This move could have a huge impact on how Michigan recruits preferred walk-ons. Up until this point most PWOs have come from higher income families who can afford to pay the tuition.
The change means that Michigan could well become attractive to in-state athletes from lower income families. In other words, PWO targets going forward could be from a broadened prospect universe which sort or resembles a barbell- high income on one end (even higher for out of state targets) and low incone on the other end. Still, I feel that going forward the impact will not be that big as a higher percentage of targets from low income families live in school districts where they simply don't get as many educational opportunities to br prepared to enroll at Michigan.
This raises a couple of interesting points:
1) Does the tuition change just cover the cost of attending school or also room and board? I would assume the former, which would mitigate the attractiveness for a full-scholarship caliber athlete to attend Michigan as opposed to having all costs paid for by another institution.
2) Does the football program benefit from lower admission standards for PWOs as it does for scholarship athletes? If so, the pool of potential in-state targets would grow exponentially. If not, perhaps there would only be one or two new viable in-state targets per year, if even that. Talented in-state football players from low-incone families with a 30+ ACT and near 4.0 GPAs don't grow on trees.
As an aside, keep in mind that when Nebraska had its walk-on program rolling in the late twentieth century they had one kid from each county in Nebraska each year who would automatically get a fully paid academic scholarship to Nebraska. Most of these were used on football players. Hence, all those farmboy walk-on offensive linemen at Nebraska who went on to have such great success.
The change means that Michigan could well become attractive to in-state athletes from lower income families. In other words, PWO targets going forward could be from a broadened prospect universe which sort or resembles a barbell- high income on one end (even higher for out of state targets) and low incone on the other end. Still, I feel that going forward the impact will not be that big as a higher percentage of targets from low income families live in school districts where they simply don't get as many educational opportunities to br prepared to enroll at Michigan.
This raises a couple of interesting points:
1) Does the tuition change just cover the cost of attending school or also room and board? I would assume the former, which would mitigate the attractiveness for a full-scholarship caliber athlete to attend Michigan as opposed to having all costs paid for by another institution.
2) Does the football program benefit from lower admission standards for PWOs as it does for scholarship athletes? If so, the pool of potential in-state targets would grow exponentially. If not, perhaps there would only be one or two new viable in-state targets per year, if even that. Talented in-state football players from low-incone families with a 30+ ACT and near 4.0 GPAs don't grow on trees.
As an aside, keep in mind that when Nebraska had its walk-on program rolling in the late twentieth century they had one kid from each county in Nebraska each year who would automatically get a fully paid academic scholarship to Nebraska. Most of these were used on football players. Hence, all those farmboy walk-on offensive linemen at Nebraska who went on to have such great success.
