We're at 105

[Palatine]

70 recruits/portal entries. 35 retained from last year. No new player (scholarship or walk on) can join unless someone leaves or is dismissed. We might find someone we want that didn't get a chair when the music stopped. If so, we have to juggle the roster.

 

[huskymedic]

70 recruits/portal entries. 35 retained from last year. No new player (scholarship or walk on) can join unless someone leaves or is dismissed. We might find someone we want that didn't get a chair when the music stopped. If so, we have to juggle the roster.

Nah… looks like they have till the end of summer before finalizing the roster for this upcoming year and there is a little latitude for grandfathering in a limited number of “designated student athletes” this year.

Question No. C1: When must Participating Institutions be in compliance with new roster limits (see Bylaw 17.2)?

Answer: Beginning in the 2025-26 academic year, for fall sports, Participating Institutions must be at or below the roster limits no later than the end of the calendar day before the first date of competition that counts for championships selection in the relevant sport.

For winter and spring sports, Participating Institutions must be at or below the roster limits no later than December 1 or the end of the calendar day before the first contest that counts for championships selection in the relevant sport, whichever is earlier.

Participating Institutions should remain at or below the relevant roster limit for the remainder of the academic year or until the end of the team’s playing season, whichever is later. The team’s playing season as mentioned in this section shall include
postseason competition.

A sport at a Participating Institution may exceed the Division I and conference roster limits by the number of Designated Student-Athletes included on the submitted roster. See Question Nos. C12 through 16 for information on Designated Student-Athletes. <-

 

[Palatine]

Just going by this. NCAA Division I FBS: 105 players is the new maximum roster cap. All players up to this limit can receive a scholarship.

 

[Exit 4]

Medic has it correct (of course!). Players on the roster prior to April 2025 and/or were recruited prior to April 2025 are exempt from the cap while the remain at their current school.

2026 will be a transition year and we can expect a final roster that is in the 105-115 type range.

Frankly, I think this rule needs further adjustment. 105 is too restrictive to run a proper 4 deep and maintain smart depth at QB and with kickers under a system with one portal window annually.

 

[Palatine]

Medic has it correct (of course!). Players on the roster prior to April 2025 and/or were recruited prior to April 2025 are exempt from the cap while the remain at their current school.

2026 will be a transition year and we can expect a final roster that is in the 105-115 type range.

Frankly, I think this rule needs further adjustment. 105 is too restrictive to run a proper 4 deep and maintain smart depth at QB and with kickers under a system with one portal window annually.

I preferred 85 scholarships. This larger scholarship number allows the rich and powerful to stack their rosters with talent they don't need or use, while keeping them away from schools that could narrow the talent gap. It's great for Alabama and Ohio State and bad for the rest of college football.

 

[ZooCougar]

I preferred 85 scholarships. This larger scholarship number allows the rich and powerful to stack their rosters with talent they don't need or use, while keeping them away from schools that could narrow the talent gap. It's great for Alabama and Ohio State and bad for the rest of college football.

The portal and the opportunity to play mitigates that, but I also hate the portal.

I agree that 85 was better.

 

[giddyup]

The Good - The new model proven by Indiana is anybody compete.
The Bad - the competition is who can spend more to buy kids
The Ugly - these are not student athletes and we are living in a farce..

 

[Palatine]

The portal and the opportunity to play mitigates that, but I also hate the portal.

I agree that 85 was better.

That's why I said "rich" and powerful. The rich can horde even more talent now with 105 scholarships. The portal makes it worse.

85 scholarship spreads the talent around.

 

[mikedog10]

The Good - The new model proven by Indiana is anybody compete.
The Bad - the competition is who can spend more to buy kids
The Ugly - these are not student athletes and we are living in a farce..

The competition is was always who can spend more to buy kids. They used to do it under the table, now they have to do it by the books.

Everyone is playing by the same rules now. I think this change is favorable to schools like UConn, that didn’t already have a vast black market of donors. Connecticut was founded by colonial lawyers, acing this type of thing is in our blood.

 

[huskymedic]

That's why I said "rich" and powerful. The rich can horde even more talent now with 105 scholarships. The portal makes it worse.

85 scholarship spreads the talent around.

… But remember the roster was set @ 125-ish previously. So it was 85 Scholarship and the ability to carry/stash another 40 kids. Now it’s 105 kids all in. I would think UConn can fund 105 scholarships moving forward on current success trajectory. Agree 105 could be a bit higher

 

[gioff2323]

The 2d HS signing window closes in ~2 weeks. I’m sort of expecting more signings there.

 

[FightOnCT]

The competition is was always who can spend more to buy kids. They used to do it under the table, now they have to do it by the books.

Everyone is playing by the same rules now. I think this change is favorable to schools like UConn, that didn’t already have a vast black market of donors. Connecticut was founded by colonial lawyers, acing this type of thing is in our blood.

I think the change is favorable to UConn because we have more money than the vast majority of the G5 and with revenue share on top of that, it’s probably not as far as you’d think from a low-end P4.

Players know UConn is viable now. If Candle can get the train rolling year 1, it will only get better.

 

[TheDude]

I preferred 85 scholarships. This larger scholarship number allows the rich and powerful to stack their rosters with talent they don't need or use, while keeping them away from schools that could narrow the talent gap. It's great for Alabama and Ohio State and bad for the rest of college football.

No it doesn't if players are buried deep they just enter the portal. Things have changed.

 

[Kolumbo]

That's why I said "rich" and powerful. The rich can horde even more talent now with 105 scholarships. The portal makes it worse.

85 scholarship spreads the talent around.

I don't like the portal volume but at least it gives the kids options. Choose to be (or be relegated to) the 4th stringer on a major player or transfer to a lower P4 or G6, start and put up big numbers. I don't know how much the backups make on Ohio State, probably a lot, but it's much better to transfer and play.

 

[WestCoastHusky]

They need to put in some kind of salary cap type of system to keep things somewhat under control. They also need to take into consideration NILs so there aren't many loopholes.

Most kids just want to play, and some will take less money just to play vs. being buried as a 4th stringer on a team. UConn can definitely compete in this new era. I believe coach Candle can get us there.

If Indiana can do it, why not us? The state of CT can certainly get enough money to put coach Candle put together a good P4 caliber roster.

 

[DoctorWho85]

General question 70 is massive for a recruiting class both portal and high school signings. We have to have one of the largest in the cycle.

 

[gioff2323]

General question 70 is massive for a recruiting class both portal and high school signings. We have to have one of the largest in the cycle.

tOSU lost 30 kids to portal, plus graduation/draft. It’s the new reality, although we all understand that more happens when hc leaves.

I like candles approach of minimizing 1 and doners this cycle.

 

[AllHusky]

He is counting on rapid development and adaptation to a new school and system(for non Toledo typres)

 

[BlueandOG]

The Good - The new model proven by Indiana is anybody compete.
The Bad - the competition is who can spend more to buy kids
The Ugly - these are not student athletes and we are living in a farce..

I love this format. I'll try:

The Good - The new model benefits schools that are willing to pay, and UConn fans are willing.
The Bad - The attitude of our guys when the other teams look down on them for not being in a power conference.
The Ugly - The beating our guys are going to put on the other teams next year.

 

[Palatine]

No it doesn't if players are buried deep they just enter the portal. Things have changed.

That's just the rich cutting off the bottom of their rosters while they raid the best of the rest (the poorer teams) to fill out their bench. More scholarships per team means the rich get richer.

Look at UConn our best players moved to the B10. We picked up the bottom of B10 talent they let leave. No one left the B10 who was getting paid B10 money.

 

[Alum1620]

That's just the rich cutting off the bottom of their rosters while they raid the best of the rest (the poorer teams) to fill out their bench. More scholarships per team means the rich get richer.

Look at UConn our best players moved to the B10. We picked up the bottom of B10 talent they let leave. No one left the B10 who was getting paid B10 money.

And we have seen the opposite as Mora when he was here complained about 85 as not enough to fill out the program

 

[FightOnCT]

That's just the rich cutting off the bottom of their rosters while they raid the best of the rest (the poorer teams) to fill out their bench. More scholarships per team means the rich get richer.

Look at UConn our best players moved to the B10. We picked up the bottom of B10 talent they let leave. No one left the B10 who was getting paid B10 money.

On the one hand, this is entirely correct in theory.

On the other hand, Skyler Bell

 

[Palatine]

On the one hand, this is entirely correct in theory.

On the other hand, Skyler Bell

It's a good point. But even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then. The bottom line is the golden rule. "He who has the gold rules." They system will always favor the rich.

 

[Woof 101]

It's a good point. But even a blind squirrel finds an acorn every now and then. The bottom line is the golden rule. "He who has the gold rules." They system will always favor the rich.

Such a keen sense of the obvious. An enlightening observation on the topic.

Most kids just want to play, and some will take less money just to play vs. being buried as a 4th stringer on a team. UConn can definitely compete in this new era. I believe coach Candle can get us there.

If Indiana can do it, why not us? The state of CT can certainly get enough money to put coach Candle put together a good P4 caliber roster.

Not sure how to respond, just like above where are these dreams coming from? Indiana has Mark Cuban the billionaire that supports his school. UConn has donors but nothing like that. So far our best players have followed the money elsewhere.
I have seats that require a donation that help the situation. No attack but you mention us a couple of times you donating to the cause? Bless you if you are... Go Huskies...

 

[Palatine]

Such a keen sense of the obvious. An enlightening observation on the topic.

Just keeping it real.