Trouble getting under the 85 limit?
The current number of recruited players on scholarship break down as follows:
Class of 2012: 10
Class of 2013: 20
Class of 2014: 15
Class of 2015: 13
Class of 2016: 29
Transfers: 2 (O'Korn and Isaac)
Grand Total: 89
This means M needs to shed 4 scholarships between now and fall camp. But who?
I think there is an obvious one not getting his 5th year. But that still leaves us with 3 other potentially messy partings that could bring more bad press to Harbaugh.
I'm a bit worried about this.
February 7th, 2016 at 9:11 AM ^
I doubt it will be messy. There will be voluntary transfers due to playing time. Three is not bad and pretty normal amount to see transfer without being "pressured". When you get up to 6 and 7 then there is a problem.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 7th, 2016 at 10:16 AM ^
no chance that an outgoing player will sling mud, if they forever wanna feel part of the team.
I think there will be a few grad transfers too so say 6.
Of the 6, I think one qb for sure, maybe 2. One wr for sure, probably two. of the dbs I guess two. and on the OL i ll guess one.
February 7th, 2016 at 11:03 AM ^
Signed, Ondre Pipkens
February 7th, 2016 at 9:11 AM ^
Wasn't Bars discussed just a few days ago? He wants to get on to law school right now. Harbs is writing his recommendation letter. Others will have an opportunity to earn their place during spring ball.
Those who try hard will stay.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 7th, 2016 at 9:33 AM ^
try hard...will be Champions.
February 7th, 2016 at 1:41 PM ^
Those who try hard, will stay.
(to quote Coach Harbaugh from SOTS)
February 7th, 2016 at 9:52 AM ^
Those who try hard will stay.
As long as no more than 6/10 5th year seniorstry hard.
They need to cut 4 guys. The ONLY guys that can be tossed are the 10 5th year guys.
...so even if all 10 were starters after spring ball, you're still tossing 4 of them.
February 7th, 2016 at 10:00 AM ^
I agree. I really wish they would just modify the rules so you cannot be in this situation.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 7th, 2016 at 11:29 AM ^
They don't need to recruit or sign so many either. Don't act like any coach, even without a rule change, HAS to recruit or sign 29 players in a single year
February 7th, 2016 at 12:01 PM ^
As noted elsewhere - MSU is also over 85 scholarships with their class of 19. Shit happens. Coaches know or a have a good feeling of who will be around the next season. Not planning for attrition and having scholarships for non-contributing walkons (to distinguish from Glascqow and Allen) is poor roster management.
February 7th, 2016 at 12:22 PM ^
I agree. I don't blame Harbaugh; the rule encourages you to go over the limit becuase you know attrition is likley coming. But if attrition doesn't come naturally, then you're going to have to somehow make it happen. It puts the coaches in a bad situation becuase they can't play it completely safe without giving up an advantage.
The best solution would be to either require that schools never sign enough players that they end up over 85 (or perhaps increase the 85 limit to 90, knowing attrition will bring many schools back down around 85 each year), or -- better yet -- tie the scholarship to the player, not the slot, so that if a player leaves, he does not create an opening. You get to sign 25 dudes a year (or 22, or 27, or whatever number the NCAA thinks is appropriate), and those are your dudes. If they decide to transfer, or quit football, or get hurt, tough nuggets. Try to keep your players on the team, where they wanted to be in the first place.
February 7th, 2016 at 1:13 PM ^
I dunno man. I think the 4-year scholarship thing goes a long way and it seems needlessly punitive to teams that have legitimate attrition for other reasons. And this would incentivize a team to not kick off players who break team rules or the law.
February 7th, 2016 at 1:16 PM ^
All legitimate problems, none of which are nearly as bad as the current problem, in my view.
February 7th, 2016 at 3:19 PM ^
What exactly is so bad? what do you think happens?
February 7th, 2016 at 7:01 PM ^
each class is completely unrealistic. If you make the number 25 a year, then you are allowing 125 scholarships for football. With Title IX that means adding 40 to women's sports. Very few schools can afford that, so they will mostly cut men's sports to account for those extra football scholarships.
We all know schools will end up with less than 125, but you cannot promise any lower number, then you'd be cutting kids to get there. So scholarships for athletes will go unused. And just how will accepting JuCos and other transfers be handled? No one is going to want to use five year spots for players that will only be on campus for a year of two. So you end up restricting the opportunities of athletes to move
This idea also punishes programs for successes. You're punished for playing freshmen, for players graduating in four years and starting their careers, in or out of the NFL. There's no realistic justification for that..
There are going to be some downsides to any system. You can try to address those in the current system with rules like four year guarantees and you can create brand new problems.
February 8th, 2016 at 10:01 AM ^
Would be that teams can only sign 25 players each year. This includes grad transfers, transfers, and Juco transfers. Scholarships are for 4 years. Schools can approve up to 10 Red Shirt seniors. This puts the scholarship cap at 110, however, the roster will be smaller due to injuries and such.
Grad Transfers would be complete free agents. The only thing to possibly encourage kids to get their degree early would be a rule to allow an extra scholarship if you lose a player to a grad transfer.
Only thing I'd have to figure out is walk ons and how they get scholarships. This just seems like it would curb a lot of oversigning and encourage both kids and schools to get their degrees.
February 8th, 2016 at 10:08 AM ^
A possible solution to your walk-on problem is when there is a player that is medicaled or transfers, a scholarship is freed up for a walk-on (this could be restricted to walk-ons from within that particular class to help prevent any funny business).
February 8th, 2016 at 10:48 AM ^
The only replacements are walk-ons who have worked hard to be there.
This just seems like it would fix the gray shirt, and the over promising, and would be long term vs short term goal, when teams go for Jucos, since it would count against that class. There'd be no incentive to medical kids, unless they really needed it, and it would help programs who vet their prospects.
I do agree that it would hurt the kids who might be borderline risks, but I'm sure small schools would take a chance at them, and it might make their profiles go up.
To do this, Congress would also have to change the title 9 rule. I think it needs an overhall to split Football and Basketball as revenue sports, allowing more freedom to run the sports that support the rest of womens and mens teams.
February 8th, 2016 at 4:57 PM ^
just punishing the kids who went to JuCo. What reason is there for doing so other than it favors Michigan?
February 9th, 2016 at 9:48 AM ^
It works the same way as always. You have 25 recruits each year, and some can be Jucos. It just means you only get maybe 2 years instead of 4 with a freshman. If you plan on taking Jucos every year, then you won't have an issue. If you try to make a quick fix by using half your scholarships for Jucos and plan on normal classes (2-3 Jucos) from then on, you will be at a disadvantage.
February 7th, 2016 at 2:47 PM ^
"This situation" doesn't mean jack; the situation after spring practice will be a lot more clear, though. Harbaugh will give everyone an honest assessment of what they can reasonably expect for the upcoming season. After that, players will make their decisions on autopilot.
It will all work out fine with no ruffled feathers.
February 7th, 2016 at 10:06 AM ^
Not true. An under grad could still transfer and it help us. They could potentially wait until after the spring to do so, but it seems likely that we lose a QB at some point, possibly a WR too, in addition to the Blake Bars type guys.
Morris for example, graduates in the spring. He has to finish his degree in order to be eligible to play right away somewhere else, so players that fall into the same category will wait until after spring to do so. Not saying Morris is going to transfer, but his situation is a perfect example.
Point being, nowhere does it say it explicitly HAS to be a 5th year guy. Any transfers open up the scholarship.
February 7th, 2016 at 10:48 AM ^
Morris said a while ago he would graduate in spring of '17 and decide what to do after that so he's not going anywhere this year. I have a hard time seeing Malzone ever playing so he would be my guess.
February 7th, 2016 at 12:46 PM ^
or they should consider transferring if they ever want to play at the college level. (Edited to remove name)
February 8th, 2016 at 10:53 AM ^
If he doesn't win the starting job this spring, It'd be great if he could graduate and play somehwere else after getting a year and a half of Harbaughing. Especially if he boosted a smaller program. If he stays with the team, I think that is still a positive too, because it sounds like a positive kid in general.
Suprised people think Malzone will jump so quick. He is still really young and most of these kids are here to complete. In mid and late 90s, there was plenty of competition at QB.
February 7th, 2016 at 10:28 AM ^
We just witnessed a few guys who graduated in 3 years transfer. We also saw a kid who had some off-field issues depart. Why do you assume the worst?
February 7th, 2016 at 6:41 PM ^
They don't have to cut four players. Four players have to leave. That's not the same thing and they already know the intentions of some not to return.
Are people already forgetting that they took fewer players in this class than the 30 or 31 many were forecasting? This was completely by choice, as Viramontes and Pie Young were ready to come on board. We are also taking no greyshirts, despite by all accounts having a recruit that was originally offered as one.
I'll gladly bet that we'll be under 85 in the spring, probably by more than one..
February 7th, 2016 at 9:11 AM ^
Don't be. There will be natural attrition near spring ball.
February 7th, 2016 at 9:12 AM ^
"I am officially worried about this"
Leave it to the coaches.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
February 7th, 2016 at 9:35 AM ^
That's funny. That same line caught me too.
It's like - well, since you're "officially" worried.
February 7th, 2016 at 10:53 AM ^
I'm worried, but unofficially.
February 7th, 2016 at 10:59 AM ^
I'm worried about officials. Will they ever stop fucking up the targeting calls?
February 7th, 2016 at 11:19 AM ^
I'm also worried about CBB officials and their inability to get the charge/blocking calls right.
February 7th, 2016 at 1:45 PM ^
But it's not a committable worry until the summer/fall.
February 8th, 2016 at 8:51 AM ^
I'm worried, but not fully worried.
February 7th, 2016 at 9:12 AM ^
Can we please not speculate about this? I agree it's an issue, but it's a discussion which doesn't go well. There are kids who will be fighting hard for those spots in spring practice, I'm sure some won't make it, but IMO, speculating who just seems inappropriate.
February 7th, 2016 at 1:18 PM ^
I am officially uncomfortable about naming specific players who will leave. Actually the Bars thing is interesting; I went to law school very recently so I would be interested in seeing where/why he wants to do that to himself
February 7th, 2016 at 9:17 AM ^
We will be at 85 or under by fall. Even if Allen and R. Glasgow receive scholarships. There are several players that know where they stand heading into the spring and summer. Grayshirts, blueshirts, greenshirts, attrition, and back dating scholarships are being managed very well.
February 7th, 2016 at 9:18 AM ^
I love greenshirts. They make my eyes glow. I wonder if Harbaugh needs a 36 year-old bald guy on special teams.
February 7th, 2016 at 9:52 AM ^
I'm 33 and would give the left one for a chance to cover a kickoff and destroy a buckeye or spartan. One play would be enough!! However, I'm hearing the Bison might want me as qb next season.
February 7th, 2016 at 9:28 AM ^
Is there even a question of Ryan Glasgow not receiving a scholarship? My goodness he's one of the best players on an outstanding defense.
Allen too, he's certainly earned it.
February 7th, 2016 at 9:31 AM ^
Pretty he gets one.
February 7th, 2016 at 9:36 AM ^
if ugly or icky they wouldn't get one?
/s
February 7th, 2016 at 10:07 AM ^
The numbers will be managed and I am pretty certain he gets rewarded with a scholarship.
February 7th, 2016 at 11:11 AM ^
I am groot
February 7th, 2016 at 2:44 PM ^
Whoosh?
February 7th, 2016 at 11:12 AM ^
I am groot
February 7th, 2016 at 11:35 AM ^
Glasgow "earning" a scholarship and him "getting" a scholarship. Based on how the Glasgow family seems to hold UM and how Harbaugh helped Graham this year you might see Glasgow pay his own way if that's something that helps UM and Harbaugh this fall.
February 7th, 2016 at 12:07 PM ^
Yeah, they seem to be pretty well off, and with Graham about to receive some NFL money, that doesn't appear to change anytime soon. He has completely EARNED a scholarship. I don't know another way to say it, but it would benefit the team more if he payed his own way. I wouldn't blame him for taking the scholarship, but it would be a HUGE Michigan Man type move and a great team leader move to pay his own way.
February 7th, 2016 at 1:23 PM ^
I don't know if it's his choice. If we have a scholarship, it's his (we don't need to save it because it's his final year, right?). If we don't, it's not. Well, I guess the only choice would be if it was down to 1 for him and Kenny Allen and he got to pick.