Would it be in the PAC's interest to try and lower the number of FBS scholarships down to a number such as 70 or 75?

I can see where it could make them more competitive and also be good for the G5 too.

(06-25-2018 06:13 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Would it be in the PAC's interest to try and lower the number of FBS scholarships down to a number such as 70 or 75?

I can see where it could make them more competitive and also be good for the G5 too.

I think FCS would need to lower their limit too, as a smaller gap would make it harder to keep the riff-raff out of FBS.

(06-25-2018 06:43 AM)chargeradio Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 06:13 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Would it be in the PAC's interest to try and lower the number of FBS scholarships down to a number such as 70 or 75?

I can see where it could make them more competitive and also be good for the G5 too.

I think FCS would need to lower their limit too, as a smaller gap would make it harder to keep the riff-raff out of FBS.

Walk-on programs ensure a nice gap IMO.

No.

The P5 will want more not less schollies...

NFL is 50 plus 5 practice squad players I believe.

There is no need to run 85 scholarship programs.

(06-25-2018 06:13 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Would it be in the PAC's interest to try and lower the number of FBS scholarships down to a number such as 70 or 75?

I can see where it could make them more competitive and also be good for the G5 too.

I could see how this would help the G5 schools, but not the PAC. The PAC would be better off picking a fight they could actually win.

(06-25-2018 07:55 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 06:13 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Would it be in the PAC's interest to try and lower the number of FBS scholarships down to a number such as 70 or 75?

I can see where it could make them more competitive and also be good for the G5 too.

I could see how this would help the G5 schools, but not the PAC. The PAC would be better off picking a fight they could actually win.

I do not know how the PAC 12 could pick a fight when they lose to G5 and FCS teams a lot. There is no reason for a PAC 12 school to lose to Portland State (cough, Oregon State, cough).

Instead of dropping Scholarship limits, they should drop WSU and OSU instead.

PAC-12 just needs USC to get back to being a top 5 program.

(06-25-2018 07:21 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  NFL is 50 plus 5 practice squad players I believe.

There is no need to run 85 scholarship programs.

The P5 wants more, not less scholarships. 90-100 would actually be preferred

I don't think it's unanimous in the P5 that they want more scholarships by any means.

(06-25-2018 09:41 AM)Gamecock Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 07:21 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  NFL is 50 plus 5 practice squad players I believe.

There is no need to run 85 scholarship programs.

The P5 wants more, not less scholarships. 90-100 would actually be preferred

Evidence?

I don't recall any ever submitting legislation to that effect.

(06-25-2018 08:30 AM)goofus Wrote:  Instead of dropping Scholarship limits, they should drop WSU and OSU instead.

Cough, Colorado got stung by the Hornets of Sacramento State, and I think UC-Davis beat California.

(06-25-2018 08:01 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 07:55 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 06:13 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Would it be in the PAC's interest to try and lower the number of FBS scholarships down to a number such as 70 or 75?

I can see where it could make them more competitive and also be good for the G5 too.

I could see how this would help the G5 schools, but not the PAC. The PAC would be better off picking a fight they could actually win.

I do not know how the PAC 12 could pick a fight when they lose to G5 and FCS teams a lot. There is no reason for a PAC 12 school to lose to Portland State (cough, Oregon State, cough).

Current FCS teams wins vs Current P5 teams
ACC - 17
Big 12 - 14
PAC-12 - 10
Big Ten - 9
SEC - 6

Facts get in your way once again.

(06-25-2018 10:58 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:01 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 07:55 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 06:13 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Would it be in the PAC's interest to try and lower the number of FBS scholarships down to a number such as 70 or 75?

I can see where it could make them more competitive and also be good for the G5 too.

I could see how this would help the G5 schools, but not the PAC. The PAC would be better off picking a fight they could actually win.

I do not know how the PAC 12 could pick a fight when they lose to G5 and FCS teams a lot. There is no reason for a PAC 12 school to lose to Portland State (cough, Oregon State, cough).

Current FCS teams wins vs Current P5 teams
ACC - 17
Big 12 - 14
PAC-12 - 10
Big Ten - 9
SEC - 6

Facts get in your way once again.

2 things.
1- what's the time frame?
2- how many games vs FCS opponents?

(06-25-2018 10:58 AM)MissouriStateBears Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 08:01 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 07:55 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(06-25-2018 06:13 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  Would it be in the PAC's interest to try and lower the number of FBS scholarships down to a number such as 70 or 75?

I can see where it could make them more competitive and also be good for the G5 too.

I could see how this would help the G5 schools, but not the PAC. The PAC would be better off picking a fight they could actually win.

I do not know how the PAC 12 could pick a fight when they lose to G5 and FCS teams a lot. There is no reason for a PAC 12 school to lose to Portland State (cough, Oregon State, cough).

Current FCS teams wins vs Current P5 teams
ACC - 17
Big 12 - 14
PAC-12 - 10
Big Ten - 9
SEC - 6

Facts get in your way once again.

Facts never get in his way, they just don't exist.

Worth consideration. It would keep certain schools from hoarding an excessive number of 5 and 4 star athletes. It would spread top talent out a bit more. As is, certain schools, even in the same conference, cannot overcome recruiting talent gaps.

Reduces the future cost of paying athletes too.

(06-25-2018 07:21 AM)Kittonhead Wrote:  NFL is 50 plus 5 practice squad players I believe.

There is no need to run 85 scholarship programs.

The NFL also allows the signing of free agent players to fill roster spots opened by injury, release, etc. That option is not available to college programs.