Orange.
Pocket presents 🍊
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2021
- Messages
- 23,841
- Likes
- 145,835
I’m completely fine with them cutting football roster sizes down. If the NFL can operate with 53 active players (48 actually dress) and a 16 player practice squad for a 17 game regular season then college teams can trim their insane 85 scholarship players (70 can only appear in a game currently). And that’s not even including the walk ons, so it’s more like 120 players actually on your roster currently. That’s ridiculous to me. Trim it down to 70 scholarship players and disperse those scholarships amongst the other sports like baseball that can’t even field an entire team with their measly 12 scholarships.I understand. But I think it's a bad idea. Also, no money is rolling in from gymnastics. From what I hear gymnastics is a money pit.
I fear it would just be a new group and lobby siphoning off funds that could go to the teams we already have and complaining that other teams got more or whatever.
I want baseball to be a big winner in the change.
Also, I don't want football to be hurt. Supposedly they might eliminate walk-ons for football and significantly reduce roster sizes. I'm still trying to figure out how big a difference that will make. Idk. We were so depleted at DB in '22 that we had a walk-on playing in the 4th quarter when we beat Bama. Also I know of cases where we've been able to take a player by means of NIL sufficient to cover tuition.
I've mostly been concerned this whole time about the NCAA figuring out ways to re-introduce caps and limits. That's music to the ears of well-known mass cheaters like Bama, Georgia, Michigan, etc., who will be able to go back to their bag games wholesale. The NCAA is corrupt and always permits these teams to cheat with impunity. Meanwhile the NCAA will target rivals of the favorites.
I'm a rare guy who likes this so-called "wild west," but the last thing I want to do is start up talk about that! It's very divisive.
I’m completely fine with them cutting football roster sizes down. If the NFL can operate with 53 active players (48 actually dress) and a 16 player practice squad for a 17 game regular season then college teams can trim their insane 85 scholarship players (70 can only appear in a game currently). And that’s not even including the walk ons, so it’s more like 120 players actually on your roster currently. That’s ridiculous to me. Trim it down to 70 scholarship players and disperse those scholarships amongst the other sports like baseball that can’t even field an entire team with their measly 12 scholarships.
Yea the huge roster size is weird, when only play now 15 games or 16 games tops if you're in playoffs. NFL plays 17 regular season games with a smaller rosters.I’m completely fine with them cutting football roster sizes down. If the NFL can operate with 53 active players (48 actually dress) and a 16 player practice squad for a 17 game regular season then college teams can trim their insane 85 scholarship players (70 can only appear in a game currently). And that’s not even including the walk ons, so it’s more like 120 players actually on your roster currently. That’s ridiculous to me. Trim it down to 70 scholarship players and disperse those scholarships amongst the other sports like baseball that can’t even field an entire team with their measly 12 scholarships.
What people don’t realize is if you cut the roster size then that’s less money you have to pay the football players. It makes too much business sense to not do it. Would you rather pay 85 football players or 70 football players, 25 baseball players, and 25 softball players? Those football players are pretty expensive.Yea the huge roster size is weird, when only play now 15 games or 16 games tops if you're in playoffs. NFL plays 17 regular season games with a smaller rosters.
Baseball and Softball need full ride scholarships no doubt but as long as football is the cash cow things will never change.
$35k is plenty for a 3rd string QB who mostly likely never sees the field.Based on Tennessee’s academic release in January there are roughly 600 student-athletes. That’s a lot of kids looking to make some money. If you trim the football rosters down to 70 and split $10.5M evenly then that’s $150k per football player. We all know it’s not going to be evenly distributed because positions will command different compensation but even if the minimum is $35k, that’s still a ton of money for a college football player.
Yeah the more I look at it, it would make the most sense to give football 50%, basketball 25%, and everyone else 25%. May not seem fair to the other athletes but football and basketball bring in the most money. Going to leave a little over $5M for the ~500 student-athletes that don’t play those sports. It is what it is. $10-$15k per year to play college baseball is better than nothing. That’s about $40-$60k over a 4 year career.$35k is plenty for a 3rd string QB who mostly likely never sees the field.
There actually used to be a MVP NCAA baseball game by EA Sports whenever I was in high schoolSo…EA Sports is bringing back NCAA Football, comes out July 19…SIAP…If there was a baseball version, how many would buy it?
Yeah there would definitely be a market for it. College baseball is way more accessible than it was 15-20 years, heck even 5 years ago really. There was a NCAA basketball game too. People would definitely buy all those games. At least the hardcore college sports fan would.You think there’s enough star power? I mean, I think there is, but I’m biased.
I would, I'd need to buy the console first but I'd do it.........