Change coming?

[goodsn4]

How will this affect FBS and FCS realignment?

http://eye-on-collegefootball.blogs.cbs ... 8/32698997

[AZGrizFan]

I don't see this impacting realignment much....JMHO.

[MadMaxMonarch]

Like most rules and recommendations put forth by the NCAA these do not pass the smell test because they are composed of, well, shite.

After reading that I feel like they will affect NCAA basketball more than football. Especially the restriction on foreign travel. Many teams now use that every-fourth-year trip overseas as a springboard to post season success.

[Skjellyfetti]

Easier to fund going from 63 scholarships to 80. Also spreads the talent around among non-BCS schools. This is good news for everyone but the BCS conference schools. (if it happens)

[FargoBison]

Would this even matter for FCS schools? We can split scholarships up, FBS schools can't. So even though we lose three scholarships, each scholarship is worth more money if the full cost of attendance idea is implemented.

I do agree with another poster, this would have a big impact on men's basketball.

[DJH]

Easier to fund going from 63 scholarships to 80. Also spreads the talent around among non-BCS schools. This is good news for everyone but the BCS conference schools. (if it happens)

No. This is not good news for smaller schools like us. This is just the initial movement toward a "cost-of-attendance" type scholarship system.

This is all about the select few big-time BCS schools in football and basketball, and finding a way for them to pay their athletes. It will only serve to further enlarge the gap between them and us.

[FargoBison]

Easier to fund going from 63 scholarships to 80. Also spreads the talent around among non-BCS schools. This is good news for everyone but the BCS conference schools. (if it happens)

No. This is not good news for smaller schools like us. This is just the initial movement toward a "cost-of-attendance" type scholarship system.

This is all about the select few big-time BCS schools in football and basketball, and finding a way for them to pay their athletes. It will only serve to further enlarge the gap between them and us.

Not so sure about that....

http://www.usatoday.com/sports/college/ ... ance_n.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[DJH]

Here is some great info explaining the cost of attendance proposal---http://www.ncaa.org/blog/2011/05/what-f ... lly-means/

Obviously if a school cannot afford to provide as many full cost-of-attendance scholarships as it wants, it will suffer competitively. How much depends on how short a school falls in this regard. For instance, if a school determines it can afford additional cost for nine basketball student-athletes on both teams, that covers a normal rotation, and the reserves will only receive a full grant-in-aid. A school might be able to remain competitive in that case. But if it cannot afford them at all, it recruits from a significant disadvantage.

The greatest impact is likely to be felt in Division I’s middle class: FBS schools out of the BCS conferences and the FCS. They will have the largest additional scholarship bills to meet, with comparitively low revenue to meet them. And underrated winners will be non-football departments like Gonzaga and Xavier, with strong revenue but not the massive additional expense of football.