This is interesting.

[ROLL TIDE FOREVER AMEN 0]

No matter who you pull for.

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories....004109161&EDATE

[DKW 86 7,440]

I would hope that rhey do increase the scholarship limit, but not to the unmonitored extent they had before. It used to be that they would just stockpile talent and let it waste on the sidelines. That is what I would consider to be a WORST CASE scenario. Keeping a player from playing by recruitinig him and stockpiling him is as bad as it gets and should not be tolerated by anyone. Problem, how do you completely eliminate it? Maybe we just make a rule that if the kids is getting playing time, then he can have a scholarship, say after 10 minutes of playing time in a year.

This is tough, but the stockpiling of talent is the far worse case. It is bad for competition, and really screws a kid over.

PS, I have a friend that wears his SEC Championship ring from He never played one down. I have to ask, why was he even on the team? So another team woud not have him, I guess. Worked out for four years, for nothing. There could be nothing worse for a real athlete.

[quietfan 233]

I'm certainly no barrister, but I don't see how NCAA scholarship limits would be any different than pro salary caps if the NCAA falls under the Sherman Act, and those (salary caps) have survived anti-trust challenges to date.

Certainly it's a victory for anti-NCAA forces if the courts say it falls under anti-trust jurisdiction, but I wouldn't get too excited about this surviving appeal.

Of course, I still lean toward the NCAA as a "representative body controlled by its members" point of view rather than the NCAA as a "out of control evil dictatorship" point of view. Call me naive, but I still believe the member schools can fix all of its purported problems from inside if they'll just get the balls and mutual coordination to vote the reforms and/or fire the incompetents.

[TrueBlue72 0]

If scholarship limits for football were increased, wouldn't it also require an increase in women's scholarships under title IX? That might not be a problem for a major college football power, but it would be very difficult for many mid-majors and lower level 1-A programs.

[Argo 8]

I would hope that rhey do increase the scholarship limit, but not to the unmonitored extent they had before. It used to be that they would just stockpile talent and let it waste on the sidelines. That is what I would consider to be a WORST CASE scenario. Keeping a player from playing by recruitinig him and stockpiling him is as bad as it gets and should not be tolerated by anyone. Problem, how do you completely eliminate it? Maybe we just make a rule that if the kids is getting playing time, then he can have a scholarship, say after 10 minutes of playing time in a year.

This is tough, but the stockpiling of talent is the far worse case. It is bad for competition, and really screws a kid over.

PS, I have a friend that wears his SEC Championship ring from He never played one down.  I have to ask, why was he even on the team? So another team woud not have him, I guess. Worked out for four years, for nothing. There could be nothing worse for a real athlete.

181956[/snapback]

I agree that this was a huge part of the problem before the scholarship limit was put into effect, but I don't think it would be the same as it was years ago. Players today DEMAND starting time, and they will go elsewhere if they don't get it. You won't have players sitting on the bench for entire careers waiting for a chance to start. It just doesn't happen anymore. More and more players today are more about "what can this coach/school do for me" instead of "what can I do for this coach/school." That's why you have players growing up a certain teams fan, but pick a different college to attend because "the coaching style fits my playing style better". It's all about which school will get the player into the NFL the quickest. Keep in mind that I don't think ALL kids have this attitude, but a lot do.....and I'm not looking down at them for it, just stating the way it is. JMO.

[DKW 86 7,440]

I would hope that rhey do increase the scholarship limit, but not to the unmonitored extent they had before. It used to be that they would just stockpile talent and let it waste on the sidelines. That is what I would consider to be a WORST CASE scenario. Keeping a player from playing by recruitinig him and stockpiling him is as bad as it gets and should not be tolerated by anyone. Problem, how do you completely eliminate it? Maybe we just make a rule that if the kids is getting playing time, then he can have a scholarship, say after 10 minutes of playing time in a year.

This is tough, but the stockpiling of talent is the far worse case. It is bad for competition, and really screws a kid over.

PS, I have a friend that wears his SEC Championship ring from He never played one down.  I have to ask, why was he even on the team? So another team woud not have him, I guess. Worked out for four years, for nothing. There could be nothing worse for a real athlete.

181956[/snapback]

I agree that this was a huge part of the problem before the scholarship limit was put into effect, but I don't think it would be the same as it was years ago. Players today DEMAND starting time, and they will go elsewhere if they don't get it. You won't have players sitting on the bench for entire careers waiting for a chance to start. It just doesn't happen anymore. More and more players today are more about "what can this coach/school do for me" instead of "what can I do for this coach/school." That's why you have players growing up a certain teams fan, but pick a different college to attend because "the coaching style fits my playing style better". It's all about which school will get the player into the NFL the quickest. Keep in mind that I don't think ALL kids have this attitude, but a lot do.....and I'm not looking down at them for it, just stating the way it is. JMO.

181969[/snapback]

24, we agree. The real answer I am looking for is how do we kep it from getting bad? I think maybe we put a have to play a certain set of minutes, no matter what, per year. I dont have THE answer, but I would love to see more schollies, but real schollies, not just player hogging by a few schools.