menu
Logo
99+
Bobcat Attack Menu
Logo
99+
Ohio Football Topic
Topic: What’s up with Smith?
Page: 14 of 15
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 12:00 AM
settings_applications edit_note
As I understand it, players who were on the roster prior to the drop to 105 can be labeled as protected, and so long as they remain on the roster, the roster can exceed 105. I don't foresee most teams getting close to 105 for at least a few more years.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,792
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 7:30 AM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
As I understand it, players who were on the roster prior to the drop to 105 can be labeled as protected, and so long as they remain on the roster, the roster can exceed 105. I don't foresee most teams getting close to 105 for at least a few more years.
You are correct in that LC.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,792
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 7:31 AM
settings_applications edit_note
TWT wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
Again, my question is do you know how many we are using? And if you missed the memo, we always bloated our roster over the 105 limit. So to some extent that limit has hurt us.
I didn't say I know how Ohio is distributing the 85 full scholarships. Yes I know we bloated over the 105 limit and those kids will have to go FCS or Akron or something.

https://sportssurge.alibaba.com/football/how-many-scholar...
I am not arguing, I’m literally asking a question, how many are we using?
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,640
person
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 8:53 AM
settings_applications edit_note
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
Again, my question is do you know how many we are using? And if you missed the memo, we always bloated our roster over the 105 limit. So to some extent that limit has hurt us.
I didn't say I know how Ohio is distributing the 85 full scholarships. Yes I know we bloated over the 105 limit and those kids will have to go FCS or Akron or something.

https://sportssurge.alibaba.com/football/how-many-scholar...
I am not arguing, I’m literally asking a question, how many are we using?
He answered this question very directly multiple times. As usual, you're being a prick for no reason at all.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,663
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 10:58 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
Again, my question is do you know how many we are using? And if you missed the memo, we always bloated our roster over the 105 limit. So to some extent that limit has hurt us.
I didn't say I know how Ohio is distributing the 85 full scholarships. Yes I know we bloated over the 105 limit and those kids will have to go FCS or Akron or something.

https://sportssurge.alibaba.com/football/how-many-scholar...
I am not arguing, I’m literally asking a question, how many are we using?
He answered this question very directly multiple times. As usual, you're being a prick for no reason at all.
Speaking of thread drift . . . can't someone at least post more idle speculation about Coach Smith!
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,792
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 12:29 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
Again, my question is do you know how many we are using? And if you missed the memo, we always bloated our roster over the 105 limit. So to some extent that limit has hurt us.
I didn't say I know how Ohio is distributing the 85 full scholarships. Yes I know we bloated over the 105 limit and those kids will have to go FCS or Akron or something.

https://sportssurge.alibaba.com/football/how-many-scholar...
I am not arguing, I’m literally asking a question, how many are we using?
He answered this question very directly multiple times. As usual, you're being a prick for no reason at all.
Your obsession with me is bordering on unhealthy behavior. You may want to seek therapy.
Alan Swank
General User
AS
Member Since: 12/12/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 7,375
person
mail
Alan Swank
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 12:51 PM
settings_applications edit_note
TWT wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
Everything I've seen says it can be 105 full scholarships. You may be right, but I can't find documentation of that anywhere so help us out with a definitive source. Thanks.
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User
BLSS
Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 4,640
person
mail
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 1:39 PM
settings_applications edit_note
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
Your obsession with me is bordering on unhealthy behavior. You may want to seek therapy.
Aaaaaaaand, still a prick.
Deciduous Forest Cat
General User
DFC
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: OH
Post Count: 4,557
person
mail
Deciduous Forest Cat
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 2:43 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
Your obsession with me is bordering on unhealthy behavior. You may want to seek therapy.
Aaaaaaaand, still a prick.
How about you guys taking your never- ending pissing contest to a single thread the rest of us can ignore and you quit ruining every actual discussion that comes up? Just a thought.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,663
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 4:05 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Alan Swank wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
Everything I've seen says it can be 105 full scholarships. You may be right, but I can't find documentation of that anywhere so help us out with a definitive source. Thanks.
I believe it is 105 full scholarships, which is what it used to be in the old days before they reduced to 95 and then 85. The difference this time is that you can't go over the 105 limit. At one point back in the day Ohio State had 105 on scholarship about 285 on the team. Those additional players were all walkons and simply practice fodder for the scholarship players. They just had bragging rights with their family and friends that they were on the OSU team. A few would eventually get scholarships as juniors or seniors, but it was mainly ego thing. Some of those players could have probably been starters or signficant contributors at other schools but they liked being part of the OSU brand.
TWT
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,445
mail
TWT
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 8:19 PM
settings_applications edit_note
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
Everything I've seen says it can be 105 full scholarships. You may be right, but I can't find documentation of that anywhere so help us out with a definitive source. Thanks.
I believe it is 105 full scholarships, which is what it used to be in the old days before they reduced to 95 and then 85. The difference this time is that you can't go over the 105 limit. At one point back in the day Ohio State had 105 on scholarship about 285 on the team. Those additional players were all walkons and simply practice fodder for the scholarship players. They just had bragging rights with their family and friends that they were on the OSU team. A few would eventually get scholarships as juniors or seniors, but it was mainly ego thing. Some of those players could have probably been starters or signficant contributors at other schools but they liked being part of the OSU brand.
The reason behind the 105 roster limit is so the powers can concentrate their revenue sharing efforts on a smaller roster instead of having to spread it around 285 ways. With Title IX any increase in men's scholarships has to be matched on the women's side and the value of the scholarships is often an impediment. Ultimately 105 is 105 and whether the players are paid a full scholarship or they are receiving a royalty doesn't matter. Roster spots on a P4 are going to be tighter since they'll spend to retain their valuable players and then spend in the portal for upper classman at smaller programs.

Quote:expand_more
There's more. Football programs now can give partial -- or, equivalency -- scholarships to members.

For example, as first reported here several months ago, Notre Dame is moving to fund 95 football scholarships as part of that institution's overall decision to add 19 new athletics scholarships across all sports in 2025-26.

Three other Power Conference general managers, who asked their schools to not be named, also told FootballScoop that they would fund "at least 95" scholarships moving forward.

Of additional note: increased scholarships moving forward count against the $20.5 million revenue-sharing distribution as part of the House Settlement.

Therefore, multiple programs who spoke to FootballScoop are increasing funding up to 95 scholarships but not to the entire 105-scholarships limit in order to take that additional scholarship money and reinvest it in their rosters as part of the revenue-sharing disbursement.

In other words, if a school has to claim, for example, $800,000 of revenue-sharing funds for adding 10 additional scholarships, schools are pausing at that number rather than adding 20 additional scholarships at an example-cost of $1.6 million.

https://footballscoop.com/2025/06/23/ncaa-clears-way-for-...
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 10:29 PM
settings_applications edit_note
TWT wrote:expand_more
The reason behind the 105 roster limit is so the powers can concentrate their revenue sharing efforts on a smaller roster instead of having to spread it around 285 ways. With Title IX any increase in men's scholarships has to be matched on the women's side and the value of the scholarships is often an impediment. Ultimately 105 is 105 and whether the players are paid a full scholarship or they are receiving a royalty doesn't matter. Roster spots on a P4 are going to be tighter since they'll spend to retain their valuable players and then spend in the portal for upper classman at smaller programs.
increases
When do they finally have to get down to 105? Is it 2027 or 2028?
BryanHall
General User
BH
Member Since: 9/12/2010
Post Count: 620
person
mail
BryanHall
mail
Posted: 12/14/2025 11:25 PM
settings_applications edit_note
Deciduous Forest Cat wrote:expand_more
Your obsession with me is bordering on unhealthy behavior. You may want to seek therapy.
Aaaaaaaand, still a prick.
How about you guys taking your never- ending pissing contest to a single thread the rest of us can ignore and you quit ruining every actual discussion that comes up? Just a thought.
+1
M.D.W.S.T
General User
Member Since: 12/24/2021
Post Count: 3,655
mail
M.D.W.S.T
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 9:51 AM
settings_applications edit_note
TWT wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
That is something I hadn't really considered, now follow me down this path...

If OU DID NOT offer 105 scholarships, and stuck to... 85. Does that free up $500,000 in free money? I'm guessing no, but I wonder if that has been investigated as a potential opportunity to play a shell game with 'existing' funds.
Andrew Ruck
General User
Member Since: 12/22/2004
Location: Columbus, OH
Post Count: 5,631
mail
Andrew Ruck
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 9:59 AM
settings_applications edit_note
M.D.W.S.T wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
That is something I hadn't really considered, now follow me down this path...

If OU DID NOT offer 105 scholarships, and stuck to... 85. Does that free up $500,000 in free money? I'm guessing no, but I wonder if that has been investigated as a potential opportunity to play a shell game with 'existing' funds.
Not sure I completely understand what you're asking, but the NCAA now allows 105 full scholarships to be awarded while also limiting the roster to 105 (but will be higher for a few years due to the grandfathering as mentioned). Ohio is staying at 85 (reportedly) simply because they are not choosing to make that investment (and the Title IX balancing that would come with it). There aren't some magical new dollars that appear because of the 20 unused scholarships.

Switching sports, I have been trying to get an answer on if OU is sticking with 13 basketball scholarships or utilizing the full 15 now allowed by the NCAA and still can't seem to find an answer.
M.D.W.S.T
General User
Member Since: 12/24/2021
Post Count: 3,655
mail
M.D.W.S.T
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 10:10 AM
settings_applications edit_note
Andrew Ruck wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
That is something I hadn't really considered, now follow me down this path...

If OU DID NOT offer 105 scholarships, and stuck to... 85. Does that free up $500,000 in free money? I'm guessing no, but I wonder if that has been investigated as a potential opportunity to play a shell game with 'existing' funds.
Not sure I completely understand what you're asking, but the NCAA now allows 105 full scholarships to be awarded while also limiting the roster to 105 (but will be higher for a few years due to the grandfathering as mentioned). Ohio is staying at 85 (reportedly) simply because they are not choosing to make that investment (and the Title IX balancing that would come with it). There aren't some magical new dollars that appear because of the 20 unused scholarships.

Switching sports, I have been trying to get an answer on if OU is sticking with 13 basketball scholarships or utilizing the full 15 now allowed by the NCAA and still can't seem to find an answer.
I was thinking of it in reverse. If OU was going from 105 to 85, if that free'd up some sort of allotment. If today they have a standing pool of lets call it 25K per athlete x 105 = 2.6M per year in football base roster cost, and they dropped to 85... if they could do some fun accounting there and shift those dollars into an NIL fund.

I'm sure that would cause a shitstorm if it became public, but I'm just spitballing over here.
Last Edited: 12/15/2025 10:11:06 AM by M.D.W.S.T
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 10:19 AM
settings_applications edit_note
As I understand it, it is not legal for a school to put money into the NIL fund. the NIL fund is separate, and technically external to the University. Thus, the NIL fund relies on private donations.
Last Edited: 12/15/2025 10:20:20 AM by L.C.
M.D.W.S.T
General User
Member Since: 12/24/2021
Post Count: 3,655
mail
M.D.W.S.T
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 10:25 AM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
As I understand it, it is not legal for a school to put money into the NIL fund. the NIL fund is separate, and technically external to the University. Thus, the NIL fund relies on private donations.
WELP. That solves that.


Back to our regularly scheduled programming.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,792
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 12:51 PM
settings_applications edit_note
M.D.W.S.T wrote:expand_more
...
Maybe we didn’t lose anyone because at that point and at this time there is no where to go right now. Portal will be about balancing your roster and finding experience, not adding freshmen.

Portal will be different this year. This is the double attrition year. Players who entered in 2020 got a Covid year, and used up their eligibility this year. Players who entered in 2021 did not get a Covid year, and also used up their eligibility this year. A lot less people will end up with no home this year.
And additionally, schools can offer 105 scholarships rather than the previous 85.
Can, but do you know how many schools actually are? We are not.
Its 85 scholarships and a roster limit of 105. Ohio can offer partial scholarships across 105 players if it chose to do so. The bigger difference is programs are no longer allowed to bloat the walk-on roster to 120, 130 or 140. 105 is the roster max so former P4 walk-on material guys will have to find roster spots at smaller programs.
That is something I hadn't really considered, now follow me down this path...

If OU DID NOT offer 105 scholarships, and stuck to... 85. Does that free up $500,000 in free money? I'm guessing no, but I wonder if that has been investigated as a potential opportunity to play a shell game with 'existing' funds.
Not sure I completely understand what you're asking, but the NCAA now allows 105 full scholarships to be awarded while also limiting the roster to 105 (but will be higher for a few years due to the grandfathering as mentioned). Ohio is staying at 85 (reportedly) simply because they are not choosing to make that investment (and the Title IX balancing that would come with it). There aren't some magical new dollars that appear because of the 20 unused scholarships.

Switching sports, I have been trying to get an answer on if OU is sticking with 13 basketball scholarships or utilizing the full 15 now allowed by the NCAA and still can't seem to find an answer.
I was thinking of it in reverse. If OU was going from 105 to 85, if that free'd up some sort of allotment. If today they have a standing pool of lets call it 25K per athlete x 105 = 2.6M per year in football base roster cost, and they dropped to 85... if they could do some fun accounting there and shift those dollars into an NIL fund.

I'm sure that would cause a shitstorm if it became public, but I'm just spitballing over here.
We never went above the 85 scholarship limit to my understanding, we’ve not increased in any of the sports. But we did allocate some dollars for the revenue sharing aspect of the agreement.
BillyTheCat
General User
BTC
Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 10,792
person
mail
BillyTheCat
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 12:52 PM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
As I understand it, it is not legal for a school to put money into the NIL fund. the NIL fund is separate, and technically external to the University. Thus, the NIL fund relies on private donations.
May be wrong here, but are the funds not now ran through the departments with athletes able to do outside true 3rd party deals.
TWT
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,445
mail
TWT
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 12:59 PM
settings_applications edit_note
M.D.W.S.T wrote:expand_more
As I understand it, it is not legal for a school to put money into the NIL fund. the NIL fund is separate, and technically external to the University. Thus, the NIL fund relies on private donations.
WELP. That solves that.


Back to our regularly scheduled programming.
L.C. is right about not being able to put money for revenue sharing into an external third party NIL exchange. The university can however spend whatever it wants up to the 20.5 million dollar revenue cap on the roster subtracting out the money the university is already giving to the students in the form of scholarships and cost of attendance.

Strategy wise it sounds like everyone in FBS is leaving some room for preferred walk-ons rather than offering scholarships up to the 105. Exisitng walk-ons (those from 2024 prior) are grandfathered in but everyone is recruiting toward the new 105 roster limit already.

With the P4 having more scholarship athletes in general they take up more of that 20.5 million cap than a G6 school. But the P4 generally has big third party NIL collectives which are not subject to the institutional revenue sharing cap. Only a select few G6 programs have deep third party NIL pockets (e.g. UConn, Memphis) comparable to lower tier P4 programs.
TWT
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Alexandria, VA
Post Count: 5,445
mail
TWT
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 1:08 PM
settings_applications edit_note
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
As I understand it, it is not legal for a school to put money into the NIL fund. the NIL fund is separate, and technically external to the University. Thus, the NIL fund relies on private donations.
May be wrong here, but are the funds not now ran through the departments with athletes able to do outside true 3rd party deals.
This is a good quesiton of how its being handled at Ohio. Actually a good question for the AD once he has his first carvan. Some G6 have made the decision to no longer support third party NIL exchanges and encouraged donors to just give directly to the university who will turn around and give it to the players. I think a better approach is to continue to support the development of third party marketing deals for the players in addition to revenue sharing. There is potential for strong regional players to attract sponsorship though they were not P4 material out of high school which could encourage them staying at the G5.
L.C.
General User
LC
Member Since: 9/1/2005
Post Count: 10,584
person
mail
L.C.
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 2:35 PM
settings_applications edit_note
BillyTheCat wrote:expand_more
As I understand it, it is not legal for a school to put money into the NIL fund. the NIL fund is separate, and technically external to the University. Thus, the NIL fund relies on private donations.
May be wrong here, but are the funds not now ran through the departments with athletes able to do outside true 3rd party deals.

The whole thing is a murky black box to me. The 3rd party cooperatives solicit money, and somehow, money flows to the athletes that the University wants it to flow to. Yet, somehow the funds are independent of the University. Sometimes there are things I just don't want to know the details of, and this is one of those.
greencat
General User
Member Since: 3/13/2005
Post Count: 2,835
mail
greencat
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 2:57 PM
settings_applications edit_note
OhioCatFan wrote:expand_more
Speaking of thread drift . . . can't someone at least post more idle speculation about Coach Smith!
He just interviewed for the Michigan job.

Fansided or some other click-bait site said so. It has to be true.
OhioCatFan
General User
Member Since: 12/20/2004
Location: Athens, OH
Post Count: 15,663
mail
OhioCatFan
mail
Posted: 12/15/2025 3:26 PM
settings_applications edit_note
L.C. wrote:expand_more
The whole thing is a murky black box to me. The 3rd party cooperatives solicit money, and somehow, money flows to the athletes that the University wants it to flow to. Yet, somehow the funds are independent of the University. Sometimes there are things I just don't want to know the details of, and this is one of those.
I fear that there is a scandal brewing in that black box somewhere. Seems not much different to me than the $1000 dollar handshake made famous in the SEC, and not unknown elsewhere.
Showing Messages: 326 - 350 of 347
reply
vertical_align_top
vertical_align_center
vertical_align_bottom
add_comment
chevron_backward
chevron_forward
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)