NCAA D1 proposed waivers.

Any increase from 11.7?

@mburtner17 posted:

Any increase from 11.7?

Not at this time.

Increased rosters = more kids riding the bench = more kids heading to the transfer portal

Or, am I miss understanding it?

Due to possible quarantining deeper rosters are needed to maintain enough players to field a team.  But yes, a kid who rides the bench is likely to enter the portal.   where will they land?  Surplus talent everywhere.  Musical chairs for the kids who just left for the portal?  I'm inclined to think coaches will fill with JUCO talent who got reps over a surplus who sat the bench.

to me the zero minimum scholarship is bad.  Easier for a school to sell borderline commitment on $5 athletic scholarship than a preferred walk on.  Or 5%, 10% or whatever the magic number is.   more Guys going to schools who don't love them, but thinking the love is there because they get some money.  Reality is they are a safety net.

@Francis7 posted:

Increased rosters = more kids riding the bench = more kids heading to the transfer portal

Or, am I miss understanding it?

Francis, the increase roster is due to the NCAAs poor choice in giving extra years to everyone, my opinion it should have been awarded to seniors only.

With that being said, a coach can only keep as many as he can afford. This is where those state players in some states with reduced or earned tuition helps because the minimum is eliminated. This also is a good lesson in doing well in HS for academic money.

I made the same statement a while back as Bandera, due to covid, it might be a good idea to keep more on staff as a safety net. 

By next week, coaches will decide who stays and who goes, and more than likely rosters will not be ridiculous due to budget restraints.

I agree about the zero minimum scholarship. That would mean you would have more players with nothing than something. And keep in mind many programs do not even fund all 11.7.

JMO

@@bandera wrote, “Reality is they are a safety net.”

The truth is that (in top 50 D1 programs) more than half of every recruiting class is a safety net. They are insurance in case something goes wrong. That’s why recruiting classes are so large and that’s why there is so much roster turnover. Recruiting is a part art and part science - and it’s very inexact. Many schools bring in as many players as they can and spend a semester sorting thru them. Half or so are sent packing after one year (or less) not understanding that they were never anything more than an insurance policy to begin with. They never had a realistic read on the situation. I believe that now (more than ever) it will be very hard to recover from making a bad decision out of the gate. If you are realistic and make a good first decision the odds of a good experience will go way up!

Other than the top programs most don't support 11.7 so increasing it would only give the top programs more leverage, which the NCAA would like to limit.

All of this makes it even more important for players (and parents) to carefully assess the prospects of making a team, otherwise the prospect of switching schools if they want to continue playing is a higher risk - than an already risky situation.

@TPM what do you mean by "By next week, coaches will decide who stays and who goes, and more than likely rosters will not be ridiculous due to budget restraints?"  I'm unclear on this.

@NotMadeOf$$ posted:

@TPM what do you mean by "By next week, coaches will decide who stays and who goes, and more than likely rosters will not be ridiculous due to budget restraints?"  I'm unclear on this.

Fall practice more than likely over for many programs and in some states students wont be returning to campus until spring, due to Covid. The coaches make cuts depending how players did in fall.