ADVERTISEMENT

Does College Football really need 85 scholarship players?

JRHawk2003

HR King
Jul 9, 2003
54,279
27,560
113
Montrose
Why not knock it down the NFL 53? Or even let's say 65. This would not be bad for Iowa. It keeps the OSU's from being able to hoard players.


Title IX isn't going away.
 
Why not knock it down the NFL 53? Or even let's say 65. This would not be bad for Iowa. It keeps the OSU's from being able to hoard players.


Title IX isn't going away.
You're right...there would be a talent trickle down affect with fewer schollys. Parody would increase. Bluebloods would be more susceptible. Only drawback is the scholarship athletes at the bottom who no longer have a scholarship.
 
You're right...there would be a talent trickle down affect with fewer schollys. Parody would increase. Bluebloods would be more susceptible. Only drawback is the scholarship athletes at the bottom who no longer have a scholarship.

I guess I am in the minority that would like to see the swimmers and others still be there. I dont want Iowa to drop down unilaterally of course, but I would hate to see men's scholarship sports down to football and basketball only and maybe hockey in some places.
 
Why not knock it down the NFL 53? Or even let's say 65. This would not be bad for Iowa. It keeps the OSU's from being able to hoard players.


Title IX isn't going away.

The issue would be colleges don’t have the ability to replace injured players like NFL teams do.
Would mean more players playing both offense and defense if actually happened

I can see going down to 80 but not 53 60
 
Cutting football schollies would be a terrible idea.

NFL rosters are limited to 53 only because of league rules to mandate equal resources. Not to mention 12 additional practice squad players.

The 85 scholarships have much more to do with depth and scout purposes. With less, you'd see less effective scout teams, therefore sloppier play, and injuries would screw teams even more than they already do. It also allows freshmen to catch up physically and mentally to the older players, which is sorely needed in a sport like football, much moreso than others.

There's other ways to try and bring those other sports back, but by restricting scholarships for football, the same amount of student-athletes are getting left out in the cold.
 
Prior to 1972 when Title IX was passed, football schools could offer as many scholarships as they could afford, and several had 150 scholarishop players, or sometimes even more. 1973 brought about the first limitations on football scholarships in order to free up money for women's sports, which resulted in the NCAA implementing a limit of 105 football scholarships. Additional reductions were made in 1978 (95) and again in 1992 which brought the limit to its present number of 85.

For the reasons others have mentioned, I think it is difficult to get much lower. Beyond the roster players on an NFL team, each team also has a practice squad that can be tapped in the event of injury, etc. Also, the transition many freshmen require means of those players are idally using their first year to get acclimated. The often comprise roughly 1/4th of a college teams roster, while rookies typically account for mor elike 10% of an NFL teams roster.

So it might be feasible to further reduce the number ot say 80, but 53 is completely out of the question, and even 65 is almost certainly too low.
 
Prior to 1972 when Title IX was passed, football schools could offer as many scholarships as they could afford, and several had 150 scholarishop players, or sometimes even more. 1973 brought about the first limitations on football scholarships in order to free up money for women's sports, which resulted in the NCAA implementing a limit of 105 football scholarships. Additional reductions were made in 1978 (95) and again in 1992 which brought the limit to its present number of 85.

For the reasons others have mentioned, I think it is difficult to get much lower. Beyond the roster players on an NFL team, each team also has a practice squad that can be tapped in the event of injury, etc. Also, the transition many freshmen require means of those players are idally using their first year to get acclimated. The often comprise roughly 1/4th of a college teams roster, while rookies typically account for mor elike 10% of an NFL teams roster.

So it might be feasible to further reduce the number ot say 80, but 53 is completely out of the question, and even 65 is almost certainly too low.

You assume all players have to be on scholarship. They don't. Several sports are mixtures of scholarship, partial, and non scholarship players.
 
^^ According to a recent OWH article, when Nebraska won their first mythical title in 1970, they had 45 full scholarship players. At that same time, the Big Ten limited their teams to 30.
 
You assume all players have to be on scholarship. They don't. Several sports are mixtures of scholarship, partial, and non scholarship players.
For FBS, there is no such thing as a partial scholarship.

And again, that doesn't solve the issue, only kicks the can somewhere else.
 
Prior to 1972 when Title IX was passed, football schools could offer as many scholarships as they could afford, and several had 150 scholarishop players, or sometimes even more. 1973 brought about the first limitations on football scholarships in order to free up money for women's sports, which resulted in the NCAA implementing a limit of 105 football scholarships. Additional reductions were made in 1978 (95) and again in 1992 which brought the limit to its present number of 85.

For the reasons others have mentioned, I think it is difficult to get much lower. Beyond the roster players on an NFL team, each team also has a practice squad that can be tapped in the event of injury, etc. Also, the transition many freshmen require means of those players are idally using their first year to get acclimated. The often comprise roughly 1/4th of a college teams roster, while rookies typically account for mor elike 10% of an NFL teams roster.

So it might be feasible to further reduce the number ot say 80, but 53 is completely out of the question, and even 65 is almost certainly too low.
You are wrong. I worked in the Big Ten office at the time you cited and there were clear limits of scholarships in the conference. Since freshmen were ineligible you could only use three classes and you were limited to 120 total scholarships and a limit of no more than 35 initial scholies a year. No redshirting.
 
You are wrong. I worked in the Big Ten office at the time you cited and there were clear limits of scholarships in the conference. Since freshmen were ineligible you could only use three classes and you were limited to 120 total scholarships and a limit of no more than 35 initial scholies a year. No redshirting.

The data I posted was for the NCAA, and not specific to the B1G. It is accurate. I have no recollection of the B1G having any different scholarship limits than the NCAA, can find no reference to any such differences, and find it hard to believe the B1G would put its member institutions at a competetive disadvantage to schools from other conferences for no apparent reason.
 
The data I posted was for the NCAA, and not specific to the B1G. It is accurate. I have no recollection of the B1G having any different scholarship limits than the NCAA, can find no reference to any such differences, and find it hard to believe the B1G would put its member institutions at a competetive disadvantage to schools from other conferences for no apparent reason.

The Big Ten was more restrictive because it did not allow redshirts. One of the primary reasons Iowa alum, Wayne Duke, was hired away from the Big Eight to run the Big Ten. Within four years of his arrival the Big Ten had approved redshirting and allowed multiple schools to participate in bowl games.
 
^^ According to a recent OWH article, when Nebraska won their first mythical title in 1970, they had 45 full scholarship players. At that same time, the Big Ten limited their teams to 30.

Actually, Nebraska's 1969 recruiting class included 46 scholarsship freshmen alone. And no, the B1G didn't limit football scolarship to any number even remotely close to 30.
 
When Johhny Majors left ISU to take the head coaching job at Pittsburgh he signed a huge freshman class which included Tony Dorsett. Pittsburgh won the national championship four years later. Wouldn't have happened if the current scholarship limits had been in place.
 
Why not knock it down the NFL 53? Or even let's say 65. This would not be bad for Iowa. It keeps the OSU's from being able to hoard players.


Title IX isn't going away.
The issue of course is that if the NFL players get hurt they either pull from the practice squad, OR they can go sign anyone from another practice squad or someone thats not affiliated with a team currently. In college you have what you have. No going out and replacing players on the roster. Also if the league wasn't paying players so much money they would collectively bargain for bigger rosters. Its a matter of dollars and cents....
 
IMO, parity in sports is boring. It's much more exciting to have blue bloods and enjoy the process of trying to improve to match them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Buck2427
Once upon a time we had single platoon, limited substitution football. That ended in 1965. Iowa's only two Rose Bowl wins (1957 and 1959) came in the single platoon era that produced, among others, All-Americans Bob Jeter, Willie Fleming, Kenny Ploen, Randy Duncan, Alex Karras, Jim Gibbons, Paul Krause and, of course, going way back to Nile Kinnick and Duke Slater.

Returning to single platoon football (maximum of three subs at a time) would cut most football expenses in half as well as further distribute talent while income would remain the same. Among the reasons Evy quit coaching was his concern that Iowa might not be able to compete in two-platoon football.

There were many terrific football teams and football players in the single-platoon era. It would take five years or so to make such a change, but personally, I'd love to see it.
 
Once upon a time we had single platoon, limited substitution football. That ended in 1965. Iowa's only two Rose Bowl wins (1957 and 1959) came in the single platoon era that produced, among others, All-Americans Bob Jeter, Willie Fleming, Kenny Ploen, Randy Duncan, Alex Karras, Jim Gibbons, Paul Krause and, of course, going way back to Nile Kinnick and Duke Slater.

Returning to single platoon football (maximum of three subs at a time) would cut most football expenses in half as well as further distribute talent while income would remain the same. Among the reasons Evy quit coaching was his concern that Iowa might not be able to compete in two-platoon football.

There were many terrific football teams and football players in the single-platoon era. It would take five years or so to make such a change, but personally, I'd love to see it.

it would be interesting to be sure. The game would be far different. The players are far bigger and faster across the board today than they were back then. The guys you mentioned would have all been great no matter the era, especially if given the advantage of the improvements in diet and strength training afforded today's players.

I really don't see how from a practicality standpoint they could go back to that with increased emphasis on player safety. But an interesting thought exercise.
 
Back in their glory days of the 1950's Georgia Tech would have 150-160 scholarship football players. Remember this was in the days of one platoon ball. In the early 60's the SEC passed the "140" rule. The "140" rule meant you could have that many total scholarship athletes. This included basketball, baseball, etc. Remember there were no women sports at the time. Georgia Tech was very unhappy with the new rule because they argued that Alabama (Bear Bryant) and Auburn (Shug Jordan) would run off players to get the scholarship back and Tech didn't. The other SEC schools argued that Georgia Tech was one of the few SEC schools that could afford 165-185 scholarships (Atlanta in the pre-pro sports days when GT was the only game in town). This was one of several reasons why Georgia Tech left the SEC in 1964.

Then there were the scholarship ideas that Bear Bryant and Johnny Vaught (Ole Miss) came up with after the SEC put a yearly limit on scholarships in the mid to late 1960's. Both would give football players swimming scholarships. Why? Neither school had a swimming team and they didn't want those scholarships to go to waste.
 
I think limiting it to 75 scholarships would be great for football. I think Iowa would do better.
 
The Big Ten was more restrictive because it did not allow redshirts. One of the primary reasons Iowa alum, Wayne Duke, was hired away from the Big Eight to run the Big Ten. Within four years of his arrival the Big Ten had approved redshirting and allowed multiple schools to participate in bowl games.


You are correct. Only way to get a red shirt was medical. Freshman couldnt be on the varsity. We had our own
freshman team and played two games.
 
"Wanna be" was called ""want of bees" by someone and then shortened to WOB. I used the word "parody" instead of "parity", hence I'm this thread's WOB, which I proudly embrace.

Part of HR's lore, but pales in comparison to the all-time great "That's not me, it's my jacket!"
 
This thread reminds me of the D2 mind set back in the day when they reduced scholarships to 36
because there were a couple of teams who were more powerful and had more money. So they reduced to 36
to try and stifle competition because they were getting their asses kicked.
 
Once upon a time we had single platoon, limited substitution football. That ended in 1965. Iowa's only two Rose Bowl wins (1957 and 1959) came in the single platoon era that produced, among others, All-Americans Bob Jeter, Willie Fleming, Kenny Ploen, Randy Duncan, Alex Karras, Jim Gibbons, Paul Krause and, of course, going way back to Nile Kinnick and Duke Slater.

Returning to single platoon football (maximum of three subs at a time) would cut most football expenses in half as well as further distribute talent while income would remain the same. Among the reasons Evy quit coaching was his concern that Iowa might not be able to compete in two-platoon football.

There were many terrific football teams and football players in the single-platoon era. It would take five years or so to make such a change, but personally, I'd love to see it.

Certainly! Fans would be clamoring for a return to those wonderful days that produced scores of 3-0, 0-0, 7-6 and the high scoring games like 20-17 and 17-14! Yippee. Back to the future.
 
Why not knock it down the NFL 53? Or even let's say 65. This would not be bad for Iowa. It keeps the OSU's from being able to hoard players.


Title IX isn't going away.
53 is like what you need to play a game, not a season. 53 would mean a lot of freshman would be very active, probably not in great way. It would mean too many injuries and you seriously hurt your chances of competing
 
ADVERTISEMENT