Should seniors get another year of eligibility?

[cbraarj]

It remains a discussion because of the cancellation of a number of conference tournaments and the biggest event in collegiate athletics, the NCAA tournament. Whenever opportunity and an earned experience is taken away from an individual due to an unprecedented circumstance, thought is given to those who have been adversely impacted the most by the loss.

Is there anything that can be done for those seniors who earned that opportunity with their teams this season but won't be able to have one last shot to fulfill that experience? Collegiate sports may be on the shelf for an extended time due to the virus. The way we are able to live our lives has been altered significantly. Opportunity gives hope to those who can use some additional hope right now. That is why I simply don't want to push the senior athletes out the door when there may be a path that can provide opportunity to those that truly want it.

No it shouldn't happen! It's to bad on what happened with the NCAA Tournament! Most womens conferences played there tournaments already so they completed their year! At least they have their online classes which is why they are there in the first place! Thinking they will offer an extra year just because they lost out on the tournament is the biggest joke about all this! For all the book smarts people can be so stupid!

 

[domerduck]

No it shouldn't happen! It's to bad on what happened with the NCAA Tournament! Most womens conferences played there tournaments already so they completed their year! At least they have their online classes which is why they are there in the first place! Thinking they will offer an extra year just because they lost out on the tournament is the biggest joke about all this! For all the book smarts people can be so stupid!

Speaking of smarts (which some people who call names should be more considerate), the NCAA is not just basketball. You have several other winter sports where the championship meet is absolutely EVERYTHING these athletes have been working for in their sport. Gymnastics, wrestling, fencing, hockey (mens and women's), swimming and diving, even bowling, rifling, and skiing are all winter sports where their championsips were not held.

Most of these students are not even on scholarship and the only issue is eligibility. As a parent of a student who lettered 4 years in multiple D1 sports (soccer & xcountry) I know how hard they work to keep up with their sport. Whatever decision the NCAA makes about bball must be in context of all the other winter sports. Eligibility can be granted without scholarship and a those that hadn't received their 5th year might be able to get it added if the rules can be fair. It's a reasonable argument.

Lot's to consider and name calling is truly not called for. See all the championships that the NCAA administers.

Championships

The official Championships page for the NCAA.org

www.ncaa.org

 

[WestCoast]

No it shouldn't happen! It's to bad on what happened with the NCAA Tournament! Most womens conferences played there tournaments already so they completed their year! At least they have their online classes which is why they are there in the first place! Thinking they will offer an extra year just because they lost out on the tournament is the biggest joke about all this! For all the book smarts people can be so stupid!

You may want to check your own spelling above before calling other people "stupid." I hear clearly that you don't approve of granting the opportunity to seniors.

I just believe that we can do better for those who have been adversely impacted the most. Difficult times often call for considering out-of-the-box solutions. Rather than dismissing the idea entirely, I would be very interested in any ideas that could help the impacted seniors who, absent any NCAA action, won't be able to compete again. They have had something taken from them due to an unprecedented circumstance. We are at war with virus containment. Following this war, give the seniors that opportunity as life and sports are restored in this country.

 

[Shades]

It’s not just the seniors who lost the opportunity to play in the tournament in 2020. The underclassmen also lost the opportunity. So should all players be given an extra year of eligibility? That would seem to be the only fair way to do it, but the ramifications of doing that would be overwhelming, I would think.

Also, only the players from the teams that qualified for the tournament should be given the opportunity for an extension. There was no selection show. A bracket was never determined, so that would have to be done. The NCAA doesn’t seem interested in doing so.

Several players have already made social media statements on their disappointment of how their seasons ended, but are understanding and ready to move on. Time for the fans to move on too.

 

[WestCoast]

It’s not just the seniors who lost the opportunity to play in the tournament in 2020. The underclassmen also lost the opportunity. So should all players be given an extra year of eligibility? That would seem to be the only fair way to do it, but the ramifications of doing that would be overwhelming, I would think.

Also, only the players from the teams that qualified for the tournament should be given the opportunity for an extension. There was no selection show. A bracket was never determined, so that would have to be done. The NCAA doesn’t seem interested in doing so.

Several players have already made social media statements on their disappointment of how their seasons ended, but are understanding and ready to move on. Time for the fans to move on too.

Ionescu's situation is so quantifiably different than that of the typical college student-athlete that including her to make that "just move on" point isn't really a relevant comparison. Yes. Most seniors are moving forward with their plans. Ionescu is an anomaly in that she will be financially secure as soon as her Nike shoe deal is released. She is ready to make her fortune in her next profession.

Allow the opportunity. That is the extent that I am hoping for from the NCAA. Others feel differently. I understand that.

 

[Conndog]

No to seniors having extra year. Not necessary, not even unfair to the seniors (they played full season, and life has curveballs, get used to it), and implementing it without causing chaos and favoring certain teams is impossible. Makes no sense to me.

 

[domerduck]

It’s not just the seniors who lost the opportunity to play in the tournament in 2020. The underclassmen also lost the opportunity. So should all players be given an extra year of eligibility? That would seem to be the only fair way to do it

I agree with you and have thought about this across all the winter sports. The way to administer this is to grant an additional year of eligibility for all affected, but only allow 4 years of "play" scholarship to receive scholarship. The "30% rule" and proper waivers for 5th and 6th year would stay the same, but if you played 4 years. No athletic scholarship. If they qualify for academic scholarships (like any non athlete student) then it should be able to be applied for their education funds.

True student athletes should be applauded for their desire to continue to pursue their education. I don't think those that ask for another year would not be worthy. Some want to move on and will. Sabrina wouldn't ask because she is all about playing bball. The WNBA & Team USA are her next steps.

Mik Pivec (who says she wants another year), on the other hand, does truly want to be a doctor and adding another year of education while she starts that pursuit and continues to play as an amateur bball may be worth it to her. Then she may be set up to continue to pursue her medical education while being a pro athlete. There is precedent as one of my favorite female pro athletes (Nadia Nadim) continued medical school while playing star forward for the Portland Thorns and playing on her Danish National team. She started schooling before she was signed by Portland and continues her pursuit to be a surgeon when she went back to Europe to play for Manchester City and now PSG,

The WNBA season is even shorter than the NWSL. Give Mik a good start she may be able to do both like Nadia.

Nadia Nadim - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[UcMiami]

The disadvantage to juniors, sophomores, freshmen, and recruits of returning the senior class for another senior season has been a bit downplayed (even in spring sports. There is a general progression of skill and responsibility that college kids experience during their 4 years of eligibility that is part of the passing of the torch. At Uconn for example, what would have happened if this happened in 2016 and Stewart Tuck and Jefferson were returning for a fifth year - the development of Gabby, Napheesa, Lou, Chung, and Dangerfield would have been stunted. This year if Lou and Napheesa had returned, Megan would likely not be turning pro as both she and Williams and ONO would not have been forced to mature and Anna and Aubrey might not have seen the floor. Dangerfield would never have experienced the leadership roll that she deserved to take on as the 'next senior' up. And if Dangerfield were to come back next year how does that change the situation for Page and Nika - do we allow them a free transfer before they arrive on campus since their experience will definitely not be what they signed up for?

I understand the emotional reactions, but bringing back seniors who got their full season (and the tournaments are not part of a 'season') greatly changes the arc for all the non-seniors on the team.

 

[WestCoast]

I agree with you and have thought about this across all the winter sports. The way to administer this is to grant an additional year of eligibility for all affected, but only allow 4 years of "play" scholarship to receive scholarship. The "30% rule" and proper waivers for 5th and 6th year would stay the same, but if you played 4 years. No athletic scholarship. If they qualify for academic scholarships (like any non athlete student) then it should be able to be applied for their education funds.

True student athletes should be applauded for their desire to continue to pursue their education. I don't think those that ask for another year would not be worthy. Some want to move on and will. Sabrina wouldn't ask because she is all about playing bball. The WNBA & Team USA are her next steps.

Mik Pivec (who says she wants another year), on the other hand, does truly want to be a doctor and adding another year of education while she starts that pursuit and continues to play as an amateur bball may be worth it to her. Then she may be set up to continue to pursue her medical education while being a pro athlete. There is precedent as one of my favorite female pro athletes (Nadia Nadim) continued medical school while playing star forward for the Portland Thorns and playing on her Danish National team. She started schooling before she was signed by Portland and continues her pursuit to be a surgeon when she went back to Europe to play for Manchester City and now PSG,

The WNBA season is even shorter than the NWSL. Give Mik a good start she may be able to do both like Nadia.

Nadia Nadim - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Thanks for keeping an open mind. A lot of people are getting hung up on the scholarship impact of granting the additional year. Scholarship or not, it is the opportunity at closure that I would like to see restored for the winter sports seniors who had earned that final opportunity.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

I'm pretty ambivalent about players getting another year.

I'm not sure I understand how someone could feel strongly against it.

 

[WestCoast]

The disadvantage to juniors, sophomores, freshmen, and recruits of returning the senior class for another senior season has been a bit downplayed (even in spring sports. There is a general progression of skill and responsibility that college kids experience during their 4 years of eligibility that is part of the passing of the torch. At Uconn for example, what would have happened if this happened in 2016 and Stewart Tuck and Jefferson were returning for a fifth year - the development of Gabby, Napheesa, Lou, Chung, and Dangerfield would have been stunted. This year if Lou and Napheesa had returned, Megan would likely not be turning pro as both she and Williams and ONO would not have been forced to mature and Anna and Aubrey might not have seen the floor. Dangerfield would never have experienced the leadership roll that she deserved to take on as the 'next senior' up. And if Dangerfield were to come back next year how does that change the situation for Page and Nika - do we allow them a free transfer before they arrive on campus since their experience will definitely not be what they signed up for?

I understand the emotional reactions, but bringing back seniors who got their full season (and the tournaments are not part of a 'season') greatly changes the arc for all the non-seniors on the team.

The NCAA tournament is certainly part of an athlete's "full season." That is why doing something for the seniors is even being considered by the NCAA.

 

[WestCoast]

Let's see, do we have Oregon, Baylor and SC on next year's schedule? I don't think that Oregon is...so yes, go for the 5th year. I also posted about the idea of the 5th year of eligibility in another of the "cancelled" type threads and brought up many of the reasons cited in this thread in my reasoning. This was before the Geno interview was posted, one of the Men's pundits has tweeted it. And I thought that the main concern would be for the Student\Athletes that were no longer "Students". The schools would have to foot the bill for them, and in UConn's case, it could be 5 team members. And the NCAA would have to alter the Max number of scholarships allowed but I guess that would be no problem for the NCAA, just a problem for the schools.
Maybe a Federal Stimulus package will address this too.

The schools shouldn't have to foot the bill for any scholarships that they didn't renew. If the college didn't want a graduating senior to continue in the program, the senior would need to seek out a new school through the transfer portal. I am not suggesting entitlement here. Instead, simply provide the opportunity.

You are correct in that a federal stimulus package will be resulting in checks to all American adults relatively soon. The first wave of checks to Americans will reportly be worth combined a $250 billion. Major retail stores are closing for indefinite periods effective today. Our educational system and economy are already adjusting to a new world.

Desperate times often require desperate and new measures. The thinking of the past needs to be reevaluated. Look for ways to benefit others by providing hope and opportunity whenever possible. We must keep our minds open to doing things differently than we have in the past.

 

[shiverz45]

If Ty and Kiki wanted to come back we have plenty of room since we only have 11 on scholarship and bringing in only 1.

 

[WestCoast]

If Ty and Kiki wanted to come back we have plenty of room since we only have 11 on scholarship and bringing in only 1.

Bring 'em back and allow them to take graduate level courses as they remain eligible in the fall and winter terms, assuming that they have already earned their degrees. The quality of women's collegiate basketball would be higher than normal for one year.

It is unlikely that pro basketball will be available for them anywhere anytime soon.

 

[Plebe]

I'm pretty ambivalent about players getting another year.

I'm not sure I understand how someone could feel strongly against it.

I mean, it's not gonna keep me up at night or make me write my congresspeople, but I can sum it up in overreaction, overcorrection, overreach, and do-gooderism.

 

[SVCBeercats]

I would probably not vote for this. The impact then rolls downhill to current juniors and incoming freshmen

Are the high schools bringing back all the senior players who missed playing in the state championship games? Life is full of disappointments. Athletes get catered to enough. Give them a participation trophy and move on.

 

[Figurehead]

Aint gonna happen. Maybe softball and baseball have a good arguement

 

[WestCoast]

Are the high schools bringing back all the senior players who missed playing in the state championship games? Life is full of disappointments. Athletes get catered to enough. Give them a participation trophy and move on.

Do I sense some anti-athlete sentiment above?

The comparison to high school isn't that analogous. A college athlete can go to grad school and continue his/her educational path at the same college. Lots of high school players go on and continue their athletics careers in college. A much smaller subset of athletes are able to play professionally.

It is true that all of us will experience disappointment. Most of the time that disappointment can't be remedied. In this unique case, there is a chance to make things better by providing that opportunity.

 

[SVCBeercats]

Do I sense some anti-athlete sentiment above?

The comparison to high school isn't that analogous. A college athlete can go to grad school and continue his/her educational path at the same college. Lots of high school players go on and continue their athletics careers in college. A much smaller subset of athletes are able to play professionally.

It is true that all of us will experience disappointment. Most of the time that disappointment can't be remedied. In this unique case, there is a chance to make things better by providing that opportunity.

I am far more concern with the folks whose paychecks will cease. No one will give them a do over. So yeah! I think the way athletes are viewed and treated is skewed. I understand having feeling for a kid but it isn't tramatic. It is a bump in the road. I lost a year of sports as a junior in high school because a school board member stole a lot of money. I lettered both freshman and sophomore and competed for state championship. So I thought this is our year. I was disappointed but then I thought the coaches would lose income. In small coal town there were not many options to make up the money other than heading for the coal mines during the summer.

 

[WestCoast]

I mean, it's not gonna keep me up at night or make me write my congresspeople, but I can sum it up in overreaction, overcorrection, overreach, and do-gooderism.

Is "do-gooderism" such a bad thing in today's uncertain world, especially if any cost would have to be either paid by the student-athlete or financed within the current number of approved scholarships?

 

[Plebe]

Is "do-gooderism" such a bad thing in today's uncertain world, especially if any cost would have to be either paid by the student-athlete or financed within the current number of approved scholarships?

I don't mean "do-gooderism" as in actually doing good things. I mean a misguided attempt to do something good, but which creates more problems than it actually solves.

Of all the problems that actually need solving amid a pandemic and impending economic crisis, I would hope that the people intent on making a positive difference are directing their focus elsewhere.

 

[WestCoast]

I am far more concern with the folks whose paychecks will cease. No one will give them a do over. So yeah! I think the way athletes are viewed and treated is skewed. I understand having feeling for a kid but it isn't tramatic. It is a bump in the road. I lost a year of sports as a junior in high school because a school board member stole a lot of money. I lettered both freshman and sophomore and competed for state championship. So I thought this is our year. I was disappointed but then I thought the coaches would lose income. In small coal town there were not many options to make up the money other than heading for the coal mines during the summer.

Me, too. Lots of people will be without jobs soon. The unemployment rate estimate that was being floated today was 20% within the next month. Not a good time to be trying to find a decent paying job for the first time.

Sorry to hear about your high school athletic experience and disappointment. Our past experiences often shape how we feel about future circumstances that impact other people. I can understand why you don't support the opportunity for other people who likewise faced disappointment during a formative time in their lives. Probably toughens them up and gets them better prepared for greater disappointments in life.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

Is "do-gooderism" such a bad thing in today's uncertain world, especially if any cost would have to be either paid by the student-athlete or financed within the current number of approved scholarships?

It's just strange to me.

If the NCAA does this, the only thing that happens is some young people who had their seasons curtailed by a national emergency get to play another year of college basketball...if they want to.

I get bent out of shape by ad hoc decisions regarding eligibility that don't really make sense from case to case, but I can't imagine what there would be to be upset about in a blanket waiver.

 

[Gamecockfan77]

I don't mean "do-gooderism" as in actually doing good things. I mean a misguided attempt to do something good, but which creates more problems than it actually solves.

Of all the problems that actually need solving amid a pandemic and impending economic crisis, I would hope that the people intent on making a positive difference are directing their focus elsewhere.

Granting kids another year of eligibility will hardly affect anything that is happening in the world to address the pandemic.

 

[UConnCat]