https://www.espn.com/college-football/st...-transfers

Rule would allow up to 32 to cover transfers. One additional scholarship for the first 7 transfers.

This one will be the killer for the G5.

(09-14-2021 08:55 PM)banker Wrote:  This one will be the killer for the G5.

This^^^^^^^
Although paying athletes won't help.

(09-14-2021 08:55 PM)banker Wrote:  This one will be the killer for the G5.

Not as long as the 85 rule is still in place.

(09-14-2021 08:55 PM)banker Wrote:  This one will be the killer for the G5.

I dont think so. Its what had to happen. With the new more liberal transfer rules, your going to see teams in certain positions get hammered by a huge wave of transfers (say when a popular G5 coach is poached by a P5). That kind of situation could be incredibly hard for the new coach coming in to ever recover from. The extra 7 scholarships to counter balance transfers will help prevent those cases from becoming long term lingering issues. It also will help more of those kids in the portal to find homes (most dont right now).

(09-14-2021 08:55 PM)banker Wrote:  This one will be the killer for the G5.

This rule being in place is a major reason as to why programs like UMass have stayed down so long. Firing coaches has people transfer out, and then you can't get back up to the full 85 until a few years later...at which point your coach could likely be fired again and you start the process over again.

(09-14-2021 08:55 PM)banker Wrote:  This one will be the killer for the G5.

I expect Bowling Green will welcome it. Ever since a 2019 coaching change, we've been at the 25-player limit with more scholarships to give, if we only could, because of transfers.

Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

Agree the rule change is good provided the 85 overall limit is maintained.

(09-14-2021 10:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  With the new more liberal transfer rules, your going to see teams in certain positions get hammered by a huge wave of transfers (say when a popular G5 coach is poached by a P5).

The concern wouldn't be for just any coaching change, it would be if a coaching change might be perceived as a negative by a large number of players, and motivate them to explore transferring -- for example, if a well-liked coach like Tom Allen at Indiana was replaced by a hardass like Bill O'Brien. Or if a coach leaving a successful program goes to a team that is thin on talent and several players from his former team want to follow him to the new place. That seems like a bigger problem in basketball than football, though basketball doesn't have the annual cap on scholarships.

(09-16-2021 10:31 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

I mentioned this issue in another thread. If the NCAA gets rid of rules that run afoul of the Alston case, or if they are forced to by a court, the scholarship caps in each sport probably have to go away, as being anticompetitive -- but a roster limit for each team in each sport would be permissible because it is a rule of competition in the sport, like the number of players that can be on the field or court at the same time, and not a rule relating to compensation.

(09-16-2021 11:05 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-14-2021 10:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  With the new more liberal transfer rules, your going to see teams in certain positions get hammered by a huge wave of transfers (say when a popular G5 coach is poached by a P5).

The concern wouldn't be for just any coaching change, it would be if a coaching change might be perceived as a negative by a large number of players, and motivate them to explore transferring -- for example, if a well-liked coach like Tom Allen at Indiana was replaced by a hardass like Bill O'Brien. Or if a coach leaving a successful program goes to a team that is thin on talent and several players from his former team want to follow him to the new place. That seems like a bigger problem in basketball than football, though basketball doesn't have the annual cap on scholarships.

(09-16-2021 10:31 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

I mentioned this issue in another thread. If the NCAA gets rid of rules that run afoul of the Alston case, or if they are forced to by a court, the scholarship caps in each sport probably have to go away, as being anticompetitive -- but a roster limit for each team in each sport would be permissible because it is a rule of competition in the sport, like the number of players that can be on the field or court at the same time, and not a rule relating to compensation.

BYU has effectively ended scholarship limits by sport with their NIL deal providing money to 120 players on the football roster.

(09-16-2021 10:31 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

Scholarship caps are effective tools for spreading talent across many schools. If scholarship caps are eliminated, we’ll return to the Bear Bryant - Bobby Dodd debate…some brand programs will horde talent even though there is little chance that talented kids get a legitimate chance to play.

That having been said, I do believe that the scholarship limits for certain team sports (such as baseball, softball, soccer, etc.) should be increased.

(09-16-2021 12:18 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 11:05 AM)Wedge Wrote:  

(09-14-2021 10:46 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  With the new more liberal transfer rules, your going to see teams in certain positions get hammered by a huge wave of transfers (say when a popular G5 coach is poached by a P5).

The concern wouldn't be for just any coaching change, it would be if a coaching change might be perceived as a negative by a large number of players, and motivate them to explore transferring -- for example, if a well-liked coach like Tom Allen at Indiana was replaced by a hardass like Bill O'Brien. Or if a coach leaving a successful program goes to a team that is thin on talent and several players from his former team want to follow him to the new place. That seems like a bigger problem in basketball than football, though basketball doesn't have the annual cap on scholarships.

(09-16-2021 10:31 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

I mentioned this issue in another thread. If the NCAA gets rid of rules that run afoul of the Alston case, or if they are forced to by a court, the scholarship caps in each sport probably have to go away, as being anticompetitive -- but a roster limit for each team in each sport would be permissible because it is a rule of competition in the sport, like the number of players that can be on the field or court at the same time, and not a rule relating to compensation.

BYU has effectively ended scholarship limits by sport with their NIL deal providing money to 120 players on the football roster.

I'm not too concerned about that because in the vast majority of cases, the people providing NIL money are going to want themselves and their money to be associated with star players and not guys who only get on the field during practice.

At any rate, a roster limit would take care of that issue, because very few elite athletes are going to want to stay at a school where they are not on the roster, even if their tuition, room, and board are taken care of.

(09-16-2021 12:22 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 10:31 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

Scholarship caps are effective tools for spreading talent across many schools. If scholarship caps are eliminated, we’ll return to the Bear Bryant - Bobby Dodd debate…some brand programs will horde talent even though there is little chance that talented kids get a legitimate chance to play.

That having been said, I do believe that the scholarship limits for certain team sports (such as baseball, softball, soccer, etc.) should be increased.

But why limit student choices? They should have the right to go to any school they want.

The NIL is about to change college sports so radically that rules from the NCAA won't really matter.

(09-16-2021 12:46 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 12:22 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 10:31 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

Scholarship caps are effective tools for spreading talent across many schools. If scholarship caps are eliminated, we’ll return to the Bear Bryant - Bobby Dodd debate…some brand programs will horde talent even though there is little chance that talented kids get a legitimate chance to play.

That having been said, I do believe that the scholarship limits for certain team sports (such as baseball, softball, soccer, etc.) should be increased.

But why limit student choices? They should have the right to go to any school they want.

I am sure there are loads of 2 star kids from Catholic high schools all over the country who would LOVE to play football for Notre Dame. Why is Brian Kelly limiting their choices?

(09-16-2021 01:19 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 12:46 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 12:22 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 10:31 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

Scholarship caps are effective tools for spreading talent across many schools. If scholarship caps are eliminated, we’ll return to the Bear Bryant - Bobby Dodd debate…some brand programs will horde talent even though there is little chance that talented kids get a legitimate chance to play.

That having been said, I do believe that the scholarship limits for certain team sports (such as baseball, softball, soccer, etc.) should be increased.

But why limit student choices? They should have the right to go to any school they want.

I am sure there are loads of 2 star kids from Catholic high schools all over the country who would LOVE to play football for Notre Dame. Why is Brian Kelly limiting their choices?

Um that is a different argument, nice try. That was a incredibly lame argument by the way. Come on, you're smarter then that.

In reality this is a relationship so both parties have to agree. If a student wants to come to ND and we have 500 football athletes on scholarship and he knows it and is okay with it he should be able to make that choice.

(09-16-2021 01:26 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:19 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 12:46 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 12:22 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 10:31 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

Scholarship caps are effective tools for spreading talent across many schools. If scholarship caps are eliminated, we’ll return to the Bear Bryant - Bobby Dodd debate…some brand programs will horde talent even though there is little chance that talented kids get a legitimate chance to play.

That having been said, I do believe that the scholarship limits for certain team sports (such as baseball, softball, soccer, etc.) should be increased.

But why limit student choices? They should have the right to go to any school they want.

I am sure there are loads of 2 star kids from Catholic high schools all over the country who would LOVE to play football for Notre Dame. Why is Brian Kelly limiting their choices?

Um that is a different argument, nice try. That was a incredibly lame argument by the way. Come on, you're smarter then that.

In reality this is a relationship so both parties have to agree. If a student wants to come to ND and we have 500 football athletes on scholarship and he knows it and is okay with it he should be able to make that choice.

In fairness it is not the same. But, I think you will admit that a loosening of the scholarship requirements would help the Notre Dame (and Alabama and OSU) a great deal at the expense of 90% of FBS. But I am skeptical that your position is based purely on altruistic concern for student-athletes.

(09-16-2021 10:31 AM)domer1978 Wrote:  Just do away with scholarship caps. If a school wants to give out a 1000 scholarships and kids want to play their let it happen.

Sure, if you absolutely don't care about destroying the last bit of parity.

(09-16-2021 01:42 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:26 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 01:19 PM)UpStreamRedTeam Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 12:46 PM)domer1978 Wrote:  

(09-16-2021 12:22 PM)Wahoowa84 Wrote:  Scholarship caps are effective tools for spreading talent across many schools. If scholarship caps are eliminated, we’ll return to the Bear Bryant - Bobby Dodd debate…some brand programs will horde talent even though there is little chance that talented kids get a legitimate chance to play.

That having been said, I do believe that the scholarship limits for certain team sports (such as baseball, softball, soccer, etc.) should be increased.

But why limit student choices? They should have the right to go to any school they want.

I am sure there are loads of 2 star kids from Catholic high schools all over the country who would LOVE to play football for Notre Dame. Why is Brian Kelly limiting their choices?

Um that is a different argument, nice try. That was a incredibly lame argument by the way. Come on, you're smarter then that.

In reality this is a relationship so both parties have to agree. If a student wants to come to ND and we have 500 football athletes on scholarship and he knows it and is okay with it he should be able to make that choice.

In fairness it is not the same. But, I think you will admit that a loosening of the scholarship requirements would help the Notre Dame (and Alabama and OSU) a great deal at the expense of 90% of FBS. But I am skeptical that your position is based purely on altruistic concern for student-athletes.

Does it matter my motive? We are in an era where freedom of movement and choice are paramount in the sport.

Will it help us? Probably, but every change that is on going will help the big schools now anyway. My motive is just open the barn door already and let the stuff fly.