Position Players Hurt by New Limits?

While I think it will have some effect, many commits are position palyers as well. Look at the 2010 commits that are starting to come out. Pitchers have always been a priority for early signing, but then also a bigger risk to lose in the draft. I think a bigger impact is that you will see more early commits all across the board. Waiting thru the recruiting game is nerve racking for the kids. You see those omments from college football kids as well.

Gold I think it will affect position players mostly. I think it would be rare a pitcher signs for only 25%. There are going to be fewer RS players that would back up the stronger position players. For example. If there are more than lets say 7 infileders on the fall roster they may only want to keep 5. Only the top feaw will see BB money. It also was not uncommon to see 5-6 catchers on a fall roster and they really only use 1 or 2 with a 3rd for back up. That will mean players may not get a D1 opportunity and be allowed to develop at a particular college.
I know I have seen coaches commenting on how frugal they have to be and careful where they spend the bulk of their money
I(t is too early to see the stats of any real meaning yet.

25% is only the minimum combined amount. Nothing has changed, pitchers have and always will get more $$ because they are needed more. But there are many pitchers who also will not receive anymore than 25%. There are many position players who will get opportunities that may include becoming a pitcher, you better have a strong accurate arm these days. You don't have to produce HR's as a position player, speed may be more important and finding a way to get on base as well. There are only a very few on a team that hit for power. And remember, lots of coaches recruit differently, some schools base their programs on hitting, others on pitching. Some schools offer more to power guys than to pitchers.

It's not the percentage, it's the 27 scholarship/35 roster limit that is challenging. The new rules were designed to eliminate large roster #'s. Who needs 2 shortstops and 6 catchers? That only means more sitting on the bench.

Now more reason than ever to work hard in the classroom, as noted in another thread there is more academic $$ available than athletic $$, always has and will be.

27 have to receive baseball money and all counters who have entered Fall of 2008 and beyond must get 25% minimum if the program chooses to max it out.

27 x 25 equals 6.75 equivalencies leaving almost 5 full grants to be used for pot sweetening. Most rosters have 14 pitchers.

You also have exempted academic monies for those that meet the criteria.

If a team expects to compete, they better have a few rakers of the baseball.

Throwing around 90mph plus as some easy thing to do is a falsehood. Most D1 pitchers work well below that level of velocity.

OS the 27 is a max not a have to number. Did I read your statemnet wrong ?
Before colleges could bring in an excess of position players but I think that is over with. It also would not surprise me to see the 35 limit reduced at some point. I think even 35 is a lot of players. The extra players are there to cover injuries etc but a team can operate well with 28 - 30 players.

quote:

if the program chooses to max it out

quote:

If you are a non pitching position player you fall into the 10% catagory- Pitchers fill 90% of all early signing monies.

Looking at a few early-signing lists in Texas -- which include only those who signed for 25% or more -- I don't find the situation to be quite that dire for position players:

Baylor
3 pitchers
5 position players

Dallas Baptist
4 pitchers
1 2-way player
2 position players

Texas A&M-College Station
4 pitchers
4 2-way players
2 position players

Texas A&M-Corpus Christi
5 pitchers
1 2-way player
4 position players

Texas Tech
2 pitchers
1 2-way player
6 position players

UT-Austin
4 pitchers
2 2-way players
2 position players

UT-Arlington
1 2-way player
7 position players

UT-San Antonio
5 position players

The position players who may not get a 25% offer include those who excel in one aspect (fielding or hitting) but lag behind in the other, and those who have physical potential but have not yet bulked up -- in other words, those who cannot make an "immediate impact" as a freshman.

All new "counters" get 25% minimum, so I guess you are saying roster fillers 28 thru 35 for the 09-10 season?

Does a player who played D1 in 07-08, jc 08-09 and back to D1 for his remaining two years qualify for the 25% minimum?
Or is it incoming freshman only.

I think that the new signs can be based a lot on projected returnees and future needs. It will take 3-4 years to get a true feel.

I think this is much ado about nothing


Prior to the new rules the teams traveled with 25 players only and most had 30 to 35 on the roster---there are still only 9 positions on the field at one time


A kid still has to win a spot---there are no givens--I do not see much changing in terms of position players

quote:

Originally posted by Danny Boydston:
Does a player who played D1 in 07-08, jc 08-09 and back to D1 for his remaining two years qualify for the 25% minimum?
Or is it incoming freshman only.

Good question.

15.5.4.1 Minimum Equivalency Value. An institution shall provide each counter athletically related and
other countable financial aid that is equal to or greater than 25 percent of an equivalency. (Adopted: 4/26/07 effective 8/1/08 for student-athletes who initially enroll full time at any four-year collegiate institution on or after 8/1/08,Revised: 8/9/07)

One interpretation can focus on the term "initially".

Was he an initial counter at D1 freshman year? Is he a 1st time counter at D1 junior year?

I have to agree with TR, the new rules have not changed much for many programs who always kept their numbers below 35. The 25 man roster still remains in effect and that sometimes will include, as in the past, more pitchers than position players.

Keep in mind that in 2010, rosters sizes are redued to 33. I think with the scholarship and walk on limitations, college coaches will have to recruit at a much more sophisticated level. We attended a Florida camp right after they hired their new caoch and they even commented on recruiting smarter. Their qoute was we can no longer sign two shortstops and three etc per class. They said if we sign one this year, we might not sign another until two years later. Also, with the reductions, redshirting highly unlikely as they expect you to contribute early. Colleges better make sure they can get the signees to campus rather than the pros as well.

quote:

Originally posted by chalkline:
Also, with the reductions, redshirting highly unlikely as they expect you to contribute early.

Chalkline,
Thanks for posting that, I stated that last year, got it from the same source and called on the carpet that redshirting would be a thing of the past.

I did not know that roster size would be reduced to 33.

quote:

I did not know that roster size would be reduced to 33.

Is that accurate?

Counter max goes from 30 to 27, but we all learned rosters remain at 35

Slugger's statement is correct.
Those numbers were on the table originally; however, when they revised the scholly min. from 33% to 25% they kept the roster at 35 with 27 max on schollys. With the 25% rule, coaches reviewed a proposal to submit to college presidents to increase the schollys from 11.7 to 14 but were told it would not even be considered at this time.

Most coaches think the 25% rule will be more restrictive and intrusive than the 35 man roster limit. (travel squad will remain at 25)

Thanks for the clarification.

The 25% is all relevent to the school. For example, a school such as Florida is able to use state funds for academic blending, the tuition coming from state sources generated by lottery.

It is my understanding that most coaches are finding the 27 scholarship limit a challenge. Recruited walk ons usually becoming those that can afford to walk on, eligible for academic $$, those that want and need bb $$ assistance lost to other programs. One coach in Jupiter told me as far as he was concerned, he only has 30 players and next year 27.

Another point of contention is no fall roster limits, very unfair with sit out rule for 40 to show up and only 28-35 might make the spring roster. Ask a lot of questions when being recruited as a walk on.


Lot of creative recruiting going on, the winners will be those that can recruit successfully working the numbers, with what they are allowed.

Maybe they will need more JC players that can step in right away and contribute, they only are on roster for two years. Esp. position players, since most freshmen dont play a lot anyway.

Thanks to everyone for all the insightful input. Fanofthegame you make a great point.

quote:

Originally posted by fanofgame:
Maybe they will need more JC players that can step in right away and contribute, they only are on roster for two years. Esp. position players, since most freshmen dont play a lot anyway.

Fanofgame,
Depends upon a program. I looked at one state program and there were no JUCO players, another in same state had 10 out of 35.

I suppose your son will have to go through the process all over again.

quote:

Originally posted by goldenretriever:
Curious to know what others think of this post from a Cleveland baseball forum?

Bolognie