UMass Scholarship Shenanigans

[Van Everyman]

Bob Hohler with an eye-opening piece in the globe today about the UMass field hockey coach, doing a bait and switch on recruits. in the main instance, the article alleges that she initially offered a 50% scholarship for each of the four years and then right before the beginning of the first semester, asked the girl and her family to alter the arrangement to back load the scholarship, before cutting the player after her first semester and saying she wouldn’t be receiving the increased terms. This was, despite the fact that there had been no academic issues or misconduct, the only circumstances with which athletic scholarships can be revoked.

The article make some interesting points about the impact that the transfer window may be having on collegiate management of athletic rosters, as well as the fact that it seems like female coaches, are being held to a higher standard on this kind of thing than men. Earlier this year, the.Globe ran a pretty damning expose on the Harvard women’s hockey coach. Hohler also delves into whether students and their families of outsized expectations about the scholarship process – and weather as a society. We are more protective of female athletes, who have been wronged, or potentially wronged.

I am on mobile, so I’m not sure if this article is behind the pay wall and can add some quotes later if necessary. But I’d be interested to know what other posters with more experience in these issues think. The audio recordings of the conversation between the player and coach certainly don’t paint the coach in a particularly flattering light. But it also suggests that the coach is not only successful, but well liked, and may be being pressured by the athletic department.

 

[DJnVa]

Bob Hohler with an eye-opening piece in the globe today about the UMass field hockey coach, doing a bait and switch on recruits. in the main instance, the article alleges that she initially offered a 50% scholarship for each of the four years and then right before the beginning of the first semester, asked the girl and her family to alter the arrangement to back load the scholarship, before cutting the player after her first semester and saying she wouldn’t be receiving the increased terms. This was, despite the fact that there had been no academic issues or misconduct, the only circumstances with which athletic scholarships can be revoked.

I'll have to read article later but I was under impression scholarships are always year to year. That's why Sanders at Colorado was able to get rid of so many players.

 

[Coachster]

I just finished the article, and a couple of things stand out.

It's not a gender issue. I'm certain this happens with men's sports too.

The UMass coach is a lying piece of garbage to her players, but nothing she does is illegal. Immoral, sure. I'm not positive how she can sleep at night, but here's the key:

NCAA athletic scholarships are one-year renewable. That's it. There are no 'other' scholarships. No four-year rides. Any coach who says 'we'll give you this much now and more down the road' isn't telling the full truth.

When I was a D-I coach, I inherited a player who was just not good enough. We called her in the office and told her we'd honor her scholarship, but there was no place on the team for her. We thought that was fair. (My sense of fairness is probably the reason I'm not a D-I coach any more.)

Parents: It's one year. Any coach who tries to play with that is taking advantage. I thought everybody knew that.

 

[Joe D Reid]

I'll have to read article later but I was under impression scholarships are always year to year. That's why Sanders at Colorado was able to get rid of so many players.

Power 5 conference members have a rule that scholarships are guaranteed (playing time/roster spots are not guaranteed, though, so Sanders was able to tell guys he didn't like that they would honor the scholarship if they stayed enrolled but they'd never see the field). All others are year-to-year.

 

[DJnVa]

Power 5 conference members have a rule that scholarships are guaranteed (playing time/roster spots are not guaranteed, though, so Sanders was able to tell guys he didn't like that they would honor the scholarship if they stayed enrolled but they'd never see the field). All others are year-to-year.

Okay, so if I'm following that correctly, UMASS field hockey isn't Power 5 and scholarships are year to year?

 

[DJnVa]

When I was a D-I coach, I inherited a player who was just not good enough. We called her in the office and told her we'd honor her scholarship, but there was no place on the team for her. We thought that was fair. (My sense of fairness is probably the reason I'm not a D-I coach any more.)

How strong is the push for that player to leave though? There's a scholarship limit and if that player is taking one (or part of one) your team is losing out, no?

 

[Joe D Reid]

Okay, so if I'm following that correctly, UMASS field hockey isn't Power 5 and scholarships are year to year?

Yeah, they would be year-to-year.

 

[RedOctober3829]

Bob Hohler with an eye-opening piece in the globe today about the UMass field hockey coach, doing a bait and switch on recruits. in the main instance, the article alleges that she initially offered a 50% scholarship for each of the four years and then right before the beginning of the first semester, asked the girl and her family to alter the arrangement to back load the scholarship, before cutting the player after her first semester and saying she wouldn’t be receiving the increased terms. This was, despite the fact that there had been no academic issues or misconduct, the only circumstances with which athletic scholarships can be revoked.

The article make some interesting points about the impact that the transfer window may be having on collegiate management of athletic rosters, as well as the fact that it seems like female coaches, are being held to a higher standard on this kind of thing than men. Earlier this year, the.Globe ran a pretty damning expose on the Harvard women’s hockey coach. Hohler also delves into whether students and their families of outsized expectations about the scholarship process – and weather as a society. We are more protective of female athletes, who have been wronged, or potentially wronged.

I am on mobile, so I’m not sure if this article is behind the pay wall and can add some quotes later if necessary. But I’d be interested to know what other posters with more experience in these issues think. The audio recordings of the conversation between the player and coach certainly don’t paint the coach in a particularly flattering light. But it also suggests that the coach is not only successful, but well liked, and may be being pressured by the athletic department.

Athletic scholarships are not a 4-year commitment to begin with. Scholarships are only a 1-year commitment and can be non-renewed at the end of the year for any reason so the coach lied to them about the reasons to pull them. The parents should have been more educated about the process. Having year-end meetings that result in reduction or loss of scholarship happens in every program in every school in the country. This sounds like some angry parents and athletes who were naive to the process. Hohler tried to write another "gotcha" piece but this comes off as being a mouthpiece for a couple of disgruntiled parents and athletes. That being said, the coach comes off as a bit of a slimeball but the overarching point stands. Unless you are a star player, your spot on a roster is guaranteed for 1 year and that's it. Division I sports are a business even at the lowest of levels and coaches are always trying to "recruit over" you especially now with the transfer portal.

 

[Van Everyman]

Athletic scholarships are not a 4-year commitment to begin with. Scholarships are only a 1-year commitment and can be non-renewed at the end of the year for any reason so the coach lied to them about the reasons to pull them. The parents should have been more educated about the process. Having year-end meetings that result in reduction or loss of scholarship happens in every program in every school in the country. This sounds like some angry parents and athletes who were naive to the process. Hohler tried to write another "gotcha" piece but this comes off as being a mouthpiece for a couple of disgruntiled parents and athletes. That being said, the coach comes off as a bit of a slimeball but the overarching point stands. Unless you are a star player, your spot on a roster is guaranteed for 1 year and that's it. Division I sports are a business even at the lowest of levels and coaches are always trying to "recruit over" you especially now with the transfer portal.

I hear you but if it's only a one-year thing, why all the machinations about the agreement -- and then shitcanning her after one semester? Maybe they were just trying to lower her scholarship for year one once they realized the kind of player she was, but it seems unnecessarily cumbersome.

Also, getting a kid to commit and then pulling a bait and switch right before freshman year should be against the rules. The fact that they said they'd make up for it in later years in writing is deceptive.

It's not a gender issue. I'm certain this happens with men's sports too.

I think that's a point in the article tho: that it *does* happen with men's sports but that nobody blinks an eye when men's coaches do this (see: Sanders at Colorado example upthread). He also suggests that women athletes are perhaps seen more as victims of this than men athletes.

 

[moondog80]

Athletic scholarships are not a 4-year commitment to begin with. Scholarships are only a 1-year commitment and can be non-renewed at the end of the year for any reason so the coach lied to them about the reasons to pull them. The parents should have been more educated about the process. Having year-end meetings that result in reduction or loss of scholarship happens in every program in every school in the country. This sounds like some angry parents and athletes who were naive to the process. Hohler tried to write another "gotcha" piece but this comes off as being a mouthpiece for a couple of disgruntiled parents and athletes. That being said, the coach comes off as a bit of a slimeball but the overarching point stands. Unless you are a star player, your spot on a roster is guaranteed for 1 year and that's it. Division I sports are a business even at the lowest of levels and coaches are always trying to "recruit over" you especially now with the transfer portal.

I'm very wary of the disgruntled parent angle, it was the fist thing I thought of here. The kid was presumably a huge star in high in school and now is finding out for the first time that it's a big world out there and she's just not good enough. But if the allegations are true here, she was done wrong. I'd guess the coach knew she wouldn't work out after the fist few practices and got her to agree to the change in scholarship just to get her off the books down the road.

 

[Humphrey]

Another factor might be the rules about partial versus full scholarships. If field hockey is like baseball, the number of scholarships is far less than the number of women on the team and those scholarships are split up in any number of ways, and I would imagine there's a lot of juggling going on. FCS football works the same way.

 

[moondog80]

Doesn't this come up in Hoop Dreams? I think there's a scene where William Gates asks the Marquette coach if his scholarship was guaranteed, and the coach admits that it is not, it is only year-to-year, but then says that if he didn't honor it for four years, his name would be tainted throughout the country and no kid would ever come to Marquette again. He then tells Gates that even if he suffered an injury his senior year of HS, he would get 4 years of college paid for. Gates ends up choosing Marquette, has a lot of injury problems to the point where he's probably not "worth" the scholarship by the end, but Marquette holds up their end of the bargain and he ends up with a degree.


https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/william-gates-3.html

 

[Humphrey]

This is not behind a pay wall. https://sportslawexpert.com/2023/05/02/a-college-athletes-story-you-will-be-treated-like-royalty/

 

[Ale Xander]

Another factor might be the rules about partial versus full scholarships. If field hockey is like baseball, the number of scholarships is far less than the number of women on the team and those scholarships are split up in any number of ways, and I would imagine there's a lot of juggling going on. FCS football works the same way.

Yup. Only 12 scholarships per D1 FH team
(Rosters in the low-mid 20’s)

 

[moondog80]

This is not behind a pay wall. https://sportslawexpert.com/2023/05/02/a-college-athletes-story-you-will-be-treated-like-royalty/

Eh. This isn't a great look. "I had to sleep in the same room as a manager and another student athlete on away trips."

 

[Coachster]

Another factor might be the rules about partial versus full scholarships. If field hockey is like baseball, the number of scholarships is far less than the number of women on the team and those scholarships are split up in any number of ways, and I would imagine there's a lot of juggling going on. FCS football works the same way.

Yeah, this is an issue. Funny that basketball has enough scholarships where they generally don’t have to be split up. Once scholarships have to be split, there will always be hard feelings.

I was surprised to see that the NCAA max for rowing is 20.

https://scholarshipstats.com/ncaalimits

 

[RedOctober3829]

Yeah, this is an issue. Funny that basketball has enough scholarships where they generally don’t have to be split up. Once scholarships have to be split, there will always be hard feelings.

I was surprised to see that the NCAA max for rowing is 20.

https://scholarshipstats.com/ncaalimits

There are sports that are "head count" sports and sports that are "equivalency" sports when it comes to scholarships. Head count sports in D-1 are M/W BB, FBS Football, women's gymastics, women's tennis, and women's volleyball. That means everyone on the team on scholarship gets a full one. Every other sport you get a certain number of scholarships(for example baseball gets 11.7) and you can break them up however you want.

 

[Coachster]

How strong is the push for that player to leave though? There's a scholarship limit and if that player is taking one (or part of one) your team is losing out, no?

Absolutely we would have been losing out on that scholarship spot, but the student athlete had been promised the money (by the previous coach, FWIW) and I was going to honor that commitment. I was concerned about my reputation and wanted the word on the street to be that this guy ran a fair honest program.

The UMass coach obviously doesn’t care about being perceived as honest. It’s all about that national ranking.

 

[Coachster]

There are sports that are "head count" sports and sports that are "equivalency" sports when it comes to scholarships. Head count sports in D-1 are M/W BB, FBS Football, women's gymastics, women's tennis, and women's volleyball. That means everyone on the team on scholarship gets a full one. Every other sport you get a certain number of scholarships(for example baseball gets 11.7) and you can break them up however you want.

I just want to add something to this, in case any of you have kids who are athletes and are looking ahead-

D-I teams in head count sports CAN offer up to the maximum number of scholarships, but they don’t have to. Lower end D-I conferences generally have schools with fewer scholarships than the full head count. (In my specific experience, the Metro Atlantic, the Northeast and the Patriot League have many volleyball programs that aren’t fully funded. )

This Is true of D-II programs as well.

 

[DJnVa]

Only 11.7 for baseball seems way too low, but I'm sure there are *reasons*.

 

[rsmith7]

And doesn't the Globe (and other papers) feed the misunderstandings of scholarships when their all-scholastic pages are full of blurbs saying "...will be attending UMass on a full-ride" or some such?

 

[joe dokes]

There are sports that are "head count" sports and sports that are "equivalency" sports when it comes to scholarships. Head count sports in D-1 are M/W BB, FBS Football, women's gymastics, women's tennis, and women's volleyball. That means everyone on the team on scholarship gets a full one. Every other sport you get a certain number of scholarships(for example baseball gets 11.7) and you can break them up however you want.

I have a cousin playing D1 baseball. Through him, I've learned that there is a limit as to how they can be broken up. The minimum scholarship is 25%. Roster maximum is 37; scholarships can be divided up among 27 of those. Not sure about other sports.
College Baseball Scholarship Requirements and Facts (ncsasports.org)

One year waiver to increase some numbers:

The NCAA Oversight Committee this week approved a one-year waiver for Division I Baseball programs to have a roster size of 40 players, while also allowing them to spread 11.7 scholarships over 32 players instead of the 27-counter cap that used to be in place.
Just last month, those two measures were taken up by the NCAA Student Athlete Experience Committee, and the committee overwhelmingly supported the waivers. The Oversight Committee followed suit this week, and the waiver was granted for the 2023-24 academic and athletic year.

NCAA Approves Waivers To Increase Roster Size, Scholarship Flexibility • D1Baseball

 

[BroodsSexton]

Absolutely we would have been losing out on that scholarship spot, but the student athlete had been promised the money (by the previous coach, FWIW) and I was going to honor that commitment. I was concerned about my reputation and wanted the word on the street to be that this guy ran a fair honest program.

The UMass coach obviously doesn’t care about being perceived as honest. It’s all about that national ranking.

Many would suggest that being perceived as honest supports national ranking, because better talent is more likely to relate to and trust an honest program.

 

[joe dokes]

Many would suggest that being perceived as honest supports national ranking, because better talent is more likely to relate to and trust an honest program.

In the world where transfers are freely made, though, I wonder if the players are as concerned with that as they used to be. Or, at least, maybe the schools' calculus is that they aren't.

 

[Van Everyman]

This is not behind a pay wall. https://sportslawexpert.com/2023/05/02/a-college-athletes-story-you-will-be-treated-like-royalty/

Eh. This isn't a great look. "I had to sleep in the same room as a manager and another student athlete on away trips."

I didn't realize this when you posted it, but this is a post from last month by Emma Peck, the girl featured in the Globe piece.

As for the content, I mean, this is an 18 year-old kid who is understandably upset that her coach and college deceived her. But she's not whining about little things -- and I think what she's arguing here is fair:

I am asking Barb and other coaches who decide to go this route of dismissing an athlete from their team, to give the athlete some sort of warning or to at least tell the family what is happening, so they are not blindsided by this. Especially when it comes to the financial part. When Barb manipulated my father into thinking we were rearranging my scholarship for her team, when in fact you would use the 10% against us when cutting me from my team.

Barb told my father the day before I signed my binding contract that she would be re-arranging my scholarship. She did this due to “making room for other athletes to have scholarships.” She promised me, in writing, 10% scholarship my first two years, and then 50% scholarship the last two years of my college career. In the meeting when she cut me, she then told me I would only be getting 10% my four years at UMass.

One question: apparently she actually got the money she was promised on the back end. What happened to @RedOctober3829 's point that "Scholarships are only a 1-year commitment and can be non-renewed at the end of the year for any reason"? Is that because the coach had her sign a written agreement?

 

[RedOctober3829]

I just want to add something to this, in case any of you have kids who are athletes and are looking ahead-

D-I teams in head count sports CAN offer up to the maximum number of scholarships, but they don’t have to. Lower end D-I conferences generally have schools with fewer scholarships than the full head count. (In my specific experience, the Metro Atlantic, the Northeast and the Patriot League have many volleyball programs that aren’t fully funded. )

This Is true of D-II programs as well.

Sure, there are teams that are not fully funded.

 

[moondog80]

As for the content, I mean, this is an 18 year-old kid who is understandably upset that her coach and college deceived her. But she's not whining about little things -- and I think what she's arguing here is fair:

Yeah, unless there's a another side to this where she was explicitly told that the 50% was contingent on her development, I think she was wronged. But she would have been better off sticking to that and not brining up other things that were in fact, little. And I get that she's a kid, but she's also choosing to take this issue public, even after she got the 50%, so I think some pushback is fair.

 

[wade boggs chicken dinner]

Only 11.7 for baseball seems way too low, but I'm sure there are *reasons*.

My understanding is one main reason is Title IX. Having 85 full football scholarships means that any additional baseball scholarships actually cost twice - the amount of the baseball scholarship plus the amount of a scholarship for women's sports. https://247sports.com/college/mississippi-state/Article/Mississippi-State-college-baseball-new-scholarship-concept-transformation-committee-187475128/

 

[RedOctober3829]

I didn't realize this when you posted it, but this is a post from last month by Emma Peck, the girl featured in the Globe piece.

As for the content, I mean, this is an 18 year-old kid who is understandably upset that her coach and college deceived her. But she's not whining about little things -- and I think what she's arguing here is fair:



One question: apparently she actually got the money she was promised on the back end. What happened to @RedOctober3829 's point that "Scholarships are only a 1-year commitment and can be non-renewed at the end of the year for any reason"? Is that because the coach had her sign a written agreement?

I've never heard of a written agreement for multiple years in the form they're talking about. Especially in partial scholarship sports, things change from year to year all the time. Good players may get their money bumped up and players who didn't play well will get theirs reduced or "urged" to find someplace else to play due to not getting playing time. That's just the way it goes. For that coach to promise the player X amount each year right up front is now how it usually goes which sounds very shady on her end. So it's twofold....the coach is shady but the player/parents have to have a basic understanding of how this process works.

 

[Humphrey]

And doesn't the Globe (and other papers) feed the misunderstandings of scholarships when their all-scholastic pages are full of blurbs saying "...will be attending UMass on a full-ride" or some such?

The papers are chuck full of that sort of thing, saying stuff about kids going to NESCAC and the like on "scholarship"....when that league and all of D3 is "need based" aid only (yeah, we could argue about "need based" meaning if they need you, they give you more, but let's stay away from that now).

 

[Van Everyman]

I've never heard of a written agreement for multiple years in the form they're talking about. Especially in partial scholarship sports, things change from year to year all the time. Good players may get their money bumped up and players who didn't play well will get theirs reduced or "urged" to find someplace else to play due to not getting playing time. That's just the way it goes. For that coach to promise the player X amount each year right up front is now how it usually goes which sounds very shady on her end. So it's twofold....the coach is shady but the player/parents have to have a basic understanding of how this process works.

Yes, but: she committed based on a certain number that was projected for four years. Right before her first semester starts, the coach comes to her and tells her “I need you to take only 10% this year, and I will make it up for you in the last two years.”

I don’t see that as “the player/parents just don’t understand the process“ – tying one year’s scholarship amount to a four year projection that isn’t going to happen is straight up deceptive.

And, I would add, it’d kind of a horrible thing to do when you’re talking about a kid’s education. I know we’ve all become a little cynical about college athletics, but there’s no professional field hockey league that any of these women are going to make a career in. They are playing for the school, but also there to get a degree. So this isn’t just like some favor that the college was doing for her. They’re there to market the school, more or less, and the school gives them a discounted education in return.

I get that Title IX complicates things from a scholarship management perspective for schools but there should probably be some explicit prohibitions on the kind of thing Weinberg (presumably pushed by her athletic director who blames the whole thing on the coach’s “communication style”) did here.

 

[moondog80]

I get that Title IX complicates things from a scholarship management perspective for schools but there should probably be some explicit prohibitions on the kind of thing Weinberg (presumably pushed by her athletic director who blames the whole thing on the coach’s “communication style”) did here.

The article is behind paywall -- when you get a chance, would you mind posting the school's response? Thx in advance.

 

[SoxJox]

My daughter's experience may be an outlier. She went to South Dakota State on an equestrian scholarship. The coach was up front and crystal clear, they have an intended yearly scholarship plan but she could in no way guarantee it would be met. The intended plan was 25%, 25%, 50%, 50%. In the end, they honored it, but we knew exactly where we stood from the beginning.

Of course, our fallback was that SDSU was so inexpensive - even for an out of state student, that we could easily afford the payments. All inclusive cost of attendance (tuition, R&B, books, lab fees) from 2010-2014 was less than $13,000 per year.

 

[DJnVa]

So it's twofold....the coach is shady but the player/parents have to have a basic understanding of how this process works.

Absolutely. But you'd *hope* the coach would provide that info to prospective players. But, if the coach is shady, you won't know that until it's too late.

 

[Van Everyman]

The article is behind paywall -- when you get a chance, would you mind posting the school's response? Thx in advance.

Sure thing, here's the relevant section:

Weinberg issued a statement defending her recruiting and coaching, without addressing the specific allegations made by Peck and other former players.

“As a Division 1 program, we hold our student-athletes to the highest standards of performance and commitment within a framework that prioritizes mental health and overall well-being,” Weinberg said. “The student-athletes currently in our program or those who have participated in field hockey at UMass were recruited in good faith and have been treated fairly.”

UMass athletic director Ryan Bamford said in a statement that he is “fully supportive of Coach Weinberg and her stewardship of our program.”

“Under her leadership, our program carries a Top 25 national ranking and a team cumulative GPA above 3.7,” Bamford said. “Over the past three years, Coach Weinberg has earned high student-athlete experience scores from our women, earning marks well above national averages and ranking in the highest tier among her coaching peers at UMass.

“In addition, the decisions she has made relative to student-athlete recruitment and roster management have been entirely appropriate and professional.”

Bamford said a review by the university cleared Weinberg of any wrongdoing. The review, however, did identify shortcomings.

“We recognize that Coach Weinberg’s communication around student-athlete recruitment, financial aid considerations, and roster retention was not as clear as it could have been,” Bamford said.

When the Pecks presented Bamford with evidence that Weinberg had agreed in writing to the scholarship arrangement she tried to alter in cutting her, Bamford assured them he would honor the written agreement. Bamford also granted a scholarship for summer classes to Peck’s teammate who was cut the same day and was otherwise left without additional athletic financial aid. The player said she is angry that the scholarships Weinberg offered her during the recruiting process failed to materialize. She said she also considered the free summer classes that Bamford granted her an acknowledgment that she had been shortchanged

 

[moondog80]

Sure thing, here's the relevant section:

Thanks. I'm glad the school is honoring the scholarship, however reluctantly. But, is this a loophole that can be exploited by the richer schools? If I have 10 scholarships, I budget for 15 and just cut kids who didn't make it and turn them into academic money so they don't count against my limit?

Or am I misunderstanding this and Peck's 50% will still be count as an athletic scholarship?

 

[Bozo Texino]

When I was a D-I coach, I inherited a player who was just not good enough. We called her in the office and told her we'd honor her scholarship, but there was no place on the team for her. We thought that was fair. (My sense of fairness is probably the reason I'm not a D-I coach any more.)

I'm shocked you did this. You're a good person.

EDIT: Sorry. I'm not shocked YOU in particular did this - I don't know you. I'm shocked any D1 coach would do something like that.

 

[Buck Showalter]

There are sports that are "head count" sports and sports that are "equivalency" sports when it comes to scholarships. Head count sports in D-1 are M/W BB, FBS Football, women's gymastics, women's tennis, and women's volleyball. That means everyone on the team on scholarship gets a full one. Every other sport you get a certain number of scholarships(for example baseball gets 11.7) and you can break them up however you want.

Not that Red needs me to be his lawyer; but I can assure you from my own experiences via athletic offspring that this is 100% accurate.

 

[Buck Showalter]

If I have 10 scholarships, I budget for 15 and just cut kids who didn't make it and turn them into academic money so they don't count against my limit?

If I'm understanding your question; M & W lacrosse does this all the time.

They have 11+ scholarships but recruit / provide roster spots for 30+.

This especially works if the kids are okay with riding the pine if it's their reach school (ex. Duke, Northwestern, Vandy etc.).

Often the parents are fine with it as well.

 

[moondog80]

If I'm understanding your question; M & W lacrosse does this all the time.

They have 11+ scholarships but recruit / provide roster spots for 30+.

This especially works if the kids are okay with riding the pine if it's their reach school (ex. Duke, Northwestern, Vandy etc.).

Often the parents are fine with it as well.

But those benchwarmers aren't given scholarships.

If I have a 10 scholarship limit and bring in 12 kids with the understanding that only 10 would get a roster spot but the other 2 would get still get their tuition paid for, that seems like a loophole the NCAA would not like. Which is why I suspect Peck's deal might have to count as an athletic scholarship.

 

[BaseballJones]

An interesting workaround would be if there's a kid from a wealthy family who would obviously be a scholarship player, maybe one who could do well with NIL money, and ask him or her to not take a scholarship so that it could be given to another high-level athlete. Maybe that kid says yes because they can afford school no problem. Maybe this kind of thing already happens.

 

[snowmanny]

I know Bronny was offered scholarships. Is he on one?

 

[moondog80]

An interesting workaround would be if there's a kid from a wealthy family who would obviously be a scholarship player, maybe one who could do well with NIL money, and ask him or her to not take a scholarship so that it could be given to another high-level athlete. Maybe that kid says yes because they can afford school no problem. Maybe this kind of thing already happens.

Yeah, I'm not sure how you could police that, other than the fact that most people, regardless of wealth, aren't keen to just give money away like that. And doing so would probably result in all sorts of scrutiny of both player and school that it's probably not worth it.

 

[Doug Beerabelli]

An interesting workaround would be if there's a kid from a wealthy family who would obviously be a scholarship player, maybe one who could do well with NIL money, and ask him or her to not take a scholarship so that it could be given to another high-level athlete. Maybe that kid says yes because they can afford school no problem. Maybe this kind of thing already happens.

I think Pedroia’s parents may have done this at ASU.

From Wiki: To help ASU recruit better pitchers, Pedroia also relinquished the last two years of his athletic scholarship

 

[Mr. Wednesday]

Thanks. I'm glad the school is honoring the scholarship, however reluctantly. But, is this a loophole that can be exploited by the richer schools? If I have 10 scholarships, I budget for 15 and just cut kids who didn't make it and turn them into academic money so they don't count against my limit?

Or am I misunderstanding this and Peck's 50% will still be count as an athletic scholarship?

To my knowledge, it's still an athletic scholarship if it was awarded on the basis of athletic ability, which it would appear that it would be in this case. There's an exception for medical retirements (which is allegedly sometimes stretched, though I have a hard time getting worked up about it since it means that former student athletes get to continue getting a free or discounted education).