Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 21
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Delaware

    NCAA Grants eligibility relief to spring athletes (and not winter athletes)

    https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources...acted-covid-19

    The NCAA has given extra eligibility to spring athletes and is allowing expanded rosters to accommodate. This is for all athletes and not just seniors. Winter athletes, however, are not being given extra eligibility.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Raleigh, NC
    Quote Originally Posted by SCMatt33 View Post
    https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources...acted-covid-19

    The NCAA has given extra eligibility to spring athletes and is allowing expanded rosters to accommodate. This is for all athletes and not just seniors. Winter athletes, however, are not being given extra eligibility.
    Great. This is the right decision.
    "This is the best of all possible worlds."
    Dr. Pangloss - Candide

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by chrishoke View Post
    Great. This is the right decision.
    100% agree. The NCAA release says:

    Winter sports were not included in the decision. Council members declined to extend eligibility for student-athletes in sports where all or much of their regular seasons were completed.
    Thinking about basketball, I strongly suspect that close to half of the seniors in college hoops had already completed their season. 13 leagues had finished their tournaments and several others were almost finished on that Thursday when the season ended. Sure, there were a couple hundred seniors who were denied their final games and that sucks, but giving all of them an extra year of eligibility to compensate for the final couple games they missed makes no sense.
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Cary, NC
    Agree that it was the right decision. I feel for our seniors, especially Robinson, but in the big picture they've had four years with the program (five for Robinson) and have played most of this season already. The guys I really feel bad for are the seniors at schools like Rutgers or Penn State who might have never been to the tournament before (maybe those particular schools have, don't quote me on that but you know what I mean) and this would have been their only chance.

    Selfishly speaking, granting an extra year to our three guys would have caused all kinds of chaos. And I feel like it would have helped other schools more than it would have helped us, so I'm glad they didn't do it.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    New York
    The NCAA made a sensible decision. I am shocked.

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by TywinBlue View Post
    The NCAA made a sensible decision. I am shocked.
    And they did it quickly... even more shocked.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Durham
    Let's My hope there is a spring sports season next year.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Clifton, VA
    Quote Originally Posted by chrishoke View Post
    Great. This is the right decision.
    Totally agree it was the right decision. However, I will be interested to see what the NCAA does moving forward. By granting the extra eligibility year to all Spring Sports Athletes (not just Seniors), the NCAA has very likely unintentionally penalized many high school athletes (especially in the Classes of 2021-2023) who have not only lost a year of HS Sports and recruiting opportunity (which they will never get back) but now have less spots available to play college sports when they graduate. Plus, those who are fortunate enough to earn a spot will now have less opportunity for playing time as a freshman given that the players already in the program will be presumably a year older and have another year of eligibility than they would have had. While a tremendous opportunity for current college athletes, this is kind of a triple whammy for many aspiring college athletes. I hope the NCAA can come up with a creative solution.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by DUKIE V(A) View Post
    Totally agree it was the right decision. However, I will be interested to see what the NCAA does moving forward. By granting the extra eligibility year to all Spring Sports Athletes (not just Seniors), the NCAA has very likely unintentionally penalized many high school athletes (especially in the Classes of 2021-2023) who have not only lost a year of HS Sports and recruiting opportunity (which they will never get back) but now have less spots available to play college sports when they graduate. Plus, those who are fortunate enough to earn a spot will now have less opportunity for playing time as a freshman given that the players already in the program will be presumably a year older and have another year of eligibility than they would have had. While a tremendous opportunity for current college athletes, this is kind of a triple whammy for many aspiring college athletes. I hope the NCAA can come up with a creative solution.
    I think they expand the number of scholarships to accommodate. Of course, schools still have to foot the bill for that. And certainly doesn't address your PT item, don't think anything can really be done about it. It's somewhat of a zero sum game -- if it benefits one class, might cause hindrances to another given they are competitive sports. Not much way around it. But my understanding is NCAA is allowing scholarships to still be offered, not sure exactly how the numbers work but they did it for Duke LAX the one time they allowed the team to be eligible for another year.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Delaware
    Quote Originally Posted by Bluedog View Post
    I think they expand the number of scholarships to accommodate. Of course, schools still have to foot the bill for that. And certainly doesn't address your PT item, don't think anything can really be done about it. It's somewhat of a zero sum game -- if it benefits one class, might cause hindrances to another given they are competitive sports. Not much way around it. But my understanding is NCAA is allowing scholarships to still be offered, not sure exactly how the numbers work but they did it for Duke LAX the one time they allowed the team to be eligible for another year.
    This hits at the crux of the matter. There’s one fewer NCAA season, and the same number of athletes to accommodate. There’s a smaller pie of minutes/games/championships to go around and the same number of kids. Someone has to get a smaller slice. They chose current athletes for winter sports and future athletes for spring sports. This makes some intuitive sense because so many winter athletes were already done. Allowing athletes an extra year for the spring would have allowed many, if not most of them, to actually gain from the situation at the expense of a much larger number of future athletes. But I also find it hard to characterize as the “right” decision, as some here have, because there is no “right” decision to be made here. There’s only bad options because someone has to be a loser, and it certainly would have been defensible to grant the year for winter athletes, just as it would have also been defensible to not grant relief to spring athletes.

    Even with the extra scholarships (and as far as I can’t tell, it’s not clear from the NCAA’s release whether the relief on scholarship limits is for 2020-21 or if it will extend through to 2023. Even if the limits are expanded, many schools, especially small ones, won’t offer all of them and there are going to be some current high school athletes who aren’t going to get a D1 scholarship offer who otherwise would have because some schools will choose to prioritize the next 4 years of super seniors. Even the current incoming freshman will be hurt because they’ll never get “their” senior year because they’ll now largely share it with this years freshman, who are all getting a do-over.

    And even if you could magically find a way to expand the minutes and games to accommodate more players, it still won’t make everyone whole. There’s no way to replicate this season and the teams for whom it was a generational year. It’s certainly possible, but in all likelihood, you’re never going to see a year where there were 3 presumptive 1-seeds outside the power conferences. For Dayton and SDSU, they may never sniff it again in our lifetimes unless they pull of the incredible feat of becoming the next Gonzaga type program. Nothing you can do will replicate that. And that’s just one example across many many sports.

    The NCAA made what is likely the prudent decision, but ultimately, there’s no “right” when you can only pick losers.

  11. #11
    I recognize that I am the outlier and will be viewed as the proverbial Grinch that stole Christmas.

    I have had a hard time feeling terrible sympathy (I do feel sympathy but it is tempered) for student athletes in losing their final year of athletic competition. Their situation is no worse than my daughter who lost her last semester and will not be graduating on grounds with her class. She is very upset. But she will still graduate - as will all of these students athletes. And the notion that they come back to school for an another year – at a significant expense to the school (there is only so much scholarship money) simply so they can play their sport for an additional year does not resonate with me. To be clear – a student coming back for a legitimate academic purpose should be able to play sports for the fourth year – but realistically speaking we recognize that this is not the case in most of these circumstances.

    I love college athletics and I think kids who get to play sports (particularly those that are not revenue generating), are most fortunate. And to the extent that they have a scholarship to do so or preferential admission treatment, is a wonderful benefit. But the notion that they should come back for an additional year of school – not for an academic purpose, but simply so they can play their sport for another year is not compelling.

    I do feel bad for my daughter that she will not graduate with her classmates in a formal ceremony this spring. But I tried to explain to her that in the context of what is going on in the world, her loss is relatively small. And I do feel bad for the student athletes – but not bad enough to feel that they should come back to school for an additional year so that they can play a fourth season.

    Playing college athletics is wonderful and it is a privilege. But when a world tragedy occurs some things may be lost – such as playing a fourth season of baseball. And it is not necessary that you have another year of school simply so you can play that last game.

    Apologies if this is an unpopular opinion. But just one person’s view.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    Quote Originally Posted by 1991 duke law View Post
    I recognize that I am the outlier and will be viewed as the proverbial Grinch that stole Christmas.

    I have had a hard time feeling terrible sympathy (I do feel sympathy but it is tempered) for student athletes in losing their final year of athletic competition. Their situation is no worse than my daughter who lost her last semester and will not be graduating on grounds with her class. She is very upset. But she will still graduate - as will all of these students athletes. And the notion that they come back to school for an another year – at a significant expense to the school (there is only so much scholarship money) simply so they can play their sport for an additional year does not resonate with me. To be clear – a student coming back for a legitimate academic purpose should be able to play sports for the fourth year – but realistically speaking we recognize that this is not the case in most of these circumstances.

    I love college athletics and I think kids who get to play sports (particularly those that are not revenue generating), are most fortunate. And to the extent that they have a scholarship to do so or preferential admission treatment, is a wonderful benefit. But the notion that they should come back for an additional year of school – not for an academic purpose, but simply so they can play their sport for another year is not compelling.

    I do feel bad for my daughter that she will not graduate with her classmates in a formal ceremony this spring. But I tried to explain to her that in the context of what is going on in the world, her loss is relatively small. And I do feel bad for the student athletes – but not bad enough to feel that they should come back to school for an additional year so that they can play a fourth season.

    Playing college athletics is wonderful and it is a privilege. But when a world tragedy occurs some things may be lost – such as playing a fourth season of baseball. And it is not necessary that you have another year of school simply so you can play that last game.

    Apologies if this is an unpopular opinion. But just one person’s view.
    Let's say your daughter wanted to delay her "real life" and stay on campus one more year so she could have that formal graduation ceremony next year. There are no rules preventing that, I don't think.

    Well, in the case of a spring athlete, there was a rule that prevented them from doing that in their sport. The NCAA has merely lifted that rule. These folks are not required to come back, it is at their option. I am betting a fair number of them will not take advantage of this because they will want to get on with their life. But, for the ones where that final season was a really big deal to them, the NCAA has lifted the rules that took it away from them.
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  13. #13
    Jason - she is doing more than that, she is staying three more years - but moving down the road to UVA’s law school. I just don’t know if I can afford for her to delay her life for three more years like this!

    But, you are right – I have no issue with kids electing to stay. I am not in favour of scholarship money being provided to subsidize a fifth year. I understand that there are other examples where this does occur - redshirts etc. But I will ignore it in order to make this discussion simpler.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    I moved. Now 12 miles from Heaven, 13 from Hell
    As my nephew, a D1 baseball coach who will have to deal with this, said: It's up to the coaches and administrators to figure this out, but it's the absolutely right thing to do.

    As mentioned, some will move on with their lives, but others, especially those who are affected by the end of the season and future draft changes, will take use of the makeup year to further their prospects in their chosen profession.

  15. #15
    I have no issue with their doing it and I am not saying it is not the wrong thing to do – subject to the funding issue. I have no idea if baseball players all get full scholarships but the notion of providing additional scholarship money so that a fifth year of ball can be played is not fine in my view - I would far prefer that funding be used to assist students generally. The pot is not unlimited – and for every dollar spent on a fifth year student athlete there is one dollar less for other purposes.

    But to be very clear, if there is no cost associated with doing this I am 100% in agreement that the extra eligibility makes sense.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    I wonder how many of the senior spring athletes will stay another year. By the end of my senior year, and I really liked college, I was ready to move on.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    I moved. Now 12 miles from Heaven, 13 from Hell
    Quote Originally Posted by 1991 duke law View Post
    I have no issue with their doing it and I am not saying it is not the wrong thing to do – subject to the funding issue. I have no idea if baseball players all get full scholarships but the notion of providing additional scholarship money so that a fifth year of ball can be played is not fine in my view - I would far prefer that funding be used to assist students generally. The pot is not unlimited – and for every dollar spent on a fifth year student athlete there is one dollar less for other purposes.

    But to be very clear, if there is no cost associated with doing this I am 100% in agreement that the extra eligibility makes sense.
    IIRC, baseball gets the equivalent of 13.5 scholarships to spread among 27 players (they are allowed 8 walk-ons; the only spring sport with a roster limit.)

    And it's not a fifth year of ball. It's allowing the athletes to complete their four full years of playing. Since the players didn't complete a quarter of the schedule, it's similar to if they all had season ending injuries, and were granted an extra year of eligibility, which is in the rules right now.

  18. #18
    Yes – I fully understand it is not a fifth year of ball. But it is a fifth year of school. And as I mentioned earlier, I do recognize that there are examples of fifth year players – redshirting or otherwise. But I think my point is clear. I do not support funding a scholarship for a fifth year of school in these circumstances.

    My speculation is that the additional scholarships will only be made available for a small select group of the best. And as MartyClarke says, many of the student athletes will not want a fifth year of school.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Washington, DC area
    An unprecedented situation left the NCAA with, um, less than good choices.

    We're all doing the best we can. (And some rise to a better "best" than others...)

    -jk

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by SCMatt33 View Post
    The NCAA has given extra eligibility to spring athletes and is allowing expanded rosters to accommodate. This is for all athletes and not just seniors. Winter athletes, however, are not being given extra eligibility.
    Wisconsin Badgers seniors won't return to spring sports in 2021

    "What we tried to do was encourage our seniors to go ahead and, if you're going to graduate, graduate and move on with your life," [athletic director Barry] Alvarez said Wednesday on his monthly radio show on 1310 WIBA and Learfield/IMG College. "We appreciate everything that you've done. But move forward. The future is in question, and we can't promise you anything."

Similar Threads

  1. NCAA Grants Edgar Cerenord Another Year of Eligibility in 2019
    By chrishoke in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-07-2018, 07:59 PM
  2. How to Pay NCAA Revenue Athletes
    By Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 03-03-2018, 03:55 PM
  3. A way NCAA athletes could receive compensation
    By g-money in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 42
    Last Post: 10-28-2013, 04:06 PM
  4. NCAA: Serious about graduating student-athletes?
    By Verga3 in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 03-21-2010, 11:53 AM
  5. USA Today:College athletes studies guided toward 'major in eligibility'
    By gotham devil in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 11-20-2008, 12:43 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •