They will have 65 scholarship players every year. NFL roster? 53. They will be fine...

Everybody in the NFL has the same number of players on the roster. Penn State will be playing with 20 fewer scholarships than their opponents ... you don't see that as a disadvantage?

Everybody in the NFL has the same number of players on the roster. Penn State will be playing with 20 fewer scholarships than their opponents ... you don't see that as a disadvantage?

 

I don't. However, I am unfamiliar with how college football programs conduct practice, offseason workouts, etc. How many players out of 85 play the most and practice the most? 40? 50? Even with just 65 shouldn't they still be able to function? USC is playing with less scholarships available than everyone else this year and they'll be preseason top 5 most likely.

Everybody in the NFL has the same number of players on the roster. Penn State will be playing with 20 fewer scholarships than their opponents ... you don't see that as a disadvantage?

That is a huge disadvantage. The NFL comparison is a terrible one because those guys are, you know, professional caliber players. It kills quality depth.

I don't. However, I am unfamiliar with how college football programs conduct practice, offseason workouts, etc. How many players out of 85 play the most and practice the most? 40? 50? Even with just 65 shouldn't they still be able to function? USC is playing with less scholarships available than everyone else this year and they'll be preseason top 5 most likely.

 

The situations are night-and-day. Kids did not have free reign to move to a better school. USC's ban also did not lapse the full duration of a kid's stay.

I am not sure they will be able to sign kids at that level.

I look for every Freshman and Sophmore to leave. I look for most juniors to leave. Seniors will stay and win 8 games next season.

 

The lack of 40 kids is like Hiring Steve Kragthorpe at UL. He removed 40 kids. Difference they play in the B10.

 

 

Scout.com: Top Recruit Sticking With PSU

 

Well, they kept one 5 star recruit despite the sanctions.

Scout.com: Top Recruit Sticking With PSU

 

Well, they kept one 5 star recruit despite the sanctions.

 

Good for him.

The situations are night-and-day. Kids did not have free reign to move to a better school. USC's ban also did not lapse the full duration of a kid's stay.

 

It just started last year though and the only kids that can leave Penn State are the ones there now. After this year if you're there you are there on your own free will. I don't know why I should feel sorry for a Penn State team over the next four years anymore than I should feel for Georgia State.

Scout.com: Top Recruit Sticking With PSU

 

Well, they kept one 5 star recruit despite the sanctions.

 

I'd say he won't be the only one. Penn State will still be better than UK.

 

 

All four years of the postseason ban and all five years of probation with 60 million less dollars.

Everybody in the NFL has the same number of players on the roster. Penn State will be playing with 20 fewer scholarships than their opponents ... you don't see that as a disadvantage?

 

I see it as a disadvantage in practice depth. Do they allow more than 11 on the field at a time in college now? 65 scholarships is plenty to field a solid team and not be in the situation CoachBucket seems to imply like they would be running out high school sophomores against Big 10 opponents. The program earned that disadvantage when they knowingly masked child abuse in their own building for 14 years in the name of not tarnishing their athletic image...

I see it as a disadvantage in practice depth. Do they allow more than 11 on the field at a time in college now? 65 scholarships is plenty to field a solid team and not be in the situation CoachBucket seems to imply like they would be running out high school sophomores against Big 10 opponents. The program earned that disadvantage when they knowingly masked child abuse in their own building for 14 years in the name of not tarnishing their athletic image...

 

 

 

Preach!!

The situations are night-and-day. Kids did not have free reign to move to a better school. USC's ban also did not lapse the full duration of a kid's stay.

 

Every junior and senior at USC had free reign to move with no penalty. Most stayed...

After hearing Coach O'Brien today, I'm not sure they'll be down and out for as long as I initially thought.

It has nothing to do with what I think. It's clear because they just dropped the hammer on the football program. They are the governing body, so they governed. Clearly, they didn't feel a need to get involved in other situations but there also hasn't been this big of a cover up, ever.

 

So the NCAA CAN do it because they DID do it? That's like saying PSU CAN cover up Sandusky because they DID cover up Sandusky.

 

And I'm not really comfortably with the NCAA deciding who to punish based on their "feeling a need" to do so.

Is it possible that since this involved high ranking officials all the way up to the President that this could affect the school's accreditation? I've seen people say that it should. Is it possible those people aren't necessarily in the clear they just haven't been subpoenaed yet?

 

Not too sure how accreditation would be be affected. But is everyone not under indictment already may not be 'in the clear'? That was not the way they were talking during a segment before the Freeh report came out. The segment I heard said this 'is big' and will hit Penn State hard.

 

I view the Freeh report as the University's (i.e. President, board, etc., not necessarily faculty and students) stake in the ground. And they wanted to channel as much as they could to Paterno. And I think they wanted big visible action and big NCAA non-criminal action to give them maximum cover. So the statute came down and then the NCAA came down. But the NCAA action should not stop any police / 'real' FBI investigation into criminal matters. There should be more indictments. I think the 'Joe had ultimate power' is cop out for those who should have done more.

I see it as a disadvantage in practice depth. Do they allow more than 11 on the field at a time in college now? 65 scholarships is plenty to field a solid team and not be in the situation CoachBucket seems to imply like they would be running out high school sophomores against Big 10 opponents. The program earned that disadvantage when they knowingly masked child abuse in their own building for 14 years in the name of not tarnishing their athletic image...

Depth matters in college football. It means Penn State can sign fewer players than their competitors, and a couple of players leaving, flunking out or suffering a long-term injury puts a bigger dent in the talent pool.

 

And please, spare us the preaching about the heinousness of the crimes and Penn State's administrative negligence. No one – no one – disputes any of that stuff.