My first thought when I read the headline.I agree with you on this one, the rich get richer,
![]()
Our brilliant AD owes an explanation to Gamecock fans, imho.
( I use the word "brilliant" loosely)
Now I don't blame him alone. And, for all I know, he may have opposed it (though since this really helps baseball, I would not bet he opposed it). But this is detrimental to college football. I like the other sports OK. But, it's football I am most interested in. This really hurts Carolina football. It's like we entered a black hole time warp and went back to the 1960s. Yes we won our only conference championship back at the end of that decade. The ACC was a shade better than the Southern Conference back then. But, for the most part, Carolina football was awful in the 1960s.. Tulane came to our stadium in 1963 with the longest losing streak in college football. They broke it against us, 20-7.I agree. Damn him for allowing this to happen......
The NCAA is simply acquiescing to whatever the FBS schools are demanding. They are allowing the FBS enough rope to hang themselves. The next step will be employee status which will be the death knell for FBS level college sports.We reduced the number to help with parity. Why go back?
Air ballOur brilliant AD owes an explanation to Gamecock fans, imho.
( I use the word "brilliant" loosely)
Our brilliant AD owes an explanation to Gamecock fans, imho.
( I use the word "brilliant" loosely)
I know. My frustration is showing.I don't know how much role he would have played in the decision.
Doubtful that he carries much weight in the world of college football.
Exactly what I was thinking. With 20+ new scholarships in football and baseball, schools will have to add entirely new womens sports to balance them out under Title IX, correct?The NCAA is simply acquiescing to whatever the FBS schools are demanding. They are allowing the FBS enough rope to hang themselves. The next step will be employee status which will be the death knell for FBS level college sports.
In no way can those numbers fit within the equitable Title IX parameters. This is almost a “do it, I dare you” move.
Pretty much….or cut other men’s sports, though like Clemson found out, that can have you running afoul of Yitle IX also.Exactly what I was thinking. With 20+ new scholarships in football and baseball, schools will have to add entirely new womens sports to balance them out under Title IX, correct?
I know that was tongue-in-cheek. But we all know he amounts to the proverbial ant fart in a cyclone anyway.I agree. Damn him for allowing this to happen......
I don't understand their desire to spend significantly more money to enroll what is bound to be more lower-level talent.The NCAA is simply acquiescing to whatever the FBS schools are demanding. They are allowing the FBS enough rope to hang themselves. The next step will be employee status which will be the death knell for FBS level college sports.
In no way can those numbers fit within the equitable Title IX parameters. This is almost a “do it, I dare you” move.
The power players in college football obviously don’t believe they will be signing lower level players.I don't understand their desire to spend significantly more money to enroll what is bound to be more lower-level talent.
As does every AD who isn’t at UGA, BAMA, TOSU, UMEAT, UND, TEXAS, etc. Those are the ADs that have the power to impact major college football.I know that was tongue-in-cheek. But we all know he amounts to the proverbial ant fart in a cyclone anyway.
There are only so many players who are difference makers. Behind them are mainstays, non-skill players mostly. Many more players who will wind up seeing little to no playing time at FBS schools would have lifted the fortunes of FCS schools all over the country.The power players in college football obviously don’t believe they will be signing lower level players.
As does every AD who isn’t at UGA, BAMA, TOSU, UMEAT, UND, TEXAS, etc. Those are the ADs that have the power to impact major college football.