Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 27 to 39 of 63
  1. #27
    BamaNation All-American Florida Tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    4,449
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Mood
    GameFace on TideFans.com

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Quote Originally Posted by GulfCoastTider View Post
    Y'all are fixin' to either (1) incur the wrath of Earle or (2) get this thread moved to the non sports forum.

    I'm not a fan of removing scholarship limitations. There are smaller schools with limited resources that should have an opportunity to sign quality players. I am a fan of restoring the 105 scholly limit because that would give kids more opportunities to get scholarships.

    Trying to force things through bureaucratic tinkering doesn't work and it hasn't worked in college football. Not. One. Bit. The OP demonstrated this by explaining that the same programs who won before 1994 have won after 1994. There's no reason to think that it won't change. The guys with the resources to game the system always will. As it was in the beginning, is now and ever shall be, world without end, Amen.

    Eventually, the guys with the resources will throw up their hands and say that the NCAA model is no longer working. It will lead to the creation of a new league, with perhaps 40-80 big time college programs who leave the NCAA and make their own TV deals.

    The business of America is business. And college football ain't never been more business than it is now. The people who try to restrict business will be gotten around one way or another.
    I agree with EVERYTING you said here.

  2. Advertisement
  3. #28
    BamaNation First Team
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    869
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    It is not politics. Title IX was the ruling of the U.S. Federal Courts. Football skews the EXPENSE numbers. It is not about the mountians of money being made in college football. It is about Title IX requiring equal amounts to be spent on women's rowing, bowling, gymnastics, soccer, and the other women's sport out there. Since football has 85 scholarships with very expensive equipment and facilities, it will always be the easiest target to cut by limiting scholarships. Every dollar/scholarship cut in football helps every athletic department losing money to cut epenses X 2 by reducing an equal amount on the women's side. Bet the ranch that athletic departments losing money will vote to reduce football scholarships every opportunity provided them. The recent success of the SEC in winning NC's will only make it happen quicker. Whether you agree or disagree, but I sincerely believe they will be limited to 65 in most of our lifetimes.

  4. #29
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,686
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Mood
    GameFace on TideFans.com
    Thread Starter

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Quote Originally Posted by GulfCoastTider View Post
    Y'all are fixin' to either (1) incur the wrath of Earle or (2) get this thread moved to the non sports forum.
    What is the difference?


  5. #30
    BamaNation First Team Im_on_dsp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Canton, GA
    Posts
    573
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Quote Originally Posted by RedStar View Post
    You said "Before the reduction, CPB used to sign people just so no one else could have them." There's no other way to read that other than the way you intended. No coach has the power to sign kids against their will. Recruits are free to sign wherever they want. If they want to attend Alabama as an 8th string LB, then who am I to disagree? It's certainly not the NCAA's duty to tell kid where to go.?
    I still don't see how your getting to the someone being forced to sign. They've always been free to sign where they want. I'm sure every one of those boys that signed scholarships 86 thru 105 were absolutely tickled pink to be going to Alabama and playing for the best coach of all time. However, having signed that scholarship with Alabama they were taken off the market for everyone else. If I had 105 scholarships I might be willing to sign a marginal player just to keep Auburn from getting them. That's what I was saying and that's exactly what the Alabama's, Oklahomas, Nebraskas did back in the 70's.

    Quote Originally Posted by RedStar View Post
    Not angry at all. Why does every other thread devolve into this? Just because two people disagree doesn't mean anger has to be involved. I've got no issue with someone holding a separate viewpoint from mine, just as I assume you don't. I've always thought that was the entire point of a message board anyway. To have a discussion. Seems like that's what we're doing, no?
    It is, but being snarky shouldn't be a part of it.

    Quote Originally Posted by RedStar View Post
    Boosters can donate at their will, and we've seen that before. If a Booster wants to donate a few million to have a locker room named after him, then that's exactly what's done. (The Fail Room) If a soccer donor wants to earmark their contribution to the soccer program, than that's done too. I don't even understand the point in bringing that into the discussion. Boosters have absolutely nothing to do with the original conversation.
    Boosters do have something to do with the original conversation because it all revolves around money and BOOSTERS = CASH$. And FWIW, I don't think there is a check-box on the form when you donate to only send the money to soccer, football, etc. When you donate to the Athletic Dept they spend your money as they see fit. More money spent on football means 1) more money that now has to be spent on women's sports and 2) less money for other men's sports. Other men's sports don't "carry their weight" because they don't generate revenue and never will. I guess we should do away with them.

  6. #31
    BamaNation All-American mikes12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Posts
    2,884
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Quote Originally Posted by Im_on_dsp View Post
    Boosters do have something to do with the original conversation because it all revolves around money and BOOSTERS = CASH$. And FWIW, I don't think there is a check-box on the form when you donate to only send the money to soccer, football, etc. When you donate to the Athletic Dept they spend your money as they see fit. More money spent on football means 1) more money that now has to be spent on women's sports and 2) less money for other men's sports. Other men's sports don't "carry their weight" because they don't generate revenue and never will. I guess we should do away with them.
    If the donors don't see their donations going where they want it to go, the donations will dry up.

  7. #32
    BamaNation Hall of Fame selmaborntidefan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2000
    Location
    Dallas, TX
    Posts
    7,666
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Mood
    GameFace on TideFans.com

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    I don't know enough about it but here's what I do know - we need to cut the FBS in half, have four 16-team conferences, and a four-team playoff using a Top 20, not 25.

    Whatever does that would be fine. However, the bowls won't let that happen.
    :13

  8. #33
    BamaNation All-American B1GTide's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,154
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Mood
    Relaxed on TideFans.com

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Quote Originally Posted by Im_on_dsp View Post
    Other men's sports don't "carry their weight" because they don't generate revenue and never will. I guess we should do away with them.
    Along with any women's sports that do not have sufficient fan support to survive on their own. Individual schools should decide these things, not some external agenda.

  9. #34
    BamaNation First Team
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    869
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Most large donations to the athletic department are earmarked or to a specific giving opportunity. Obviously, football gets the majority, but not all athletic department donations are directed to the football program. Tennis Coach Jenny Mainz has done an incredible job in coaching as well as fund raising to build facilities. Our tennis facilities are some of the best in the country as a result of earmarked tennis donations. Coach Pat Murphy has done the same with the softball program and the softball faciities. If you ever have an opportunity to hear Pat speak, you will understand why. No coach on campus has done a better job of building a program than Coach Murphy. He used to call it "selling the vision" and he was the best at it.

    Selma, How did you mean using the "Top 20 and not the Top 25" in a 4 team playoff? It may come to 4 sixteen team conferences but breaking away from the NCAA to form any other entity the mind of man can imagine DOES NOT change the court ordered enforcement of Title IX.
    For the record, I am a traditionalist and don't favor a playoff beyond what is now scheduled for the BCS. Alabama has a strong fan base that faithfully travels with the Crimson Tide but even the planned 4 team playoff has me concerned. My concern is that playoffs become a made-for- tv production and lose some of the fan game day experience which is expensive enough for fans. Ask yourself this question: How many fans would have been at South Beach drinking $34 poolside margaritas if it had been a semifinal game with the actual NC Game scheduled the following weekend in Pasadena? More than likely most would have made the choice of one game or the other. I could see the BCS NCG becoming like the SuperBowl where sponsors take practically all of the tickets and fans are left at home. Sure the money is enticing but I would hate to see the regular season game day excitement replaced, or diminished, by playoffs.
    Off topic, sorry. But the fact athletic departments will always be forced to comply with Title IX, or lose tax paying funding for the universities, is an absolute fact....regardless of how much money is generated through college football.

  10. #35
    BamaNation First Team AgentAntiOrange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Norman, OK
    Posts
    575
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Mood
    Suspicious on TideFans.com

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Quote Originally Posted by Capstone46 View Post
    Ask yourself this question: How many fans would have been at South Beach drinking $34 poolside margaritas if it had been a semifinal game with the actual NC Game scheduled the following weekend in Pasadena?
    It will be painful but eventually the entire bowl system needs to be removed. Playoff games should be seeded and played at higher seeds home field. Championship games could be played at rotating southern and domed sites like the SB.
    Be Good Or Be Gone

    I just put them on the coffee table for recruits to look at
    -Coach Saban when asked if he wears his championship rings.

    'Im sorry, folks outside of SEC country, but a few facts are incontrovertible. They smoke better barbecue than you. Their women are prettier than your women. They play football better than your schools play football.
    -Andy Stiles, Sports Illustrated, after the 42-14 beat down of ND

  11. #36
    BamaNation First Team
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Posts
    869
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    I could not disagree more. Div I college football regular season games would suffer if playoffs followed the way of the lower divisions playoffs. Off topic -but none of this impacts scholarship limits.
    Bowls or no bowls, fans would have extreme difficulty traveling coast to coast on one week's notice.

  12. #37
    BamaNation All-SEC
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Dayton, Ohio
    Posts
    1,984
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Quote Originally Posted by RedStar View Post
    You said "Before the reduction, CPB used to sign people just so no one else could have them." There's no other way to read that other than the way you intended. No coach has the power to sign kids against their will. Recruits are free to sign wherever they want. If they want to attend Alabama as an 8th string LB, then who am I to disagree? It's certainly not the NCAA's duty to tell kid where to go.
    Not angry at all. Why does every other thread devolve into this? Just because two people disagree doesn't mean anger has to be involved. I've got no issue with someone holding a separate viewpoint from mine, just as I assume you don't. I've always thought that was the entire point of a message board anyway. To have a discussion. Seems like that's what we're doing, no?

    And nowhere in any of my statements did I even remotely insinuate that all I wanted Alabama to have was a football program. There's nothing even remotely close to that. I've probably been to more Alabama basketball games than I have Alabama football games. Boosters can donate at their will, and we've seen that before. If a Booster wants to donate a few million to have a locker room named after him, then that's exactly what's done. (The Fail Room) If a soccer donor wants to earmark their contribution to the soccer program, than that's done too. I don't even understand the point in bringing that into the discussion. Boosters have absolutely nothing to do with the original conversation.

    I'll ask the question again since it hasn't been answered. Why should it be football's responsibility to carry the other sports?
    ..simple, because football drives revenue at most schools...others are not revenue generators.

  13. #38
    BamaNation Hall of Fame RedStar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Shoals, AL
    Posts
    8,976
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Mood
    GameFace on TideFans.com

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Quote Originally Posted by bamafaninOhiO View Post
    ..simple, because football drives revenue at most schools...others are not revenue generators.
    I didn't ask why it does, I asked why it should.

    And as we've been hashing out, it's all about Title IX.
    Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice? Congratulations, you'd probably make a pretty good con-man.

  14. #39
    BamaNation Hall of Fame RedStar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Shoals, AL
    Posts
    8,976
    Post Thanks / Like
    My Mood
    GameFace on TideFans.com

    Re: Should the NCAA Remove the Limit on Football Scholarships?

    Quote Originally Posted by Im_on_dsp View Post
    I still don't see how your getting to the someone being forced to sign. They've always been free to sign where they want. I'm sure every one of those boys that signed scholarships 86 thru 105 were absolutely tickled pink to be going to Alabama and playing for the best coach of all time. However, having signed that scholarship with Alabama they were taken off the market for everyone else. If I had 105 scholarships I might be willing to sign a marginal player just to keep Auburn from getting them. That's what I was saying and that's exactly what the Alabama's, Oklahomas, Nebraskas did back in the 70's.
    When you say someone is "hoarding" players, you make it sound as if they are doing so against the players will. I completely understand your point, I just don't buy it.


    Quote Originally Posted by Im_on_dsp View Post
    Boosters do have something to do with the original conversation because it all revolves around money and BOOSTERS = CASH$. And FWIW, I don't think there is a check-box on the form when you donate to only send the money to soccer, football, etc. When you donate to the Athletic Dept they spend your money as they see fit. More money spent on football means 1) more money that now has to be spent on women's sports and 2) less money for other men's sports. Other men's sports don't "carry their weight" because they don't generate revenue and never will. I guess we should do away with them.
    As has been said, boosters can earmark their donations, and they have. It's why some sports have top notch facilities (softball) and some don't (baseball).

    No one is suggesting we do away with any sports, I don't understand how you're pulling that out of these posts. If a program is under-performing or not bringing in enough money to keep itself afloat, that's a problem the University would have to deal with on a case by case basis. But no one here is suggesting we cut any sports as far as I can tell.
    Fool me once, shame on me. Fool me twice? Congratulations, you'd probably make a pretty good con-man.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
'Gear UP! Get your University of Alabama Crimson Tide National Championship & Football Dynasty Gear!