UCLA’s scholarship count

I know a lot of folks are wondering about UCLA’s scholarship count heading into training camp.
Currently, if all of UCLA’s signees (and JUCO commit Branden Warner) are eligible, coach Rick Neuheisel will have to clear four more scholarships to get down to the 85 limit.
For those wondering, this will not be an issue since scholarships must be renewed on an annual basis.

Share this post:Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on RedditShare on TumblrShare on LinkedInEmail this to someonePrint this page
  • kevlabry

    Maybe some of the recruits will grey-shirt.

  • rejn

    It may not be an issue for you or me, but the four that get cut, I’m sure they won’t be too happy.

  • nyc bruin

    “Maybe some of the recruits will grey-shirt.”

    Expect to see more Dorrell recruits have a change of heart.

  • Anonymous

    they wont be happy, but thats how it goes. if you dont perform you dont make the cut. thats how it is in every sport… and in business also.

  • Anonymous


    Can they give give half scholarships like some other sports do? For example, say there are two players whose families are not hurting financially, could they give each of those players a half scholarship and have it only count as one towards the 85 limit?

  • sigbruin

    half scholies are not allowed in most of the major revenue sports, football and basketball especially. it is all or nothing

  • Anonymous

    Brian, Didn’t you say that some of our incoming recruits may not be able to attend UCLA because of academics? So that will help with the scholarship issue…

  • BruinJigs

    Brian, I know matematically, this is a nonissue, but ethically, I think this is a huge issue.

    Just as the coaching staff (and the fans) demand loyalty/acountablity from our players, the players expect a little from the coaches too. This means not getting kicked to the curve when comes the time for scholarship renewal.

    When UCLA was recruting these athletes, I have no doubt in my mind that they were giving them compliments left and right, and saying anything neccesary to get them to commit. I would almost be willing to bet that not once did the coaches remind the players that the scholarship that they are offering is only for a one year, after which you can either be forced to leave or pay your own way.

    I just think it is unfair to kick a player out that 1) during the recruiting prcoess was promised a UCLA education (which, even with California’s econ. crsis, is still top notch) 2) Has gone through a numerous amount of coaching changes (how can a player develop when he has a new voice in his ear ever year, telling him something different) 3) Was likely never made aware that this letter of intent is only binding for once year, after which the school can essentailly decide to pick up your option or not.

  • kevlabry

    RS Sr. Osaar Rasshan- Change of position was long over do
    JR. Brandon Bennett- Beat out by a inexperience walk on (Brett Downey)
    JR. Darius Savage- injuries and inconsistent play. Reached potential as thrower but just isn’t the player fans hoped he’ll be.
    RS Jr. Andy Keane- struggles to find himself in a inept offensive line and very bare defensive line.
    These players have struggled to say the least and just haven’t been consistent with their play.

  • La Femme Bruin

    I don’t know what to think about this issue. I imagine that players are told when they’re offered the scholarship that it is for 1 year only and subject to renewal. However, it seems pretty harsh to say “sorry, we don’t need you anymore.” And on the other side of things, is it fair to give a scholarship to someone who doesn’t contribute anything on the field? I know BD says it’s not really an issue, but is this how most colleges handle their athletic scholarships? Hopefully this matter can be worked out to all parties’ satisfaction.

  • Greg

    Bruinjigs, I have to disagree. There are kids who have not kept their weight in check, kids who have lost the passion for playing and working out, kids who don’t give 100% anymore. These kids still get to stay in school (at a university they never would have gotten into otherwise) and maybe have top have 1-2 years of student loans to get them through (as opposed to the 4 years most of us had to use). It may hurt to realize that their NFL aspirations were diminished, but it will help them focus on their education because that’s what will put bread on the table.

  • Anonymous

    If a player can’t play at this level, they shouldn’t be given a free ride at this school.

    Jigs, try not to shed any tears over this, we are trying to build a championship caliber football program and a player is promised nothing more than a chance to compete for playing time and if he cannot earn that playing time, he should either pay his way to stay at that school or go somewhere he can earn play time.

  • pr

    It could be worse – John Caliparri plans on revoking all scholarships of the guys that were leftover from Billy Gillespie. It reminds me of cut day in the NFL. I wonder who the “turk” is for UCLA?

  • Anon

    Some so-called “cut” players may still qualify for tons of financial aid, which could minimize the economic hit. The real crisis then is the potential elimination of the Cal Grant program for budgetary reasons, which will subject thousands of students beyond just these four to the reality that they may no longer be able to afford to go to college.

  • Steve

    I kind of agree with what BruinJigs is saying. Just because you can legally do something, doesn’t mean you should do something.

    I’m not sure what the program tell players…if a guy is working hard on and off the court and doesn’t develope or is injured, pulling his scholarship seems pretty harsh.

    If a guys isn’t putting in the effort (which maybe the case in some situations), then maybe its okay.


  • UB (Ultimate Bruin)

    I say, cut the non-performers. If CRN has to cut 4 slackers, so be it! Yes, when they are recruited, the coaches sign their praises to get them to commit. This is a two-way street. In exchange for a full-ride schollie to UCLA, you must perform on the FB field. Each party must do their part. So, if a player with gret promise pans out at UCLA, they his schollie SHOULD be in jeopardy. After all, this is UCLA. If they can’t cut it here when the team is clearly down and rebuilding, then they need to move on with life. College FB is a business. The fans support the sport through ticket purchases, merchandise, and DONATIONS. I do not donate money to the Wooden Athletic Fund so that an underperforming, overweight slacker can get a full ride to UCLA. For MY MONEY, perform or hit the road. Plain and simple. CRN will lose NO SLEEP over this issue. And neither should any of us. It’s time the Bruin faithful put on a thick skin and accept that if we are EVER going to have a competitive program in the Pac 10, let alone nationally, we MUST treat this endeavor as a BUSINESS. We pay the bills (tickets, merchandise, donations), the coashes do their job and so do the players, or to borrow a phrase from The Donald, “You’re fired!”


    Can’t say that I am surprised by this greasy move to yank scholarships from deserving players whose dream it was to play Football at UCLA. As the saying goes, a leopard never changes his spots. Just because its allowed under the NCAA rules, doesn’t mean its right.

    In all honesty, Coach Pete Carroll never pulls these greasy moves at the Football Programme across town.

    That said, if anyone has to go, it should be the players who repeatedly failed drug tests earlier this year. Their drug heads should be first under the guillotine.


  • Tustin Dave

    We often see players move on at schools if they fail to achieve a high level of play. Pete Carroll is famous for getting rid of guys that don’t pan out and he ran off Whitney Lewis a few years ago (after he had been a top national recruit so it happens). I don’t belive that a classy university like UCLA would pull a scholie from a guy that was in his second or third year. I believe that all the guys mentioned were either 4th or 5th year guys that have gotten their eduction paid for for many years but hadn’t contributed on the field. I don’t like to see guys run off but sometimes the players talents don’t match the system and they can’t break into the rotation. Doesn’t mean they aren’t great athletes or good players, just not right.

  • Anonymous

    Reminder: “Lawyer John” is not a lawyer.

  • Anonymous

    I agree with you BruinJigs. I’m sure the coaches are not telling kids they are recruiting right now that it’s for one year or how long we feel you are worth it. They are selling a UCLA education along with football.

  • maui13

    Lawyer John,

    Pete Carroll ran off a boatload of players his first two years at $UC. And he does his best to cheat in recruiting and in getting his players paid. So don’t come on a UCLA board trying to slam Coach RN.

  • bbruin

    this is unfortunate, but we have some players that are just not up to standard for whatever reason. Many are 4th and 5th year seniors. I believe crn is trying to honor 4 years of the scholarship in doing this and not giving out 5 years to a bench-type player. We will see how many if any need to go off scholarship, then maybe the self righteous may have their day to flame.


    Tustin Dave, thanks for your pointed comment. Your point is well taken. But allow me to disagree. Andrew Dean, Raymond Carter, Milton Knox, Chris Forcier have all been politely asked to leave. They are all Freshman. Had they gone to other schools they wouldn’t be in this predicament.

    As Dohn said in the Q&A, the younger players are asked to leave the Programme because some of them can still finagle a scholarship from another school. However, no self-respecting school/programme wants an old beaten down horse that never saddled up for a race.

    In my opinion, no one wants to believe that yanking a plethora of scholarships is a greasy move. But it is. I agree that if it was simply yanking 1 or 2 scholarships, well, that is an easier pill to swallow. But yanking 7 or 8 scholarships is much harder to convince yourself that its not a greasy move by Sir Neuheisal. But keep trying to swallow that bitter pill. You will eventually get it down in the name of “building a better programme”.


    Tustin Dave said: “I don’t belive that a classy university like UCLA would pull a scholie from a guy that was in his second or third year. I believe that all the guys mentioned were either 4th or 5th year guys that have gotten their eduction paid for for many years but hadn’t contributed on the field.”

  • j_doe

    Can’t have it both ways. If people are going to complain about finishing with 4-5 wins, you can’t complain about upgrading the talent. “Perform or else” is part of life, is it not?

  • Bruins095

    Who is Andrew Dean? Milton Knox has been asked to leave? Just making stuff up now. While spewing your garbage, at least try to get it right.

    The other players you referenced didn’t pan out and want to go where they can hopefully get some playing time. It happens at every program, even at your pretend school. Green, Moody, Hazelton ring a bell? Cheaty stockpiles at every position and kids tranfer. You think scum Carrol tells these kids they may get buried on the depth chart and may not play?

    Most programs run into scholarship issues. Difficult decisions have to be made. As Brian states repeatedly, scholarships are renewed on an annual basis. Look a little more closely at your fake school and get your facts straight.

  • stephen

    Bruinjigs has the right sentiment, but its not as clear cut as that. There are walk-ons who are awarded scholarships when the coach feels someone really deserves it and there are scholarships left over. These are the players who are first in line to not have their scholarship renewed. This is not unethical and every player that I have ever known to get a scholie as a walk on is very aware that its only for one year unless its a rare circumstance. If coaches start pulling scholarships from the those who came in with a scholarship, then that would be a good recruiting point against UCLA. I may be wrong, but I’d like to know if that is actually happening.

  • ev

    There is a whole lot of difference between Moody, Green and Hazelton deciding to leave when USC doesn’t use all their scholarships, and Knox, Dean and others leaving when UCLA doesn’t have enough to go around. If you don’t see that, then you just don’t want too.

    Rick over-signed knowing he was going to have to run kids off. That isn’t the UCLA way and it isn’t right. Bruins use to say UCLA was better than other programs because they use to do things the right way. Guess those days are done, the only question remaining is what is next…

  • Tustin Dave

    Dear John Esq.

    I don’t believe that UCLA wanted all those guys you listed to leave. I think that some of the guys you listed are staying. In the case of Forcier, he has been beaten out at QB by Prince, Craft, and Brehaut so he would be 4th string at best. Rashaan is a guy that may be asked to give up his scholarship as a 5th year Sr. that has basically already graduated. There is a difference between asking a guy that has gotten 4 years of college paid for and a guy that thinks he has a shot at being a big time college football player in another system. “Andy” Dean was one of our top recruits a year ago, I don’t think that the coaches gave up on him and asked him to leave. Even Pete Carroll as slimey as he is doesn’t get rid of guys after only 1 year.

    Maybe being an attorney makes you smarter than the rest of us but like someone pointed out, you probably aren’t really an attorney. Then again, I know some ambulance chasers that aren’t exactly rocket scientist either.

  • robert55

    Yeah, LawyerJohn–“Andrew Dean”–way to read the “evidence.” Glad you do not represent me. His real name is Aundre Dean. Dean will be great at TCU a Top 7 team from last year that slapped BYU down. RN wants blocking backs to protect a RS FR QB (Prince), otherwise, he will never get the QBs that USC does. That is why Coleman and Ramirez will be in there blocking on that short passing offense. Franklin will be featured out of the backfield as a receiver. How long will Chow stay after this year once the NFL (and Titans0 no longer front his $1M plus annual deal? Will he stay for $300K? I doubt it.

  • Bruins095

    Knox is not leaving. Please don’t tell me you believe $c doesn’t take away football scholarships. Despite being asked to return, Jody Adewale was asked to leave and give up his scholarship.

    I admit it doesn’t look good when a coach oversigns. This is currently a common trend. Some kids may not qualify and others may greyshirt. I had some concerns when Neuheisel was hired. He is trying to rebuild the wreckage left by Dorrell. I hope this will be more of a transitional issue, time will tell. Dean was contemplating transferring last season and wasn’t happy. Johnson admitted to not always putting in the effort. Regardless, I am curious as to what was said to all of them.