(02-04-2020 04:02 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(02-01-2020 09:28 PM)pvk75 Wrote:  I favor improved fairness to the student-athlete, but this proposal goes too far. It is proposed under the guise of being more "fair" to players, but what it really does is ...

--- Turn the entire G5 into a farm club level of football where the P5 "calls up" and "sends down" players at will.
--- Allow the P5 to get even richer by cutting recruiting budgets, and letting the G5 do some of their work for them, without compensation.
--- Alienate even more of the "forgotten" college fans who have ties to the 65 G5 schools. Many already do not bother to attend/pay attention to the "feel-good" bowl games.

If this proposal is adopted, I would expect the next move to be an expansion in the number of FBS scholarships allowed. Generally, the P5 has the money; the G5 does not.

Any time a P5 school or conference proposes anything, you can bet there is an alterior motive. It is NOT for the benefit of college football or the student-athlete. And the fans do not matter at all.

It's not really the 85 limit that's such a big deal - it's the rule on only 25 per class. SC for example always has extra scholarships because so many people transfer out every year and we can't sign enough to replace them.

I don't have a link handy, but one of the P5 conferences (Big 12?) has proposed allowing schools up to 30 initial counters in any given year while maintaining a cap of 50 in any rolling 2-year period.

Kind of surprising that they aren't continually addressing matters of attrition. They probably would tackle the matter in earnest if athletes were allowed one freebie per career.

EDIT: The Big 12 & MAC are the sponsors: 2019-42 Should be up for a vote in April.

The ACC has one too: looks like 2019-41 would allow schools to sign 25 + the number of players who either left for the pros the prior year or suffered a career ending illness or injury that same year. (Nothing about transfers.)