OK so I read the article. His point is obvious - he thinks it is unfair that there are unfilled scholarships that could go to someone "who would be happy to sit on the bench to have their expenses paid". He is claiming it is a disservice to female athletes in general - hence the suggestion of giving them to another sport (not happening, obviously).
At the same time, he is disingenuous, since the issue of "depth" isn't related to the number of players - it is related to the quality of them.
