NCAA working group to recommend cutting scholarships from 85 to 80

[SimplyTide]

No surprise its being lead by UGA. Surely the fact that the state has the hope scholarship will be brought to light. Talk about an unfair advantage, and another reason that Richt really sucks as a coach. Can you imagine CNS in a position where the hope scholarship could be given to those who qualified for it academically and they walk on, then the rest were used for those out of state or that otherwise didn't qualify for the hope?

My understanding was that if a player had any type of scholarship, that the player counted against scholarship limits. :conf3:

 

[crimsonaudio]

If they're really interested in helping out potential student athletes, they should RAISE the limit, not lower it.

 

[willie52]

Well it's obvious that no one here read the fine print, in it are the words "SEC ONLY". :biggrin2:

I have only one question, are these people politcian wannabe's or ex-politicians.

 

[mrusso]

THIS!!! these people are forgetting the point of college athletics! the point is to provide kids who otherwise would have no means to better themselves with an education. There would be 600 less kids a year who miss their shot at a college education.

Kind of along these same lines, I've always thought that using reduced scholarships as punishment for schools was wrong. If you take away 5 scholly's, that's five kids that will probably never make it into college. The 1,2, and 3 star athletes will still get a scholarship, but somewhere down the line five lower rated athletes are going to be left out. Multiply that by the number of outstanding scholarship losses, and you have a lot of kids not going to college. Glad we have the NCAA looking out for the best interest of the kids.

 

[Dallas4Bama]

My understanding was that if a player had any type of scholarship, that the player counted against scholarship limits. :conf3:

You could very well be right. My understanding was that academic scholarships provided by the state didn't count. Hopefully someone with direct knowledge will clarify. I haven't lived in GA in years and wasn't in school at the time, so I'm probably wrong here.

 

[twofbyc]

You could very well be right. My understanding was that academic scholarships provided by the state didn't count. Hopefully someone with direct knowledge will clarify. I haven't lived in GA in years and wasn't in school at the time, so I'm probably wrong here.

this info seems to suggest otherwise...
http://www.athleticscholarships.net/academicscholarships.htm
I know most academic schollys are nut "full rides" like athletic schollys..
Please note I said "seems to suggest"...

 

[Mongo4Bama]

this is a ridicoulos idea hope it doesn't see the light if day.

 

[bamaslammer]

Yea, like we need 600 more uneducated kids a year in this country to work at McDonalds. I don't need my hamburger that bad.

 

[p'colabamaman]

I can't understand the thinking on a rule like this. What good could it possibly do?

 

[Crimson1967]

I think HOPE scholarships can only be used by baseball and other non-revenue sports, not football and basketball. If that rule is ever changed, we'd have an education lottery in Alabama so fast it would make your head spin.

It is a marginal savings for BCS schools like Georgia. It will really help places like the Extension Center's program, which has a smaller budget and can now get our bottom feeders.

 

[AustinTider]

The NaziCAA at work.
They have run out of ideas so now they only can dream up bad ones...

 

[TidenLA]

This is the biggest pile I've heard in a while...Who the Hell wants to go to Memphis when you can go to Bama? Education first remember..

This is designed to send players to other schools. Make it "more of a level playing field" type move. If Alabama can't give a player a scholarship, nor can AU or UGA or etc, he might can go to UAB, Stamford, Troy, etc. Gives them better players over a few years, etc...or they go to another school, say Memphis, and their program gets "better". Bottom line is the Memphis' of the world don't care about football as they give little to the program....

More or less taking from the haves and trying to give to the have nots. Anyone heard of this philosophy before?

 

[GreatDanish]

Like everyone else, I cannot find a good reason for this. I agree with CA - if they were interested in the student-athletes, they should raise the limit.
For each kid that is "squeezed" down from a BCS school to UAB, Samford, etc., at least one more will be squeezed out of an athletic scholarship altogether - if UAB takes a kid that would have been at Vanderbilt under the 85 rule, they have to NOT take a kid they would have otherwise taken. And, those are the kids who are probably most dependent upon the athletic scholarship to get their degrees.

 

[skrayper77]

Wouldn't that lead to, oh, about 600 kids not getting their college paid for?

And people can't say it trickles down... not unless lower division schools suddenly can have more kids on their scholarship rosters.

 

[westide]

We should reduce the number of bureaucrats at the universities and the NCAA.

 

[bamanut_aj]

Here's what the numbskulls that came up with this think:

It's not fair that the SEC wins everything. We need to level the playing field. Everyone 'deserves' a shot.

So, since the bottom 5 (out of 25 each year) kids that can't go to BAMA, they're gonna magically decide to go to what, iowa state, tulane, wyoming? No. If they can't go to BAMA, they're gonna go to ole miss, miss state, ky....and the bottom 5 (out of 25) kids that can't get in to THOSE schools are gonna go to the crappier little schools. BAMA, et al will get 20 of the absolute best; the middle of the back will get slightly better kids; and the bottom feeders will get the bottom feeders still.

So REALLY, the good get gooder, and the worse get worser. LOL

 

[twofbyc]

Here's what the numbskulls that came up with this think:

It's not fair that the SEC wins everything. We need to level the playing field. Everyone 'deserves' a shot.

So, since the bottom 5 (out of 25 each year) kids that can't go to BAMA, they're gonna magically decide to go to what, iowa state, tulane, wyoming? No. If they can't go to BAMA, they're gonna go to ole miss, miss state, ky....and the bottom 5 (out of 25) kids that can't get in to THOSE schools are gonna go to the crappier little schools. BAMA, et al will get 20 of the absolute best; the middle of the back will get slightly better kids; and the bottom feeders will get the bottom feeders still.

So REALLY, the good get gooder, and the worse get worser. LOL

I know there's a lot of jobless folks out there conf3, but did ya hafta hire a barner to write that?

 

[CullmanTide]

They need to go in the other direction back to the 35-105 rule.

 

[Capstone46]

As I have posted many times on these boards, I fully expect football scholarships to be reduced to 60 within the next 10-15 years. It has absolutely nothing to do with the NCAA. Since only 15 or so school make money within their athletic departments, most schools are forced to supplement the athletic department from their general budget. ATHLETIC DEPARTMENTS LOSE MONEY BECAUSE THEY ARE FORCED TO COMPLY WITH TITLE IX BY FEDERAL COURTS. Every dollar spent in football has to be matched on the other side of the gender aisle. Since football EXPENSES (NOT REVENUES OR EVEN PROFITS) skew the numbers, nearly all schools are willing to cut their football budget to reduce their losses. Every dollar they save in football EXPENSES keeps them from having to spend equal amounts on women's sports. Schools bring pressure on the NCAA to cut football EXPENSES regardless of how profitable football may be for them because it cuts their losses within athletic departments X TWO.
Every women's sport at the University loses money. Gymnastics usually loses 1.5 million per year.

 

[mikes12]

I think we need to reduce the number of 'working groups' in the NCAA.

First on the chopping block are the people proposing stupid ideas like this. Seriously, they need to find more useful roles in society, instead of 'look how important I am, I make rules for the NCAA'.

If this happens, the SEC needs to SECede from the NCAA. We still can't avoid title IX, but there's no sense in allowing us to be pushed around by these pencil-pushing beureaucrats. We will be a 14 school league and will have enough to form schedules from within, and can add women's sports to fill out title IX. In fact, abolish the scholarship limit altogether and we would be a true premier league in all college sports.