Potential 1 year waiver for the 25 man limit in the 2022 Class

[W.E.D 11,070]

This is good for us b/c we need to take like 50 OL in the transfer portal

 

 

 

[Paladin 3,305]

Sources: NCAA Moving Closer to an Immediate Expansion of Signing Class Limit

BY ROSS DELLENGER , AUG 20, 2021

College football signing classes are expected to soon grow in size.

NCAA officials are moving closer to an immediate expansion of the annual 25-person signing limit as a way for coaches to replace players they’ve lost to the burgeoning transfer portal. The NCAA Division I Football Oversight Committee is finalizing a proposal that would change the signing limit this cycle in what’s being described as a one-year waiver of relief until a permanent policy is created.

Multiple officials spoke to Sports Illustrated under the condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of ongoing deliberations on the proposals.

A compromise is finally emerging among a group of proposals. Under the plan, schools can sign 25 new players while gaining additional signee spots for every player who transfers out of their program—up to a certain limit. The extra spots would be based on the number of players who enter the transfer portal under their own volition and would be capped at a figure, such as seven.

For instance, a school that loses five players to the portal can sign 30 new players. A school that loses 10 players to the portal can sign 32 new signees, if the cap were seven. The replacement cap has not been finalized.

In fact, other proposals are being discussed as well, including one that simply increases the total signees to 30, 32 or 35. Another proposal, still being vetted, would require a school to use its 25 spots on high school players and would give a school an additional five to seven spots for transfers.

The impetus for immediate action on the topic is a result of policy changes that are leaving—and will leave—many schools well short of the overall 85 scholarship limit. While schools are limited to having 85 scholarship players a year, they are restricted to signing 25 players in a single class. The 100 signees over four years leaves a 15-player wiggle room for natural attrition.

However, there is more movement in the sport than ever before because of a rule change that grants athletes the right to transfer once without penalty. The transfer surge combined with name, image and likeness is resulting in another disturbing trend: coaches steering their recruiting away from the high school level and toward the portal.

Meanwhile, rosters are in for a critical makeover next year, when two classes—as many as 40 players—exit because of a COVID-19-inspired rule granting each athlete an extra year of eligibility.

Officials believe the solution is offering coaches more signee spots, hoping they will use them to both recruit the high school circuit more and to consistently remain near the 85 mark.

“We want to maintain the ability to recruit high school players,” says Todd Berry, the executive director of the American Football Coaches Association. “If we don’t have any corrective legislation, people aren’t going to do that. We’re trying to maintain high school recruitment and make sure universities hard hit by losses to the transfer portal are O.K.”

Proposals were brought before the Oversight Committee last week and then socialized among the conferences this week. The committee meets Thursday to further discuss the topic and potentially approve an immediate move.

It’s a somewhat stunning turn of events. The waiver would expand the 2022 signing class—which coaches are in the midst of amassing—four months before the early-signing period starts.

But not everyone agrees with the proposals. The annual signing limit in football has for years been an argumentative issue. It was originally implemented to disincentivize the trend of coaches cutting or pushing out scholarship players in an effort to over-sign high school players or transfers.

Earlier this year, West Virginia athletic director Shane Lyons and other administrators expressed concern that replacing departures with additional signee spots will “repeat history.” They believe that coaches will exploit the change by pushing out players to create an additional spot for more talented athletes—a reason for the cap on replacements.

However, in the compromise proposal, schools can replace only players who leave for the transfer portal on their own. Schools would not be able to gain additional spots for players dismissed from a team, pushed out by coaches or those who leave early for the NFL draft.

In a policy proposed by the AFCA, similar to the compromise plan, only those players who enter the transfer portal after the first day of the February signing period can be replaced. Schools would have to replace them by the time camp starts. They would not carry over to the next class.

That timing is still under discussion and some of these concepts have been met with scrutiny. For instance, asks one athletic director, who is to determine exactly why a player has left? In order to amass additional spots, will coaches convince departing players who they have pushed out to lie to compliance staff?

“Is there a possibility of that happening? Yes,” says Berry, “but players who are run off are usually not happy. They’ll come in and tell compliance ‘They kicked me off the team.’”

Officials are hoping the additional spots result in coaches steering their recruiting back to the high school level. Some coaches have stated publicly that they’re holding as many as half of their classes for transfers, adversely impacting high school and junior college recruiting.

“When you start looking at where we’re headed with the transfer portal, there are two ways of looking at it,” Minnesota coach P.J. Fleck told SI in the spring. “The first singing day is like the draft. The second part is free agency, and that’s the transfer portal. You’ll see less and less people signing 25 high school kids.”

The portal is overflowing with players, many of them with nowhere to go. In SI research for a story this past spring, the average Power 5 program had 8.5 scholarship players in the portal, while the average Group of 5 squad had 6.3.

Portal hunting comes at a cost, hurting overall numbers. Not only does a transfer punish his own school by leaving an empty scholarship spot, but he’s using one of the precious 25-signee spots at his new school despite, many times, not having a full four years of eligibility remaining.

Jon Steinbrecher, commissioner of the MAC, said in the spring that the 25-player limit needs a “hard look” because of the concern that teams will not consistently fill all 85 of their scholarship spots given the transfer movement. That is a concern from a host of college athletic administrators and coaches.

“It’s going to be hard for teams to have 85 when the season starts,” says Pat Chun, the Washington State athletic director.

[fredst 9,064]

I think this has potential to hurt us as much as help. Those guys that are borderline “takes” for a school could get taken just to keep them from going elsewhere, ie E. Harris 

[toddc 13,194]

3 hours ago, fredst said:

I think this has potential to hurt us as much as help. Those guys that are borderline “takes” for a school could get taken just to keep them from going elsewhere, ie E. Harris 

Buzz kill. Just when I had hope you ripped from my hands with your logic. 😝 

[SumterAubie 3,031]

4 hours ago, fredst said:

I think this has potential to hurt us as much as help. Those guys that are borderline “takes” for a school could get taken just to keep them from going elsewhere, ie E. Harris 

Right. This was a yearly thing  for bamr under the old drunk. They would offer a scholarship to a player just to keep him attneding Auburn, Tennessee, whomever.

Edited August 21, 2021 by SumterAubie

[fredst 9,064]

36 minutes ago, toddc said:

Buzz kill. Just when I had hope you ripped from my hands with your logic. 😝 

I know 😔I have confidence in our staff but those guys that might fall to us just because of a number crunch elsewhere might not with something like this

[Mikey 16,605]

This whole roster limit/signee limit/ transfer portal situation has the feel of a car that's fish tailing on a slippery road. Every time the wheel is turned to correct the slide, the next skid is worse. The NCAA fixed something that wasn't broke and now they don't have a solution to the problems they caused.

[W.E.D 11,070]

On 8/20/2021 at 4:24 PM, fredst said:

I think this has potential to hurt us as much as help. Those guys that are borderline “takes” for a school could get taken just to keep them from going elsewhere, ie E. Harris 

They'd still have to deal with the 85, so it's not like they can just take everyone. 

The portal would probably help us more than HS kids. We really need to fill out our OL roster.

[Zeek 16,650]

20 hours ago, Mikey said:

This whole roster limit/signee limit/ transfer portal situation has the feel of a car that's fish tailing on a slippery road. Every time the wheel is turned to correct the slide, the next skid is worse. The NCAA fixed something that wasn't broke and now they don't have a solution to the problems they caused.

Well said Mikey. They really have no clue what they're doing or where to go from here. Honestly it seems like there should be a different limit for transfers vs high school signees. It's honestly hard to figure out something that doesn't end up screwing someone over.

[Paladin 3,305]

 

[Paladin 3,305]

 

[Gowebb11 9,326]

Odds that Bama has at least 7 guys enter the portal soon? 😅

[Mikey 16,605]

NCAA grasping at straws. They have lost most of their power anyway. The NIL ruling took care of that.

[McLoofus 35,182]

18 hours ago, Gowebb11 said:

Odds that Bama has at least 7 guys enter the portal soon? 😅

Gonna be the case with every power program. 

*****

^Page break to denote that I'm no longer directly addressing Gowebb^

I'm glad that at least some people are comfortable with continuing to tweak and adjust to get it right rather than avoid needed change just because it's hard and scary. I've noticed that a lot of folks are very uncomfortable with and frightened by change, and just assume that ongoing improvement signifies ignorance and uncertainty. That's so strange to me. Like, when did we stop wanting to improve? Every time something changes it's the end of college football for some of y'all.

Just glad the invention of the forward pass didn't happen in the internet age. Some of y'all would've burned your Depends in protest. 

[USATiger 741]

On 8/20/2021 at 4:24 PM, fredst said:

I think this has potential to hurt us as much as help. Those guys that are borderline “takes” for a school could get taken just to keep them from going elsewhere, ie E. Harris 

Glad I read the whole thread before posting.  This is my concern as well.  We may not like to admit it, but we have benefited with some wonderful players that only ended up with us because Georgia and Alabama were full of higher ranked kids.  This will hurt us as its like what the Bahr did, sign kids you won't and those you don't want going to Auburn