Another reason why MVB has been cut - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Another reason why MVB has been cut (/thread-20122.html)

---

Another reason why MVB has been cut - Mick - 07-21-2020

"Off the Block" a men's volleyball blog, is reporting that the NCAA has approved a proposal to give men's volleyball players more financial options.  This will have the net effect of making men's volleyball players more expensive, at least at the higher level.  

The current scholarship limit is 4.5, tied for the second lowest of any sport.  The new proposal will dramatically expand access to funds without offending NCAA brahmins.

Ten years ago, during my son's recruiting year, BYU arranged for men's volleyball recruits to have the equivalent of full rides.  Of course, they were caught.  Of course BYU faced sanctions.  And the players that were recruited were allowed, by special dispensation, to transfer without having to wait a  redshirt year.

And NAIA teams have always been allowed to cut better deals.  In any event, it doesn't surprise me at all that Stanford cut men's VB.  It's about to get a whole lot more expensive.

http://www.offtheblockblog.com/2020/07/ncaa-approves-proposal-to-give-mens-volleyball-players-more-scholarship-options/#more-33852

---

RE: Another reason why MVB has been cut - fullmetal - 07-21-2020

Need-based aid used to count towards a scholarship limit?  And non-athletic merit-based financial aid did the same?  So a player from a disadvantaged background would have had his need-based aid marked as a team scholarship, and a player who had earned an academic scholarship from high school science fair would have also had his award counted toward the team's limit?

---

RE: Another reason why MVB has been cut - BobK - 07-21-2020

I have never heard of this ever.

---