The P5 G5 thing is new and evolving they have not figured it all out yet.
Some believe a true split will happen others see a bigger FBS.
Some see schools moving down .
No one can predict the unintended consequences or future changes accurately.


1. the next play off contract maybe the P5 keep an even higher percentage of the money.Possibly no guaranteed money if eight teams .The P5 could each take a guaranteed eighth then award money for each placement. The G5 technically having a chance at a spot or eighth share for that conference.

2. Cost may become too high for most of the G5 schools and they opt out in some way .Maybe not dropping down just not trying to keep up.

3. FBS adopts some cost saving measures maybe 75 scholarship minimum .Possibly reducing the number of sports required. Title nine being challenged as revenue or non revenue . Meaning only non revenue sports need to be equal.

Some are really high on the G5 future thinking they will surpass the VCU and Gonzaga type programs. meaning everyone in FBS elevates to a higher level. I could see the opposite happening with Wichita State type programs easily affording the changes ( less athletes) and getting stronger.

Anyway I am curious to see what people with a better handle on this think.

Interesting ideas. Personally I would love to see the scholarship limit for football reduced (75 might work). I'd also like to see Title IX challenged as you mention here (nothing against women, mind you, but I do like to watch men's sports every now and then).

Eventually, the Majors are going to raise the amount of scholarships they can offer. That will end up being a dividing line.

In order to expand conference postseasons, they are going to need some countering propaganda. Being able to say that they have more players to field will definitely help with explaining how they can make some teams play even longer seasons. More players means more substituting and thus the proposed theory that it means less injuries. Whether or not that is the truth wont matter as much as whether or not enough people buy it to keep the grumbling to a minimum.

Scholarship limits are going to be a big deal at the end of this season.

(08-25-2014 07:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Eventually, the Majors are going to raise the amount of scholarships they can offer. That will end up being a dividing line.

In order to expand conference postseasons, they are going to need some countering propaganda. Being able to say that they have more players to field will definitely help with explaining how they can make some teams play even longer seasons. More players means more substituting and thus the proposed theory that it means less injuries. Whether or not that is the truth wont matter as much as whether or not enough people buy it to keep the grumbling to a minimum.

Scholarship limits are going to be a big deal at the end of this season.

I hope they raise to 115 at minimum....
Hope you're right about this :)

(08-25-2014 07:07 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Eventually, the Majors are going to raise the amount of scholarships they can offer. That will end up being a dividing line.

In order to expand conference postseasons, they are going to need some countering propaganda. Being able to say that they have more players to field will definitely help with explaining how they can make some teams play even longer seasons. More players means more substituting and thus the proposed theory that it means less injuries. Whether or not that is the truth wont matter as much as whether or not enough people buy it to keep the grumbling to a minimum.

Scholarship limits are going to be a big deal at the end of this season.

I hope they raise to 115 at minimum....
Hope you're right about this :)

It is also a devilish way for the Major programs to limit how competitive some other programs can be with them.

This is another reason why the AAC will end up expanding to 20 teams. These kind of moves require previous catalysts in order to create the proper conditions.

Scholarship limit raising is one of the slated changes that is coming sooner rather than later.

(08-25-2014 07:21 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:07 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Eventually, the Majors are going to raise the amount of scholarships they can offer. That will end up being a dividing line.

In order to expand conference postseasons, they are going to need some countering propaganda. Being able to say that they have more players to field will definitely help with explaining how they can make some teams play even longer seasons. More players means more substituting and thus the proposed theory that it means less injuries. Whether or not that is the truth wont matter as much as whether or not enough people buy it to keep the grumbling to a minimum.

Scholarship limits are going to be a big deal at the end of this season.

I hope they raise to 115 at minimum....
Hope you're right about this :)

It is also a devilish way for the Major programs to limit how competitive some other programs can be with them.

This is another reason why the AAC will end up expanding to 20 teams. These kind of moves require previous catalysts in order to create the proper conditions.

Scholarship limit raising is one of the slated changes that is coming sooner rather than later.

Basically pricing the G5 out of FBS or at least being competitive.

(08-25-2014 07:57 PM)MJG Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:21 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:07 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Eventually, the Majors are going to raise the amount of scholarships they can offer. That will end up being a dividing line.

In order to expand conference postseasons, they are going to need some countering propaganda. Being able to say that they have more players to field will definitely help with explaining how they can make some teams play even longer seasons. More players means more substituting and thus the proposed theory that it means less injuries. Whether or not that is the truth wont matter as much as whether or not enough people buy it to keep the grumbling to a minimum.

Scholarship limits are going to be a big deal at the end of this season.

I hope they raise to 115 at minimum....
Hope you're right about this :)

It is also a devilish way for the Major programs to limit how competitive some other programs can be with them.

This is another reason why the AAC will end up expanding to 20 teams. These kind of moves require previous catalysts in order to create the proper conditions.

Scholarship limit raising is one of the slated changes that is coming sooner rather than later.

Basically pricing the G5 out of FBS or at least being competitive.

It is about Pricing and about the centralization of talent.

A backlash is inevitable especially if the right schools are threatened.

I would think as costs rise some cost savings measures will be taken. These measures would be optional and make it harder to compete. Kinda like the current proposals you can match but you don't have to.

So a possible compromise say a new limit of 95 scholarships with a lower minimum of 75.

The P5 gains Nothing with a separation.
Continued domination is better more domination is desired.
The G5 even benefit as a whole with this setup.

(08-25-2014 08:09 PM)MJG Wrote:  A backlash is inevitable especially if the right schools are threatened.

I would think as costs rise some cost savings measures will be taken. These measures would be optional and make it harder to compete. Kinda like the current proposals you can match but you don't have to.

So a possible compromise say a new limit of 95 scholarships with a lower minimum of 75.

The P5 gains Nothing with a separation.
Continued domination is better more domination is desired.
The G5 even benefit as a whole with this setup.

The AAC will expand to 20 schools, it will get four divisions just like the 4 major conferences of 16 teams. It will be heavily regional but have enough games between it's different divisions in order to tie together it's SoS. It will also get a Conference Tournament just like the four Major conferences and with the rising competition for live sports, it will get it's tournament on tv for a solid price. It will be THE source of most Cinderella teams in the future expanded College Playoff. The Networks love Cinderella's so the existence of such will be assured once they move past the four team Playoff.

It is inevitable, the slippery slope is still quite slippery.

(08-25-2014 07:07 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Eventually, the Majors are going to raise the amount of scholarships they can offer. That will end up being a dividing line.

In order to expand conference postseasons, they are going to need some countering propaganda. Being able to say that they have more players to field will definitely help with explaining how they can make some teams play even longer seasons. More players means more substituting and thus the proposed theory that it means less injuries. Whether or not that is the truth wont matter as much as whether or not enough people buy it to keep the grumbling to a minimum.

Scholarship limits are going to be a big deal at the end of this season.

I hope they raise to 115 at minimum....
Hope you're right about this :)

I doubt it happens. For starters, you'll have Title IX issues to deal with, and not all P5 schools will be able to accomadate. Also, I can see raising scholarship limits also affecting P5 schools as well, where you potentially see the best schools stockpiling talent in order to keep smaller P5 programs down. However, it may become moot because the best kids should also desire playing time, which should help mitigate some of the issues.

We'll see, but I doubt it happens.

(08-25-2014 08:48 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:07 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Eventually, the Majors are going to raise the amount of scholarships they can offer. That will end up being a dividing line.

In order to expand conference postseasons, they are going to need some countering propaganda. Being able to say that they have more players to field will definitely help with explaining how they can make some teams play even longer seasons. More players means more substituting and thus the proposed theory that it means less injuries. Whether or not that is the truth wont matter as much as whether or not enough people buy it to keep the grumbling to a minimum.

Scholarship limits are going to be a big deal at the end of this season.

I hope they raise to 115 at minimum....
Hope you're right about this :)

I doubt it happens. For starters, you'll have Title IX issues to deal with, and not all P5 schools will be able to accomadate. Also, I can see raising scholarship limits also affecting P5 schools as well, where you potentially see the best schools stockpiling talent in order to keep smaller P5 programs down. However, it may become moot because the best kids should also desire playing time, which should help mitigate some of the issues.

We'll see, but I doubt it happens.

I don't see how Title IX matters. That works in regards to the number of programs being equal, not the number of scholarships. There is no women's sport right now that makes it equal with the amount of male scholarships that are given through football right now.

You are reaching with that.

In regards to top P5 programs taking away from other P5 programs? Kids want playtime and they want to play at the top level of competition if possible.

When you go from where we are now to an increased amount of scholarships, you are not going to see the likes of Alabama filling those new spots with 5 star and 4 stars. These are going to be the likes of athletes that are a little more of a risk, that are a little more of a project that requires more time to build. These are going to be substitutes. Other P5 schools are playing at the top level and they want playing time. It is a defeatist attitude to say that expanding the scholarships will mean that the likes of Alabama will take the very best away from other P5 schools.

What is more likely is that the mid tier and lower tier P5's take away talent from G5's.

As a talent, do you choose to play at Mississippi State or do you choose to be on the Alabama team but perhaps never play except on special teams during your senior year?

People like to take such a talking point beyond rationality.

(08-25-2014 05:56 PM)MJG Wrote:  Title nine being challenged as revenue or non revenue . Meaning only non revenue sports need to be equal.

I love when people who don't appear to understand Title IX make comments about changing the rule!

I'm not sure everyone realizes it is not an NCAA rule, but US LAW. Title IX is part of the Educational Amendments of 1972, and it takes super-majorities of Congress and the Senate to change such acts - the law itself has been upheld numerous times in court and ruled upon by the supreme court. Title IX is not about sports, its about EQUAL OPPORTUNITY within all institutions receiving Federal Funds.

So most often we hear Title IX used to ensure there are an equal amount of scholarships for men and women - which is why there are more sports teams for ladies, to match the amount of scholarships offered to men on a football team. This is why they cannot pay football players alone, but must offer stipends to ALL sports, which is why splitting it upon revenue and non-revenue will not work, because not matching revenue sports would NOT offer equal opportunity within an institution receiving Federal funds as EVERY university public and private does!

I too would like to see the number of football scholarships reduced from 85 to I'd say 80. It'd provide more competitive balance which in the long run would be really great for the sport.

I've known a number of college coaches and while they will all get their roster to the 105 limit and award the 85 maximum scholarships, they would be glad to have fewer guys to ride herd on. As one put it to me, the more players you have, the more locker room lawyers you have creating problems.

The raising of the scholarship limit wont be a decision made by coaches. It will be a "political" decision. I put political in quotes because I don't mean one made by politicians but a decision made in a political manner.

(08-25-2014 09:16 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 08:48 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:07 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 07:02 PM)He1nousOne Wrote:  Eventually, the Majors are going to raise the amount of scholarships they can offer. That will end up being a dividing line.

In order to expand conference postseasons, they are going to need some countering propaganda. Being able to say that they have more players to field will definitely help with explaining how they can make some teams play even longer seasons. More players means more substituting and thus the proposed theory that it means less injuries. Whether or not that is the truth wont matter as much as whether or not enough people buy it to keep the grumbling to a minimum.

Scholarship limits are going to be a big deal at the end of this season.

I hope they raise to 115 at minimum....
Hope you're right about this :)

I doubt it happens. For starters, you'll have Title IX issues to deal with, and not all P5 schools will be able to accomadate. Also, I can see raising scholarship limits also affecting P5 schools as well, where you potentially see the best schools stockpiling talent in order to keep smaller P5 programs down. However, it may become moot because the best kids should also desire playing time, which should help mitigate some of the issues.

We'll see, but I doubt it happens.

I don't see how Title IX matters. That works in regards to the number of programs being equal, not the number of scholarships. There is no women's sport right now that makes it equal with the amount of male scholarships that are given through football right now.

You are reaching with that.

In regards to top P5 programs taking away from other P5 programs? Kids want playtime and they want to play at the top level of competition if possible.

When you go from where we are now to an increased amount of scholarships, you are not going to see the likes of Alabama filling those new spots with 5 star and 4 stars. These are going to be the likes of athletes that are a little more of a risk, that are a little more of a project that requires more time to build. These are going to be substitutes. Other P5 schools are playing at the top level and they want playing time. It is a defeatist attitude to say that expanding the scholarships will mean that the likes of Alabama will take the very best away from other P5 schools.

What is more likely is that the mid tier and lower tier P5's take away talent from G5's.

As a talent, do you choose to play at Mississippi State or do you choose to be on the Alabama team but perhaps never play except on special teams during your senior year?

People like to take such a talking point beyond rationality.

Same thing goes for lower P5. Do you want to start for a G5 or sit on the bench at a lower P5. The reality is 4 and 5 star athletes don't think they are going to sit on the bench where ever they go. The top athletes at Tech will be a target for Alabama. They will go becaue they believe they wont be sitting on the bench. Tech will then refill with G5 talent. Now, does Tech want to play Albama with thier current talent, or with the guys that are playing G5 football right now? The scholarship limits are not going up because that only helps the Alabamas of the world.

(08-25-2014 09:23 PM)IceJus10 Wrote:  

(08-25-2014 05:56 PM)MJG Wrote:  Title nine being challenged as revenue or non revenue . Meaning only non revenue sports need to be equal.

I love when people who don't appear to understand Title IX make comments about changing the rule!

I'm not sure everyone realizes it is not an NCAA rule, but US LAW. Title IX is part of the Educational Amendments of 1972, and it takes super-majorities of Congress and the Senate to change such acts - the law itself has been upheld numerous times in court and ruled upon by the supreme court. Title IX is not about sports, its about EQUAL OPPORTUNITY within all institutions receiving Federal Funds.

So most often we hear Title IX used to ensure there are an equal amount of scholarships for men and women - which is why there are more sports teams for ladies, to match the amount of scholarships offered to men on a football team. This is why they cannot pay football players alone, but must offer stipends to ALL sports, which is why splitting it upon revenue and non-revenue will not work, because not matching revenue sports would NOT offer equal opportunity within an institution receiving Federal funds as EVERY university public and private does!

I don't pretend to know the ins and outs of title nine.
Non revenue sports lose money so schools are forced to lose more on women's sports. That really is not equal and title Nine has hurt men's sports. I know it is a law with some bad unintended consequences. Equal to me would be losing Money on the same number of athletes.

The ability to pay for families to visit and attend games will help some teams recruiting. Kids can go away to college and the family gets a vacation. Families attending bowl games also can help schools in poor recruiting areas.

(08-25-2014 09:25 PM)brista21 Wrote:  I too would like to see the number of football scholarships reduced from 85 to I'd say 80. It'd provide more competitive balance which in the long run would be really great for the sport.

I wouldn't mind seeing the number as low as 75, but with a twist. Make freshmen ineligible once again, but all players are eligible to play and receive a scholarship up to their 25th birthday. Then, any player who has already earned his degree at the same school does not count against the scholarship limit. Schools who do a better job academically will have an advantage instead of the other way around.

(08-25-2014 09:25 PM)brista21 Wrote:  I too would like to see the number of football scholarships reduced from 85 to I'd say 80. It'd provide more competitive balance which in the long run would be really great for the sport.

That sounds like something a G-fiver would say.