Once they opened that door for the Covid year, you knew it wouldn’t ever real close again.
I think we all saw this coming.
- Thread starter patdog
- Start date
They just continue to make it worse and worse. Why, oh why, would you do this and encourage more bum17ery like Diego Pavia?
Dang. Forgot about JUCO not counting now. So a guy can go to 2 years if JUCO. Then redshirt & play 5 years in college. Get ready for a lot of 27-year old seniors. Interestingly, the average age an NFL players career ends is 27.
I'm still hoping that's some one-off due to some technical BS that many people are missing. Because yeah if they do that, geez, even worse.
That said, I bet the JUCO market sees an uptick. And they'll overall be more places for football players to play, all the way down to the NAIA. And speaking of that, does NAIA count? Heck you could go there for 4 years, graduate, then transfer to the NCAA. Or better yet, go JUCO, then NAIA for 4 years, then NCAA for 5 years! Go to college for 11 years baby.
At first I laughed. Then I realized that’s really not much crazier than where we are already. And just wait till the first lawsuit some 27-year old files that NCAA is depriving him of making a living with the 5-year eligibility rule.
AND get paid more than the average US family annual income while doing it. Oh, to be young again....
This would be a great way for players who are not good enough for the NFL to continue to make a paycheck. Unfortunately, very few will realize it, "declare for the draft" and never be heard of again.
All you folks out there that have your kid playing travel soccer or baseball in hopes to get a crappy partial scholarship, might start thinking about transitioning to football. They'll be more spots than ever before. Might not be getting big NIL, but there will be more scholarships available.
Start lifting weights now Johnny. The hell with those concussions.
If the NCAA becomes a direct, viable competitor with the NFL for players, then don't they BOTH lose their control of the market, thereby eliminating anti trust issues?
Sounds perfect!!**
Sounds perfect!!**
I keep thinking there's not enough money to make it happen, but these dumbass, rich (somehow) boosters continue to up the ante in the name of winning a college football game. I often wonder how high it can truly go. Beats all I've ever seen.
Nice. So instead of the norm being a 4-year guy applying for a 5th, now it will be 5 year players applying for a 6th. I really do wonder how long it's going to be before the courts let the NCAA know that they have no right to arbitrarily restrict a college athlete's years of eligibility. I don't personally love the idea of a 27 year old playing college ball, but I also don't know what gives the NCAA the right to say that 4 years, 5 years, etc is the magic number
Damn... It makes me wish I was younger and maybe I would be a college player, too. That seems to be the way to go.
I wonder if the ability to redshirt a kid would go by the wayside if this passes.
That’s what this is doing. They’re eliminating the redshirt.
How are there going to be more spots available if each individual player now has 25% more eligibility?
There are actually going to be far fewer spots available, as its going to create a logjam of older players that block younger ones from coming in. It’s like a corporate office where everyone’s been in their current role for years and nobody ever moves up because nobody ever leaves to create room for it.
I’m cool with it… It took me 5 years to get my degree.
Maybe Lebby knew what he was doing signing all those JC players.
Maybe Lebby knew what he was doing signing all those JC players.
BYU says hold my lemonade
I think the plan is to allow 5 years with no redshirts, which would eliminate guys deciding to redshirt after the fourth game of the season.
More spots or less spots ? Kids won't be leaving for the NFL or running out of eligibility
Guess you're right. I was assuming more roster spots.
Which - we will get.....but yeah, not doing that complicated math right now, but probably less spots overall. Nevermind.
ETA: Doing the math, if we're going from 85 to 105. Probably will be about the same spots per class, dividing by 4 or 5. Guys were already there anyway, so numbers SHOULD go up at the D1 level anyway. PT will go down.
Last edited:
By that logic, what right does the WNBA have to decide that only women should be eligible to play for them. They have the right because they are organizing a sports league and have the right to set the rules. It's only an antitrust issue because the NCAA includes the vast majority fo schools playing college sports. If the P4 would break off into their own conference and set rules apart from the NCAA, that would probably be sufficient to avoid the antitrust issue. Either they are professionals and competing with the NFL or they are college teams competing with the G5, DII, and DIII schools. If the G5 schools cried uncle and started their own league, I would think that would be even safer because they clearly don't have any kind of market power.
And they screwed over a lot of high school kids with that extra covid year, they really just don't care.
Well actually, the move to create 105 scholarship roster spots took care of that and set this up for 5 year eligibility. The old way was 5 years to play 4 with only 85 scholarships and 25 signees per year to maintain 85 or fewer players on scholarship roster spots. With the 20 extra Scholaship roster spots. 5 years works just fine.
I’m not sure I get all the outrage over this. There’s a lot of players that get redshirted and get a fifth year but I imagine coaches are scared to redshirt players because they’ll get mad and leave.
Grant them 5 years with no redshirts. The end. Move along.
We are about to see expanded rosters anyway so schools can handle the extra players.
Grant them 5 years with no redshirts. The end. Move along.
We are about to see expanded rosters anyway so schools can handle the extra players.
This is good and obvious. Abolish redshirting. Get rid of the mid-year quits. Don't incentivize players to refuse to play.
Just because you can have 105 scholarships doesn’t mean you can put that many guys out on the field.
There’s only 11 guys that can be out there at a time, and only 55-60 guys at most that can really get meaningful reps over the course of a season. You can let 300 guys be on the roster, doesn’t matter. Only so many guys can play. And if they can’t play, no one’s gonna pay them shít. The marginal talents that are quality starters but not NFL caliber will all be hanging out forever, transferring 2,3,4 times in 5 years if that’s what it takes to stay out there and stay paid, and all the 20 new scholarships does is add 20 more guys to the end of the bench who won’t see the field.
Only ways you alleviate the bottleneck that already exists now (before this new nonsense ruling even begins) is to either expand the NFL draft, or change the rules to allow 13-14 players on the field for each team. Neither is happening.
Last edited:
I fail to see how this addresses any of that.
Old system - Creed Whittemore has 5 years to play 4. He quits after 4 games in 2nd year, to preserve 3 years of eligibility (presumably).
New system - He has 5 years to play 5 seasons. He quits after 4 games in his 2nd year. He still has 3 years left.
It fixes nothing. These guys aren’t just quitting to preserve eligibility. They are getting paid to quit. You want to end mid-year quitting? Then get rid of the 4-game allowance for redshirt years, unless there’s a medical issue in those first 4 games. Or get rid of the damn transfer portal. Easy peasy.
Under this system, Creed wouldn't have had any reason to quit 4 games in the season, because he'd be getting 3 more years at his new school anyway.
Maybe he still would have and it wouldn't solve the problem 100%, but it's going to reduce the mid-season quits since "preserving the redshirt" is the primary reason people do that.
It now just lets them do the same thing after Game 5, 6, 7, etc. In either case, they’ve already been paid by the current school, they are getting paid to quit by new school, then getting paid again when they get there.
End the portal. Bring back the 1 year sit-out rule for all transfers….graduated or not. Simple as that. That solves every problem, and there’s no legal reason why it couldn’t be done yesterday. Their NIL is just as valuable, whether they are playing or not, and they can still get paid for it.
I get the sense a handful of really scummy people are driving this thing. It is suspicious they haven’t put up some basic guardrails to safeguard the sport a little bit.
