The "Nebraska Way" of doing things was an easy motto to talk about when NU was dominating college football in the 90s. Even then, Osborne brought in a lot of "not so nice" players to help push NU over the top and get to those national championships. After NU stopped being the dominating team, some fans want hang on to the "Nebraska Way" as some type of mythological/legendary way of "doing things right".
I meant more that people argue we're supposed to be nicer at Nebraska and helping guys leave the program is not nice. "Visit Nebraska. Visit Nice." :facepalm: Stupid slogan
I am agreeing with you. My point is that it was a lot easier for fans to act all high and might and say how "nice" we are as a school, football program, and state when NU was one of the best football programs in America. At some point, if NU is going to want to get back to playing championship-level football, they need to run a program that isn't always "nice". I think Frost will take the right approach to running his program to get NU back to the championship-level.
Is he eligible, under that NCAA rule being discussed in another thread, to stay on scholarship but not be counted against the scholarship limit? I would assume so. Simple to Decker, I guess.
Yep, it sounds like the rules for medical hardships are being relaxed, and this will allow schools to keep kids on a scholarship to allow them to finish school, but not count against the 85-scholarship limit.
This will more than likely grow the competitive divide in college athletics (football specifically). If your athletic program has the capital to put the "non-contributors" on scholarship but not count against the 85-scholarship limit, some schools will be able to pay for 100-120 (or whatever number) scholarships and some will struggle just to get to the 85 limit. Thus, you can "cut" players off your 85 roster (while not affecting their academic standing) and just keep the contributors. This will create a disparity in the quality of depth between programs.
It will definitely favor the schools with the most amount of $. Basically, when you have a kid who's been in the program for a few years and they don't show a sign of contributing, you can tell them "You can stay at the school, but we want to remove you from the team, or you can transfer to a different school if you want to keep playing football." I would think the choices from the kids will be about half and half between those two options.
One caveat I wonder about to this is how many kids you could convince to take part in that, though. People who aren't on the 85-man or a walk-on can't (or, at least, shouldn't) take part in team meetings, workouts, activities, etc. I don't know if you'd be able to have an abundance of capable athletes hiding in the wings. Maybe there are some loop holes and workarounds. It also sounds like this rule mainly applies to kids who get there first and then decide to quit. You'd have to convince a lot of kids to quit I would think to really make it a valuable loophole.
