[Hey]

[quote author=teejers1 link=topic=12112.msg223423#msg223423 date=1518070160]
The 5-7 unused scholarship numbers doesn't even include fifth years who, in a normal (stronger) recruiting year, would not be invited back.

I've seen more than one person refer to the unused scholies as 'self-imposed NCAA sanctions.'  That strikes me as a reasonable description, without the (fleeting) opprobrium associated with the NCAA actually coming down with sanctions and a scholie reduction.

There's no other way to describe it.  If the NCAA docks say 20 scholarships, the school typically would lose five initial counters for four years in a row. Stanford doing this to itself is quite mind bending.
[/quote]

My conspiracy theory here is that Shaw has better options for '19 and is hoarding the scholarships for next year’s harvest.

[Hey]

[quote author=teejers1 link=topic=12112.msg223423#msg223423 date=1518070160]
The 5-7 unused scholarship numbers doesn't even include fifth years who, in a normal (stronger) recruiting year, would not be invited back.

I've seen more than one person refer to the unused scholies as 'self-imposed NCAA sanctions.'  That strikes me as a reasonable description, without the (fleeting) opprobrium associated with the NCAA actually coming down with sanctions and a scholie reduction.

There's no other way to describe it.  If the NCAA docks say 20 scholarships, the school typically would lose five initial counters for four years in a row. Stanford doing this to itself is quite mind bending.
[/quote]

My conspiracy theory here is that Shaw has better options for '19 and is hoarding the scholarships for next year’s harvest.