New recommendations to the NCAA approved

[Buffnik]

The following proposals will be made to the NCAA for a vote in January:

- FBS football scholarships from 85 to 80.

- Women’s basketball scholarships from 15 to 13.

- Elimination of institutional foreign tours that may be scheduled during the summer-vacation period between the institution’s spring and fall terms or during an academic year

- In the sport of football, the Working Group will recommend a limit of 12 non-coaching staff members, whose duties include support of the football program in any capacity, including third-party contractors that may be employed by an institution. The 12 non-coaching staff members will not include athletics trainers, academic support and compliance staff members.

- In the sport of men’s basketball, the Working Group will recommend a limit of six non- coaching staff members, whose duties include support of the basketball program in any capacity, including third-party contractors that may be employed by the institution. The six non-coaching staff members will not include athletics trainers, academic support and compliance staff members.

NOTE: The non-coaching personnel limitations do include videographers, strength and conditioning coaches, and operations and administrative personnel. The Collegiate Model— Rules Working Group is asked to work with staff to refine the list of what would be included in the non-coaching staff limits.

http://chronicle.com/items/biz/pdf/ncaa.pdf

 

[slider]

Why the football scholarship reduction?

 

[tante]

Why the football scholarship reduction?

I'm guessing to increase parity, spreads the talent among schools a little bit more.

 

[Darth Snow]

Why the football scholarship reduction?

I'm guessing to increase parity, spreads the talent among schools a little bit more.

That and the staff limits are probably a reaction to the "full cost of attendance" schollies.

 

[Buffnik]

I think they're reducing to help with Title IX compliance.

 

[BuffNut99]

Why the football scholarship reduction?

So USC doesn't get hurt as much

 

[DBT]

I think they're reducing to help with Title IX compliance.

Good point. But, then, why cut schollies to women's bball?

 

[rscmac]

Im guessing they want to cut back to 80 because of the extra scholarship money they will be paying out, so that it doesnt effect some of the school who do not have the funds.

 

[Buffnik]

Good point. But, then, why cut schollies to women's bball?

Because 15 is ridiculous and the could justify losing two there if they cut 5 from football.

If we were going by a straight money game as if athletic departments were run like a business, football would have 100 scholarships, men's basketball would be at 13, and every other sport would only get partial scholarships. A young position coach for football who didn't have coordinator responsibilities would make more money than a head coach in any other sport (other than MBB) regardless of tenure or career records.

So, if any cuts are being made in football it's purely for political reasons.

 

[skibum]

- Elimination of institutional foreign tours that may be scheduled during the summer-vacation period between the institution’s spring and fall terms or during an academic year

In an increasingly global world, good job NCAA - way to cut yourself off at the knees! Let's reduce our international exposure even further!

NCAA - where parochialism rules.

 

[Alfred91]

Seems like the 80 from 85 thing is an reaction to the super-conference thing.

If you cut down by five, you get around 400-450 kids that would be in AQ conferences that are now going to be in mid-major schools.

I don't know how much difference it would really make, but you could make the argument that it's an attempt to at least try to add more legitimacy to those programs.

 

[SINKRATZ]

How do they enforce the limit on non-coaching staff members? What's to stop a school from say loading up on "athletic trainers" that also happen to know a thing or two about designing blitz packages or running an effective play action pass?

 

[CanadianDuck]

Good the scholarship limit helped Oregon when they implemented it so this scholarship reduction should help too.

 

[DBT]

Because 15 is ridiculous and the could justify losing two there if they cut 5 from football.

If we were going by a straight money game as if athletic departments were run like a business, football would have 100 scholarships, men's basketball would be at 13, and every other sport would only get partial scholarships. A young position coach for football who didn't have coordinator responsibilities would make more money than a head coach in any other sport (other than MBB) regardless of tenure or career records.

So, if any cuts are being made in football it's purely for political reasons.

I've been thinking about this and this is as good a place as any to ask. Sports like XC give partial schollies, like half rides. So, they can give two athletes half rides for one scholarship. Why does football not do this for kids that may be sort of on the cusp of PWO vs scholarship player?

 

[Buffnik]

I've been thinking about this and this is as good a place as any to ask. Sports like XC give partial schollies, like half rides. So, they can give two athletes half rides for one scholarship. Why does football not do this for kids that may be sort of on the cusp of PWO vs scholarship player?

Not allowed by NCAA rule.

 

[XIIfan]

I've been thinking about this and this is as good a place as any to ask. Sports like XC give partial schollies, like half rides. So, they can give two athletes half rides for one scholarship. Why does football not do this for kids that may be sort of on the cusp of PWO vs scholarship player?

Does this change their ability to access the training table or any other benefits of scholarship athletes when you switch from full to part scholarship?

 

[DBT]

Not allowed by NCAA rule.

Kind of what I figured. But is that strictly for the revenue sports? It is allowed for minor sports, is it not?

 

[OrangeBowl]

Seems like the 80 from 85 thing is an reaction to the super-conference thing.

If you cut down by five, you get around 400-450 kids that would be in AQ conferences that are now going to be in mid-major schools.

I don't know how much difference it would really make, but you could make the argument that it's an attempt to at least try to add more legitimacy to those programs.

Interesting,would never have thought of it like that but it makes sense

 

[DBT]

If the NCAA believes that a stipend is inevitable, maybe this is also a means of reducing overall costs. On second thought, how much would it really save an individual school? Probably not enough to matter. But if the NCAA were going to fund a "stipend program", then it could be a factor.

 

[sackman]

If the NCAA believes that a stipend is inevitable, maybe this is also a means of reducing overall costs. On second thought, how much would it really save an individual school? Probably not enough to matter. But if the NCAA were going to fund a "stipend program", then it could be a factor.

The NCAA wouldn't fund a stipend. They might allow conferences to provide stipends, though.