NCAA decides NOT to grant extra year of eligibility for winter sports

[UConnCat]

as expected

 

[MilfordHusky]

For winter sports, I think it's the right decision. Spring sports are a different matter.

 

[Geew1992]

For winter sports, I think it's the right decision. Spring sports are a different matter.

I as just about to say this

 

[TheFarmFan]

In many respects, it would have been robbing Peter to pay Paul, because the incoming frosh and the rising sophomores, juniors, and seniors all made decisions predicated on the senior class departing. Really, really sucks, but I couldn't see a feasible alternative.

That said, I'm still not exactly sure how that will work for spring athletes, since the same rob-Peter-pay-Paul dynamic will emerge there, too. And unlike football and basketball, most spring sports are already partial scholly sports like golf and tennis, where the teams are comprised in part of starter-level athletes who cannot qualify for full scholarships. That crunch would only get worse with five classes' worth of athletes to cover. And if the NCAA partially waives scholarship restrictions, the richer schools (like Stanford) can afford to get richer and retain them, while I would imagine a lot of state schools will be unable to cover them easily.

BTW: this is a conversation for down the road, but look for major cuts to staff, travel, recruiting, etc. in the coming seasons. The NCAA cut its disbursements to schools in half due to March Madness being cancelled, and all the conferences and their networks will be hemorrhaging cash for the foreseeable future. University endowments are down big. Donors are pulling back. State budgets are going to be decimated.

This is not anyone's topline concern today, but funding for college sports will be a major issue sooner than we think. I suspect just as the pandemic will be the death knell for much of major retail, there is going to be a retrenchment with a lot of low-performing non-revenue D1 sports folding because schools will no longer be able to pay for them. Even some top programs like Cal have been living on the edge for several of their (well performing) sports programs for the past decade.

 

[msf22b]

The only reasonable decision.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I many respects, it would have been robbing Peter to pay Paul, because the incoming frosh and the rising sophomores, juniors, and seniors all made decisions predicated on the senior class departing. Really, really sucks, but I couldn't see a feasible alternative.

That said, I'm still not exactly sure how that will work for spring athletes, since the same rob-Peter-pay-Paul dynamic will emerge there, too. And unlike football and basketball, most spring sports are already partial scholly sports like golf and tennis, where the teams are comprised in part of starter-level athletes who cannot qualify for full scholarships. That crunch would only get worse with five classes' worth of athletes to cover. And if the NCAA partially waives scholarship restrictions, the richer schools (like Stanford) can afford to get richer and retain them, while I would imagine a lot of state schools will be unable to cover them easily.

BTW: this is a conversation for down the road, but look for major cuts to staff, travel, recruiting, etc. in the coming seasons. The NCAA cut its disbursements to schools in half due to March Madness being cancelled, and all the conferences and their networks will be hemorrhaging cash for the foreseeable future. University endowments are down big. Donors are pulling back. State budgets are going to be decimated.

This is not anyone's topline concern today, but funding for college sports will be a major issue sooner than we think. I suspect just as the pandemic will be the death knell for much of major retail, there is going to be a retrenchment with a lot of low-performing non-revenue D1 sports folding because schools will no longer be able to pay for them. Even some top programs like Cal have been living on the edge for several of their (well performing) sports programs for the past decade.

For the spring sports directly I don't think the issue of 5 classes worth of athletes will be an immediate problem, because I think some will not take advantage of the ability to return ("getting on with life") and what it will really mean is that the teams with really good recruits coming in will be loaded. For the coaches it will be a management issue, and some folks are not going to have the scholarship funds they hoped for, but I really think the immediate issue of next season is probably manageable.

However, you nailed some long term effects.

I am happy to say I made my current usual annual donation last week to Arizona but am not making my much smaller Rutgers donation at this time. I am going to admit the amount, I usually wouldn't, because I want to make a context. I give $2000 to Arizona athletics variously distributed. My point is that my donation wouldn't be missed - BUT - if everyone gives their (modest) (usual) (planned) gift, it will be a big help to schools. The big donors are of course another story. If I have to reduce it, that is an issue for future years.

As we all know almost all schools are not making money from their sports to begin with, so the various minor sports are going to be a struggle. But I suspect that most schools will continue with "most" of the sports. A school like Rutgers - with way too many sports even after they eliminated five a few years ago, may have to eliminate a few more. But if each school concentrates on the more minor sports that they do well, it could be the best thing.

 

[j66kicker]

That crunch would only get worse with five classes' worth of athletes to cover. And if the NCAA partially waives scholarship restrictions, the richer schools (like Stanford) can afford to get richer and retain them, while I would imagine a lot of state schools will be unable to cover them easily.


This is not anyone's topline concern today, but funding for college sports will be a major issue sooner than we think. I suspect just as the pandemic will be the death knell for much of major retail, there is going to be a retrenchment with a lot of low-performing non-revenue D1 sports folding because schools will no longer be able to pay for them. Even some top programs like Cal have been living on the edge for several of their (well performing) sports programs for the past decade.

The NCAA's own announcement says, "Schools also will have the ability to use the NCAA’s Student Assistance Fund to pay for scholarships for students who take advantage of the additional eligibility flexibility in 2020-21."

Division I Council extends eligibility for student-athletes impacted by COVID-19

The Division I Council on Monday voted to allow schools to provide spring-sport student-athletes an additional season of competition and an extension of their period

www.ncaa.org

 

[TheFarmFan]

The NCAA's own announcement says, "Schools also will have the ability to use the NCAA’s Student Assistance Fund to pay for scholarships for students who take advantage of the additional eligibility flexibility in 2020-21."

Division I Council extends eligibility for student-athletes impacted by COVID-19

The Division I Council on Monday voted to allow schools to provide spring-sport student-athletes an additional season of competition and an extension of their period

www.ncaa.org

Good catch. Though I am skeptical that this will fully cover all student-athletes currently on athletic scholarships, especially given this proviso:

The Council vote also provided schools with the flexibility to give students the opportunity to return for 2020-21 without requiring that athletics aid be provided at the same level awarded for 2019-20. This flexibility applies only to student-athletes who would have exhausted eligibility in 2019-20.

Without knowing more, that could mean giving students half scholarships, or covering tuition but not room and board, etc. I'll be curious to see how this plays out in practice, if we hear anything at all...

 

[j66kicker]

Good catch. Though I am skeptical that this will fully cover all student-athletes currently on athletic scholarships, especially given this proviso:



Without knowing more, that could mean giving students half scholarships, or covering tuition but not room and board, etc. I'll be curious to see how this plays out in practice, if we hear anything at all...

Yeah, to me it means the student athlete still has the year of eligibility, but - simple version - the school isn't required to give them a scholarship if they do come back. Of course it's more complicated with all the partial scholarship permutations...

And it also means don't bother applying for NCAA aid for underclassmen (now or later) who want to use their extra year after they are seniors.

 

[EricLA]

As Doug said, expected outcome, and no other option was really feasible. Not sure what the NCAA will do for the spring sports, but for the winter sports, most of the teams had finished their seasons. All that was left for the women was the NCAA and NIT tourneys.

Bummed for the seniors, but it's the right call. Now they can all turn the page and move onto the next chapter of their lives...

 

[willtalk]

Missing the tournament is not reason enough to take the drastic step of granting all seniors an extra year. I do think that some of the borderline decisions based on a game or two over the limit should be reconsidered for those that ask for injury waivers. The tournament was important for certain players with respect to their resume for professional ball. But even more so for those that spent most or all of their senior year just getting back to preinjury condition. They have been left with very little resume to go on.

 

[chrissaran]

Does the NCAA ever make sense? How about Evina not being able to play, not the only one, while others were eligible right away. Don't care what they decided. They have no clue what they're doing most of the time.