Not enough scholarships | The Boneyard

Not enough scholarships

P

Puertorock43

Joined
Mar 26, 2012
Messages
86
Reaction Score
300
There’s 14 players listed on the roster but isn’t there only 13 scholarships available? Am I missing something?
 
Argonaut said:
Men’s basketball has 13 scholarships, but there are 15 scholarships available for women’s basketball.

So, UConn actually has one remaining.
Expand ...
Now you’ve got me curious. Does anyone know the reason for the disparity? My guess would be that it might be associated with Title IX to better equalize the total number of athletic scholarships available to men and women, but that is just a guess. Men’s football has more than 60 scholarships available and probably creates an imbalance.
 
Forego said:
Now you’ve got me curious. Does anyone know the reason for the disparity? My guess would be that it might be associated with Title IX to better equalize the total number of athletic scholarships available to men and women, but that is just a guess. Men’s football has more than 60 scholarships available and probably creates an imbalance.
Expand ...
FBS football level scholarships are capped at 85. IIRC there is more to IX than that. It's also about opportunities for participation including non-scholarship athletes with training, equipment, coaching. Teams like rowing or lacrosse are designated equivalency sports which means you can break the
scholarships up into halves and such to distribute them on many on larger teams. Baseball, soccer falls into this as well.
 
so does that mean we have only one left to give, so for 2024 if we get Strong we are done, and if we get Koval we are done, cannot get both. Why are people talking about getting 2 or 3 more from 24?
 
.-.
Duncan Idaho said:
FBS football level scholarships are capped at 85. IIRC there is more to IX than that. It's also about opportunities for participation including non-scholarship athletes with training, equipment, coaching. Teams like rowing or lacrosse are designated equivalency sports which means you can break the
scholarships up into halves and such to distribute them on many on larger teams. Baseball, soccer falls into this as well.
Expand ...
Once again, Title IX is not all about athletics, it’s about equality in education and educational activities that receive federal funding. And contrary to some football fans’ opinions, there is no mention of football or trainers or any specifics related to sports. Back before Title IX, girls were excluded from colleges, from clubs, say, debate teams or chess clubs, or other education-related programs, which includes athletics.

Not directed at you @Duncan Idaho because I know you’re a big football fan, but I get tired of hearing football fans talk about Title IX like it was enacted to punish their favorite team.

Title IX protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. Title IX states:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

A recipient institution that receives Department funds must operate its education program or activity in a nondiscriminatory manner free of discrimination based on sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity. Some key issue areas in which recipients have Title IX obligations are: recruitment, admissions, and counseling; financial assistance; athletics; sex-based harassment, which encompasses sexual assault and other forms of sexual violence; treatment of pregnant and parenting students; treatment of LGBTQI+ students; discipline; single-sex education; and employment.

www2.ed.gov

Title IX and Sex Discrimination

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities which receive Federal financial assistance.
www2.ed.gov www2.ed.gov
 
Scholarships could be a wonder if all our seniors decide to get their covid years
 
Ralph said:
so does that mean we have only one left to give, so for 2024 if we get Strong we are done, and if we get Koval we are done, cannot get both. Why are people talking about getting 2 or 3 more from 24?
Expand ...
No, it means 14 scholarships are being used this coming year, 2023-2024. The NCAA is allowing teams to over the maximum number of scholarships because players are taking the Covid season, next year the limit is reimposed

BB71B791-AABF-436A-94F2-730CE23FCE13.jpeg
 
Keep in mind that Athletic Scholarships are the only ones available to students who play sports. Many athletes qualify for Academic Scholarships so they wouldn't be dependent on Athletic money alone. Depending on the sport you will see many who have half of one scholarship that is completed by another type of scholarship.

In today's athletic environment I can't see how a player recruited by the likes of UCONN could possibly have to make a decision based on who has scholarships available for their sport. Money is flowing freely and whether people like it or not UCONN is still King of the Hill in WCBB.
 
Forego said:
Now you’ve got me curious. Does anyone know the reason for the disparity? My guess would be that it might be associated with Title IX to better equalize the total number of athletic scholarships available to men and women, but that is just a guess. Men’s football has more than 60 scholarships available and probably creates an imbalance.
Expand ...
Forego- - - I posted elsewhere that when Title IX came in ALL men's sports were in the mix to compare to women's sports numbers!
Which is stupid since football is a weird sport where 70 to 100 players maybe on the roster and no women's sport compares with those numbers!
Football should be a separate entity, by itself, then compare men's numbers to women's numbers!
That's why smaller men's teams such as: Golf, Tennis, Wrestling, Gymnastics, Volleyball, etc. were cut to equal out the numbers, which was reverse discrimination toward men!
It's a little better now as Congress has improved Title IX!
 
.-.
RSHERMVIKES said:
Forego- - - I posted elsewhere that when Title IX came in ALL men's sports were in the mix to compare to women's sports numbers!
Which is stupid since football is a weird sport where 70 to 100 players maybe on the roster and no women's sport compares with those numbers!
Football should be a separate entity, by itself, then compare men's numbers to women's numbers!
That's why smaller men's teams such as: Golf, Tennis, Wrestling, Gymnastics, Volleyball, etc. were cut to equal out the numbers, which was reverse discrimination toward men!
It's a little better now as Congress has improved Title IX!
Expand ...
An institution receiving federal funds needs to devote as much money and resources to females as it does to males, period. It doesn’t matter if it’s the football team, marching band, math class, academic scholarships, or administration. Separating football changes nothing because Title IX isn’t about sports, it’s about equal opportunities for males and females.

If universities want to avoid the football scholarship issue, they should all get rid of University-sponsored teams and let the NCAA set up a semi-pro league.
 
HuskyNan said:
No, it means 14 scholarships are being used this coming year, 2023-2024. The NCAA is allowing teams to over the maximum number of scholarships because players are taking the Covid season, next year the limit is reimposed

View attachment 89193
Expand ...

Are they? I thought it was only for 1 year.
 
RSHERMVIKES said:
Forego- - - I posted elsewhere that when Title IX came in ALL men's sports were in the mix to compare to women's sports numbers!
Which is stupid since football is a weird sport where 70 to 100 players maybe on the roster and no women's sport compares with those numbers!
Football should be a separate entity, by itself, then compare men's numbers to women's numbers!
That's why smaller men's teams such as: Golf, Tennis, Wrestling, Gymnastics, Volleyball, etc. were cut to equal out the numbers, which was reverse discrimination toward men!
It's a little better now as Congress has improved Title IX!
Expand ...
Seriously?
 
HuskyNan said:
An institution receiving federal funds needs to devote as much money and resources to females as it does to males, period. It doesn’t matter if it’s the football team, marching band, math class, academic scholarships, or administration. Separating football changes nothing because Title IX isn’t about sports, it’s about equal opportunities for males and females.

If universities want to avoid the football scholarship issue, they should all get rid of University-sponsored teams and let the NCAA set up a semi-pro league.
Expand ...
I was not aware that Title IX extends far beyond an institution of higher learning’s althletic scholarships. I simply viewed men’s and women’s basketball as equivalent athletic programs and did not understand why they did not have an equivalent number of scholarships. I was aware that football has the largest number of athletic scholarships at UConn and was wondering if that had anything to do with the fact that the men’s team had fewer scholarships. Thank you for the Title IX explanation. It’s always a good day when i learn something
 
HuskyNan said:
No, it means 14 scholarships are being used this coming year, 2023-2024. The NCAA is allowing teams to over the maximum number of scholarships because players are taking the Covid season, next year the limit is reimposed

View attachment 89193
Expand ...


I don't believe that is correct. The NCAA allowed extra scholarships the first year after covid messed up the season. But after that, teams were required to go back to the normal limit.
 
stamfordhusky said:
I don't believe that is correct. The NCAA allowed extra scholarships the first year after covid messed up the season. But after that, teams were required to go back to the normal limit.
Expand ...
It looks like you’re right. Sorry for the confusion
 
.-.
I sure wouldn't want to be the 15th scholarship player on this coming year's team............:(
 
HuskyNan said:
An institution receiving federal funds needs to devote as much money and resources to females as it does to males, period. It doesn’t matter if it’s the football team, marching band, math class, academic scholarships, or administration. Separating football changes nothing because Title IX isn’t about sports, it’s about equal opportunities for males and females.

If universities want to avoid the football scholarship issue, they should all get rid of University-sponsored teams and let the NCAA set up a semi-pro league.
Expand ...
HuskyNan- - The first 5 to 6 years Title IX was initiated the lady in charge went before congress and insisted that the numbers jibe, women must have the same number athletes as men so Colleges such as USC, UCLA, ND, and at least 3 southern schools etc. dropped men's sports such as Wrestling to get the numbers closer! It took Congress about 5-6 years to realize eliminating Men's sports wasn't equal! But many Colleges didn't return the smaller men's teams!
One year after I graduated the MO College I wrestled at dropped the sport for Title IX reasons! They just reinstated Wrestling this past year!
I am sure of this because when I started coaching Wrestling in MO I would get letters from the National Wrestling Coaching Association to write Congressmen about this problem asking for it to be fixed!
 
Is the scholarship limit 13 for all men's basketball teams in general? I think UConn lost some scholarships due to past sanctions, but that may have affected only prior years.
 
Wbb should be cut to 13 scholarships and the two leftovers should be given to softball.

BB 15 scholarships for 5 starter. 3 deep. Full rides.
SB 12 scholarships for 9 starters. Less than two deep. Very few players get a full ride.

Same is true for mbb/baseball.

What value do the 14th and 15TH players bring to a bb roster?
 
Last edited:
HuskyNan said:
Once again, Title IX is not all about athletics, it’s about equality in education and educational activities that receive federal funding. And contrary to some football fans’ opinions, there is no mention of football or trainers or any specifics related to sports. Back before Title IX, girls were excluded from colleges, from clubs, say, debate teams or chess clubs, or other education-related programs, which includes athletics.

Not directed at you @Duncan Idaho because I know you’re a big football fan, but I get tired of hearing football fans talk about Title IX like it was enacted to punish their favorite team.

Title IX protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities that receive federal financial assistance. Title IX states:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

A recipient institution that receives Department funds must operate its education program or activity in a nondiscriminatory manner free of discrimination based on sex, including sexual orientation and gender identity. Some key issue areas in which recipients have Title IX obligations are: recruitment, admissions, and counseling; financial assistance; athletics; sex-based harassment, which encompasses sexual assault and other forms of sexual violence; treatment of pregnant and parenting students; treatment of LGBTQI+ students; discipline; single-sex education; and employment.

www2.ed.gov

Title IX and Sex Discrimination

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 protects people from discrimination based on sex in education programs or activities which receive Federal financial assistance.
www2.ed.gov www2.ed.gov
Expand ...
Yes , it is a civil rights law.
 
.-.
visitingcock said:
Wbb should be cut to 13 scholarships and the two leftovers should be given to softball.

BB 15 scholarships for 5 starter. 3 deep. Full rides.
SB 12 scholarships for 9 starters. Less than two deep. Very few players get a full ride.

Same is true for mbb/baseball.

What value do the 14th and 15TH players bring to a bb roster?
Expand ...
Injury insurance? Losses to Transfers insurance? Diamond in the rough? (a hidden gem with potential, needing time?)
It the 14th or 15th player chooses to transfer = they can exercise their choice!
 
What if Paige used the extra year for Covid, then the following season applied to to use her medical redshirt year? That could push her out to Ines' year. IS there anything that states when the Covid year has to be used? Her Medical Redshirt year should not effect her ability to get that extra year. And if her NIL is more profitable than going in the the WNBA immediately... why not? Could you imagine the records she could set....
 
01Neaggrad02 said:
What if Paige used the extra year for Covid, then the following season applied to to use her medical redshirt year? That could push her out to Ines' year. IS there anything that states when the Covid year has to be used? Her Medical Redshirt year should not effect her ability to get that extra year. And if her NIL is more profitable than going in the the WNBA immediately... why not? Could you imagine the records she could set....
Expand ...
If Paige waited 1 or more years to use her covid year, after it is all over, she could apply for social security.
 
HuskyNan said:
No, it means 14 scholarships are being used this coming year, 2023-2024. The NCAA is allowing teams to over the maximum number of scholarships because players are taking the Covid season, next year the limit is reimposed

View attachment 89193
Expand ...
Ice and Ayanna have grown an inch, perhaps Azzi has grown 2 inches and Caroline has lost an inch?
 
01Neaggrad02 said:
What if Paige used the extra year for Covid, then the following season applied to to use her medical redshirt year? That could push her out to Ines' year. IS there anything that states when the Covid year has to be used? Her Medical Redshirt year should not effect her ability to get that extra year. And if her NIL is more profitable than going in the the WNBA immediately... why not? Could you imagine the records she could set....
Expand ...
It doesn't work like that. The "Covid Year" simply extended eligibility by essentially stating that one season just didn't count. They received an extra year to complete their "4 seasons in 5 years" allotment, so essentially 4 seasons not counting the Covid year in 6 seasons, as I understand it. We have discussed this on the board in the past, it seems to be confusing, but I do know it is separate from her medical redshirt. That typically is to be used within the (normal) 5 years allotment, which is why historically some athletes were granted a 6th season to complete their 4 years playing eligibility because they had injuries in 2 seasons or had to sit out (or whatever the NCAA deemed a reason).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,189
Messages
4,556,184
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom