As College Football Teams Fret Roster Numbers, Is a Solution Near? Will college football abolish the 25-man signing limit? (Dellenger @ SI)

[huskymedic]

 

[huskymedic]

“ Many within the college football industry say it’s time the 25-man signing policy changes. Soon, that could happen. College leaders are exploring what would be yet another groundbreaking change in an era of transformation within the industry: the elimination of annual signing limits in football. Under the concept, teams could sign an unlimited number of players each year as long as they remain at or below the NCAA-maximum 85 scholarships.

The discussions are serious enough that such a proposal has been widely socialized among coaches and athletic administrators, some of whom believe the issue has a legitimate shot at passing in time for this upcoming signing class. Signing caps are expected to be a central discussion topic starting next month, when a slew of FBS conference meetings transpires—the first of which begins Monday in Phoenix with the Big 12, Mountain West, Pac-12 and Big Ten.

There is plenty of pushback against the proposal. While eschewing annual signing limits would provide schools a solvent to an increasingly difficult problem—managing a roster in the age of excessive transfers—skeptics have worries. For starters, will the plan further open the door for coaches to purposely turn over their rosters by cutting players and replacing them with signing classes of upwards of 40?”

 

[uconnric]

“ Many within the college football industry say it’s time the 25-man signing policy changes. Soon, that could happen. College leaders are exploring what would be yet another groundbreaking change in an era of transformation within the industry: the elimination of annual signing limits in football. Under the concept, teams could sign an unlimited number of players each year as long as they remain at or below the NCAA-maximum 85 scholarships.

The discussions are serious enough that such a proposal has been widely socialized among coaches and athletic administrators, some of whom believe the issue has a legitimate shot at passing in time for this upcoming signing class. Signing caps are expected to be a central discussion topic starting next month, when a slew of FBS conference meetings transpires—the first of which begins Monday in Phoenix with the Big 12, Mountain West, Pac-12 and Big Ten.

There is plenty of pushback against the proposal. While eschewing annual signing limits would provide schools a solvent to an increasingly difficult problem—managing a roster in the age of excessive transfers—skeptics have worries. For starters, will the plan further open the door for coaches to purposely turn over their rosters by cutting players and replacing them with signing classes of upwards of 40?”

This will be a problem for all but the elite programs in the P5. There has to be some sort of annual limit, otherwise we revert back to the old days without scholarship limits, which allowed power schools to over-sign recruits and then cut players that weren't performing.

There are many competing interests and levels of support at the FBS level. I don't see how this doesn't end with the formation of an elite group of teams splitting off with their own governance.

 

[DoctorWho85]

This will be a problem for all but the elite programs in the P5. There has to be some sort of annual limit, otherwise we revert back to the old days without scholarship limits, which allowed power schools to over-sign recruits and then cut players that weren't performing.

There are many competing interests and levels of support at the FBS level. I don't see how this doesn't end with the formation of an elite group of teams splitting off with their own governance.

Schools still won't be able to go over 85 though. So it's not like Saban can walk into Florida and Texas and just prevent talent from going elsewhere. Let's be honest if a school like Alabama or Michigan comes calling there's not much a school like UConn or Syracuse or Wake Forest or Vanderbilt or pretty much 95% of D1 can do. This helps teams build better depth. The top teams are going to get the top talent regardless of the 25 limit or not. Let the rest of college football have more competitiveness. UConn could have definitely benefited the last 3 or 4 years by having larger than 25 recruiting classes.

 

[Skiblets]

It's the wild wild west now in college sports.

 

[uconndogs]

Only a matter of time before the SEC and BiG petition for an increase in the scholarship limit. That will further concentrate the talent pool.

 

[Stinger92860]

Only a matter of time before the SEC and BiG petition for an increase in the scholarship limit. That will further concentrate the talent pool.

They can only play 11 at a time and kids want to play.

 

[uconndogs]

They can only play 11 at a time and kids want to play.

The 85 scholarship limit was put in place years ago to keep larger programs from loading up on kids in an attempt to get as many talented kids into the program as possible and, also to keep talent away from the competition. It was put in place primarily to control costs and level the playing field for smaller programs.

In my opinion, top programs will eventually use their leverage with the NCAA to go back to those days. I think they'll get that and kids will be all the more enticed to give the most competitive programs a whirl given that they can now transfer without sitting out. Large programs will get more talent on campus to assess and thereby concentrate more of the best talent.

Everything is moving to the advantage of the largest and most successful football programs.

 

[Jimdish255]

It's a huge tactical advantage to have more kids on your campus to evaluate. Even if some transfer they've been vetted out and still have to adjust to a completely new environment. Makes it even harder for lower resourced schools to prepare for a season. But didn't Feinbaum rip us for letting a kid go a few years ago? Surely he's vocally against this.

 

[Dizzy21]

The 85 scholarship limit was put in place years ago to keep larger programs from loading up on kids in an attempt to get as many talented kids into the program as possible and, also to keep talent away from the competition. It was put in place primarily to control costs and level the playing field for smaller programs.

In my opinion, top programs will eventually use their leverage with the NCAA to go back to those days. I think they'll get that and kids will be all the more enticed to give the most competitive programs a whirl given that they can now transfer without sitting out. Large programs will get more talent on campus to assess and thereby concentrate more of the best talent.

Everything is moving to the advantage of the largest and most successful football programs.

With the transfer portal they can't hold onto the kids like they used to, so if they load up on kids, those who don't start can just transfer. Before it was a pain to transfer, now it's easy.

 

[uconndogs]

With the transfer portal they can't hold onto the kids like they used to, so if they load up on kids, those who don't start can just transfer. Before it was a pain to transfer, now it's easy.

Exactly. So if the scholarship limit is increased programs will look to bring in as many kids as possible to assess and then essentially cut loose those that don't pan out. Again, that favors the larger more established programs.

 

[Dizzy21]

Exactly. So if the scholarship limit is increased programs will look to bring in as many kids as possible to assess and then essentially cut loose those that don't pan out. Again, that favors the larger more established programs.

For a year maybe, but when Alabama is recruiting a 5* or 4* and doing their evaluation in the fall, the 5*/4* will already see they are double or triple stacked at their position with players they will eventually let go and the recruit would probably decide to choose another team, so then Alabama loses disgruntled really good players into the portal and also the good recruits that would have otherwise gone there.

 

[uconndogs]

For a year maybe, but when Alabama is recruiting a 5* or 4* and doing their evaluation in the fall, the 5*/4* will already see they are double or triple stacked at their position with players they will eventually let go and the recruit would probably decide to choose another team, so then Alabama loses disgruntled really good players into the portal and also the good recruits that would have otherwise gone there.

I think increased scholarship limits gives programs like Alabama an advantage. They can bring as much top talent as they want into the program. Athletes want a shot at playing for the best. Programs like Alabama will then assess and retain the best proven talent. You're right, a lot of kids will then hit the portal, but not the best. As a result, talent will be further concentrated.

I know folks want to believe there will be something resembling parity in college athletics. But, at the top levels with all that is going on exactly the opposite is happening. At this stage I don't think there's anything the NCAA can do about it.

 

[huskymedic]

 

[huskymedic]

-> The NCAA could do away with the 25-man scholarship limit (dubbed "initial counters"), possibly by as soon as the end of this month. <-

-> Some have suggested keeping the 25-man initial counter limit and then moving to a 1-for-1 system on transfers, where each program can add one imPort for each exPort, but it seems a simpler system is set to win out. <-

-> In short, programs can add as many initial counters and transfers as they want, but to limit greyshirting and trap-door cuts, they may not go over 85 scholarships at any one time. Presently, the current rules allow teams to go over 85 scholarships so long as they get to the number by the opening of training camp. <-

If/when it happens… I’m glad we have the current staff/mindset on-board.

 

[huskymedic]

 

[huskymedic]

 

[huskymedic]

 

[huskymedic]

Couple of other notable changes that could effect UConn:

DI Council lifts football signing, initial counter limits for two years - NCAA.org

Division I football teams will not have annual signing and initial counter limits for the next two academic years, the Division I Council decided Wednesday.

www.ncaa.org