The cost of attrition

[banker6796]

underwood leaving got me to thinking. We recruit the kid, which cost something, but we'll ignore that. Anyway, he signs with us and comes here on a full scholarship, practices for a semester, then leaves.

From a football perspective it doesn't hurt too much, we have other QBs and will recruit more. My guess is he isn't the second coming of Cato or we would have heard a lot more about him by now. So no big deal.

However, this is where I have a rub with these guys who bolt. We paid for at least a semester of school, room, board, fees, books, plus a COA allowance. That's somewhere around $18,000-$20,000 and got absolutely nothing for it. For a broke program and athletic department it's not good to hand out free schooling and get nothing in return. His cost is the equivalent of 200 Big Green donors each giving $100 a year.

When you start thinking of all the guys who leave early without really contributing anything the cost gets kind of ridiculous.

 

[MrHerd05]

It’s a bigger issue in my opinion. Personally I do not understand the need for 85 scholarship players. NFL teams have what 53? 65 should be the number.

 

[banker6796]

I don't know about that. A lot of difference between a 22-23 year old lineman and an 18 year old one. Those guys need a RS year. Also, in the NFL, you can pick up and cut players throughout the season. Get a couple RBs injured and go sign one or bring one up from the practice squad. Can't do that at a college.

 

[MrHerd05]

Right but still 65 is a lot. And it works at the FCS level.

 

[ilmherdfan]

I don’t necessarily disagree, but because we are forced to take some chances on guys that “fell through the cracks” in order to get talent we need all the opportunities we can get (85) because we’ve seen how often it doesn’t work out.

I am not making a judgement on the people but more about finding guys that, for various reasons (size, a past mistake, injury, etc.), got overlooked by larger programs but our staff feels has good upside.

Recruiting at the G5 level has to be very tough. You have to find the guys other people missed. The big boys have it much easier. Alabama, Clemson, etc.. don’t have much competition.

 

[herdalicious]

It’s a bigger issue in my opinion. Personally I do not understand the need for 85 scholarship players. NFL teams have what 53? 65 should be the number.

I agree with this 1,000%, especially for G5 where budgets are tighter. I think the 85 scholarship max is the result of the bigger schools with unlimited coffers wanting to minimize risk in recruiting. Take 3 players at a position, and if one works out you're good.

With how easy the NCAA is making transferring (de facto free agency, essentially), I don't think it really matters anymore. All those extra scholarships do is increase the number of unhappy backups who will inevitably enter the portal.

 

[i am herdman]

Isn't that how VMI felt about Elmore? They were pissed off about him tying up time and money? It goes both ways, but i think this new transfer portal thing is changin the landscape of college sports. QB at LSU, Hurts to Oklahoma, etc.

 

[Sash19]

Isn't that how VMI felt about Elmore? They were pissed off about him tying up time and money? It goes both ways, but i think this new transfer portal thing is changin the landscape of college sports. QB at LSU, Hurts to Oklahoma, etc.

The difference though with Hurts and Burrow is that they spent multiple years at their former schools thus "earning" the dollars allocated to them......

 

[JudgeDD]

You can't use the NFL as a comparison. Yes, they make it work with 53. But they have a practice squad. And they cut players and sign new players mid season as a matter of course. They play with a different set of roster rules. You can argue that FCS gets away with less: I could also argue that delivers a lesser product in all but the top tier of that division.

Now, we are entering a new era in college football with the transfer portal. Will that become the NCAA version of free-agency? I'm not sure. It's unclear who the real winners and losers will be in the long run.

 

[MrHerd05]

Agree. But 85 is still too many. Like I said FCS runs off 65 I believe.

 

[Sslt75]

FCS teams can offer partial scholarships to get to their 63 number. Offering financial aid and grant money allows them to have more players and use less scholarships in order to have enough kids that are good enough to play.

FBS is full scholarship or nothing. That’s how FCS teams are able to work within that number.

 

[pdbailey]

It’s a bigger issue in my opinion. Personally I do not understand the need for 85 scholarship players. NFL teams have what 53? 65 should be the number.

65 isn't enough when you consider that you need at least 50 spots for the 2-deep and probably 10-15 to absorb in-season injuries. That is 60-65 right there and then you have the HS recruits where many will need to redshirt before being physically ready to play. I would say that the number should be around 75 spots. This would result in some trickle-down of talent from the P5 to G5 programs, and still give enough scholarships to cover team depth and recruiting misses.

 

[i am herdman]

There are also more teams playing FBS(IA) now. The number is too high in my opinion.

 

[rvntx]

Remember back when there was no limit on scholarships? Ohio St had nearly 500 players!

 

[banker6796]

That's a little bit of an overestimate.

 

[BleedsGreen33]

There are also more teams playing FBS(IA) now. The number is too high in my opinion.

We need that euro soccer league rule. Have 2-3 divisions and you have to win at a certain level to maintain at the top division. Divisional mobility is purely about W/Ls. There are too many teams forcing themselves to play FBS football and they don't have the slimmest chance of ever winning.

 

[BleedsGreen33]

Remember back when there was no limit on scholarships? Ohio St had nearly 500 players!

Tom Osborne bragged about taking guys he knew he'd never play just to keep them from Oklahoma.

 

[BleedsGreen33]

You want to really fix CFB cut the money out of it. Make it about the sport and not about making money.

 

[5150]

underwood leaving got me to thinking. We recruit the kid, which cost something, but we'll ignore that. Anyway, he signs with us and comes here on a full scholarship, practices for a semester, then leaves.

From a football perspective it doesn't hurt too much, we have other QBs and will recruit more. My guess is he isn't the second coming of Cato or we would have heard a lot more about him by now. So no big deal.

However, this is where I have a rub with these guys who bolt. We paid for at least a semester of school, room, board, fees, books, plus a COA allowance. That's somewhere around $18,000-$20,000 and got absolutely nothing for it. For a broke program and athletic department it's not good to hand out free schooling and get nothing in return. His cost is the equivalent of 200 Big Green donors each giving $100 a year.

When you start thinking of all the guys who leave early without really contributing anything the cost gets kind of ridiculous.

I have read several articles recently about attrition and how other schools are fighting the issue. One of those is having an aggressive PWO program where you bring kids in and develop their talent. This provides depth in the program when the scholarships are low due to attrition. Also according to one coach these kids work harder then most because they are fighting for playing time and a scholarship. One thing is for sure and that is Doc is stuck in his ways so not sure how interested he is in change

 

[Chris McLaughlin]

I have read several articles recently about attrition and how other schools are fighting the issue. One of those is having an aggressive PWO program where you bring kids in and develop their talent. This provides depth in the program when the scholarships are low due to attrition. Also according to one coach these kids work harder then most because they are fighting for playing time and a scholarship. One thing is for sure and that is Doc is stuck in his ways so not sure how interested he is in change

We bring in a bunch of PWOs every year. We "signed" 12 last year alone.

 

[5150]

We bring in a bunch of PWOs every year. We "signed" 12 last year alone.

Good. It is becoming more of a trend to help off set the attrition issues in college football. Quality PWO's are being recruited almost like kids who get full rides.

 

[ohio herd]

Remember back when there was no limit on scholarships? Ohio St had nearly 500 players!

I remember one time around maybe 1974 they said they dressed 150 for the Michigan game. 500 seems high.

 

[banker6796]

I believe Pitt was notorious for being the largest collector of players back in the day. In 1972 they signed 76 players in one class. Of course Bear Bryant was famous for putting extra football players on basketball scholarships once the limits kicked in in 73 or 74.

 

[i am herdman]

I think some of the lower divisions still have a lot of players. A friend of mine went to a Ferum College game and he said it looked like that 100 plus players dressed. I just looked at their roster and it looks like they have 122 guys or so listed.

 

[Tim Hensley]

Ferrum

 

[5150]

We bring in a bunch of PWOs every year. We "signed" 12 last year alone.

Just listened to a podcast from a guy that is head of recruiting for a P5 school and they pick out 12 to 15 kids a year that are high D2, 1AA, or low D1 kids and recruit them as PWO's just as if they were being brought in on scholarship. They evaluate them on potential and their ability to compete for playing time at some point during the 5 years they are in the program. One assistant coach runs the PWO offer program and meets weekly with the head coach with updates. As stated its all done to keep numbers up and provide depth.