Good on ’em for that, although it never occurred to me they might take any other stance.
Good on ’em for that, although it never occurred to me they might take any other stance.
Filed under SEC Football, The Body Is A Temple
“Those 13 jerseys are going to be around a long time.”-- Brock Bowers, The Athletic, 1/10/23
But will their scholarships count toward the 85 scholarship limitation?
LikeLike
and will it count against their years of eligibility?
Will the 85 scholarship limit be expanded if the season doesn’t happen or to allow kids who opted out of the 2020 season come back?
LikeLike
Maybe this is why Kirby has us at 90 scholarships right now. He believes the 85 number will be raised.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Of course some lesser players who would probably redshirt may suddenly fear the Covid – 19 and snd express a desire not to play while leaving a full 85 scholarship players still available for play. This crossed my mind the minute I read it.
LikeLike
The 85 number will stay the same. The number was lowered to 85 to save money ans schools are very good at saving money
LikeLike
It wasn’t lowered to 85 to save money, it was lowered to create parity. Further it should be moved back to 95.
LikeLike
I would propose that there be no exact number, just a minimum of 85 active players. If we happen to have 12 scholarship players that opt out this season, the team would be allowed to carry 97 but only 85 are eligible to play.
Also, if players that test positive during the season are required to sit out a game, we should be able to award another scholarship to a player so that we would always carry 85 active, then we would have 98 scholarship in total.
LikeLike
That seems logical. So, it is doomed.
LikeLike