(04-17-2021 04:20 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-16-2021 09:17 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  I think Kansas has also had problems fielding a full 85 scholarship players on a yearly basis. I think a rule change to cap scholarships per year at "25 + Number of Outgoing Transfers" would be a massive win-win-win. Win for the players, since more scholarships are available. Win for the coaches, since they can remake their roster and replace players immediately rather than a year or two down the road. Win for the programs/schools at large, since they can stay at or near the 85 max scholarship roster size and have more enrolled students (assuming educational stuff matters in this context).

No, that would be a big loss for players. If a head football coach wants to sign 45 players, all he would have to do is revoke 20 scholarships among current players. Increasing the incentive for coaches to screw their existing players would be bad. They have more than enough ways to do that already.

If a coach has 20 players he wants to get rid of, chances are the 45 he's going to be able to attract won't be too hot either.

(04-17-2021 04:48 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-17-2021 04:20 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-16-2021 09:17 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  I think Kansas has also had problems fielding a full 85 scholarship players on a yearly basis. I think a rule change to cap scholarships per year at "25 + Number of Outgoing Transfers" would be a massive win-win-win. Win for the players, since more scholarships are available. Win for the coaches, since they can remake their roster and replace players immediately rather than a year or two down the road. Win for the programs/schools at large, since they can stay at or near the 85 max scholarship roster size and have more enrolled students (assuming educational stuff matters in this context).

No, that would be a big loss for players. If a head football coach wants to sign 45 players, all he would have to do is revoke 20 scholarships among current players. Increasing the incentive for coaches to screw their existing players would be bad. They have more than enough ways to do that already.

If a coach has 20 players he wants to get rid of, chances are the 45 he's going to be able to attract won't be too hot either.

Not to mention if you have the reputation for aggressively running off players---your probably going to start have trouble attracting players. I think that will be more than enough to self regulate any abuse of such a rule. I think the rule should be something that doesnt even kick in until you are below 75 scholarship players on the roster AFTER awarding all 25 scholarships for the year. That means you'd have to be down 35 or more scholarship players in one year. I think giving a school like that some relief is reasonable.

(04-17-2021 04:48 PM)ken d Wrote:  

(04-17-2021 04:20 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(04-16-2021 09:17 AM)AssyrianDuke Wrote:  I think Kansas has also had problems fielding a full 85 scholarship players on a yearly basis. I think a rule change to cap scholarships per year at "25 + Number of Outgoing Transfers" would be a massive win-win-win. Win for the players, since more scholarships are available. Win for the coaches, since they can remake their roster and replace players immediately rather than a year or two down the road. Win for the programs/schools at large, since they can stay at or near the 85 max scholarship roster size and have more enrolled students (assuming educational stuff matters in this context).

No, that would be a big loss for players. If a head football coach wants to sign 45 players, all he would have to do is revoke 20 scholarships among current players. Increasing the incentive for coaches to screw their existing players would be bad. They have more than enough ways to do that already.

If a coach has 20 players he wants to get rid of, chances are the 45 he's going to be able to attract won't be too hot either.

That's no comfort to the players who had their scholarships revoked.

The better approach would be to permit an FBS team to apply for a waiver of the 25-per-year limit for a year in which the number of players who actually transferred out is well above the median number of transfer-outs in FBS. Then the team would have an opportunity to demonstrate that the unusually high number is not due to coaches forcing out players who wanted to stay.