per the new rule instituted by the NCAA. Though the rule has been delayed for an official vote, the B1G has instituted it early and this years recruits will get a 4 year scholarship rather than the one year renewable schollies like in the past.

Not surprisingly, the SEC has decided to allow member schools to make their own decisions regarding the situation.

http://www.cleveland.com/osu/index.ssf/2012/01/big_ten_offering_recruits_secu.html

[h=4]The four-year plan[/h]

• What you need to know about multi-year scholarships.
  • In October, the NCAA made them possible, but not required. However, enough schools protested that a final vote on the matter will be held in February. For now, though, the rule is in place.
  • Previously, scholarships were for one year at a time, though most were renewed. Still, players were in danger of having their scholarships pulled if they were not playing well.
  • The Big Ten asked schools to make four-year offers to football players for National Signing Day. Ohio State is definitely doing so. The SEC and the MAC, for instance, took no position, leaving the decision up to each school.
  — Doug Lesmerises

[/LIST]

The B1G didn't force the schools to do this, but Delaney did suggest the schools do it.

se-alum;1071739 wrote:The B1G didn't force the schools to do this, but Delaney did suggest the schools do it.

No, but we obviously think it's the right move. By doing so it shows legendary leadership

The way it should be; barring some idiot doesn't mess up and do something stupid.

so is there a stipulation about taking schollies away for being a jack-off and getting in trouble?

Yes, the scholarships are not immune to grades, or off-the-field issues, or general jackassery (is my understanding). Here's some more from ESPN on the issue:

Michigan, Penn State, Michigan State, Wisconsin, Iowa, Illinois and Northwestern have confirmed to ESPN.com that they have also awarded four-year grants to recruits. Purdue, Minnesota and Indiana are still offering the one-year, renewable scholarship.
The SEC and MAC have left it up to individual schools to determine if they want to offer multi-year grants, Lesmerises reports. A four-year scholarship offer could help schools in recruiting if a prospect is faced with the choice between that and only one secured year of a full ride.

By guaranteeing four years to a player, programs are eliminating a coach's ability to run off players because they have oversigned or because they feel the player's athletic performance is not up to snuff. It also prevents a new coach from coming into a program and cutting players who don't fit his style. That gives more protection to the college athlete, and that's a noble cause.
[INDENT]"Some may look at it and say it's symbolic," Chad Hawley, the Big Ten's associate commissioner for compliance told The Plain Dealer. "In the vast majority of cases with a one-year grant, if student-athletes came in and did what they needed to do, it was renewed. But at the same time, I think there's a peace of mind that goes beyond symbolism."[/INDENT]
Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith told the paper that players can still lose their scholarship for academic failings and off-the-field transgressions, so a school won't be locked into keeping a troubled player. And coaches can still encourage players to transfer by letting them know they won't get any playing time if they stick around.

But this should reduce or eliminate cases of players losing their scholarships through no real fault of their own. And in a college sports landscape where the rules are often stacked against players, that's a good thing.

http://espn.go.com/blog/bigten/post/_/id/44807/b1g-schools-offering-4-year-scholarships

"Four-year scholarship offer could help schools in recruiting if a prospect is faced with the choice between that and only one secured year of a full ride."

This is the key. We will see if this really means BETTER recruiting for the B1G overall. It certainly isn't reflective in this year's recruiting rankings...

It'll most likely pass in February that all schools will have to do it, so I don't think it will affect recruiting.

The intent of the rule sure as shit isn't to help recruiting as much as it is to reign in the effin' SEC lol

What if a kid just doesn't produce at a quality level? Academic scholarships are taken away if students don't produce at a certain level.

se-alum;1072553 wrote:It'll most likely pass in February that all schools will have to do it, so I don't think it will affect recruiting.

The linked article cited that as a selling point. If it's only for one year, did it have any impact? Clearly not, so that's why I questioned why that was even mentioned...

Al Bundy;1072562 wrote:What if a kid just doesn't produce at a quality level? Academic scholarships are taken away if students don't produce at a certain level.

Doesn't mean he can't be encouraged to transfer if he won't be seeing playing time. Puts a higher premium on evaluation and due diligence. There aren't ACT's and SAT's to do that for them.