The Bobcat Nation

It's about time! Although 2 to 4k pales in comparison to what these kids do in order to go through school (in actuality these teams are pretty much semi-pro anyway)
and what they earn for these schools, it's a start. That and agreeing there will be no more pulled scholarships are pretty significant steps forward.

http://espn.go.com/college-sports/story ... omy-begins

I see the non ability to pull a scholarship meaning that we will have less dropdown available. They used to be able to tell a kid, not only won't you play but if you don't move you won't have a scholly.

allcat wrote:I see the non ability to pull a scholarship meaning that we will have less dropdown available. They used to be able to tell a kid, not only won't you play but if you don't move you won't have a scholly.

I believe you are correct if they remain at 85 scholarships. I'd be willing to wager, however, that number takes a significant jump. At that level, I know you need the numbers. Case in point this year Ohio State won with their third string QB and somewhere around ten starters lost for the season. If memory serves me correctly, Spurrier lost 17 starters through the course of his National Championship. Smaller schools will continue to pull scholarships in the event of injuries.

Cat Grad wrote:

allcat wrote:I see the non ability to pull a scholarship meaning that we will have less dropdown available. They used to be able to tell a kid, not only won't you play but if you don't move you won't have a scholly.

I believe you are correct if they remain at 85 scholarships. I'd be willing to wager, however, that number takes a significant jump. At that level, I know you need the numbers. Case in point this year Ohio State won with their third string QB and somewhere around ten starters lost for the season. If memory serves me correctly, Spurrier lost 17 starters through the course of his National Championship. Smaller schools will continue to pull scholarships in the event of injuries.

So 85 scholarships isn't enough to make it through the season? How is it that NFL teams somehow manage to make it through a longer season with fewer than 50 players on their roster?

John K wrote:

Cat Grad wrote:

allcat wrote:I see the non ability to pull a scholarship meaning that we will have less dropdown available. They used to be able to tell a kid, not only won't you play but if you don't move you won't have a scholly.

I believe you are correct if they remain at 85 scholarships. I'd be willing to wager, however, that number takes a significant jump. At that level, I know you need the numbers. Case in point this year Ohio State won with their third string QB and somewhere around ten starters lost for the season. If memory serves me correctly, Spurrier lost 17 starters through the course of his National Championship. Smaller schools will continue to pull scholarships in the event of injuries.

So 85 scholarships isn't enough to make it through the season? How is it that NFL teams somehow manage to make it through a longer season with fewer than 50 players on their roster?

Age difference. Developmental differences. You're comparing by and large 17 to 21 year old kids to grown men and the NFL goes through personnel at what rate? Where the college roster is static throughout the year, the NFL can arbitrarily pick up somebody off injured reserve, or even off the street and put them on the field.

Plus the NFl can add players during the season.

CPACAT wrote:Plus the NFl can add players during the season.

OK, those are valid points, but I still don't buy that FBS schools should need more than 85 schollies,

Don't most FBS schools already have about 100 players on the sidelines right now (scholarship players plus walk-ons)?

I'm sure they could increase scholarship numbers just to monopolize more talent (and to prevent Boise State or any other non Power 5 school from beating consistently), but I can't imagine that they really "need" more scholarship players.

Bay Area Cat wrote:Don't most FBS schools already have about 100 players on the sidelines right now (scholarship players plus walk-ons)?

I'm sure they could increase scholarship numbers just to monopolize more talent (and to prevent Boise State or any other non Power 5 school from beating consistently), but I can't imagine that they really "need" more scholarship players.

Whether or not they need the extra kids or not isn't relevant for I understand it's a foregone conclusion this eventuality comes to pass. As far as the plus five schools, I have an issue with them having twenty more scholarships than 1-AA and 1-AA having twenty more than DII schools. And don't get me started on Boise State or BYU playing grown men against kids.

I guess I've missed something, I have not seen where they were getting more scholarships.

allcat wrote:I see the non ability to pull a scholarship meaning that we will have less dropdown available. They used to be able to tell a kid, not only won't you play but if you don't move you won't have a scholly.

When I watched the NDSU vs Sam Houston State playoff game, the announces said something like 4 starters (offense and defense) were on the team in the spring! All the rest were drop-downs! Boy wouldn't that hurt a program like the Bearkats have!

Dropdowns not only are bandaids but also give you more play ready guys. You don't have as many of those pesky redshirts,