NCAA proposing major changes to eligibility rules, including age limits

[BRS24]

NCAA proposing major changes to eligibility rules, including age limits

The proposal eliminates the ability for athletes to regain seasons of eligibility through redshirts (even for medical reasons) and waivers.

sports.yahoo.com

 

[Bone Dog]

Can you clarify: is the new 5th year of eligibility effectively a 5th playing year? Or is it still only 4 years of playing within 5 years?

 

[hoopsfan22]

Can you clarify: is the new 5th year of eligibility effectively a 5th playing year? Or is it still only 4 years of playing within 5 years?

That's what I was wondering as well because that's pretty big if it's the former.

 

[BBallF]

That's what I was wondering as well because that's pretty big if it's the former.

As usual, extremely poorly written article. Where do they get these people?

 

[BBallF]

The article seems to imply that you can now play for 5 seasons if passed. This is insane.

 

[VaConnFan11]

I don't think the age limit will fly. It's saying you can't be over 24 and play a sport. Just this year, Villanova had a 32 year old punter, Arkansas had a 30 year old receiver and Hawaii had a 29 year old punter and there were a handful of players over 25 playing basketball.

 

[MSSportsGuy]

I actually love this proposal and hope it passes but not sure it could stand up.

It's weird to me the claim the NCAA has a monopoly when it's not the only organization around. NAIA could still be options as well as NJCAA for those concerned about the age limit.

College athletics are a privilege, not a right, and no one forces the players to participate. If they don't feel they are compensated or treated fairly, they can always opt not to play and try to monetize their athletic talent in other ways.

 

[husky98]

I would love rules to be instituted that caps eligibility by age 24, and the athletes have up to 5 years from high school graduation to use their 4 years of eligibility. 18/19 year olds competing with 25 year old 6th year seniors is dumb

 

[LwrcasefaN]

I don’t think the age restriction will fly. I mean if a person started college at 30 I don’t see how you can say they aren’t eligible to participate in athletics, but they can compete with other students in an academic environment. I don’t think focusing on age is necessary. Focus on the ABSOLUTE number of years that can be played and how long you have to use that eligibility. No more SIX plus years playing…under any circumstance.

 

[husky98]

I don’t think the age restriction will fly. I mean if a person started college at 30 I don’t see how you can say they aren’t eligible to participate in athletics, but they can compete with other students in an academic environment. I don’t think focusing on age is necessary. Focus on the ABSOLUTE number of years that can be played and how long you have to use that eligibility. No more SIX plus years playing…under any circumstance.

This makes a lot of sense. What about previous professional experience? Can a player come back from the G league, provided they meet your criteria?

 

[BannerTown]

"According to the concept, NCAA athletes would have five full years of eligibility from the time of their 19th birthday or their high school graduation, whichever is earliest. No waiver requests, redshirts or exceptions will be permitted, except for a small group of outliers (those on maternity leave, military service or religious missions)."

So, if this "concept" were currently in effect, UCLA wouldn't have had Leger-Walker or Dugalic (both 24, born in 2001) this season? I bet Cori's glad the NCAA, in its infinite wisdom, didn't push this legislation through last year. 😂

 

[hoopsfan22]

"According to the concept, NCAA athletes would have five full years of eligibility from the time of their 19th birthday or their high school graduation, whichever is earliest. No waiver requests, redshirts or exceptions will be permitted, except for a small group of outliers (those on maternity leave, military service or religious missions)."

So, if this "concept" were currently in effect, UCLA wouldn't have had Leger-Walker or Dugalic (both 24, born in 2001) this season? I bet Cori's glad the NCAA, in its infinite wisdom, didn't push this legislation through last year. 😂

When I saw this my first thought was imagine if this legislation went through a decade ago? How many more titles would UConn have had if the teams of the 2010s had one more season (assuming everyone stayed and maxed out their eligibility)? I think we'd have at least one more championship if not two.

 

[Gael]

Can you clarify: is the new 5th year of eligibility effectively a 5th playing year? Or is it still only 4 years of playing within 5 years?

It's unclear as written, but here's how I analyze it.

Except for rare events like military service, there essentially will be no extensions available to the five years of eligibility, not for injuries or hardship or any of the usual extension criteria. That's a big takeaway for the athletes and schools.

Hence, if the 5/4 rule were to stay in place, the entire proposal would be a takeaway.

It makes more sense to me, therefore, if the students get a gift of an extra year of playing time to balance the no-extension takeaway. So, my guess it that everyone will be able to play for five years from the relevant starting point—high school graduation or age 19—but none of the usual extension reasons will be available for a 6th year, etc.

We'll see.

 

[HuskyNan]

 

[CL82]

I actually love this proposal and hope it passes but not sure it could stand up.

It's weird to me the claim the NCAA has a monopoly when it's not the only organization around. NAIA could still be options as well as NJCAA for those concerned about the age limit.

College athletics are a privilege, not a right, and no one forces the players to participate. If they don't feel they are compensated or treated fairly, they can always opt not to play and try to monetize their athletic talent in other ways.

If we decide student athletes are employees, which they are for all practical purposes, then wouldn't this limitation be age discrimination?

 

[Sifaka]

If we decide student athletes are employees, which they are for all practical purposes, then wouldn't this limitation be age discrimination?

Yes. Typically NCAA Clusterpluckery. A CBA would be a logical way to bring some stability back. It would have provisions to severely penalize anyone leaving a program after less than two years. But employees denied a livelihood due to age? Is Baker as dense as Emmert or whoever preceded him?

 

[LwrcasefaN]

This makes a lot of sense. What about previous professional experience? Can a player come back from the G league, provided they meet your criteria?

Nope. You leave eligibility ends forever.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

5 years for hs players that don’t transfer? That’s a no for me. You’re just recreating all the backlog that came with the extra covid year,

 

[hoopsfan22]

5 years for hs players that don’t transfer? That’s a no for me. You’re just recreating all the backlog that came with the extra covid year,

Yeah don't like that either. I think the 1st transfer play immediately rule is penalty enough for those that are chronic transferers. This essentially gets rid of grad transfers when I think you should be able to play 4 years in one place, graduate, and then go somewhere else for your last year of eligibility if you're going for a grad degree.

 

[BobbyJ]

If this 5 years of play goes through they'll need two sets of record books or have to use a lot of asterisks.

 

[packwrap]

While much of the criticism of this proposal is valid, I see it as a positive that the new NCAA is proactively attacking here. Combine this proposal with the govt Executive Order and you get some ideas on the table that make a good template for the needed Law in Congress.

The idea of 5 years only if you stay with 1 team is a creative way to provide an incentive for loyalty. Perhaps making this also valid for a first time grad transfer could help.

There will be plenty of further discussion on this as Congress keeps looking at a College Sports Law. What is still missing is input from athletes and agents.

 

[visitingcock]

Yes. Typically NCAA Clusterpluckery. A CBA would be a logical way to bring some stability back. It would have provisions to severely penalize anyone leaving a program after less than two years. But employees denied a livelihood due to age? Is Baker as dense as Emmert or whoever preceded him?

I don’t see how a cba could work. In the Southern “ Right to Work” states, you cannot have a closed shop. Each “employee” can opt out of a cba. Why would a Texas or Carolina or Louisiana prospect/transfer join a union and give up their right to negotiate their own deal?