NCAA FBS Football Scholarship #s

[Z.I.P.]

I'm hoping that others may remember an article that was posted on ZN.o several years ago, which included a listing of the total football scholarships funded by Football Bowl Subdivision schools. Memory serves that it was from MichiganLive, but I can't find it. It could have even been as much as ten years ago, which would possibly have put it on the old Blue Board.

For those who Do remember, you'll recall that very few -- if any -- non-power 5 conferences provide anywhere near the 85 scholarship limit. Most MAC schools in the report were in the 60-75 scholarship area, however several were below that -- and EMU came up at the caboose end with just 45 scholarships funded. I seem to recall Akron was around 70 scholarships back then.

My reason for digging up this trivia is in part the discussion begun by the AD of my local D-1 university, the Hawaii Rainbow Warrior program to consider either dropping football outright or moving to the FCS level. Many of the supporters of the FCS move have focused on the money savings that not funding 85 scholarship athletes would create. My comeback is the "dirty little secret" -- that only Power 5 conferences are able to pay that load in the first place.

It would be very interesting to find out how the landscape has changed over the past 8-10 years since that research was conducted. For example, has Bowden been able to effect any progress in numbers, or is this the reason for so few new recruits?

[ZachTheZip]

All FBS teams must fund at least 90% of the scholarship limit of 85. So 76 or 77. Anything less and you lose your standing as FBS.

[Z.I.P.]

Zach, I have to ask -- what is your source for this info? I don't mean to be flippant, and hope it doesn't look that way, but: a) I have never heard of any such rule; and b.) like the 15,000 attendance "rule", the NCAA has a convenient manner of not really enforcing such rules. If there is such a rule, it had to go into effect after the newspaper report I read, and I have been told more recently, from people in the "business" that there really IS a broad range of scholarships and other funding between the Big 5 and the little rest of us. I know that for example, some schools spend enormous sums on training tables, while the "mid-majors" can barely put tacos and burgers out for student athletes -- not just football players either. Sorry -- I have been away, and just read the thread today.

[Dave in Green]

Z.I.P, I am disappointed that your Green education did not teach you the fundamentals of modern life. Please allow me to remind you how it's done:

1. Highlight and copy Zach's first sentence (All FBS teams must fund at least 90% of the scholarship limit of 85)

2. Paste into Google search window.

3. Hit enter.

4. Read Wikipedia hit.

5. Choose whether or not to believe Wikipedia.

6. (optional) Check other sources to see if they verify Wikipedia.

[ZachTheZip]

Page 356 of the NCAA Division I manual.

In addition to Division I requirement,

a. provide an average of at least

90% of permissible maximum

number of football grants-in-aid

during a rolling two-year period

and

b. Annually offer a minimum

of 200 athletics grants-in-aid or

spend $4 million on athletics

grants-in-aid annually

[Z.I.P.]

Well, "There are rules, and then there are rules"! And BTW, when I attended Green HS (the old one on Steese Rd., with all the hillbillies and tire builders' kids, and few of the doctors' and lawyers' youngsters), they didn't even provide protractors to kids, much less anything electronic. Hell, I remember having to make all those keycards for my Fortran class at the University of Akron in 1978!

[Dave in Green]

Z.I.P., sorry, I forgot you were so old. As we can all see now, Zach had a much better source than Wikipedia.