- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Signing Limit Waiver Details & Projected Attrition
Posted on 1/6/22 at 3:05 pm to lostinbr
Posted on 1/6/22 at 3:05 pm to lostinbr
Great work. So, it does not appear that a player who is paid with NIL money but who does not receive a scholarship counts against the numbers. I expect some schools may have two classes of NIL recipients - (1) Elite 5* players who draw big (at least 6-digit) contracts; and (2) Scholarship-level players who would receive a normal scholarship (but not NIL money) but can't because the university has met its allotment. For the players in class (2), their NIL money would simply equal an amount of money equal to what they would have gotten if any scholarships were left.
In our current scenario, teams with unlimited budgets never need to worry about over-recruiting. We could see Bama, A&M, and Texas with, in effect, 120 "scholarship" players every year.
Are my assessments correct or am I missing something?
In our current scenario, teams with unlimited budgets never need to worry about over-recruiting. We could see Bama, A&M, and Texas with, in effect, 120 "scholarship" players every year.
Are my assessments correct or am I missing something?
This post was edited on 1/6/22 at 3:07 pm
Posted on 1/6/22 at 3:52 pm to Manswers
quote:
Great work. So, it does not appear that a player who is paid with NIL money but who does not receive a scholarship counts against the numbers.
I haven’t delved into all the rules about it. I gave up understanding some of it a few years ago because shite changed but then there were loopholes were you had teams like a Tennessee somehow sign 30+ players.
But a good question. Why not just walk on and get the NIL money? To some, that could be worth more than the scholarship.
This post was edited on 1/6/22 at 3:53 pm
Posted on 1/6/22 at 6:18 pm to Manswers
quote:Can you say "Bear Bryant"?
In our current scenario, teams with unlimited budgets never need to worry about over-recruiting. We could see Bama, A&M, and Texas with, in effect, 120 "scholarship" players every year.
Posted on 1/6/22 at 7:31 pm to Manswers
quote:
So, it does not appear that a player who is paid with NIL money but who does not receive a scholarship counts against the numbers.
quote:
In our current scenario, teams with unlimited budgets never need to worry about over-recruiting. We could see Bama, A&M, and Texas with, in effect, 120 "scholarship" players every year.
Are my assessments correct or am I missing something?
I don’t know that the question is necessarily related to the signing limit waiver itself, but sure - theoretically that’s possible. I’m not convinced that’s what lies ahead, though.
Consider that a rash of 4* players with scholarship offers from other schools going to a powerhouse program without any financial aid is likely to raise a TON of scrutiny from the NCAA. Also consider that these NIL deals have to be reported, so there’s a paper trail of who received money and how much.
Further, walk ons cannot sign a National Letter of Intent (NLI). The NLI is binding, and it’s the only thing that really guarantees a recruit will enroll and show up to fall camp. Despite the new one-time transfer exception, the NLI still has teeth because it’s not directly enforced by the NCAA - it’s (to oversimplify) a contract between schools who use NLI where they agree not to take a player who has signed an NLI elsewhere in the past year.
You can say “but the money will get them to enroll!” but A) we are apparently talking about small-money deals that are roughly equivalent to the scholarship a kid would receive elsewhere and B) kids are flaky/indecisive.
Granted, maybe it doesn’t matter whether the low 4-star recruits bail as long as you filled your scholarship class with better players. But when you consider everything I just don’t think it’s likely. Unless the NCAA completely punts and decides not to enforce any of their restrictions on pay-for-play. It’s a little early to make that statement right now, IMO.
Posted on 1/8/22 at 2:07 pm to Manswers
This is spot-on as any player could be legally classified as a "walk-on". BYU boosters paid all walk-ons tuition.
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News