(01-09-2015 01:16 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:08 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:05 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  http://finance.yahoo.com/news/urban-meye...39424.html

He's right, if 8 comes then I bet they up the schollie numbers.

1 more game for 4 teams and they up the scholarship numbers?
That's really just of benefit for about 20 schools, schools like Ohio St., Texas, USC, Alabama, etc. The other 100 or so would suffer as talent gets stockpiled at the bigger name schools and talented players never see the field.

And?
I think that limits are unnecessary now. I think that they'll do it more of a way to appease people about the wear and tear argument.

If ND wants to carry 115 kids on scholarship why shouldn't they be able too?

There's no way the schollie limits get raised. The majority of the P5 teams don't want to see that happen. Do you really think Wake Forest or Duke wants to see FSU get 20 more schollie kids? No chance.

Also you have the title IX problem. 20 more schollies would mean each school would need to add another womens sport(maybe 2 even).

(01-09-2015 01:30 PM)stever20 Wrote:  There's no way the schollie limits get raised. The majority of the P5 teams don't want to see that happen. Do you really think Wake Forest or Duke wants to see FSU get 20 more schollie kids? No chance.

Also you have the title IX problem. 20 more schollies would mean each school would need to add another womens sport(maybe 2 even).

I'll be surprised if they don't raise the limit in the near future . Wake or Duke don't have to carry 115 scholarships if they don't want to obviously. If you choose to add more scholarships to football then yes you should be able to easily afford adding another women's sport. If you can't you can't, then don't do it.

(01-09-2015 01:33 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:30 PM)stever20 Wrote:  There's no way the schollie limits get raised. The majority of the P5 teams don't want to see that happen. Do you really think Wake Forest or Duke wants to see FSU get 20 more schollie kids? No chance.

Also you have the title IX problem. 20 more schollies would mean each school would need to add another womens sport(maybe 2 even).

I'll be surprised if they don't raise the limit in the near future . Wake or Duke don't have to carry 115 scholarships if they don't want to obviously. If you choose to add more scholarships to football then yes you should be able to easily afford adding another women's sport. If you can't you can't, then don't do it.

The question becomes are there enough Wakes and Dukes out there to stop it from happening. If so, than it doesn't happen. If raising the schollie limits helps say 20 P5 schools, the other 45 P5 schools won't go along with that at all- and they have the majority.

(01-09-2015 01:33 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:30 PM)stever20 Wrote:  There's no way the schollie limits get raised. The majority of the P5 teams don't want to see that happen. Do you really think Wake Forest or Duke wants to see FSU get 20 more schollie kids? No chance.

Also you have the title IX problem. 20 more schollies would mean each school would need to add another womens sport(maybe 2 even).

I'll be surprised if they don't raise the limit in the near future . Wake or Duke don't have to carry 115 scholarships if they don't want to obviously. If you choose to add more scholarships to football then yes you should be able to easily afford adding another women's sport. If you can't you can't, then don't do it.

I would be surprised if they do.

Title IX is a real issue as Steve mentions. And there is no benefit to any but a few schools. There is not really benefit to the student-athletes. They are sitting on the bench at an FBS school instead of playing for an FCS school. Now maybe there is benefit to the people not getting scholarships now who would be the rosters of the Division II schools, but sitting on the bench is not a benefit to those extra 30 in FBS.

(01-09-2015 01:33 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  I'll be surprised if they don't raise the limit in the near future . Wake or Duke don't have to carry 115 scholarships if they don't want to obviously. If you choose to add more scholarships to football then yes you should be able to easily afford adding another women's sport. If you can't you can't, then don't do it.

It's not the issue of them having to carry more. It is the competitive inbalance of top programs having more "top" players, leaving less for them. It is no accident that in all sports, as scholarship limits have decreased, parity has increased. There is a direct affect. That is why the lower tier power conference school would be against it.

also sadly what would probably happen is instead of additional women's schollies, they would just cut a mens team or two.

(01-09-2015 01:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:33 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:30 PM)stever20 Wrote:  There's no way the schollie limits get raised. The majority of the P5 teams don't want to see that happen. Do you really think Wake Forest or Duke wants to see FSU get 20 more schollie kids? No chance.

Also you have the title IX problem. 20 more schollies would mean each school would need to add another womens sport(maybe 2 even).

I'll be surprised if they don't raise the limit in the near future . Wake or Duke don't have to carry 115 scholarships if they don't want to obviously. If you choose to add more scholarships to football then yes you should be able to easily afford adding another women's sport. If you can't you can't, then don't do it.

The question becomes are there enough Wakes and Dukes out there to stop it from happening. If so, than it doesn't happen. If raising the schollie limits helps say 20 P5 schools, the other 45 P5 schools won't go along with that at all- and they have the majority.

We'll see, but I see it eventually happening and if they add more games I really see it happening.

(01-09-2015 01:48 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:33 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:30 PM)stever20 Wrote:  There's no way the schollie limits get raised. The majority of the P5 teams don't want to see that happen. Do you really think Wake Forest or Duke wants to see FSU get 20 more schollie kids? No chance.

Also you have the title IX problem. 20 more schollies would mean each school would need to add another womens sport(maybe 2 even).

I'll be surprised if they don't raise the limit in the near future . Wake or Duke don't have to carry 115 scholarships if they don't want to obviously. If you choose to add more scholarships to football then yes you should be able to easily afford adding another women's sport. If you can't you can't, then don't do it.

The question becomes are there enough Wakes and Dukes out there to stop it from happening. If so, than it doesn't happen. If raising the schollie limits helps say 20 P5 schools, the other 45 P5 schools won't go along with that at all- and they have the majority.

We'll see, but I see it eventually happening and if they add more games I really see it happening.

I think it's more you hope it happens. The other 45 P5 schools really have no reason to want to increase the limits at all. It helps them out in no way shape or form. It's been 85 limit since 1992.

(01-09-2015 01:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:33 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:30 PM)stever20 Wrote:  There's no way the schollie limits get raised. The majority of the P5 teams don't want to see that happen. Do you really think Wake Forest or Duke wants to see FSU get 20 more schollie kids? No chance.

Also you have the title IX problem. 20 more schollies would mean each school would need to add another womens sport(maybe 2 even).

I'll be surprised if they don't raise the limit in the near future . Wake or Duke don't have to carry 115 scholarships if they don't want to obviously. If you choose to add more scholarships to football then yes you should be able to easily afford adding another women's sport. If you can't you can't, then don't do it.

The question becomes are there enough Wakes and Dukes out there to stop it from happening. If so, than it doesn't happen. If raising the schollie limits helps say 20 P5 schools, the other 45 P5 schools won't go along with that at all- and they have the majority.

Right now, the reason it appears this might benefit as many as 20 teams is because the previous reduction in scholarship limits made some of those 20 the power programs they are today. In reality, the number who would really benefit is probably no more than 10 schools. And those schools don't/won't need the extra players. Their sole motive for recruiting them would be to keep them from playing for their opponents.

If any change in scholarship limits were to happen, IMO, it would be to reduce the number, not increase it.

(01-09-2015 10:49 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 10:36 AM)bitcruncher Wrote:  

(01-08-2015 05:57 PM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(01-08-2015 03:13 PM)stever20 Wrote:  You are drunk if you really think that. The committee would have viewed them a lot differently if doing it for a playoff.

I can respond to this a lot of ways, but Iw ill just keep it simple. You are drunk and high, if you think something happened conference championship weekend, that all of a sudden made Miss St a team worth being ranked three spots ahead of where they were the week before. Until you can answer that, there is nothing else to discuss. My point, and the point the original person made, stands. And there is nothing else to discuss unless you can find a legit reason for that change to be made that week. Doesn't matter what you thought they should have been ranked before. Look at where they were at week 15 and then week 16. Unless you can answer that, the point stands. In an 8 team playoff, Mich St in, Miss out, unless one of the CCG losers was left in.

IMO Conference Championship game losers should be the first ones considered for inclusion. They won their half of the conference, even if they did come up short in the championship game. A school that couldn't win their half of the conference would have to be considered behind them. Deserving CCG losers should be considered highest, and other schools after that, if there are any spots left.

Of course, that assumes said CCG loser didn't get blown out in their CCG. If they did, that school can forget it.

just don't think that would be realistic. Look at the 2 teams we've been discussing. Michigan St/Mississippi St. With top 4 teams in their division. Why should a Georgia Tech(with no top 25 teams in their division) get more consideration, just because they won a weak division?

That will happen on occasion. But power cycles. It's not GT's fault their half of the division isn't as strong as you'd like. If it happens within the guidelines set, them's the breaks.

However, I didn't say a team from a weak division should be automatically included. I merely said that they should get first consideration. There's a small difference in what I'm saying and what you think I said, and it makes a big difference in the foundation of your assumptions.

(01-09-2015 02:49 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:48 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:46 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:33 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:30 PM)stever20 Wrote:  There's no way the schollie limits get raised. The majority of the P5 teams don't want to see that happen. Do you really think Wake Forest or Duke wants to see FSU get 20 more schollie kids? No chance.

Also you have the title IX problem. 20 more schollies would mean each school would need to add another womens sport(maybe 2 even).

I'll be surprised if they don't raise the limit in the near future . Wake or Duke don't have to carry 115 scholarships if they don't want to obviously. If you choose to add more scholarships to football then yes you should be able to easily afford adding another women's sport. If you can't you can't, then don't do it.

The question becomes are there enough Wakes and Dukes out there to stop it from happening. If so, than it doesn't happen. If raising the schollie limits helps say 20 P5 schools, the other 45 P5 schools won't go along with that at all- and they have the majority.

We'll see, but I see it eventually happening and if they add more games I really see it happening.

I think it's more you hope it happens. The other 45 P5 schools really have no reason to want to increase the limits at all. It helps them out in no way shape or form. It's been 85 limit since 1992.

I definitely hope it happens but I also see it as a possible thing that may happen. If 8 comes and all these lawsuits get settled(Concussions)and they see that raising limits as a way to pacify some critics(obviously not a cure for the issue, just dressing).

Something to consider concerning round 1 of a playoffs- the highest ranked team could host the bowl game at the nearest game facility that is not their home facility for the first round.

Let me explain what I am suggesting-

1. Alabama vs 8. Mississippi State
2. Oregon vs. 7. Michigan State
3. Florida State vs 6. TCU
4. Baylor vs 5. Ohio State

So, the first round playoffs could work like this-

Alabama (home) vs Mississippi State at the Sugar Bowl (New Orleans) or Atlanta or Nashville or Houston
Oregon (home) vs Michigan State at Seattle Seahawks stadium (Seattle) or at San Francisco 49ers home stadium
Florida State (home) vs TCU in the Peach Bowl (Atlanta) or Tampa Bay Buc's stadium or Orlando or Miami.
Baylor vs Ohio State in the Alamo Dome (San Antonio) or Jerry World (Dallas) or Houston

The NFL stadiums, particularly domed stadiums in the midwest, become attractive ,in my suggestion, if you are a higher seeded team. For example, let's say that Michigan State was the higher seeded team when playing Oregon. The game could be played at the Detroit Lions stadium. Let's suggest that Ohio State was the higher seed when playing Baylor. The game could be played at the Indianapolis Colts home field.

To state this, again, if you are North Carolina or Clemson, and you get the higher seed, the first round game could be played in Charlotte or Atlanta.

If you are Texas or Oklahoma, and you get the higher seed, the first round game could be in Dallas or Houston or San Antonio.

If you are Nebraska or Iowa and get the higher seed, the first round game may be played in Minneapolis (dome) or Indianapolis (dome).

The games will need fans to show up. Essentially requiring fans to travel three times over the holiday season is not ideal.

(01-09-2015 01:08 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(01-09-2015 01:05 PM)cleburneslim Wrote:  http://finance.yahoo.com/news/urban-meye...39424.html

He's right, if 8 comes then I bet they up the schollie numbers.

Most teams already carry 20 walk-ons for a total of 105 players.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk