http://eye-on-collegefootball.blogs.cbss...8/34357912

I would like it if they cut scholarships from 85 to 80. Means better players end up playing in the MAC.

Basically they are saying, bring fewer kids to college on scholarship so they can pay more to those that are here, correct? Bleh to that trickle down.

I think before rooting that one on, I'd spend some time going over the last few years of recruiting to estimate, which recruits we would have gotten (or lost or not recruited that turned out to be good gets) versus other programs. Off the top of my head, MAYBE that QB that ended up at OSU?

The JC transfers that helped out probably would not be here as we wouldn't have had room.

It's not seeming an easy formula to me.

(01-14-2012 09:20 AM)eastisbest Wrote:  Basically they are saying, bring fewer kids to college on scholarship so they can pay more to those that are here, correct? Bleh to that trickle down.

I think before rooting that one on, I'd spend some time going over the last few years of recruiting to estimate, which recruits we would have gotten (or lost or not recruited that turned out to be good gets) versus other programs. Off the top of my head, MAYBE that QB that ended up at OSU?

The JC transfers that helped out probably would not be here as we wouldn't have had room.

It's not seeming an easy formula to me.

I'm sure Toledo would have still brought in the JC's and not offered a few other guys that were at the bottom of the class.

Meh.. The NFL seems to put out a pretty good product with 53 men per side. I've always thought 264 kids on the sideline with duplicate numbers was a bit hokey anyhow.

Think about it, any scholarship reductions sends better players to the non-AQ's. We should love this.

(01-14-2012 11:21 AM)Carolina Rocket Wrote:  Meh.. The NFL seems to put out a pretty good product with 53 men per side. I've always thought 264 kids on the sideline with duplicate numbers was a bit hokey anyhow.

Think about it, any scholarship reductions sends better players to the non-AQ's. We should love this.

i remember way back when there were only 55 scholies offered ,seemed to be sufficient.

(01-14-2012 11:33 AM)1952 rocket Wrote:  

(01-14-2012 11:21 AM)Carolina Rocket Wrote:  Meh.. The NFL seems to put out a pretty good product with 53 men per side. I've always thought 264 kids on the sideline with duplicate numbers was a bit hokey anyhow.

Think about it, any scholarship reductions sends better players to the non-AQ's. We should love this.

i remember way back when there were only 55 scholies offered ,seemed to be sufficient.

Fiftyfive would be a tad low... But a reduction to maybe 75 or 70 scholarships would be doable... The trickle down effect to a school like Toledo would be substantial, and ultimately level the playing field with the talent being spread around...

(01-14-2012 10:14 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-14-2012 09:20 AM)eastisbest Wrote:  Basically they are saying, bring fewer kids to college on scholarship so they can pay more to those that are here, correct? Bleh to that trickle down.

I think before rooting that one on, I'd spend some time going over the last few years of recruiting to estimate, which recruits we would have gotten (or lost or not recruited that turned out to be good gets) versus other programs. Off the top of my head, MAYBE that QB that ended up at OSU?

The JC transfers that helped out probably would not be here as we wouldn't have had room.

It's not seeming an easy formula to me.

I'm sure Toledo would have still brought in the JC's and not offered a few other guys that were at the bottom of the class.

Would there be other positives besides trickle down recruiting? With the fewer scholarships, would schools be able to reinstitute some men's programs, like wrestling?

(01-14-2012 12:10 PM)eastisbest Wrote:  

(01-14-2012 10:14 AM)BrianNowicki Wrote:  

(01-14-2012 09:20 AM)eastisbest Wrote:  Basically they are saying, bring fewer kids to college on scholarship so they can pay more to those that are here, correct? Bleh to that trickle down.

I think before rooting that one on, I'd spend some time going over the last few years of recruiting to estimate, which recruits we would have gotten (or lost or not recruited that turned out to be good gets) versus other programs. Off the top of my head, MAYBE that QB that ended up at OSU?

The JC transfers that helped out probably would not be here as we wouldn't have had room.

It's not seeming an easy formula to me.

I'm sure Toledo would have still brought in the JC's and not offered a few other guys that were at the bottom of the class.

Would there be other positives besides trickle down recruiting? With the fewer scholarships, would schools be able to reinstitute some men's programs, like wrestling?

It's sure possible, yes.

(01-14-2012 08:59 AM)letsgoblue Wrote:  I would like it if they cut scholarships from 85 to 80. Means better players end up playing in the MAC.

I could care less about the MAC ...I'm a Toledo Fan!!!!!