Hey isn't it about time

[Bill in Sinton]

that the NCAA increses the total scholarship limit to say 95 with a limit of 30 per year?

 

[HornSwoggler]

Why? NCAA would probably argue that increasing scholarships reduces competitiveness of smaller or less popular schools. I believe that was the reasoning they used when they reduced the limit to 85.....to spread the scholarships around.

I'd prefer they spend their time developing a meaningful playoff format.....

 

[cochamps]

Not with Title 9. Wouldn't that mean 10 extra women's scholarships?

don't think schools are looking to add 20, that would be very expensive.

 

[Bill in Sinton]

That would be great to increase the women's scholarship too.

 

[JOSEYWALES66]

In reply to:

---

---

 

[toucan82]

crap, now all my focusness will be on this

 

[Les Claypool]

Increasing scholly's means that the recently successful programs, ie Rutgers, Louisvilles, Kansas, will lose revenue, while the traditional powers, Michigan, Notre Dame, Texas, etc. would continue to make the same or similar revenue.

I don't think it would be a healthy decision for college football as a whole. If you do, I think it would be a move to the way college football was in yesteryear: a handful of teams that compete every year for supremacy.

 

[Handler XIII]

I'd rather they just give all athletes 5 years of elgibility. It's time for the redshirt to go away.

 

[Mr. Orange]

The scholarship limits have been healthy for the game of college football and increasing them by that large a margin would limit the abilities of the small schools to compete. Most athletes will go the marquis programs if given the choice, so the traditional powers will get more good players and the mid-majors will slide back to where they were in years past. I personally like seeing strong teams from the MAC, Mountain West, etc giving the BCS schools a run in early season and bowl games.

But more practically, I doubt it will happen because if I understand Title IX correctly, it really means adding 20 scholarships to the athletic budgets. Texas can absorb this without even noticing it, but very few college athletic departments are profitable. Now is not the time to add stress to the budgets of mid-major schools with a move that at the same time would make these schools less competitive.

last I checked you need 22 starters and special teams. If you can't field a great team out of 85 players change your recruiting tactics. The USC and Texas teams of 2005 didn't seem hampered by scholarship limits.

 

[mishatx]

Most schools wouldn't add 20 scholarships. They wouldn't add a non-revenue women's sport.

They'd add 10 to football, then cut baseball or lacrosse or wrestling or swimming or water polo or gymnastics or volleyball or whatever non-rev men's sports they could to get even on schollies.