PonyFans.com

Scholarships being offered in football, men's and women's basketball. Is this a trend that will spread?

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap200000 ... holarships

Looks like the plantation owners are trying to start treating the players like student athletes instead of as a commodity. I am sure the lawsuits over using likeness's and forming unions by the players has nothing to do with this sudden enlightenment! A big thanks goes out to Johnny Football and the Northwestern players. Should be interesting in the near future on recognizing the money involved and the danger these players face now and in the future and the diminished value of their lives after playing football.

Question: if a player is underperforming, can they be dropped from the team, continue their education for free, and not count against the 85 scholarship limit?

In my time they just made life miserable enough that they left school.

East Coast Mustang wrote:Question: if a player is underperforming, can they be dropped from the team, continue their education for free, and not count against the 85 scholarship limit?

Hasn't it been only in the last few years that SMU athletic scholarships were for only one year in football and basketball?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

They were 4 year for the most part in my era.

most schools seemed to try to abide in good faith with the 4 year concept until about a decade or 2 ago. Most needed kids to stay enrolled to keep 85 on the roster. Then [deleted] coaches particularly in the SEC but also in the Big 12 started playing the rules by inventing the grayshirt, the purple shirt, the early enrollee, over signing way way way over the 25 man limit. I really think when coaches starting treating student athletes as expendable the NCAA's argument concerning the student athlete model became untenable and quite frankly doomed to eventual failure. I guarantee you one day all those shortcuts will be thrown in the face of the NCAA by a Judge wondering what is left of the student athlete model argument that the NCAA uses. Is it the NCAA or was it the Coaches. Its more fun to blame the NCAA

Stallion wrote:most schools seemed to try to abide in good faith with the 4 year concept until about a decade or 2 ago. Most needed kids to stay enrolled to keep 85 on the roster. Then [deleted] coaches particularly in the SEC but also in the Big 12 started playing the rules by inventing the grayshirt, the purple shirt, the early enrollee, over signing way way way over the 25 man limit. I really think when coaches starting treating student athletes as expendable the NCAA's argument concerning the student athlete model became untenable and quite frankly doomed to eventual failure. I guarantee you one day all those shortcuts will be thrown in the face of the NCAA by a Judge wondering what is left of the student athlete model argument that the NCAA uses. Is it the NCAA or was it the Coaches. Its more fun to blame the NCAA

Back to the 85 limit though- if we have a guy who just isnt going to ever make an impact on the roster, like Ronnell Sims, could we drop his scholarship as a student-athlete so that he doesnt count against the 85 limit, but still allow him to complete his degree at SMU for free?

Have him come up with a career ending injury. They keep the scholarship but it does not count against the limit. This is what happened to me.

In fact, I believe R-Simms is out for a medical reason and is staying on scholie at SMU. Same thing happened to Michael O'Guinn, tore his knee up, never saw the field again and just graduated this fall. Also, for the guys who go on scholie (walk-ons) after they have been here (at a school) for two years or more, my understanding is they also do not go against the 85 count ... and those are annual renewal deals.

walkons who get athletic (as opposed to academic) scholarships count on the 85 man roster but not the 25 man roster