed to betting on themselves and having an opportunity to develop into future pros? Yep.

There is going to be a separation of the top 40-60 from the rest of college football and it will be based on commitment and spending. The question will be what G5 schools commit to spending more and P4 schools do not and if those that don't drop down to FCS or will there be something in between?

It is crazy to me that the P4 and the G5 are even still competing for the same thing.

 

[TheWerewolfFromTwilight]

There is going to be a separation of the top 40-60 from the rest of college football and it will be based on commitment and spending. The question will be what G5 schools commit to spending more and P4 schools do not and if those that don't drop down to FCS or will there be something in between?

It is crazy to me that the P4 and the G5 are even still competing for the same thing.

There are a lot more football programs in the red than people think. And I'm not even talking about overall athletic programs; I'm talking about just football. Last I checked, I think there was one MAC team that was actually making a profit in football (Toledo, I assume, but I'm too lazy to go back and look it up again).

People have this notion that all these programs are raking in big bucks and the poor kids are indentured servants forced to act as cogs in their profiting schemes, but it's simply not true. There are even P4 schools that aren't making a profit in football (I'm assuming exorbitant coaching salaries and facility expenditures play a part in at least some of those examples, but you could probably argue that they're needed to keep up with the Joneses).

But yeah - I tend to agree that it's weird, and I would also add that there's a good chance a program like Pitt is closer to the James Madisons of the world than it is to the P2 programs if this continues to evolve a certain way.

 

[pittdan77]

People have this notion that all these programs are raking in big bucks and the poor kids are indentured servants forced to act as cogs in their profiting schemes, but it's simply not true. There are even P4 schools that aren't making a profit in football (I'm assuming exorbitant coaching salaries and facility expenditures play a part in at least some of those examples, but you could probably argue that they're needed to keep up with the Joneses).

I think "profit" is a very relative notion when it comes to the bookkeeping. I don't think schools necessarily loose sleep over the bottom line of athletics if they can get alumni on campus to spend money for other things and be able to shake them down for donations. But I also think that nobody knows where to get off of this train and that the whole thing is one huge bubble that will burst when some of the schools start to divest in trying to keep up with the Joneses, as you say, and start to pull back. It doesn't feel sustainable for most of the schools that are going to average middle of the pack or lower in football who are just there for the conference payout.