Winter sports denied extra year of eligibility

[Pinnum 840]

8 minutes ago, BigTenFanboy said:

Considering the FACT that pool or competition surface plays a factor in these competitions your statement is false.

Actually, that is not a requirement.  (Though I did mention above, before I saw your comment, that drag could have an impact due to other athletes in those instances where they compete.)

 The NCAA swimming rule book states that an event must be contested even if only one athlete enters in total.  Athletes compete against a clock so they can compete as the only athlete in the pool and a time from a single swimmer race can earn an athlete qualification for the national championship if their time is fast enough.  They also must be awarded points as if they had beat 12 other swimmers in the pool. 
 

It is all about racing the clock.   Everyone around the country is competing against the same clock all season.

 

 

[BigTenFanboy 1,790]

58 minutes ago, Pinnum said:

Actually, that is not a requirement.  (Though I did mention above, before I saw your comment, that drag could have an impact due to other athletes in those instances where they compete.)

 The NCAA swimming rule book states that an event must be contested even if only one athlete enters in total.  Athletes compete against a clock so they can compete as the only athlete in the pool and a time from a single swimmer race can earn an athlete qualification for the national championship if their time is fast enough.  They also must be awarded points as if they had beat 12 other swimmers in the pool. 
 

It is all about racing the clock.   Everyone around the country is competing against the same clock all season.

 

 

I understand that, however theres an unwritten reason why host competitions in the same pool. 

[goheels1812 676]

Cael must feel really strongly about this to tweet about it. That’s his first tweet since 2018...

[1032004 1,466]

5 minutes ago, goheels1812 said:

Cael must feel really strongly about this to tweet about it. That’s his first tweet since 2018...

And just like that, all PSU fans who didn't think they should get an extra year changed their mind. 

[VakAttack 4,016]

Cael is, of course, right.

[Pinnum 840]

Any top program would support it. 
 

1. they have the money (using the spring sport policy implementation) schools can go over budget next year, so schools with money can offer more money and bring in top recruits to redshirt with scholarships that normally wouldn’t be available with the seniors using them.  Of course only big budget schools are going to expand their scholarships.  Most non football schools already said they won’t be expanding their scholarship limit because they don’t have the money to fund it.  
 

So PsU would be able to double up on their scholarships that seniors are using.  Redshirts could be on full scholarship while training with the athletes they were suppose to be replacing.  No longer does the freestyle club have to fundraiser to fund the seniors to keep them around.  The school can now fund it directly. 
 

2.  It is much harder to recruit and develop a star athlete. So if you have one you don’t want to let them go.  Every coach would want to be able to extend the use of athletes like Rasheed, Hall, Vincenzo, and Conel.  
 

3. Most seniors around the country will graduate since they thought their career was going to be over so they were already planning to graduate.   This means there will be a lot of graduate transfers available.  So if you’re a top program with only one or two weak spots in your lineup, chances are there is a top wrestler at that weight from another program that would love to spend their last year competing for a team title.   That graduate transfers makes it possible without any issues.  
 

Coaches see the work their top athletes put in and don’t want to see it go to waste but this is the issue of the seen versus the unseen.  This would only cause harm to the future athletes not on scholarship.  Their road just got much harder and they will get much less opportunities.  
 

This would really help the top programs widen the gap from the field over the next few years. 

[BigTenFanboy 1,790]

47 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

And just like that, all PSU fans who didn't think they should get an extra year changed their mind. 

And just like that those who hate PSU agree that the winter athletes shouldnt get the year back.

[VakAttack 4,016]

There is no "great" answer for how to handle the situation, but the way that has been chosen is the worst.

[shieldofpistis 156]

On 3/30/2020 at 7:54 PM, AHamilton said:

Reportedly, most coaches were (selfishly) against another year of eligibility.

Brands and Ryan were for getting another year.  Maybe Cael, too (but he is pretty tight lipped about a lot of stuff.)

Don't you think keeping Moore and pletcher would hurt OSU as far as guys trasfering.

[shieldofpistis 156]

On 3/30/2020 at 11:28 PM, kyleinthecircle said:

really not sure why anybody thought the NCAA would give an entire season of eligibility back to athletes who had a single tournament 

I agree with this

[shieldofpistis 156]

On 3/31/2020 at 8:04 AM, Ching said:

I would like to see the coaches vote on AA's (or give them to the top eight seeds), but in no order to them.

At the least they deserve this

[Lurker 2,039]

49 minutes ago, VakAttack said:

There is no "great" answer for how to handle the situation, but the way that has been chosen is the worst.

Plase explain

[VakAttack 4,016]

19 minutes ago, Lurker said:

Plase explain

You want to have the same conversation you and I have already had again, lol?

[Lurker 2,039]

1 hour ago, VakAttack said:

You want to have the same conversation you and I have already had again, lol?

No this is a different conversation. I’d like to know of all the possible scenarios on what to do with where you come up with this being the worst. What’s your ideas on how they could have done it better? How would you implement it?

[1032004 1,466]

On 3/31/2020 at 7:38 PM, BigTenFanboy said:

With that said, none of this has to do with the denial of an extra season.

 

 

[1032004 1,466]

If they're not going to give eligibility (or even a semester) to all qualifiers, I think allowing those with a redshirt available to use one is at least somewhat of a compromise.

That's still not fair to those that have already used one, but I feel like most schools plan on a lot of guys redshirting anyway so it shouldn't be that much of an additional burden on the schools IMO.

Especially if you include ORS, that basically covers a lot of the bigger names being mentioned - Lee, Moore, Brooks, Hall,  Pletcher, Assad, Steveson, Valencia (?); but not guys like Cenzo, Lujan, Lugo, Tucker.

[kyleinthecircle 8]

On 3/31/2020 at 6:06 AM, Fletcher said:

You're saying this is the same as if the Midlands were canceled? I agree this may be how non-wrestling people view it.

Not saying it is anything other than this. The entire season was wrestled from November-March including the post-season (yes, conference tournaments are post-season). The national tournament was cancelled. Why should the athletes get to do over the entire season because one tournament was canceled? If an athlete wrestles the entire season, qualifies for the NCAA tournament, then gets injured in the days leading up to the tournament, the NCAA never grants them another season. So what made people think that the NCAA would grant 330 extra seasons for the exact same scenario (in the eyes of the NCAA)?

[Cptafw164 130]

On 4/1/2020 at 7:07 AM, 1032004 said:

I don't like basing it entirely on rankings.   Too subjective.   Giving auto qualifiers to the conference champs and then some at large spots makes sense to me.

Where exactly would the at large spots come from?  Rankings I believe. 

Edited April 5, 2020 by Cptafw164

[kyleinthecircle 8]

On 4/2/2020 at 9:33 AM, 1032004 said:

If they're not going to give eligibility (or even a semester) to all qualifiers, I think allowing those with a redshirt available to use one is at least somewhat of a compromise.

That's still not fair to those that have already used one, but I feel like most schools plan on a lot of guys redshirting anyway so it shouldn't be that much of an additional burden on the schools IMO.

Especially if you include ORS, that basically covers a lot of the bigger names being mentioned - Lee, Moore, Brooks, Hall,  Pletcher, Assad, Steveson, Valencia (?); but not guys like Cenzo, Lujan, Lugo, Tucker.

And then that sets a precedent that a redshirt means nothing, and that people should still be allowed to compete in the postseason if you have a redshirt 

[1032004 1,466]

7 hours ago, Cptafw164 said:

Where exactly would the at large spots come from?  Rankings I believe. 

Yeah for the at larges basing it on rankings would probably be fine - or a committee which I guess is pretty much the same thing

[1032004 1,466]

7 hours ago, kyleinthecircle said:

And then that sets a precedent that a redshirt means nothing, and that people should still be allowed to compete in the postseason if you have a redshirt 

Pretty sure this season won't be used as a precedent for much except for if there's another worldwide pandemic or maybe a world war.