Aidan Warner awarded scholarship

When does the 105 limit and everyone can be on scholly kick in? Isn’t it this year?

 

He deserves it as a qb that we counted on.

 

Congrats. I do hope there is a video where Billy announces it to the entire team. That is about as good as it gets. Not that things are the same in the NIL era, just that it means they are recognized for true achievement.

 

It will be a 105 limit but still 85 scholarships from what understand. Limited to 20 walk on’s

 

Nope. All 105 can be on scholly.

*apparently the sec isn’t going to follow the new ncaa rule.*

 

Hold onto that thought. We will see. I’m fairly certain you’re wrong.

 

The new ncaa rule is a hard cap of 105 and they can all be on scholly. They don’t have to be, but they’re allowed to be.


*it looks like sec is trying to keep it at 85 scholly’s and 20 walkons for this year. They’re waiting on the current lawsuit to settle.

 

Not how it’s going to come out in the wash I don’t think. There was major pushback on that and it looks like they settled on 85 and 20. We will know for sure end of June when they vote. How you are interpreting it was the original plan though.

 

Looks like the SEC has ruled that they’re sticking with 105/85 for the 25/26 season pending the settlement in the House V NCAA lawsuit. So they’ve lowered it from 115 already, they’re just not allowing the extra scholly’s.

 

I can't wrap my head around the reduction of walkons. The number of coaches and staff increases and NIL is keeping older players in college ball, limiting the number of high school recruits coming into the P4 schools but then we want to deny players coming in to compete and be a part of the team they dreamed to play for? I don't get it. How is this helping?

 

They still cost the program money to be on the team. Better to limit the WO's and redirect that money into quality players.

 

What is there to get? It is a new day and a new game. The old, while quaint in some ways, was corrupt to several different degrees. I want to believe our version of corruptness was more noble in intent and less "going for it" like Bama in football or Kentucky in basketball (or should I say what they had to do to keep up the prestige they are/were addicted to). But since I was never an insider, I can not say for sure what was/is our level of "creative accounting". I can only say that, as resourceful as UF is, and I see the makeup of the alumni and distinguished supporters, we are kind of unique. But again, I do not have certainty, just a discerning mind and good powers of observation.

Anyways, the concept of a true student-athlete is pretty much up there with the family farm delivering all our foodstuffs and gondolas being the transportation mode in Venice. It is a quaint relic that we embrace and keep it around because to think otherwise is too traumatic to our collective psyches. Now under no circumstances will I razz any person who embraces and lives the life of a true student-athlete. It is just that I am hard wired to know that when someone proclaims that they are "Vegan" because "the thought of killing innocent animals for our benefit is abhorrent" and then I see them eating fish or poultry because those have beady eyes rather than "Bambi eyes" or they have leather clothes or utilitarian items, I call them exactly what they are: arrogant hypocrites or abjectly stupid or a combination of both. It is what it is.

So, if you haven't figured it out by now, what we have today is a reflection of the values of today (and the recent past if we are being honest) and it is that greed is good and altruism is mainly a losing proposition. And to a great line, "if you aren't cheating then you aren't really trying." Again, it is what it is.

And I think your main point was "how does this help" and my reply is "no one knows, except everyone is trying anything and everything to do a bit better than everyone else." And Napier and Associates is really no different. If I may use the vegan analogy above, I would call him someone who doesn't eat meat of any kind or wears leather of any kind, but he DOES use leather products when they are clearly superior to the manmade products. Is that okay with you? Personally, I am still trying to make up my mind. And yes, I am fully prepared to walk away from an activity that I truly enjoy because once you see something, you can't unsee it. And what I see isn't looking too "noble" right now. And once again...it is what it is.

 

He earned it. Looked very capable in the spring game.

 

Handful may cost but most don't

 

That was a nice long post but did not explain how walkons are not useful and why a number that was deemed reasonable is now being reduced.

 

Again, re-read it. You are holding onto the past, and the game has changed. No one really knows what works and what is superfluous. This is Napier's way of handling the new landscape. Not that much different than hiring an assistant to an assistant analyst in charge of making sure the cleats are free of debris. It is what it is.

 

They all cost the program money. In equipment usage, taking up the trainers and the coaches time that could be spent on scholarship players. A college football team doesn't need more than 88-94 players.
88 gets you 4 deep
6 more for kickers/punters/misc.

 

The era of the student-athlete is a fond memory. What we have now in college football is a professional league in which the players are required to attend classes (at as many schools as they want to till they're out of eligibility) in order to participate in the league. Not that there's anything wrong with that, I guess, it's just not what long-time college football fans used to watch and now miss. It's still fun to watch, if you can keep up with who is playing for whom. (I guess that will be part of the fun of it.)

 

The real expense is travel and they don't unless they become contributors, which is the optimal case for a walk on. Coaches are there for a scout team regardless and we have and will have more staff than players regardless. If CBN thinks we need 125, I wouldn't argue with him. I see this as a solution without a problem.