I’ve decided I want a retroactive rebate. Even with scholarships I had to pay 25% of college for five years for one and 25% of college for four years for the other.
So here’s what most everyone on here thinks about scholarships
more athletic $$ = better athlete
One to watch. Could be famous some day. Coaches will take care of him, he’s a franchise player. Lots of playing time. Very desirable if he goes in the portal.
Here’s what Imma saying:
more athletic $$ = loss of control
Valuable up until he’s not (injury, mental health, grades, family issues, behavior, etc). Always subject to replacement or benching for whatever reason, or no reason at all. No protection.
In a world where <5% of college players get drafted, why give away your power unless you have no other option? There is far more academic money than athletic money available, go for the bag that you can hold, instead of having to accept pieces from someone else’s bag.
So many people here blinded by the system of which they are part. They not only can’t see the other side, they refuse to acknowledge it exists.
@SpeedDemon posted:So here’s what most everyone on here thinks about scholarships
more athletic $$ = better athlete
One to watch. Could be famous some day. Coaches will take care of him, he’s a franchise player. Lots of playing time. Very desirable if he goes in the portal.
Here’s what Imma saying:more athletic $$ = loss of control
Valuable up until he’s not (injury, mental health, grades, family issues, behavior, etc). Always subject to replacement or benching for whatever reason, or no reason at all. No protection.
In a world where <5% of college players get drafted, why give away your power unless you have no other option? There is far more academic money than athletic money available, go for the bag that you can hold, instead of having to accept pieces from someone else’s bag.
So many people here blinded by the system of which they are part. They not only can’t see the other side, they refuse to acknowledge it exists.
In almost every case the coach/management has the greater leverage. The players have very little unless they are a start player. Once a scholarship player is cut I’d bet 99% of the time they transfer, whether on academic or athletic money. Here’s the thing you are missing, very few kids are getting 100% academic money. So once they are cut, the rest of the funding and support goes away. So yes, you might be guaranteed 4 years of that academic money, but if you are suddenly paying full out of state price the cost becomes too great.
In a perfect world a kid would be able to stay at their school and finish their degree without baseball, but it doesn’t happen often.
So what are you saying?
Should all players get equal athletic scholarships? Or else be able to sue? That doesn't even work with academic merit scholarships.
Should coaches not be allowed to cut players? I'm actually not opposed to that, but it's not a rule currently - or actually, it is a rule at P4s for players on scholarship, but they can get players to leave by telling them they won't get playing time.
Should everyone get equal playing time? That would be absurd.
Where do you draw the line? Coaches have to be able to make decisions about their teams, no matter how unfair someone might think such decisions are.
@TPM posted:Not going to argue with you. It costs more money to bring in an out of state player. If a program is not fully funded, and they want to bring in an out of state player, they have to have options on how to fund.
Woman's softball went from 12 to 25. but remains an equivalency sport. Will see how that works out.
The term "equivalency" sport should be going away in 2025 as ALL sports will now be head count sports set to their new roster sizes.
I never said an out of state player doesn't cost more; when a college/university "funds" sports they will set the amount of $$$ (split 50-50 between men and women) and that will dictate what they fund per men's and women's sports.
This is no different than today with head count and equivalency sports except there will be no cap per sport other than roster size and COA starting Fall 2025.
My son is getting full out-of-state tuition, fees, books and meals as an equivalency player this year and his housing will be covered by a portion of his NIL (taxed) and Alston award (not taxed).
If he stays and plays next year I would imagine he *could* get 100% COA and maybe less or no NIL but who knows? I'm sure the school won't fund 100% of all sports as that would be a huge cost. So maybe he'll get the same deal next year? It really depends on the school's total sports budget and how they want to distribute it while still adhering to Title IX.
Seems to me this all comes down to your goals and keeping your eyes open with a bit of cynicism or critical thinking about what you are being sold by coaches and recruiting coordinators. I think that's been well laid out here in multiple topics on the board.
I asked why @adbono considered baseball money more valuable because I knew I had a specific idea of what I thought and wanted to know why he thought differently and I fully appreciate his response and found it entirely valid based on his interpretation of more valuable, as I find mine valid based on mine. Simply coming at the same concept from different places. Not an "Agree to Disagree" but more like 'Yeah, I see where you are coming from".
Unless you are the next coming, there will always be barriers to getting on the field, Upper-classmen, transfers, guys with more baseball money, coaches preferences, suffering grades... you can only control how hard you work, and for guys who are there to play baseball over academics, baseball money helps them with that, but I have no issue with them trying to move on to somewhere else to get a chance to play... thankfully that has been made more possible. For guys who are there and chose the school for the combination of baseball and their next 40, I think getting in the portal and trying to move on is probably not worth it and maybe it's time to hang them up and concentrate on your degree.
Again, different goals, different idea of which money is more valuable, which is just really all okay.
I appreciate your post @HSDad22. And for those that like to cast stones let me remind you that I am Volunteer College Coach. I volunteer my time and I am not compensated in any way. So any suggestion that my advice is based on receiving a paycheck is laughable. Furthermore I am, and always have been, a players’ advocate. I take some risk with some of the things I talk about on this forum but I do so to help those that don’t understand the process. A lot of gamesmanship goes on that most people just aren’t aware. Lots of bad decisions get made due to faulty or incomplete information. I use this forum to do my little part in getting the truth out when I see an opportunity. It’s absurd to suggest that I benefit personally from the content I post. And to tie that suggestion to a gender is just lunacy.
@HSDad22 posted:Unless you are the next coming, there will always be barriers to getting on the field, Upper-classmen, transfers, guys with more baseball money, coaches preferences, suffering grades... you can only control how hard you work, and for guys who are there to play baseball over academics, baseball money helps them with that, but I have no issue with them trying to move on to somewhere else to get a chance to play... thankfully that has been made more possible. For guys who are there and chose the school for the combination of baseball and their next 40, I think getting in the portal and trying to move on is probably not worth it and maybe it's time to hang them up and concentrate on your degree.
Again, different goals, different idea of which money is more valuable, which is just really all okay.
Agree with the above.
IMO, athletic is more valuable because coaches don't have to worry about students not keeping up minimum GPA requirements.
You most likely will see most top programs that fully fund use all of their 34 scholarships on their 34 players. You will more than likely see mid D1 programs blend scholarships. Academics still remain important, so keep encouraging your players to excell in the classroom.
JMO
@TerribleBPthrower posted:In almost every case the coach/management has the greater leverage. The players have very little unless they are a start player. Once a scholarship player is cut I’d bet 99% of the time they transfer, whether on academic or athletic money. Here’s the thing you are missing, very few kids are getting 100% academic money. So once they are cut, the rest of the funding and support goes away. So yes, you might be guaranteed 4 years of that academic money, but if you are suddenly paying full out of state price the cost becomes too great.
In a perfect world a kid would be able to stay at their school and finish their degree without baseball, but it doesn’t happen often.
Right! Coaches/managers do have great leverage. In fact, until very recently they had nearly perfect leverage.
And yes, of course, if someone is cut no doubt they'll look to move elsewhere or decide to hang up their cleats, depending on the situation. But a merit-based academic scholarship will give them more choices, right? Sure, if they want to continue chasing their baseball dream and there is an opportunity to do so, they can do that.
But 95% of college baseball players do not play beyond college.
95%
Just want to say thanks to everyone for the discussion.
I’m not going to respond to this thread any longer as I have nothing left to say.
Bye for now.