25 Signee Limit: Probation For 5 Star Teams?

#1
VolnJC

VolnJC

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 26, 2012
Messages
26,989
Likes
36,979
#1
#2
#2
Where is that rule? It's completely idiotic if true and really not even possible
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#3
#3
utvolpj said:
Where is that rule? It's completely idiotic if true
Click to expand...

They were talking about it on SportsTalk this morning that there was now a hard 25 rule starting this year.

From NCAA article

Football Bowl Subdivision schools are limited to signing 25 prospective and current student-athletes to a first-time financial aid agreement or a National Letter of Intent. Exceptions exclude current student-athletes who have been enrolled full-time at the school for at least two years and prospective or current student-athletes who suffer an incapacitating injury (effective for recruits who sign after Aug. 1, 2017).
 
Last edited:
#4
#4
It reads like you were saying only 15 could be lost.

Still haven't seen the other cap listed
 
#5
#5
utvolpj said:
It reads like you were saying only 15 could be lost.

Still haven't seen the other cap listed
Click to expand...

Here is what they were saying..you have 85 on scholy and you can sign 100 in four years..if you lose 15 over that time you will not be able to sign more to get up to 85.

http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...overhauling-college-football-recruiting-rules

Also bundled in the proposal is the limitation of annual scholarships to 25. This is a move to do away with oversigning and to reduce the practice of grayshirting, a tactic by which schools delay the enrollment of a prospect until the following January so his signing would technically count as part of the next class.

The legislation limits to 25 the number of prospects whose aid is initially offered in the fall term of an academic year. Before, rules limited to 25 the number of prospects allowed to sign from Dec. 1 through May 31. This portion of the changes will affect newcomers in the 2018 signing class.
 
Last edited:
#6
#6
What @ transfers? Do they sign those 2 docs?

If we keep burning thru players, we'll only be able to dress out 60 in a few years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7
#7
yea you worded this wrong.. lol I started counting our losses as transfers, quitters, grads.. was def over 15 haha

I get what you are saying now
 
#8
#8
livefaith said:
What @ transfers? Do they sign those 2 docs?

If we keep burning thru players, we'll only be able to dress out 60 in a few years.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I hope not...there has got to be a way for teams to rebuild without oversigning.
 
#9
#9
over 15 one year would not be an issue unless it was consistently over 15 some years you will have more some less.. This would, like the OP suggested, mostly impact the power 5 schools that basically "cut" players each year that they recruit over. This will give recruits a bit more security. The bigger downside is going to be situation like what we had this season with our 2 midseason defections PW and Hurd. The Preston Williams transfer still stings the worst for me imagine our offense end of last year with him included and our wR corps this year with him and JJ starting on each side.
 
Last edited:
#10
#10
Butch ain't gonna be able to sign a class of 28 every year.

He'l have to be more accountable and stop the attrition - if this new rule is true.

Edit: for the record Butch has signed 111 players the last 4 recruiting cycles - this rule would really be hard on CBJ.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#11
#11
UT Hill Man said:
Butch ain't gonna be able to sign a class of 28 every year.

He'l have to be more accountable and stop the attrition - if this new rule is true.

Edit: for the record Butch has signed 111 players the last 4 recruiting cycles - this rule would really be hard on CBJ.
Click to expand...

I was just thinking the exact same. Butch used this all the time to build the roster. Gonna hurt UT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
Attrition is impossible to fully stop.
•Injury
•Academics
•Transfers (Like QB S.Jones right now)

And because of that I really liked how CBJ took advantage of the various legal means of enlarging his signing classes to restock depleted skill groups. Especially the lines when he came in after Dooley left the cupboard bare.

I don't like this new rule. Not even a little. The way we were was fine by me and every other school has the same opportunity to do take advantage of grey and blueshirting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#13
#13
The NCAA has always got to screw with something. They should increase the limit to at least 90 scholarship players, it takes a lot of players to have a good football program. The NCAA is always trying to limit players and the time coaches can spend with them. It's STUPID! GBO!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#15
#15
If this hurts big time schools the rule will be changed again.

I do not like artificial efforts to create "parity" if that's part of the rationale. But this SHOULD reward coaches who know how to find talented kids and keep them in the program.

This should be coupled with an allowance for players that transfer in good academic standing.

It will be interesting to see how this impacts the disciplining of players. If you boot a kid off the team for any reason... it could result in a short roster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#16
#16
VolnJC said:
I heard on the radio with the new limit that a team over a 4 year period can only lose 15 players to be able to keep at the 85 limit. This seems like it is going to be a big equalizer in college football to me. Recently teams like LSU and Ohio State have lost double digit underclassmen to the draft. So you guys like this or hate it?
https://www.si.com/college-football/2017/04/14/recruiting-rules-december-signing-period
Click to expand...

This may encourage redshirting. It WILL make it more difficult to rebuild a program.

With redshirting, you can roll some guys over. In a healthy program, a good red shirting strategy would allow you to have higher attrition and still maintain 85. But you'd have to build up to it. If everyone were redshirted then you would have 5 full classes to fill 85 scholarships.

Realistically, 15 players could RS each year. That would give you 115 chances to fill your 85 man roster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#18
#18
I liked it the way it was, and I would like to see a larger scholly limit and roster limit.

But some players wouldn't like it because that would decrease PT. Others would because they'd get enough snaps to show their stuff but fewer opportunities for injury.
 
#19
#19
UT Hill Man said:
Butch ain't gonna be able to sign a class of 28 every year.

He'l have to be more accountable and stop the attrition - if this new rule is true.

Edit: for the record Butch has signed 111 players the last 4 recruiting cycles - this rule would really be hard on CBJ.
Click to expand...

This rule is going to be hard on any school that is rebuilding after a coaching change or other event that results with players leaving early.

It is also going to make it harder on transfers looking for scholarships at other schools. If that school has already offered 25, transferring in with a scholarship may be more difficult.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#21
#21
VolnJC said:
Here is what they were saying..you have 85 on scholy and you can sign 100 in four years..if you lose 15 over that time you will not be able to sign more to get up to 85.

http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...overhauling-college-football-recruiting-rules

Also bundled in the proposal is the limitation of annual scholarships to 25. This is a move to do away with oversigning and to reduce the practice of grayshirting, a tactic by which schools delay the enrollment of a prospect until the following January so his signing would technically count as part of the next class.

The legislation limits to 25 the number of prospects whose aid is initially offered in the fall term of an academic year. Before, rules limited to 25 the number of prospects allowed to sign from Dec. 1 through May 31. This portion of the changes will affect newcomers in the 2018 signing class.
Click to expand...

Guess you answered that!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#22
#22
Of the top 50 schools ranked on 247 over the last 5 year the number that exceeded 25 were: 13, 10, 16, 29, and 23.
 
#23
#23
VolnJC said:
They were talking about it on SportsTalk this morning that there was now a hard 25 rule starting this year.

From NCAA article

Football Bowl Subdivision schools are limited to signing 25 prospective and current student-athletes to a first-time financial aid agreement or a National Letter of Intent. Exceptions exclude current student-athletes who have been enrolled full-time at the school for at least two years and prospective or current student-athletes who suffer an incapacitating injury (effective for recruits who sign after Aug. 1, 2017).
Click to expand...

So you can sign 25 + one for every player that leaves after two years and + for every player that has a career ending injury up to how many?
 
#24
#24
I feel like this may help Junior Colleges but hurt players who want to transfer.

Teams have to give players permission and if a team might get penalized for players leaving , those teams won't allow it
 
#25
#25
This is gonna mean more scolly's for walk-ons if I read the rule right concerning exceptions for those enrolled at the same school for at least 2 years.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top