Football walk-on programs potentially eliminated?

[1NebrFan]

As part of a proposed new athlete compensation model, power conference leaders are considering significantly reducing football rosters, potentially moving from a roster of more than 115 to as few as 85-95 players. That figure (85) aligns with the maximum scholarship number permitted under NCAA rules.

The concept, circulated across administrative meetings over the last week, is part of what could be a sweeping and historic transformation of the industry in the coming few months — all of it rooted in a settlement agreement of various antitrust lawsuits. Any settlement of these cases — House, Hubbard and Carter — is expected to feature as much as $2.9 billion in back damages for former players, a future revenue sharing model with current athletes and an overhaul of the NCAA scholarship and roster structure.

 

[BTF69]

I could see it happening.

I think in CBB you are going to see coaches start to just keep 10-11 guys, keep a scholarship open for mid-year transfers and save some NIL cash. No one goes 13 deep anyway.

 

[king_kong_]

Dumb

Kids should have more options, not less

 

[Ses1]

I hate to see less chances for guys to come out, work extremely hard and earn their way to the field. Putting a ton of pressure on HS resumes to earn a spot. Seems kind of wild to think a persons athletic fate might be sealed before they are 18.

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

Is this another unintended consequence of NIL? Or would this have happened anyway?

 

[HuskerOH]

Is this another unintended consequence of NIL? Or would this have happened anyway?

Not NIL, Mega conferences and roster management. This is just the continuation of the development to a minor league system.

 

[RBigredMax]

So K-State would still get to have walk-ons🤬

 

[Big bo fan]

As part of a proposed new athlete compensation model, power conference leaders are considering significantly reducing football rosters, potentially moving from a roster of more than 115 to as few as 85-95 players. That figure (85) aligns with the maximum scholarship number permitted under NCAA rules.

The concept, circulated across administrative meetings over the last week, is part of what could be a sweeping and historic transformation of the industry in the coming few months — all of it rooted in a settlement agreement of various antitrust lawsuits. Any settlement of these cases — House, Hubbard and Carter — is expected to feature as much as $2.9 billion in back damages for former players, a future revenue sharing model with current athletes and an overhaul of the NCAA scholarship and roster structure.

In no world would coaches agree to practice with only scholarship players. Not happening.

 

[BugsAreQualityProtein]

What is being purposed is complete insanity. Most P5 schools would struggle to payout 30 million a year in athlete compensation. Those who could would have a huge advantage, furthering the gap between the haves and have nots.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Not NIL, Mega conferences and roster management. This is just the continuation of the development to a minor league system.

Disagree and agree, Schools with big pockets are circumventing the scholarship limits. Ohio St and other schools are going to have 105 or more players that won't pay a dime for school and will make additional money due to NIL. So it is based on NIL.

As far as agree....
The NFL and most professional or semi professional teams are looking for competitive balance. There is none in the current landscape of college football. A minor league system will want all of the schools or teams under their charge to be somewhat equal. They would want more Alabama vs Georgia, Michigan vs Ohio St or even Mich St vs Nebraska and less Rutgers vs Indiana. The only way to do that is to limit the spending on players. hence roster management and mega conferences.

 

[itseasyas1-2-3]

Disagree and agree, Schools with big pockets are circumventing the scholarship limits. Ohio St and other schools are going to have 105 or more players that won't pay a dime for school and will make additional money due to NIL. So it is based on NIL.

As far as agree....
The NFL and most professional or semi professional teams are looking for competitive balance. There is none in the current landscape of college football. A minor league system will want all of the schools or teams under their charge to be somewhat equal. They would want more Alabama vs Georgia, Michigan vs Ohio St or even Mich St vs Nebraska and less Rutgers vs Indiana. The only way to do that is to limit the spending on players. hence roster management and mega conferences.

Ive always advocated a total roster of not more than 125 players. Those 15-35 players that are no longer on the squad have a much better chance to contribute and play at the Kearney States, Wayne State, etc than to be a 5th team DT who never sees a meaningful snap.

There are some great walkon stories at NU starting as far back as I.M. Hipp and a lot of other ones, but how many out of hundreds over the last 25-30 years?

My daughter is on the complete opposite side of my argument, so who knows.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Ive always advocated a total roster of not more than 125 players. Those 15-35 players that are no longer on the squad have a much better chance to contribute and play at the Kearney States, Wayne State, etc than to be a 5th team DT who never sees a meaningful snap.

There are some great walkon stories at NU starting as far back as I.M. Hipp and a lot of other ones, but how many out of hundreds over the last 25-30 years?

My daughter is on the complete opposite side of my argument, so who knows.

I tend to agree. There are walk on success stories from current and former teams, but if you look at the number of walk on players per season, sometimes 20-25 every year, and compare it to the number of walk ons that actually compete for and win starting jobs, or even backup jobs is very miniscule. That is not to say that walk ons don't deserve a chance, just that if you look at the number of players that compete for and win starting or back up jobs, who were walkons, the number of failures far, far exceeds the number of successes. jmho

 

[spartanhusker]

Dumb

Kids should have more options, not less

Agree in spades

 

[GBRforLife1]

Dumb

Kids should have more options, not less

This ain't intramurals brotha!

 

[TruHusker]

Disagree and agree, Schools with big pockets are circumventing the scholarship limits. Ohio St and other schools are going to have 105 or more players that won't pay a dime for school and will make additional money due to NIL. So it is based on NIL.

As far as agree....
The NFL and most professional or semi professional teams are looking for competitive balance. There is none in the current landscape of college football. A minor league system will want all of the schools or teams under their charge to be somewhat equal. They would want more Alabama vs Georgia, Michigan vs Ohio St or even Mich St vs Nebraska and less Rutgers vs Indiana. The only way to do that is to limit the spending on players. hence roster management and mega conferences.

One article I read alluded to the fact that all these players will now need to be paid a salary. To keep things "even" like a pro roster, you can only have so many spots/scholarships or whatever you want to call them. All of the schools are going to have to pony up money to pay these guys off who played in the past and filed an antitrust lawsuit. They will offer this to the players and colleges will pay collectively and then proceed to limit the number of roster spots that can be on the payroll. At least, that was how I read/understood it.

 

[king_kong_]

I tend to agree. There are walk on success stories from current and former teams, but if you look at the number of walk on players per season, sometimes 20-25 every year, and compare it to the number of walk ons that actually compete for and win starting jobs, or even backup jobs is very miniscule. That is not to say that walk ons don't deserve a chance, just that if you look at the number of players that compete for and win starting or back up jobs, who were walkons, the number of failures far, far exceeds the number of successes. jmho

Same can be said for people who start a business

Probably should turn to socialism

 

[huskerdrb]

In no world would coaches agree to practice with only scholarship players. Not happening.

If it’s going to be minor league football, go with 54 man roster, 6 on practice squad, and be able to trade with Alabama for a defensive back. Look at all the savings. Oh, except for the cost of lawyers.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Same can be said for people who start a business

Probably should turn to socialism

Jesus dude. When did you become such an extremist?

In the instance of college football, in the past there was no need to pay for walk ons at all. They were provided an opportunity to pay for school and try out for the team. Now there is a need for boosters, their businesses and other supporters to pony up millions each year to help pay these “walk ons”. That,in an of itself, is going reduce the number of Johnny Tryhards given a chance, even if there is no minor league or separate division of 65, or whatever number of major college football. No coach is going to want to manage a roster of 150 players and no school is going to be able to afford to pay that many players a “salary” if it does go to a minor league.

 

[itseasyas1-2-3]

Jesus dude. When did you become such an extremist?

In the instance of college football, in the past there was no need to pay for walk ons at all. They were provided an opportunity to pay for school and try out for the team. Now there is a need for boosters, their businesses and other supporters to pony up millions each year to help pay these “walk ons”. That,in an of itself, is going reduce the number of Johnny Tryhards given a chance, even if there is no minor league or separate division of 65, or whatever number of major college football. No coach is going to want to manage a roster of 150 players and no school is going to be able to afford to pay that many players a “salary” if it does go to a minor league.

They're not going to, nor do they want to. It's one thing to say you want to develop players, its another to say you can develop all players to be actual contributors. Fvck, this is not little league baseball where every kid has to play 2-3 innings and you bat the entire order. As someone said, this isn't intramurals.

I'm all for kids getting paid, we all know athletics is a year around commitment. When my son was playing D-1 baseball, his sport demanded so much time, and school work was required, as it should be, but it took a backseat to baseball. The sport first, the education second.

Without question, there are some very serious student/athletes, i.e. aspiring doctors, engineers, etc, but the bottom line is, their ass better be there and ready to go to battle when it matters. Athletes that are highly motivated find a way to do both parts at a high level.

I don't get the participation ribbon bullshit of college athletics. In business, to be successful you have to employ productive personnel. It's not like the government where you can just have dead wood for employees at every level. If you produce, you have a chance to succeed, if not, business fails and along with it many individuals and families are affected.

Scholarship players are that for a reason, same with walkons, and of course there will always be exceptions. But, what maintains programs? The more talented and productive scholarship kids, or the +/- 5% of walkons who actually are on the 2 deep depth chart?

I'm not trying to denigrate walkons, but there is a position skill level required in this and every other competitive sport. Now's the time to dwindle down the total number of walkons. As the direction the sport is headed, you can manage it now by choice, or later when you are given no choice. No manager of a program should be punished for seeing the direction an "industry" is headed and being proactive.

I respect everyone's opinion on this topic. I just fall on one side of the equation. What can you help us do to win games and maintain/increase revenue? It's always gonna be about money and making the best use of it.

 

[Big bo fan]

If it’s going to be minor league football, go with 54 man roster, 6 on practice squad, and be able to trade with Alabama for a defensive back. Look at all the savings. Oh, except for the cost of lawyers.

There are still academics involved here with the different institutions. That would never happen.

 

[RedCap]

I don't know what will happen but I think the courts might rule against eliminating those opportunities for college kids to play football. Seems discriminatory to me but I'm not a lawyer.

 

[king_kong_]

Jesus dude. When did you become such an extremist?

In the instance of college football, in the past there was no need to pay for walk ons at all. They were provided an opportunity to pay for school and try out for the team. Now there is a need for boosters, their businesses and other supporters to pony up millions each year to help pay these “walk ons”. That,in an of itself, is going reduce the number of Johnny Tryhards given a chance, even if there is no minor league or separate division of 65, or whatever number of major college football. No coach is going to want to manage a roster of 150 players and no school is going to be able to afford to pay that many players a “salary” if it does go to a minor league.

I’m not surprised you hold this stance. You’ve been very consistent for years on this topic.

I do find it funny that you call me extreme and then post nothing but fringe whataboutisms as to why you’re right.

Walkons have always consumed resources (food, time, attention, medical, equipment, etc.). The money has thrown you and most others for a loop.

“Millions each year”. LOL. Talk about extreme.

 

[king_kong_]

They're not going to, nor do they want to. It's one thing to say you want to develop players, its another to say you can develop all players to be actual contributors. Fvck, this is not little league baseball where every kid has to play 2-3 innings and you bat the entire order. As someone said, this isn't intramurals.

I'm all for kids getting paid, we all know athletics is a year around commitment. When my son was playing D-1 baseball, his sport demanded so much time, and school work was required, as it should be, but it took a backseat to baseball. The sport first, the education second.

Without question, there are some very serious student/athletes, i.e. aspiring doctors, engineers, etc, but the bottom line is, their ass better be there and ready to go to battle when it matters. Athletes that are highly motivated find a way to do both parts at a high level.

I don't get the participation ribbon bullshit of college athletics. In business, to be successful you have to employ productive personnel. It's not like the government where you can just have dead wood for employees at every level. If you produce, you have a chance to succeed, if not, business fails and along with it many individuals and families are affected.

Scholarship players are that for a reason, same with walkons, and of course there will always be exceptions. But, what maintains programs? The more talented and productive scholarship kids, or the +/- 5% of walkons who actually are on the 2 deep depth chart?

I'm not trying to denigrate walkons, but there is a position skill level required in this and every other competitive sport. Now's the time to dwindle down the total number of walkons. As the direction the sport is headed, you can manage it now by choice, or later when you are given no choice. No manager of a program should be punished for seeing the direction an "industry" is headed and being proactive.

I respect everyone's opinion on this topic. I just fall on one side of the equation. What can you help us do to win games and maintain/increase revenue? It's always gonna be about money and making the best use of it.

“I’m not trying to denigrate walkons”

Now here’s 1,000 words denigrating walkons.

You clearly equate “production” to what happens on the field on Saturdays. You’re also not a simpleton and must know the real production takes place during the other 353 days of the year and what happens on Saturdays is merely the result of the production process.

Like it or not, walkons are a necessary input. Precisely because it’s not intramurals.

 

[itseasyas1-2-3]

I don't know what will happen but I think the courts might rule against eliminating those opportunities for college kids to play football. Seems discriminatory to me but I'm not a lawyer.

No. I'm not an attorney either, but D-1 scholarships are typically for one year. Either you earn one or you don't. Walk ons haven't earned one, that's why they're walkons.

 

[itseasyas1-2-3]

“I’m not trying to denigrate walkons”

Now here’s 1,000 words denigrating walkons.

You clearly equate “production” to what happens on the field on Saturdays. You’re also not a simpleton and must know the real production takes place during the other 353 days of the year and what happens on Saturdays is merely the result of the production process.

Like it or not, walkons are a necessary input. Precisely because it’s not intramurals.

But, they are eventually gonna go away. And no, I'm not a simpleton, but I've coached since 1972, so I know a little bit about what the contributing factors are in athletics.

The majority of money and time spent on walkons is a waste of resources. If you carry 125 kids maximum, that's 5 deep at every position. That's plenty.

(I'm not gonna make this a thing kong, I have things to do, and I'd like to keep you out of my Ignore Hopper).

 

[litespeedhuskerfan]

I wonder if we'd be doing the vast majority of walk ons...like 95%, or more, a favor by eliminating the program all together. Help em get a better and earlier, nore focused start on their career's, which starts with good grades in college...and I don't know the answer. Just playing devils advocate. I don't care one way other anymore and will support whatever they decide....and I still wonder if NIL helped pushed this issue forward. I don't think its a stretch to connect paying players now, to wanting to trim the fat/non contributers, and focus on the ones left who are good enough to pay.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

I’m not surprised you hold this stance. You’ve been very consistent for years on this topic.

I do find it funny that you call me extreme and then post nothing but fringe whataboutisms as to why you’re right.

Walkons have always consumed resources (food, time, attention, medical, equipment, etc.). The money has thrown you and most others for a loop.

“Millions each year”. LOL. Talk about extreme.

You don't think that there are millions of dollars being donated on an annual basis by boosters, businesses and other supporters of the program?

Yes, Walkons have always consumed resources. 25-30 players would walk on each year, I would bet a fraction returned the next year, and a very small fraction made it more than 2. If that wasn't the case the programs would be pushing 200 or more players rather than 125 that most programs run with. So you are talking about 40 or so players utilizing these resources.

The money hasn't thrown me for a loop. The fact that you now are asking boosters to pay for players educations and living expenses rather than upgrading facilities is going to quickly become an issue. You see it at Nebraska already, in that Trev couldn't get the funding to renovate the stadium to the extent he wanted.

If the NCAA or whatever new entity wants to pay these players through the profits derived from tv deals and other revenue streams, then the boosters and other donors can go back to donating to help improve facilities.

 

[TruHusker]

While some are ranting the value of walk ons, the college powers and their attorneys are looking at it as a business where the schools have to pay unproven talent lots of money.

Of course there will limits on the “farm team” rosters and salaries. This ain’t high school where anyone can go out and even at some HSs they cut players. This is now a business that KK and others called for and celebrate. With that business comes business restrictions.

Does the new FB league or minor league BB allow unlimited “walk ons”? Of course not, there are business limits. Get use to it, much more to come.

 

[king_kong_]

You don't think that there are millions of dollars being donated on an annual basis by boosters, businesses and other supporters of the program?

Yes, Walkons have always consumed resources. 25-30 players would walk on each year, I would bet a fraction returned the next year, and a very small fraction made it more than 2. If that wasn't the case the programs would be pushing 200 or more players rather than 125 that most programs run with. So you are talking about 40 or so players utilizing these resources.

The money hasn't thrown me for a loop. The fact that you now are asking boosters to pay for players educations and living expenses rather than upgrading facilities is going to quickly become an issue. You see it at Nebraska already, in that Trev couldn't get the funding to renovate the stadium to the extent he wanted.

If the NCAA or whatever new entity wants to pay these players through the profits derived from tv deals and other revenue streams, then the boosters and other donors can go back to donating to help improve facilities.

Trev couldn’t get the money because his proposal was bloated and the timing was called into question.

Assuming all walkons will have to be compensated in the 6-figures annually is a ridiculous conclusion to jump to.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

Trev couldn’t get the money because his proposal was bloated and the timing was called into question.

Assuming all walkons will have to be compensated in the 6-figures annually is a ridiculous conclusion to jump to.

I didn't say all walkons will be making 6 figures. But the donors that contribute to the NIL are paying for players to walk on and no longer be on scholarship. Players like Ty Robinson and others. Players with similar abilities to Robinson are getting their school paid for, getting living expenses, and probably a pretty significant stipend on top of that.

 

[king_kong_]

I didn't say all walkons will be making 6 figures. But the donors that contribute to the NIL are paying for players to walk on and no longer be on scholarship. Players like Ty Robinson and others. Players with similar abilities to Robinson are getting their school paid for, getting living expenses, and probably a pretty significant stipend on top of that.

They’re not “getting” it.

Those players have earned it. 100% of donors agree.

 

[Tuco Salamanca]

They’re not “getting” it.

Those players have earned it. 100% of donors agree.

And the school doesn't receive a stadium upgrade, The donors agree

 

[Big bo fan]

And the school doesn't receive a stadium upgrade, The donors agree

The stadium upgrades will happen maybe not at the level Trev thought but they will happen.

 

[king_kong_]

And the school doesn't receive a stadium upgrade, The donors agree

Without the players, there are no donors, there is no stadium and a fraction even notice the school exists.

The stadium will be upgraded. While the players are earning their worth. And while walkons do their best to earn theirs.

 

[jkeb]

Is this another unintended consequence of NIL? Or would this have happened anyway?

My read is yes definitely NIL related. Since walk-ons can get NIL it basically does away with the 85 scholarship rule. Limiting roster size is a way to return to the 85 scholarship rule and associated parity. Kind of sucks for the few schools that actually had a functioning walk on program.

 

[huskerdrb]

There are still academics involved here with the different institutions. That would never happen

At the moment there are a few. All this stuff is like when corporations would give guys a job, so they could play ball for that company. This could go exactly that way.

 

[Big bo fan]

At the moment there are a few. All this stuff is like when corporations would give guys a job, so they could play ball for that company. This could go exactly that way.

This will never happen.

 

[TruHusker]

Without the players, there are no donors, there is no stadium and a fraction even notice the school exists.

The stadium will be upgraded. While the players are earning their worth. And while walkons do their best to earn theirs.

It's not about "the players" it is about how many players. Everyone knows that the players make the game but we are entering a different time when they will now be employees and there is a right size to every company and team roster. Regardless of what some may think, there is a limit to how much money is available, not only at Nebraska but all over the country. I never could see how Nebraska could compete against the Michingans, Texas, USC, A&M and other well supported schools.

 

[Dean Pope]

No coach is going to want to manage a roster of 150 players and no school is going to be able to afford to pay that many players a “salary” if it does go to a minor league.

Aren't we already there with some schools paying players a salary with regard to money from NIL sources? I do not think that the present system is sustainable. Something has got to give.

 

[IM4NUalways]

As part of a proposed new athlete compensation model, power conference leaders are considering significantly reducing football rosters, potentially moving from a roster of more than 115 to as few as 85-95 players. That figure (85) aligns with the maximum scholarship number permitted under NCAA rules.

The concept, circulated across administrative meetings over the last week, is part of what could be a sweeping and historic transformation of the industry in the coming few months — all of it rooted in a settlement agreement of various antitrust lawsuits. Any settlement of these cases — House, Hubbard and Carter — is expected to feature as much as $2.9 billion in back damages for former players, a future revenue sharing model with current athletes and an overhaul of the NCAA scholarship and roster structure.

Farm teams. All they will be. Bad for a lot of kids who walk on and make contributions to teams. I get why but I think it is a bad move.