Online Now 3546

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

On this Board 2025
Record: 7394 (2/14/2012)

Online now 3318
Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)

Boards ▾

The Blue Board

We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.

247Rumors

College football scuttlebutt and scoop- powered by Football Rumor Mill

The Green Board

Where the madness isn't just in March.

Big Ten Board (Beta)

Reply

Raise scholarship limit to 90

  • purple_rein said...

    85 is good. I would make a better case for lowering the limit than raising.

    Don't buy into the NCAA bulls**t ... see: http://www.paulruschmann.com/clips/book_reviews/unsportsmanlike.htm

    "His prescription for reform includes letting athletes earn money on the side, hire an agent while still in school, and transfer to another institution without penalty. He also believes colleges should award scholarships to athletes on the same basis as the rest of the student body. The establishment finds these proposals dangerously radical, but in reality they're quite modest. They don't address the real problem: that colleges function as a farm system for the NFL and the NBA."

    Walter Byers, former NCAA President

    fars1d3s

  • fars1d3s said...

    Don't buy into the NCAA bulls**t ... see: http://www.paulruschmann.com/clips/book_reviews/unsportsmanlike.htm

    "His prescription for reform includes letting athletes earn money on the side, hire an agent while still in school, and transfer to another institution without penalty. He also believes colleges should award scholarships to athletes on the same basis as the rest of the student body. The establishment finds these proposals dangerously radical, but in reality they're quite modest. They don't address the real problem: that colleges function as a farm system for the NFL and the NBA."

    Walter Byers, former NCAA President

    Almost every idea in that blurb is retarded. Saying a kid could transfer schools w/o penalty is enough to be mocked and ignored.

    fsufsu

  • GoBucks93z said...

    Rich would just get richer, would make for less upsets ect.

    this.. less opportunities for stars to shine in programs from #11 to #50

    Players like Robert Griffin may not get the time to develop at another program

    Coastal Eer

  • fars1d3s said...

    People still lie whether the scholarship limit is 70 or 100 or anything else. There is no direct correlation between the number of scholarships and how many lies people tell.

    Better to give out more scholarships to help out more student athletes, giving more opportunities to more kids. Don't we all want to help as many kids as we possibly can? Please don't be such a fascist.

    I wasn't being fascist at all, nor does that word even come to mind in this scenario. My only purpose for saying lies is an athlete that gets a scholarship to these schools feel they are getting the best opportunity to get to the NFL... Not for academics. Less scholarships means less ability to lie about this. I think kids deserve to know the truth.

    Be realistic, I want everyone in this world to succeed more than anyone. My goals in life reflect this. I would be more accurate to call me a communist or a socialist is.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Walking up these hills you have no choice but to be fast!

    FSUTrackLoveFSU

  • Don't buy into the NCAA bulls**t: http://www.paulruschmann.com/clips/book_reviews/unsportsmanlike.htm

    "His prescription for reform includes letting athletes earn money on the side, hire an agent while still in school, and transfer to another institution without penalty. He also believes colleges should award scholarships to athletes on the same basis as the rest of the student body. The establishment finds these proposals dangerously radical, but in reality they're quite modest. They don't address the real problem: that colleges function as a farm system for the NFL and the NBA. "

    Walter Byers, former NCAA President

    fars1d3s

  • fars1d3s said...

    Don't buy into the NCAA bulls**t: http://www.paulruschmann.com/clips/book_reviews/unsportsmanlike.htm

    "His prescription for reform includes letting athletes earn money on the side, hire an agent while still in school, and transfer to another institution without penalty. He also believes colleges should award scholarships to athletes on the same basis as the rest of the student body. The establishment finds these proposals dangerously radical, but in reality they're quite modest. They don't address the real problem: that colleges function as a farm system for the NFL and the NBA. "

    Walter Byers, former NCAA President

    If this distinguished man was so smart he would realize that athletics provide kids who would never in a million years get an education a chance at a degree. If the NFL or NBA created a minor league all kinds of kids would be lost in the system and end up worse off in the long run. Colleges would lose a large source of revenue and overall education and college experience would suffer. A near sighted vision does not make up for the lack of the potential and probable outcome of changing the current system.

    Pic Sigs are for losers.

    jgdomino

  • MrWoodson said...

    Why is 90 better than 85? And if it is, why isn't 95 even better? Or 100? Why not just get rid of the limits altogether?

    I actually favor no-limit because this would offer more scholarships to more kids. A lot of these kids need scholarships because college is too expensive to attend.

    Some schools can afford more scholarships than others. But those schools will self-impose an internal limit because of financial reasons or because coaches just want to limit their roster. Schools can make arrangements/agreements with coaches to limit the roster, and the corresponding salaries to match with the school's budget.

    I also don't believe that a school with 100 scholarships is necessarily better than a school with 85 scholarships. Recruits understand that going to a smaller team usually leads to early playing time whereas at a large team of 100 players means he will have to wait his turn, or little chance of playing.

    Giving more scholarship opportunities to more kids within the school's financial parameters and the coaches' preferences/philosophy is a win-win for both the school and the kids.

    fars1d3s

  • fars1d3s said...

    I actually favor no-limit because this would offer more scholarships to more kids. A lot of these kids need scholarships because college is too expensive to attend.

    Some schools can afford more scholarships than others. But those schools will self-impose an internal limit because of financial reasons or because coaches just want to limit their roster. Schools can make arrangements/agreements with coaches to limit the roster, and the corresponding salaries to match with the school's budget.

    I also don't believe that a school with 100 scholarships is necessarily better than a school with 85 scholarships. Recruits understand that going to a smaller team usually leads to early playing time whereas at a large team of 100 players means he will have to wait his turn, or little chance of playing.

    Giving more scholarship opportunities to more kids within the school's financial parameters and the coaches' preferences/philosophy is a win-win for both the school and the kids.

    Lol do you want yankee like teams in CFB? cause that is exactly what would happen... imagine if Alabama had unlimited scholeys to dish out after how well they have been doing? Nobody would go anywhere else.... i

    And yes a school with 100 scholarships will probably trump a school with 85 because those 85 may be the kids who couldn't compete for playing time in the first place which is why they were considering this. The best schools are the schools that have kids competing for their position.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Walking up these hills you have no choice but to be fast!

    FSUTrackLoveFSU

  • I like 90.

    signature image signature image signature image

    Stealing Sparty's recruits and owning them on the field since 1898

    msucantmakebcs

  • Hell no

    Would hurt parity and make ot easier to hang on to kids that will mever play. Theres enough of that now

    $50 bet with Rebels10 - Best of 3 Egg Bowls Results 2012 - 2013 - 2014 - **the $50 goes to others schools athletics dept**

    msudawg12

  • If the scholarship limit was raised, more players would have oppurtunities to play college football and more players would have oppurtunities to play at elite schools with top resources.

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • fsufsu said...

    Anyone who posts what the OP posted has no idea the budget crisis FSU is facing.

    FIFY

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • joetheogre said...

    If the scholarship limit was raised, more players would have oppurtunities to play college football and more players would have oppurtunities to play at elite schools with top resources.

    Yes, this is good for players.

    fars1d3s

  • So OP wants more illiterate student athletes to take up class room space for kids who actually want to go to college to learn?

    bad idea

    Leppycole

  • Leppycole said...

    So OP wants more illiterate student athletes to take up class room space for kids who actually want to go to college to learn?

    bad idea

    Yeah an extra 5 guys is really going to make a difference one way or the other. Student athletes are worth their weight in the money they generate for schools.

    Do you really think Notre Dame would have the national reputation it does if it hadn't been a football powerhouse during most of the last century?

    This post was edited by joetheogre on 6/30/2012 at 11:20 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • joetheogre said...

    Yeah an extra 5 guys is really going to make a difference one way or the other. Student athletes are worth their weight in the money they generate for schools.

    Do you really think Notre Dame would have the national reputation it does if it hadn't been a football powerhouse during most of the last century?

    Oh - there are schools doing it right.

    But c'mon - be real - so allow schools who are graduating @ 50% or below to have 5 more kids who will not graduate, not go to class, and never amount to anything if they do not get drafted in place of a kid who has worked his ass off in the classroom to be told "no" our limit is met because the football team needs 5 more admission spots?????

    22 kids + special teams are on the field - if you cannot do it without over-signing, gray shirts or adding 5 schollies.....well then you suck as a coach.

    Leppycole

  • Raising scholarship limit is not about the coaches; it's about giving kids more opportunities.

    fars1d3s

  • fars1d3s said...

    Raising scholarship limit is not about the coaches; it's about giving kids more opportunities.

    More opportunity to stand on the sidelines at a major program? What would be the point of that, exactly?

    How does having an even larger number of kids on a team increase the football revenues? The downside, as many have pointed out, is that the elite programs would simply stockpile kids like they did in the past to keep them away from competitors.

    Not sure you have fully thought out your plan...

    otto_pilot

  • otto_pilot said...

    More opportunity to stand on the sidelines at a major program? What would be the point of that, exactly?

    How does having an even larger number of kids on a team increase the football revenues? The downside, as many have pointed out, is that the elite programs would simply stockpile kids like they did in the past to keep them away from competitors.

    Not sure you have fully thought out your plan...

    Kids will have more options. End of story.

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • Leppycole said...

    Oh - there are schools doing it right.

    But c'mon - be real - so allow schools who are graduating @ 50% or below to have 5 more kids who will not graduate, not go to class, and never amount to anything if they do not get drafted in place of a kid who has worked his ass off in the classroom to be told "no" our limit is met because the football team needs 5 more admission spots?????

    22 kids + special teams are on the field - if you cannot do it without over-signing, gray shirts or adding 5 schollies.....well then you suck as a coach.

    So the number of football scholarships - and thus the number of often low income, at risk kids attending college - is kept artificially low so schools can feel better about their academic reputation? Yeah, you guys are really doing the "right" thing.

    The sooner ND admissions figures out the college football and academics have nothing to do with each other, the sooner they will be an elite program again. You guys are just holding yourselves back out of some sense of misplaced self righteousness.

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • joetheogre said...

    Kids will have more options. End of story.

    No, they will have less options to actually get on the field and play.

    otto_pilot

  • joetheogre said...

    So the number of football scholarships - and thus the number of often low income, at risk kids attending college - is kept artificially low so schools can feel better about their academic reputation? Yeah, you guys are really doing the "right" thing.

    The sooner ND admissions figures out the college football and academics have nothing to do with each other, the sooner they will be an elite program again. You guys are just holding yourselves back out of some sense of misplaced self righteousness.

    roflmao

    Probae esti in segetem sunt deteriorem datae fruges, tamen ipsae suaptae enitent

    L Perry ●

  • otto_pilot said...

    No, they will have less options to actually get on the field and play.

    That is a choice THEY make though. It's not as if the option to play for a weaker team has been taken away from them.

    Lets imagine a scenario. A two star DE from Alabama has offers from Troy, UAB, and Southern Miss. With unlimited scholarships, he now has offers from Alabama and Auburn, as well as the previous three.

    He knows if he goes to Alabama or Auburn he may not play as much, but he will have access to more resources, better facilities, and more academic support. If he goes to one of the other three, he will have a much better shot at playing time, but may not get the other resources.

    Which offer sheet is more "fair"? The one where the athlete has more options about where to play, or the one where the athlere has less options? Players know what they are getting into. I fail to see how offering kids more choice can ever be a bad thing.

    This post was edited by joetheogre on 7/1/2012 at 12:57 PM

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

  • joetheogre said...

    So the number of football scholarships - and thus the number of often low income, at risk kids attending college - is kept artificially low so schools can feel better about their academic reputation? Yeah, you guys are really doing the "right" thing.

    The sooner ND admissions figures out the college football and academics have nothing to do with each other, the sooner they will be an elite program again. You guys are just holding yourselves back out of some sense of misplaced self righteousness.

    That's the problem with US society - everyone wants a free pass or some sort of charity.

    Life is not fair - you would be amazed how working hard and being goal driven will payoff in life.

    Last time I checked - college is for secondary education first - sports are secondary.

    Leppycole

  • Leppycole said...

    That's the problem with US society - everyone wants a free pass or some sort of charity.

    Life is not fair - you would be amazed how working hard and being goal driven will payoff in life.

    Last time I checked - college is for secondary education first - sports are secondary.

    Most universities have Music majors, where students are required only to take minimal outside electives like Eng 101, Hist 101, Math 110, etc. Why should football be any different? Like music students, football players are almost a separate class from the rest of the school and in a lot of cases would not have been admitted if it weren't for their talents.

    signature image signature image signature image

    "Madness is rare in individuals - but in groups, parties, nations, and ages it is the rule." - Friedrich Nietzsche

    joetheogre ●

Football Recruiting
Basketball Recruiting
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports