How many are too many?

In light of my neighbors to the south and east of my beautiful city, how many players on a roster are too many? UF will have a roster of 37 , next year. While we have had a better run of late, not head to head though , they are stocking piling recruits at an alarming rate. Sort of like Bear Bryant did back in the day, land as many recruits as possible and even if they never play a down at Alabama, at least opposing teams will not have them. Although that was before scholarship limits. I post this hear because I respect the knowledgeable posters that make up your site. So am I overreacting, or will UF have some transfers and/or unhappy campers soon.

Hard to say what the quality of recruits will be. I suggest that players who are good enough to play and don't will head to greener pastures.

at 37 players for 11 positions?? I mean enough to field 3 full squads is definitely excessive... There is no way ALL of those recruits will stay, especially if they could go elsewhere and get more scholarship $$ and/or PT.

Portland always has gone with relatively small rosters, with good success. Team chemistry is very important here, as is team commitment. No doubt that is part of why Portland has had very few transfers "out" over the years. Here are the roster numbers back to '01 (with '03 missing):

2008: 21 (including one intentional redshirt; and the three lost to U-20 World Cup duties at the end of the season)
2007: 22
2006: 19
2005: 22 (national championship)
2004: 21
2003: ?
2002: 20 (national championship)
2001: 20

Earlier in the Clive Charles era, Portland went with even smaller rosters.

This fits with the culture in Portland, which in part is that the players are here go grow as players with a view to being able to compete for the USWNT and, when there have been pro leagues, to be able to succeed as professionals. That means, among other things, learning to play within FIFA's and the pro leagues' substitution limitation rules. In fact, when Clive had smaller rosters earlier, he generally played his starting 11 plus 3 subs.

Well dealing with graduations and injuries and national team commitments I can understand the desire to maintain a larger roster... But it's not like the team is going to run out of players on the field... I can see maybe 24 being the most you would want to carry on a roster at a given time. I mean for one, 26 bench players on that FLA roster; practices are great, but you need actual game intensity play to truly improve players, and what good is it if you have to bring in a player after injuries who got 4 minutes of PT at the end of a match against E. Pokanee State?? I suppose most teams substitute a lot more than UP does (although on the international/pro level, you only get a few a half)... But seriously while stockpiling talent might prevent others from getting those players, the lack of PT to go around would prevent you from actually DEVELOPING that talent...