5th Year Players Are Here To Stay (Maybe) | The Boneyard

5th Year Players Are Here To Stay (Maybe)

It still stay that way.

Red shirt years gives +1 year. Used to be a 5th year senior was one who had a red shirt year, and is taking grad courses.
 
August_West said:
Fully agree. My gut doesnt like this, but I haven't figured out why yet specifically.
Expand ...

It's just further removing kids from being student-first athletes and shows that we're all about men's basketball and football...not your normal athlete running XC or swimming or any D2/D3 sport. Full-time students should graduate in 4 years. If we want STUDENT-athletes, it should be a 4-year system.
 
husky429 said:
It's just further removing kids from being student-first athletes and shows that we're all about men's basketball and football...not your normal athlete running XC or swimming or any D2/D3 sport. Full-time students should graduate in 4 years. If we want STUDENT-athletes, it should be a 4-year system.
Expand ...
Maybe there are a lot of athletes with Engineering majors. Don't jump to conclusions!
 
.-.
husky429 said:
It's just further removing kids from being student-first athletes and shows that we're all about men's basketball and football...not your normal athlete running XC or swimming or any D2/D3 sport. Full-time students should graduate in 4 years. If we want STUDENT-athletes, it should be a 4-year system.
Expand ...
I actually had the opposite gut reaction. I'm not sure if I'll have the same opinion after I sit on it and think about it more.

But my initial thought, at least in terms of UConn, was this could really benefit the non basketball and football athletes. Those kids are already going to be playing pro somewhere, but if the other athletes are in school 5 years that gets them a good start on a masters degree which could really benefit them long term
 
I hate this. I think it was a disaster with the Covid years. They could be a little more generous on medical redshirt years. Kids can already redshirt and do redshirt (especially in football). So you can already get 5 years of college for 4 years of playing time. Having 5 years to play hurts the kids looking for scholarships from HS. It hurts the more marginal athletes who may not find a scholarship.
 
The further away we get from the Student-Athlete model, the less I like it. It does not stop me from reading the BY voraciously and living and dying by the results on the field/court etc. What will be will be, I don't have to like it, just have to love them Huskies, whatever iteration of College Athletics we are in.
 
4 years of athletic eligibility is what is protected. Red shirt/medical waiver removes a year from being eligible thus we can get a 5th year (of being in school) player who is in their 4th year of eligibility to play.
 
Don’t like it. We already had some football players on a college roster for 9 years. This is getting ridiculous.
 
husky429 said:
It's just further removing kids from being student-first athletes and shows that we're all about men's basketball and football...not your normal athlete running XC or swimming or any D2/D3 sport. Full-time students should graduate in 4 years. If we want STUDENT-athletes, it should be a 4-year system.
Expand ...
This only looks at one side of the coin. There has to be a subset of student athletes that struggle with balancing the demands of their sport and accomplishing the requirements to get their degree. Five years of athletic scholarship would allow those students, without monetary means, to lighten their yearly load giving them a better chance to accomplish that pursuit. And if they are pushed out from a school because they are recruited over they might have an opportunity to transfer to another school and receive their degree without the restrictions on transferring in the past.

That subset of student athletes who are never likely to pass the academic rigors to get a meaningful degree and who are unlikely to go beyond college to make meaningful earnings after college are given a chance to make monies with NIL that they didn't have before. It won't help everyone in this category but at least a number of individuals won't be completely exploited for our viewing entertainment while schools are able to cash in on them.

The cynical part of me can easily argue that the outcomes I state are not the underlying motivation for this new proposal. Nor are they without negative consequences of their own. But we should not overlook the disadvantages and the exploitation of the past system on young adults. Many who didn't have the knowledge to properly assess the situation.
 
.-.
husky429 said:
It's just further removing kids from being student-first athletes and shows that we're all about men's basketball and football...not your normal athlete running XC or swimming or any D2/D3 sport. Full-time students should graduate in 4 years. If we want STUDENT-athletes, it should be a 4-year system.
Expand ...

Most college students take more than 4 years to get their degree nowadays.

That being said, I liked the five years to use four years of eligibility.

This will also dampen high school recruiting and put more emphasis on recruiting lower level D1 players. Marginal HS players will now go to low D1 schools for a year or two before the big boys recruit them.
 
5 years is a big spread in age. Liam McNeeley is 19 years old. Cam Spencer wanted to come back one more year. He's 24 years old. My 24 year old self was much stronger than my 19 year old self. My gut says keep it at 4 and yes...they are supposed to be students and athletes. What's next, 17 year-olds playing against 25 year-olds?
 
I think all students should have a year limit on how fast they need to graduate ... some studies show, the 5-year graduation rate for regular students is under 60% ... what is the obsession with controlling student athletes? - don't answer that, we already know, lol
 
ctchamps said:
Five years of athletic scholarship would allow those students, without monetary means, to lighten their yearly load giving them a better chance to accomplish that pursuit.
Expand ...
I'm not sure that they couldn't do the same under the five years to play four model that was in place until COVID led to adding eligibility to an almost insane number of years.
 
Now that there’s money involved I wouldn’t be surprised if some lawsuit results in eliminating eligibility limits altogether. Then we’ll have athletes playing until they retire.
 
So no more redshirting then right or would that make someone eligible for 6 years.
 
.-.
Kembafan said:
Now that there’s money involved I wouldn’t be surprised if some lawsuit results in eliminating eligibility limits altogether. Then we’ll have athletes playing until they retire.
Expand ...
I mean that’s the end of college sports if that ever happens. No one wants to watch a 30 year old playing against kids.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
I'm not sure that they couldn't do the same under the five years to play four model that was in place until COVID led to adding eligibility to an almost insane number of years.
Expand ...
I didn't either. And if it's meant to replace the redshirt year then nothing significantly changes from the sports side of things. However student athletes coming into a university have an opportunity to plan ahead how they might proceed academically in selecting their courses and case loads.
 
FfldCntyFan said:
I'm not sure that they couldn't do the same under the five years to play four model that was in place until COVID led to adding eligibility to an almost insane number of years.
Expand ...
Logistically sure, but do you really think kids are going to sit out and not play a year of basketball just to lighten their workload? 5 years to play 5 is a lot more realistic for athletes to use than 5 years to play 4
 
We won back-to-back natties under COVID rules. Just sayin'...
 
navery12 said:
Logistically sure, but do you really think kids are going to sit out and not play a year of basketball just to lighten their workload? 5 years to play 5 is a lot more realistic for athletes to use than 5 years to play 4
Expand ...
This is what is what my gut said but I couldn't pull it out consciously. Had I been given another year to do it perhaps.

Serious students who might have given up the pursuit of their sport might decide to pursue it now that they know they have a chance to lighten their yearly load.
 
.-.
ctchamps said:
This only looks at one side of the coin. There has to be a subset of student athletes that struggle with balancing the demands of their sport and accomplishing the requirements to get their degree.
Expand ...

We already drop the standards enough for athletes academically. Our national championship team had multiple kids who just didn't show up to class for MONTHS and still somehow passed classes. Some of these players shouldn't have passed high school. Moreso football thank basketball from what I've heard. But still.
 
Last edited:
Different websites are tracking slightly different numbers and academic years but they all mostly show about a 4-year graduation rate in the low 40% range and a 6-year graduation rate in the low 60% range.

Let's not forget the massive dropoff in high school population going in to college the next few years. It's no longer in colleges' benefits to push kids through in four years to keep getting a new batch of freshmen. The new model is any student of any age who can pay tuition.
 
husky429 said:
We already drop the standards enough for athletes academically. Our national championship team had multiple kids who just didn't show up to class for MONTHS and still somehow passed classes. Some of these players shouldn't have passed high school. Moreso football thank basketball from what I've heard. But still.
Expand ...
I agree but it may allow some players who don't have a real shot at the pros to get more difficult degrees that theyre interested in
 
Chin Diesel said:
Different websites are tracking slightly different numbers and academic years but they all mostly show about a 4-year graduation rate in the low 40% range and a 6-year graduation rate in the low 60% range.

Let's not forget the massive dropoff in high school population going in to college the next few years. It's no longer in colleges' benefits to push kids through in four years to keep getting a new batch of freshmen. The new model is any student of any age who can pay tuition.
Expand ...
What are the rates for schools that have D1 athletics though? I imagine there's a lot of small regional campuses that deflate those numbers. UConn Storrs, for example, is over 70%
 
JMick said:
What are the rates for schools that have D1 athletics though? I imagine there's a lot of small regional campuses that deflate those numbers. UConn Storrs, for example, is over 70%
Expand ...

UConn loves to use the regional campuses to make themselves look better when it serves them (to be fair, any college would). I'd be shocked if they weren't doing this with graduation rates too.

Diversity numbers? Include the regionals.
SAT scores? Only Storrs.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,625
Messages
4,586,294
Members
10,497
Latest member
Orlando Fos


Top Bottom