NCAA votes to approve age-based five-year eligibility rule, reshaping college football, basketball landscapes
Under the new rules, all college athletes will have five years to play five seasons
www.cbssports.com
5-year eligibility approved ...
- Thread starter tmcats
- Start date
www.cbssports.com
It is funny because this was kind of always "the rule" until covid changed it and adding in an injury or two, you had dudes playing 7-8 years and taking advantage of things.
This doesn't change anything. Guys will sue to get more years based on "reasons", local courts will provide annual injunctions so their favorite player can continue playing, the NCAA will sue, and by the time the case is heard the kid will be 30.NCAA votes to approve age-based five-year eligibility rule, reshaping college football, basketball landscapes
Under the new rules, all college athletes will have five years to play five seasons
From the article, "In the case of Madar, he served a two-year commitment to the Israeli military, which could provide an exception to the five-year clock. Even so, it would leave him with -- at most -- one season of eligibility."
This is the problem... it isn't about gaining an education or being a student. The universities are nothing more than a conduit for athletic prostitution. They are pimps to make a buck.
This is the problem... it isn't about gaining an education or being a student. The universities are nothing more than a conduit for athletic prostitution. They are pimps to make a buck.
I think it's a great rule, and I hope it can be enforced
I like it. Seems to make things cleaner - no more 4-game redshirt restriction, right? That seems like a win. Feels like we've "saved" some kids eligibility by not letting them play more than 4 games.... yet, how often do they actually stay 4 more years and succeed?
Get them on the field quickly and often if they have the talent. No more mismanagement of the 4-games. I don't have evidence, just feels like we sucked at this strategy.
Get them on the field quickly and often if they have the talent. No more mismanagement of the 4-games. I don't have evidence, just feels like we sucked at this strategy.
Seems like it could be tough on some in the incoming 2027 freshman class - hundreds, maybe thousands of 4th year seniors across the nation are now eligible to come back next year and take up valuable scholarship spots. Who knows - just an angle to think about during a transition.
I personally hate the link of athletics to education. That link is becoming more tenuous as costs skyrocket.
Major College Athletics needs, and will, be severed from Academic instutions in the not distant future.
Education has become a charade for these athletes and even using it in an argument is akin to the "False Fronts" of towns gone by.
The 4 game redshirt rule was more than enough. 5 full years is too much.
I think it would be great if the 5th year was tied to academic progress. As in, the player either has to graduate by the end of the 4th year and take grad-level classes, or at least be on track to graduate by the end of the 5th year. That might curb some of the transfer epidemic, since it has to be hard to stay on track to graduate if you bounce around from school to school.
Ya kind of , I think this takes the pressure of coaches they don’t have to come up with a 4 game plan for a freshman that probably can help . If they have an injury in a game or someone need a few plays off they can put the freshman in not worrying about just playing 5-8 snaps that would go against the 4 .
In Wrestling I suggest that the 5 for 5 will improve talent in programs ranked 3-10
Probably true. But my guess is that if these 5th years guys aren't AT LEAST on the 2 deep we likely move on. Don't forget we still have to pay these guys now. If I gotta pay this 4 star kid why would I pay a 5th year who can't make the 2 deep?
Weaker positions I think this might be more of a thing for teams who call themselves "developmental" might be effected more than the big dawgs. Teams like Georgia, OSU etc will have moved these kids on before it gets that far I think.
Holla
This is going to be superseded by the bill that is working its way through Congress, which seems likely to get approved. I think NCAA new eligibility rule is consistent with how the bill handles eligibility. But, the bill also goes further than just years of eligibility. It also codifies the NIL and transfer. I believe that under the bill, a player gets one free transfer. A subsequent transfer comes with a loss of one year of eligibility - with exceptions for coach moving, program terminating, player going into a graduate program. But, annually going into the portal will be greatly restricted if the bill passes.
Boy, what a mess. Not saying it wouldn't be good to have Jlaw back, but what a cascading shitstorm that would cause on the roster. There would definitely be guys looking to leave if that happens (Leonhardt?). I'd put my money on Jlaw being in a different uniform if he's able to get the extra year. It would be a tough spot for everyone.
I disagree. Leonhardt is a facilitator and then a scorer and defender. I’m a Lawrence fan, but I view him as a streaky scorer first which could affect Essegians role and minutes- not Leonhardts
It's always been 5 years, some people didn't take advantage of it, some did , but the length of time isn't changing. After we've seen 7 and 8 year players ( am I crazy or do I remember an 8th year player not too long ago)? come back. I'll be thrilled if this can actually be enforced
I feel like Fred and Lawrence have a good enough relationship to make this work, even if it means Lawrence takes on a different - and maybe reduced - role this time around.
I believe so. The 5 years is the way it should have been when they started letting players play in only 4 games.
No, he played three seasons for NU and one at Rhode Island. Never redshirted.
I think the best news for NU is that Natalie Potts gets to keep her status as a red shirt sophomore with 3 years of eligibility left.
Volleyball team would be impacted the most. There is no way those girls would make as much as a pro as they do as a Husker
What is sad is I don't think we have a football player who will make more as a pro than they are at NU. Maybe that should be the negotiating baseline. Look, we aren't paying you 250k or more unless you are looking like you can make an NFL roster.
I agree with this.. some guys will peak early and leave after 3.. others will be done in 4 and move on with their lives and some late bloomers are going to shine in years 4 & 5. Some will get injured early.. it's all going to be a vibe based on the player's situation. you'll see a distribution from 3-5 years, with 4 being most common imo.
So... does Hardy have another year?
And Antrell has 2 more as well as Minto and V Robinson has 3 years?
And Antrell has 2 more as well as Minto and V Robinson has 3 years?