Cutting the total number of scholarships by 5....

I agree with most of what you said.  I don't see scholarship reductions as decreasing the amount of competition for top recruits, but quite the opposite.  There will be less room to gamble and so schools will early identify the "sure things" and really pull out the stops for them.

Exactly. He was speaking about the schollie reductions that USC is under, but I think that Lane Kiffin may have inadvertently explained what is likely to happen if the NCAA does choose to lower the number of schollies available.

He was asked about signing only 12 players when he could have had 15. He said that he had his eye on some kids that under normal circumstances, he would have "taken a chance" on and offered them. However, because of the schollie reduction, he chose not to offer those kids so that they would be available for possible late signees or transfers or to use next season.

Now, take that explanation from him, spread it across all of college football and how many kids that teams would normally "take a chance" on that end up not getting an offer or at least not to a school that they would really like to go to.

I can be spun in many directions. Up to 600 less scholarships for 600 kids.

If this was an altruistic group, I suppose we could transfer some of those scholarships to academic excellence students instead.

the odds of that happening is about the same as BSU winning a national championship....slim and none. 

The problem with oversigning is not that a school gets more players on scholarship than allowed. The problem is, the excess kids are held up getting into another school until they are released and by the time they are released it is just plain too late for many of them.

Oversigning is a tactic used to keep good kids off the rosters of your opponents and while that does help your program it is a the cost of pain and suffering to those kids that do not get to go to the school they were promised or any other good school for that matter.

Put this out originally as a PM to nwtrucker.  Here is another problem with the cut of 5. Players get injured. Obviously broken legs cannot play. But some groin puuls might be able to play. Some high ankle sprains may be able to play. So now you play them instead of holding them out, or you play them more. You know you shouldn't but you feel the need to risk it. Heck, the kid with the broken leg would probably play if you let him. Depth becomes an issue. Some guys are going to be playing at the end of the game in a 42-0 score than normally. It could get ugly.

Troy Forever,

I don't buy you argument that cutting 5 scholarships will automatically mean coaches will play their starters deeper into the 4th Quarter when the game is a blow out (i.e. 42-0).  Every DI-A (FBS) school had 85 scholarship athletes (now only 80) on the team (plus however many walkons).  The last time I checked every team had the same number of starters (22; 11 on offense and 11 on defense).  You could probably expand the number of starters to 30, which would factor in a kicker, a punter, a long snapper, a rotation of 4-6 WRs, and a rotation of 4-6 DBs.  If you assume the same number for the "second" team, then that means FBS schools really only play 60 players.  The remaining 25 players (now 20 players) or "third teamers" are basically there to serve as the practice squad and fill in if a position is depleted with injuries.  At best, a third teamer's hope of ever seeing the field is to play on special teams because if he is waiting for a blow out then he might only see the field for 1 or 2 games that season. 

The real reason a coach leaves his starters during a blowout is to allow his players to pad their stats, who may be pursuing a record, and to run up the score.  The padding of stats is no different than how most NFL coaches handle blowouts.  The running up the score is so the team is in a better position to move up in the polls, especially when you consider most voters or their proxy voters (i.e. assistant coaches, ADs, etc.) do not have time to fulfill their regular duties and watch every game played over a weekend.  You will never see a team drop in the polls because they beat some team 94-0 instead of only 34-0.  Nor will you ever see a team get rewarded more for only beating a team 34-0 instead of 94-0 regardless if other team is deemed to be viewed as a "cupcake" or "respectable" opponent.