Admin Notes
I suppose it would be realistic to allow players to lose their scholarships (and transfer out) before season initialization, but how often does this really happen for non-academic/disciplinary reasons?

I will also note that if we make this change so that scholarships are not guaranteed, scholarship offers will no longer trump non-scholarship offers in recruiting. I would think this would skew the talent pool towards the elite schools, since currently the lower-prestige schools can get dibs once the elite schools have used up their scholarships.

Comments
Jeff Blevins (Jun 10 14:55:57 2024 )
A change like this would restrict you from designating a PTP player to be cut, right?
I think 5-6 is too much. Maybe 2 per season? I think teams need to be held accountable for some bad scholarships given out.

Loren Smith (Feb 15 15:32:26 2025 )
I'll say ok, but should be at least a small ding to your prestige for pulling the scholarship. Future players might be more skeptical of your scholarship offer holding up for four years.

Coach Proto (Sep 14 08:18:43 2025 )
I echo Jeff's comments. Keep it to a very limited number (2?) and either not allowed for PTP players or suffer some negative long term effects that stick with you for some time for doing so.

Jim Caruso (Sep 14 18:22:19 2025 )
I'm supportive of the limit of 2 per season, especially for Tier 1. For cutting players with PTP, I think the penalty should be 75-80% of what the penalty is for not fulfilling the PTP. My logic here is instead of leaving the player on your roster upset and not playing, you are allowing him to move on to play somewhere else and not lose a year of eligibility.

Perhaps the limit can be increased to 5 or another number upon taking a new job and left at 2 for incumbent coaches at Tier 1. I imagine at Tier 2/3 you have DC recruits who turn unplayable after a bad camp. It might be a coding headache, but perhaps those programs should get 3-4 per year. Or perhaps the logic could be up to 2 DC or better players and up to 5 if includes any FF rated player.

I'm likely overcomplicating things, but maybe someone will read this and think of an alternate version that is much easier to code.

Gregor Ellis (Sep 15 14:18:55 2025 )
Generally agree Loren and I don't think a small ding would be bad. Alternatively I think the transfer probabilities for schollie players who are Jr/Sr and not starters or top backup could just be increased and it would probably achieve the same results.
Jeff - yes my proposal is not intended to allow ptp players to be cut (although combined with a coach credibility rating that would take a bigger hit than actually not fulfilling a ptp, the idea could be interesting). I agree that a smaller number could be good but perhaps allow a first year coach to cut more. Any ability to cut would be interesting to me.
In answer Andy, Saban at Bama routinely pulled scholarships from players when he got commits from new recruits or transfers that they thought might be better than an existing player and needed the schollie.

- Agree Andy that making schollies generally not guaranteed would probably benefit the top programs and is not what I was hoping to achieve with the proposal. Rather than that, could any cuts allowed be required before initialization with the cut players going into the transfer pool just like players demanding a schollie but not getting one? Most of the cut players from a Tier 1 program would be good pickups for Tier 2 or any lower prestige team.

- Note that I do not think it is a good idea to allow cuts of players recruited with a ptp.

Pythagoras A (Sep 15 17:12:10 2025 )
I would be in favor, but I feel like 1 or 2 per season would be plenty. That would be enough to get rid of those players who did not develop, but might be useful for other teams. I would definitely want them to end up in the no region pool, like any other transfer.

Of course, when there are seniors (or possibly juniors) who are really good, but buried on the depth chart, it would be nice if a few of those would transfer on their own. This is most likely for QBs on the top handful of teams, who get surpassed by younger, better QBs. I don't want to steal a team's depth, but when you have a BA senior QB sitting behind two AA QBs, he would certainly be likely to transfer.