At the 11th hour, the Griz reverse course and make the correct decision to opt in this year!
-
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts access private forums and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
UM Opts in to House Settlement
- Thread starter Griz til I die
- Start date
grizfan1984
Well-known member
Okay I’m really confused on how this works, was told teams could only have 105 kids on the roster if they opt in and now it’s not capped at 105? Why did all these kids transfer down if it wasn’t capped at 105? I know msu has exactly 105 kids on the roster as we speak and I’ve heard they wanted to add more but didn’t want to go over the 105, as of right now I know Griz have 114-115 guys on the current roster (that’s not updated) so will we have to cut 10 guys or can we keep them around?
Copper Griz
Well-known member
I am no lawyer, far from it. It looks like the cap is still in place and the Griz would have to meet the cap of 105. Of course I could be missing something! I usually do.
garizzalies
Well-known member
There’s a grandfather clause in year one that allows you to go above 105. Come this time next year though, we’ll have to be at 105. The judge put that in there because she didn’t want kids losing their roster spots in year one because of how late the settlement was approved. So we’re ok.
GriznMN
Well-known member
The University of Montana’s decision to opt into the House v. NCAA settlement is a major pivot point for the Grizzlies football program—and for FCS athletics more broadly. Here’s how it could shake out:
Financial Ramifications
- Revenue Sharing Begins: Montana will now be allowed to directly compensate athletes, aligning with the broader shift toward professionalization in college sports.
Recruiting & Retention
- Competitive Edge: Opting in early could give Montana a leg up in recruiting against FCS programs that delay participation. Recruits may favor schools offering direct compensation.
- Transfer Market Dynamics: With revenue sharing in play, Montana might better retain top talent who would otherwise transfer to FBS programs for NIL or pay opportunities.
Program Identity & Strategy
- FCS Leadership Role: Montana is positioning itself as a forward-thinking FCS program. This could influence other schools to follow suit, especially if the Grizzlies show success on and off the field under the new model.
- Long-Term Planning: The move may accelerate conversations about FCS realignment or even a potential jump to FBS if Montana proves it can sustain the financial and competitive demands.
Year-to-Year Flexibility
- The settlement allows schools to opt in or out annually. Montana’s early adoption signals commitment, but they’ll likely reassess each year based on financial health and competitive outcomes.
New Selling Points
- Direct Compensation: Recruits now know they can receive revenue sharing at Montana.
- Stability & Vision: Opting in early signals to families and high school coaches that Montana is committed to competing at the highest level of FCS—or even preparing for a future FBS leap.
Strategic Shifts
- Roster Flexibility: With scholarship caps lifted under the settlement, Montana can now offer more roster spots and financial packages, which could help them land late bloomers or flip recruits from other programs.
- Retention & Transfers: The new model may also help Montana keep top talent from transferring up to FBS schools, creating a more stable core for future classes.
HelenaHandBasket
Well-known member
They can exceed roster sizes for the first year.
HelenaHandBasket
Well-known member
I heard through the grapevine that garizzalies choked while drinking his coffee. RIP
I was under the impression that was in there from the start when pending, but was that actually a new development in the final ruling? Didn’t seem like that was the only thing holding Kent back when talking about it earlier.
HelenaHandBasket
Well-known member
The judge made them put it in the agreement at the end prior to approval.
Ut-Grizfan
Well-known member
I think the Judge made sure a "Grandfather" clause was implemented, at least for the 1st season.
This is actually really impressive. I would not have predicted this high of a number in year one! Thank god the Griz got in. The optics would’ve been bad IMO if we didn’t get in!
flowtowngriz
Well-known member
From what I have heard. The grandfather clause allows you to be over the 105 limit and allows players the keep their spots or allow the player to transfer and the schools don't have to cut players.
Hoops watcher
Well-known member
The talking points all seem great but I'm curious where all the "revenue" that can be shared is going to come from? Maybe I'm just unaware of oodles of sharable cash the Athletic Department is throwing off. Perhaps someone can fill me and other Curious George's in. Thanks in advance.The University of Montana’s decision to opt into the House v. NCAA settlement is a major pivot point for the Grizzlies football program—and for FCS athletics more broadly. Here’s how it could shake out:
- Revenue Sharing Begins: Montana will now be allowed to directly compensate athletes, aligning with the broader shift toward professionalization in college sports.
- Competitive Edge: Opting in early could give Montana a leg up in recruiting against FCS programs that delay participation. Recruits may favor schools offering direct compensation.
- Transfer Market Dynamics: With revenue sharing in play, Montana might better retain top talent who would otherwise transfer to FBS programs for NIL or pay opportunities.
- FCS Leadership Role: Montana is positioning itself as a forward-thinking FCS program. This could influence other schools to follow suit, especially if the Grizzlies show success on and off the field under the new model.
- Long-Term Planning: The move may accelerate conversations about FCS realignment or even a potential jump to FBS if Montana proves it can sustain the financial and competitive demands.
The Montana Grizzlies’ decision to opt into the House settlement is already reshaping how they’re positioning themselves in a new era of FCS football.
- The settlement allows schools to opt in or out annually. Montana’s early adoption signals commitment, but they’ll likely reassess each year based on financial health and competitive outcomes.
- Direct Compensation: Recruits now know they can receive revenue sharing at Montana.
- Stability & Vision: Opting in early signals to families and high school coaches that Montana is committed to competing at the highest level of FCS—or even preparing for a future FBS leap.
- Roster Flexibility: With scholarship caps lifted under the settlement, Montana can now offer more roster spots and financial packages, which could help them land late bloomers or flip recruits from other programs.
- Retention & Transfers: The new model may also help Montana keep top talent from transferring up to FBS schools, creating a more stable core for future classes.
The NIL Collective now becomes part of the athletic department and Athletics can now make decisions on who gets how much and where the money goes.
oldngrizzly
Well-known member
so how does that work ?
Well instead of the collective being an independent entity, it becomes part of Athletics operations. I suspect Haslam will hire a “GM” that will manage the NIL funds coming in and direct where the money goes and how much money each program gets. Then from there it’ll be interesting to see if Athletics has enough money off of what they make to also put towards revenue sharing. If they do it likely won’t be a very big number meaning they’ll still be very dependent on NIL funds from the outside.
alabamagrizzly
Well-known member
Is that a good thing? I imagine it expidiates things but who’s now making the decisions? Just coaches? AD gets a say? Is this just football or all sports?
