Athletic Scholarship Player vs Academic Scholarship Player

Here's another interesting twist to this topic that seemingly doesn't get discussed or considered much... a real and unbiased scenario...

D1 school does their typical recruiting.  Most athletic $ goes to P's and select few others (as someone else pointed out above).  So, most returning and new position players are relying on academic $.  The roster sits at 40 in the fall.  The staff did not nail it this year in their recruiting efforts.  A few freshman were assured a roster spot but no athletic $ and it turns out they are not as good as expected.  The staff will have to get the roster down to 35 by spring.  They will have to let go a few upperclassmen who are better players than those freshmen and more likely to contribute but are no longer part of the new group that was assured a roster spot.  

cabbagedad posted:

Here's another interesting twist to this topic that seemingly doesn't get discussed or considered much... a real and unbiased scenario...

D1 school does their typical recruiting.  Most athletic $ goes to P's and select few others (as someone else pointed out above).  So, most returning and new position players are relying on academic $.  The roster sits at 40 in the fall.  The staff did not nail it this year in their recruiting efforts.  A few freshman were assured a roster spot but no athletic $ and it turns out they are not as good as expected.  The staff will have to get the roster down to 35 by spring.  They will have to let go a few upperclassmen who are better players than those freshmen and more likely to contribute but are no longer part of the new group that was assured a roster spot.  

I would think the guys with no athletic money would be the guys to go, especially if they are not as good as anticipated. Why let go of older contributors for younger, less talented guys?

PABaseball posted:

cabbagedad posted:

Here's another interesting twist to this topic that seemingly doesn't get discussed or considered much... a real and unbiased scenario...

D1 school does their typical recruiting.  Most athletic $ goes to P's and select few others (as someone else pointed out above).  So, most returning and new position players are relying on academic $.  The roster sits at 40 in the fall.  The staff did not nail it this year in their recruiting efforts.  A few freshman were assured a roster spot but no athletic $ and it turns out they are not as good as expected.  The staff will have to get the roster down to 35 by spring.  They will have to let go a few upperclassmen who are better players than those freshmen and more likely to contribute but are no longer part of the new group that was assured a roster spot.  

I would think the guys with no athletic money would be the guys to go, especially if they are not as good as anticipated. Why let go of older contributors for younger, less talented guys?

Recruiting promises.  Roster spot guarantee for spring.  None of those involved have athletic $.  I'm sure the same  roster guarantee was offered to some of the upperclassmen when they were being recruited as incoming freshmen as well.  The guarantee is for the spring, not future seasons.  Now, the better upperclassmen have no such guarantees and thus...

On the other thread now current (https://community.hsbaseballwe...yers-on-fall-rosters), we are told that the coach will take the best, and run off athletic scholarship or non-scholarship players as he feels appropriate.  No-one seems to know if all 40-50 on the fall roster were "guaranteed" a spring roster spot or not, but even if they were, they can be cut because the coach is in the business of winning.  So, which is it?  And, do you view an athletic scholarship a "guaranteed spring roster spot"?

anotherparent posted:

On the other thread now current (https://community.hsbaseballwe...yers-on-fall-rosters), we are told that the coach will take the best, and run off athletic scholarship or non-scholarship players as he feels appropriate.  No-one seems to know if all 40-50 on the fall roster were "guaranteed" a spring roster spot or not, but even if they were, they can be cut because the coach is in the business of winning.  So, which is it?  And, do you view an athletic scholarship a "guaranteed spring roster spot"?

Ok I’ll try to answer your 2 questions. The last one is pretty easy. Yes, an athletic scholarship is most definitely a guaranteed roster spot for the spring. Any athlete receiving athletic money counts toward the 11.7 total scholarship. So a coach would be extremely unlikely to “cut” one of those guys. 

This also kind of answers your first question. All the above responses are spot on. In the fall, everyone has a shot. The truth is, as stated multiple places above, the athletic money guys WILL have more chances to fail. But, if you are a walk-in with zero money and you mash, I guarantee you he will he kept around. Like another poster stated above, it may be at the expense of an upper classman. 

younggun posted:

anotherparent posted:

On the other thread now current (https://community.hsbaseballwe...yers-on-fall-rosters), we are told that the coach will take the best, and run off athletic scholarship or non-scholarship players as he feels appropriate.  No-one seems to know if all 40-50 on the fall roster were "guaranteed" a spring roster spot or not, but even if they were, they can be cut because the coach is in the business of winning.  So, which is it?  And, do you view an athletic scholarship a "guaranteed spring roster spot"?

Ok I’ll try to answer your 2 questions. The last one is pretty easy. Yes, an athletic scholarship is most definitely a guaranteed roster spot for the spring. Any athlete receiving athletic money counts toward the 11.7 total scholarship. So a coach would be extremely unlikely to “cut” one of those guys. 

This also kind of answers your first question. All the above responses are spot on. In the fall, everyone has a shot. The truth is, as stated multiple places above, the athletic money guys WILL have more chances to fail. But, if you are a walk-in with zero money and you mash, I guarantee you he will he kept around. Like another poster stated above, it may be at the expense of an upper classman. 

YG, the rules changed last year. If a scholarship kid "voluntarily" withdraws from the team, he can be replaced with a non-scholarship player before the season begins. I don't have first-hand knowledge of this happening, but I assume that it does.

Edited to remove wrong info about awarding scholarship to replacement player.

To clarify the above comment, the replacement player actually can be given the leaving player's remaining scholarship during the following semester or quarter of that same academic year and will not be considered a "36th" roster spot. 

However, if the replacement player stays on scholarship the following year, he will definitely count toward the 11.7 and 35-man limits.  

bacdorslider posted:

All depends on the school and the coach ......  all that matters is how much it will cost you and if the player performs, do that and all the rest is conjecture , speculation ...  at sons school , athletic, financial aid, academic .... none of it matters.... perform and you play

This is how it works at most places.  

As far as the athletic vs academic, put yourself in the coach's shoes.  As a coach if I have two equal players and I need to cut a player, one costs me 40% and the other costs me 0.  Which kid do you think is getting cut?     

d-mac posted:

bacdorslider posted:

All depends on the school and the coach ......  all that matters is how much it will cost you and if the player performs, do that and all the rest is conjecture , speculation ...  at sons school , athletic, financial aid, academic .... none of it matters.... perform and you play

This is how it works at most places.  

As far as the athletic vs academic, put yourself in the coach's shoes.  As a coach if I have two equal players and I need to cut a player, one costs me 40% and the other costs me 0.  Which kid do you think is getting cut?     

The one who's expected to contribute less is the one who gets cut, ultimately. Many times, that'll be the academic scholarship player (or walk-on) because players offered athletic scholarships tend to be the best players. However, that's not always determined to be the case once they've had to compete against one another in fall baseball.

Survival of the fittest. That goes for players and coaches.