I don't know. I've heard of one case where a D2 offered someone a lot (compared to what he had available to offer and to what kids usually got) for freshman year only (with a promise of "we'll see after that") and it sort of made sense to me. #1 What if the kid tanks when he gets there? And, #2, it's still X less than the kid will have to pay. Would you rather get $1K in athletic scholarship each year or $6K the first year only? It's still more off the total 4 year cost.
I am fully aware that the NLI is only good for one year. I also know that coaches have all different creative ways of distributing either 9 or 11.7. I am also aware that coaches have a program where they just plug in the numbers and he is able to offer based on a 4 year projection.
The recruit and his family are made aware of the verbiage in the NLI and what he needs to do to stay eligible for 4 years and to have his scholarship renewed yearly.
11.7 rule to 11.32 25% max COA temporarily lifted for 1 year, was for D1. Francis is speaking about a D2 offer.
For D2, nothing changed, I assume. However, it is that coaches responsibility to help the recruit in obtaining as much $$$ as they can before he signs, whether it be in athletic aid, academic aid, etc. for 4 years, "not here is some money, this is this year's tuition COA, we will see what happens next year".
But maybe some coaches don't care who or how many show up every fall. If the player tanks before he gets there, the coach will ask the player to look elsewhere. That's not someone my player would care for.
For someone who has asked so many questions, I am surprised at your reaction. I would want my player to have a more solid commitment, D1 or D2.
Just sayin.