Medical red shirt ruling

[winlots]

Researched this again on 'net, where I am low tech. Find two different rulings described: 1. Must not play in more than 20% of games. 2. Must not play in as many as 30% of games, excluding EX games....none of which may be after the mid-point of the season.

ALso found that Tuck played in only 8 games, the last of which was game 16, by my count, on Jan 7, when she played 13 minutes according to the box score.

Looking at the more stringent of the requirements embedded in those two sets of descriptions of the rules: Tuck played in 8 of 40 games, which is "not more than" 20%.....and is way under the 30%. Additionally, game 16 is not after the mid-point of the season. Unless I'm missing something, which I might well be, it looks as if she is clearly eligible for a medical red shirt.

 

[stamfordhusky]

There have been several threads that discussed this in detail. The correct number is 30% - but tournament games (AAC and NCAA) basically do not count, making the correct denominator 32. If the standard was still 20%, she would not be able to get a medical hardship. Fortunately it is 30%, so she will.

If you're looking for the rule, the place to go is NCAA governance on their website. There are a few details I left out.

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

There have been several threads that discussed this in detail. The correct number is 30% - but tournament games (AAC and NCAA) basically do not count, making the correct denominator 32. If the standard was still 20%, she would not be able to get a medical hardship. Fortunately it is 30%, so she will.

If you're looking for the rule, the place to go is NCAA governance on their website. There are a few details I left out.

SH...This is the type of post that makes The BoneYard such an incredible fan site.

Thanks, Oz

 

[Kibitzer]

SH...This is the type of post that makes The BoneYard such an incredible fan site.

This sort of post makes it a reliable source of information.

It becomes an incredible fan site when we become reliably informed that Gabby and Morgan are completely recovered and good to go for the upcoming season.

 

[JoePgh]

Given UConn's surfeit of guards next year, I think it will be a wise move if Gabby takes a medical redshirt next year and is FULLY recovered to play 4 years of injury-free basketball after that. I read that her father would prefer that she do that. It seems like a sensible decision both for her and for the team.

 

[winlots]

SH: Thanks for those clarifications - had not known the post-season games didn't count. In any event, sounds like she should be all set. Very important in rounding out the squad.

KIB: am still somewhat concerned about Edwards as well....missed a lot of games, I think....and certainly did not get a lot of minutes in the McD.

JOE: makes a lot of sense to me. Good that her dad is on board with it. Somewhere along the way, though, I think I read that she was really amped up to get in gear this coming season?

 

[Sonny44]

When is the decision on Tuck expected?

 

[Icebear]

The rules have been covered numerous times in a number of threads. Stamfordhusky did an excellent job laying it out if you use the BY search feature.

 

[stamfordhusky]

When is the decision on Tuck expected?

It will likely be quick once UConn sends in all of the info. The decision will be made by the AAC, not the NCAA. Only appeals and unusual situations make it to the NCAA-level. This should not be one of them.

 

[winlots]

SH: Boy oh boy....THAT is especially good news on this. I don't have much trust or respect for the NCAA.....and I would think it would behoove our own conference to be supportive.

 

[DaddyChoc]

Google is a wonderful place to do research... type in as much info as possible to get the best hits

 

[Sonny44]

SH: Boy oh boy....THAT is especially good news on this. I don't have much trust or respect for the NCAA.....and I would think it would behoove our own conference to be supportive.

But her fate is in the hands of her competitors; don't like that scenario!

 

[UConnChapette]

But her fate is in the hands of her competitors; don't like that scenario!

Why would the AAC conference deny something if the player meets the qualifications? I don't think the conference teams decide, the conference ruling body decides, correct? That would not make it her competitors who have the say. And even if they did, wouldn't you think they would worry about future retribution if they denied one of our players and then have an injury happen to one of theirs and be in the same spot?

Relax, Sonny. You worry too much.

 

[Sonny44]

Hmmmm, ok.

 

[winlots]

Google is a wonderful place to do research... type in as much info as possible to get the best hits

DC: Thanks for the tip. I usually type in s.t. minimal.
And, as far as Tuck herself goes, I think most all of us feel this is a VERY important issue for the make-up of the squad in the autumn of '16......that and her being healthy if/when approved. Also very important for the player herself; pour soul has missed so much playing time over several years. Not much worse for a kid than not being able to suit up with your teammates......the crutch thing wears thin after the first entrance into the arena.

 

[winlots]

Hmmmm, ok.

SON: hey, I LIKE it when you worry about "Our Girls." Makes me feel connected to you. Either way, have another sandwich....damn, those look good!

 

[DICKG]

I believe she also has to agree to redshirt. Even it is approved by the NCAA, she can always leave when her class graduates.​

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Why would the AAC conference deny something if the player meets the qualifications? I don't think the conference teams decide, the conference ruling body decides, correct? That would not make it her competitors who have the say. And even if they did, wouldn't you think they would worry about future retribution if they denied one of our players and then have an injury happen to one of theirs and be in the same spot?

Actually, I suspect for something this routine, it goes to the conference's compliance officer who makes sure it is ok and may get a pro-forma from the conference commissioner - but for something this routine, it really isn't anything to worry about.

Where red shirts get sticky and such is when you are talking 6 year deals, and even more so, when you are asking for a 6th year with one year not meeting the real requirement. And they still grant some of those.

 

[Ouremblem]

Has anyone read anything about Morgan's progress?

 

[formerlurker]

Given UConn's surfeit of guards next year, I think it will be a wise move if Gabby takes a medical redshirt next year and is FULLY recovered to play 4 years of injury-free basketball after that. I read that her father would prefer that she do that. It seems like a sensible decision both for her and for the team.

Really?

 

[stamfordhusky]

But her fate is in the hands of her competitors; don't like that scenario!

No, it's not. If the league ignored the NCAA rules, then UConn would get the redshirt upheld via an appeal to the NCAA. If the AAC had blatantly disregarded the rules, the AAC league administration might be sanctioned. No way they would cheat on something like this.

 

[stamfordhusky]

Actually, I suspect for something this routine, it goes to the conference's compliance officer who makes sure it is ok and may get a pro-forma from the conference commissioner - but for something this routine, it really isn't anything to worry about.

Where red shirts get sticky and such is when you are talking 6 year deals, and even more so, when you are asking for a 6th year with one year not meeting the real requirement. And they still grant some of those.

Yes, the six year requests are more complicated and less clear-cut. That is one reason those requests are not handled by the league. They automatically go to the NCAA.

 

[Ozzie Nelson]

Given UConn's surfeit of guards next year, I think it will be a wise move if Gabby takes a medical redshirt next year and is FULLY recovered to play 4 years of injury-free basketball after that. I read that her father would prefer that she do that. It seems like a sensible decision both for her and for the team.

link please...

 

[VAUConnFan]

There have been several threads that discussed this in detail. The correct number is 30% - but tournament games (AAC and NCAA) basically do not count, making the correct denominator 32. If the standard was still 20%, she would not be able to get a medical hardship. Fortunately it is 30%, so she will.

If you're looking for the rule, the place to go is NCAA governance on their website. There are a few details I left out.

By my count the denominator is 31. That concerns me. But I also heard/read(???) that one conference tournament game counts toward the denominator, so, if that is the case, there should be no problem getting the redshirt.

 

[winlots]

VAU: I get 31 also rather than 32 (have not seen a.t. yet about the one conference game counting, though it might well). Even if we happen to be correct, I think the ruling says that none of the games may be after the mid-point of the season; and game 16 is not after the mid-point. #17 would be the first game after the mid-point.

(I'm also one who looks to the "spirit" of a law, and not just to the "letter" thereof, though I recognize that many do not lean in that direction. Here is a kid who has missed a lot of her high school and college games because of injury, and I don't think her case violates the spirit of this regulation in the slightest degree. Am pretty certain I'd feel the same way if a kid from ND or Tenn or wherever had this EXACT same history; I'd be four square in favor of granting them an extra year of eligibility. Not that what I'd do matters.)