5 year proposal... ? support or oppose | Page 2 | The Boneyard

5 year proposal... ? support or oppose

navery12 said:
Or college basketball should adopt the football rule to play 33% of the season and still redshirt. That would be valuable for everyone
Expand ...
Yea I agree with this, never understood why the redshirt rule is so drastically different from football to basketball
 
Why? Where does it stop? Why don’t they just cut to the chase and let schools hire a professional team. Why even require they attend classes?
 
I just don’t see why it’s so hard or wrong to give people 4 years of eligibility and that’s it. Medical redshirt if you get hurt and miss a season, and go get a graduate degree to remain a student if you need. But you get 4 years to play.

The norm for college graduates is 4 years of school. It’s not 100%, but it’s the norm. Set your policy to the norm and strictly manage the exceptions as exceptions
 
4 full years of playing CBB is sufficient....after that make room for the next group of younger players. If after 4 full years of CBB you're good enough to still make $ money playing go for it, otherwise move on to the next chapter.
 
Last edited:
.-.
UConn Retention and Graduation Report 2024

  • Four Year Graduate: 72-76%
  • Six Year Graduate: 83-85%
Latest NCAA graduation rates remain high

www.ncaa.org

Latest NCAA graduation rates remain high - NCAA.org

NCAA releases graduation rates for Divisions I, II and III.
www.ncaa.org www.ncaa.org

Division I student-athletes continue to achieve graduation success, according to the latest Graduation Success Rate data announced Wednesday. Both the single-year and four-year rates remain high at 90%.
 
Oppose- Only benefits a few individuals and gambling platforms. I don't think anyone wants 26 year old 'kids' representing their schools.
 
.-.
Flipside said:
This!
  • My Mom graduated UConn the same year my brother (UConn Med) graduated High School
  • Took me 11 years to finish @ UConn, then on to Duke for MBA
My Mom and I didn't graduate, according to standards some are trying to re-impose on athletes ... if this is truly about education, the new models (NIL, Transfer Portal) are set up for these young athletes to do just that - get an education, and then some; opportunities that many could only dream of (which really gets to the issue, imho) --- I don't throw stones b/c I live in a glass house
Expand ...
There is nothing that says these guys can't remain at their universities as students, fully funded even.

So you could still do that.

Unfortunately, the constant transfers make it nearly impossible to achieve anything that looks remotely like an education. For normal students, their credits don't transfer en masse, and if the same standard is used, then there's no way for these players to major and graduate. UNLESS you stick them in bogus majors run by someone friendly to the athletic department -- in which case that's not a real education either. I write this as someone whose duties include approving transfer credits toward a major.
 
upstater said:
There is nothing that says these guys can't remain at their universities as students, fully funded even.

So you could still do that.

Unfortunately, the constant transfers make it nearly impossible to achieve anything that looks remotely like an education. For normal students, their credits don't transfer en masse, and if the same standard is used, then there's no way for these players to major and graduate. UNLESS you stick them in bogus majors run by someone friendly to the athletic department -- in which case that's not a real education either. I write this as someone whose duties include approving transfer credits toward a major.
Expand ...
I hear you, and trust, I'm old school and long for my glorious past too, so agree with most of your points

... but this is a new world; e.g. remote classes, nothing can ever hold up to our "realness" and what we deem is the proper experience (I used to walk 15 miles each way to school, uphill in both directions)

While folks try to cap an age on legitimate college students (athletes), who (personal sandbox moment: are enjoying the spoils of what they create), once many of those same folks reach AARP age, they usually sing a very different "It shouldn't matter" employment toon (albeit on the other side) about age discrimination, bla bla bla

(rant off)
 
4 years to graduate college is an old-fashioned mindset. 5 is fine.

Also, the game has gotten better since NIL and transfer rules changed. Less parity, but the quality of teams and rosters is vastly better than just 8-10 years ago.
 
I prefer a bright line standard to having the NCAA randomly apply a hardship waiver. I'd rather it be four years, but by five is fine.
 
How Sway?! said:
The proposal would cap the maximum age at 24...
Expand ...
If this is the case, then I am fine with it. Honestly, I would just do away with number of seasons, waivers, redshirt, etc. and just go with a straight age limit.
 
husky99 said:
Expand ...

As much as we might love it, why would either of them come back? Reed's draft position has peaked with his performance in the tournament. Even if he pulled off another great season and tournament, his age might start becoming a factor. He should not come back even if he could.

AK I don't think has anything left to achieve and another year wouldn't do anything for his future. Yeah he loves UConn, and would probably be tempted, but there's a point when you know its enough. I think he's there now and feels it. You don't want to be the old dude who just keeps clinging on.
 
.-.
Jaydumo20 said:
It's funny, we all seem to oppose. We seem to oppose most of this nonsense. It almost makes you wonder whether they care about us fans at all....
Expand ...
It shouldn't be about fans. It should be for the kids playing. Everyone, meaning schools, fans, sponsors benefits off these kids one way or another. Someone else mentioned capping NIL which should never happen. What they need to do is define what NIL is and isn't. Because even on these boards there are like 50 different definitions of NIL. NCAA will never be able to return to the old model, nor should it
 
As long as they put some rule in, I am fine. The one thing they can’t do or should not do (which means they likely will) is make it retroactive to this most recent year. What a crazy and unfair thing that would be IMO.
 
Honestly, who cares. Everything has been thrown out at this point. Every player is a free agent end of the year, guys getting paid 3, 4 or even 5 million to play college basketball, etc. At this point, its professional basketball. If they want a way to get guys a 5th year, not going to bother me.
 
uconn_jack said:
As much as we might love it, why would either of them come back? Reed's draft position has peaked with his performance in the tournament. Even if he pulled off another great season and tournament, his age might start becoming a factor. He should not come back even if he could.

AK I don't think has anything left to achieve and another year wouldn't do anything for his future. Yeah he loves UConn, and would probably be tempted, but there's a point when you know its enough. I think he's there now and feels it. You don't want to be the old dude who just keeps clinging on.
Expand ...
It could make sense for Reed, as he could be the best center in next years draft…but then what do you tell Hines? Do the play side by side for 10 minutes a game….no way it makes sense for AK IMO
 
Bigbrad1029 said:
It could make sense for Reed, as he could be the best center in next years draft…but then what do you tell Hines? Do the play side by side for 10 minutes a game….no way it makes sense for AK IMO
Expand ...
This is one of the reasons they shouldn’t make it retroactive, teams have moved on by player addition and spent monies. How could you possibly unleash a whole pool of players now? What an advantage that would be to those schools who still have money to spend, doesn’t seem fair to the other schools and most especially to players who made decisions already based on PT. It would be a mess to allow these kids to become available.
 
.-.
I always thought that the goal of college is to get a degree in 4 years. College athletes are on full scholarship and with NIL, I suppose means they can easily afford the extra year of tuition.

Consequently High School seniors would be limited in their recruitment/choices, since they can't compete with 5 year players.
 
nycscooby said:
This is one of the reasons they shouldn’t make it retroactive, teams have moved on by player addition and spent monies. How could you possibly unleash a whole pool of players now? What an advantage that would be to those schools who still have money to spend, doesn’t seem fair to the other schools and most especially to players who made decisions already based on PT. It would be a mess to allow these kids to become available.
Expand ...
I agree, if they are going to do this make it for following season, which could be great for solo 😂
 
Bigbrad1029 said:
I agree, if they are going to do this make it for following season, which could be great for solo 😂
Expand ...
It would allow him to come off the bench in the 2nd half of the season if he's feeling up to it. That would be an awesome chip to have in our pocket come the tournament.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,633
Messages
4,587,060
Members
10,497
Latest member
Orlando Fos


Top Bottom