Talk about your foreseen consequences…


NCAA officials are moving closer to an immediate expansion of the annual 25-person signing limit as a way for coaches to replace players they’ve lost to the burgeoning transfer portal. The NCAA Division I Football Oversight Committee is finalizing a proposal that would change the signing limit this cycle in what’s being described as a one-year waiver of relief until a permanent policy is created.

Multiple officials spoke to Sports Illustrated under the condition of anonymity given the sensitive nature of ongoing deliberations on the proposals.

A compromise is finally emerging among a group of proposals. Under the plan, schools can sign 25 new players while gaining additional signee spots for every player who transfers out of their program—up to a certain limit. The extra spots would be based on the number of players who enter the transfer portal under their own volition and would be capped at a figure, such as seven.


But not everyone agrees with the proposals. The annual signing limit in football has for years been an argumentative issue. It was originally implemented to disincentivize the trend of coaches cutting or pushing out scholarship players in an effort to over-sign high school players or transfers.

Earlier this year, West Virginia athletic director Shane Lyons and other administrators expressed concern that replacing departures with additional signee spots will “repeat history.” They believe that coaches will exploit the change by pushing out players to create an additional spot for more talented athletes—a reason for the cap on replacements.

Shit, you think so?  Here’s the tell:

However, in the compromise proposal, schools can replace only players who leave for the transfer portal on their own. Schools would not be able to gain additional spots for players dismissed from a team, pushed out by coaches or those who leave early for the NFL draft.

“Pushed out by coaches” is doing some seriously heavy lifting there.  Like Nick Saban doesn’t know how to make a player feel like the transfer portal isn’t his best option.

What’s being proposed as a band aid for coaches who aren’t the best at roster management is going to turn out to be a bonanza for those who are masters at it.  And five years from now, people are still going to be marveling at how much better the rosters are at places like ‘Bama and Georgia than elsewhere.  This is a real genius move, fellas.


Filed under Recruiting, The NCAA, Transfers Are For Coaches.

20 responses to “Talk about your foreseen consequences…

  1. siskey

    Yep, if this goes through Kirby will flip an extra bonus year of D. Rob for 3-5 years of another recruit. I wonder if the sensibilities and egos of 18-22 year old men will allow them to know when they’ve been run off or admit same.

    Liked by 2 people

  2. KingMackeral

    “Pushed out by coaches”? FFS — how vague and stupid is trying to categorize (and capture) something like that…

    I naively think things cannot get more bizarre and out-of-touch, then the bar has sunk even lower.

    Liked by 3 people

  3. Ran A

    If your a strong recruiter (cough, cough Kirby), this works j-u-s-t fine

    Liked by 2 people

  4. Hogbody Spradlin

    Oh brother, another rule tailor made for Saban (and yes, Kirby) to cull undesired players. “Ve haff vays of mekking you vant to tranzfer, and zign zee affidavit.”
    It would be more honest if they’d just go back to “the treatment” that Gary Shaw described in “Meat on the Hoof”.


  5. mg4life0331

    Sometimes you have to get rid of your employees to improve results.

    Too soon?

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Ozam

    When the NCAA promulgates a new rule you can be assured the law of unintended consequences goes to work.

    Liked by 4 people

  7. That thing poking you in the back is Kirby’s boner


  8. Texas Dawg

    Will this be called the Tennessee rule? They’ve pretty much lost about the equivalent of 1/2 a recruiting class to the portal. To top things off, they’ve had a plethora of players decommit. Without something like this for them to load up with 1 and 2 stars in bulk, they may have to drop down to Division II. Even then it would be a struggle for them to be relevant.


  9. W Cobb Dawg

    Another step toward treating most colleges like minor league teams, where the big boys can call up a player whenever we want.


  10. Russ

    What about the overall cap? I thought we were already having problems because of the extra year COVID gave players?


  11. jhorne2000

    Oh the horror ! A player might have to do everything a coach says with a great attitude to keep from getting pushed out !

    Let’s take it to another point on that logical path:

    How long before you (and the bleeding heart public ) realize that coaches determine playing time, which is an oppressive amount of leverage they have over the players ?

    Equal practice equal play !

    Care to endorse that ?


  12. theorginaldawgabides

    I believe this is equally a reaction to there being so many players left in the portal without a place to go. There are teams out there well below the 85 cap that would take some of these guys in the portal for roster depth, but can’t or don’t want to because of initial counter rules.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. archiecreek

    It’s a murky sit’chation…
    and gonna get a hell of a lot murkier!!


  14. A good driver can run a racecourse faster in a Ford Focus than a bad driver can in a Ferrari.


  15. ericstrattonrushchairmandamngladtomeetyou

    Roster management is part of coaching and we have the best guy in CFB for that. This was CMR’s biggest failure.