Freshman ineligible again.....?

[Dawson Rental]

Recruiting advantage for the BE to ignore this stupid idea.

I have vague memories of Al McGuire talking about freshman trying to keep their skills up by playing old guys in cutoffs at the YMCA.  Division I players need to practice constantly just to retain let alone improve their skills.  The time spent playing is a small portion of the time they have to devote to the sport, so if you still allow them to practice, how much better off are they really by just not playing in the games.  I guess not doing the travel would be a plus.

And the better the student, the more unfair this change would be.  It's all about the NCAA protecting its image against accusations of exploiting kids at the expense of those same kids.  Creepy.

[Dawson Rental]

This will kill Bo Ryan's recruiting!

On the contrary, this is Bo Ryan's recruiting forced on all programs.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'd like to see a true national discussion on it. 

[brandx]

This will not happen. Need consensus and it is not there. In many sports a large portion of the freshman class are red shirted already. Who cares if a few kids go one and done in basketball. College basketball is still far more appealing than the NBA. There is no need for the national conversation that Delaney suggests. People love college sports the way they are. The only modifications that I see are providing health care for athletes.The nature of many of the injuries sustained are permanent and there needs to be reasonable compensation.

I agree it will not happen. I was just trying to point out the lunacy of Delaney.

[Stronghold]

One of the big problems with this potential rule change is it doesn't reflect the reality of a student athletes life. The freshman would still have to put in all the effort of being on the team and go through the same stress, Yet he/she would not get the satisfaction of playing.

No kidding.  And how about the  "Hey I don't have to play in the game tomorrow let's go out and party tonight."  Not saying stuff like this doesn't happen already but is banning kids from playing in games really helping them adjust to a 'student-athlete's' life?

[GGGG]

Delaney is an idiot. His plan will kill college Basketball. The entire national game will become mid-major basketball.

And when the lawsuits start - from both players and the networks with the contracts, the whole thing will erupt in chaos. Players will have a case because only certain sports - the ones with the most minorities - are being affected. And CBS will not honor a contract if the NCAA takes away the star players. Delaney says "The increased costs would be covered with money from TV and media rights deals for the College Football Playoff and NCAA men's basketball tournament." This moron actually thinks CBS will pony up more money for a lesser product!!

People want to see the stars. They won't exist, for the most part, if freshmen are ineligible. The top HS players will no longer go to college.

What's left if you eliminate the top 25 -5- HS players coming in every year? They will have no motivation to go to college to sit for a year. Since they have to wait a year to get drafted anyway, they will go directly to the D-League. They can play right away and they will get paid.

I think this is a little hyperbolic.  

The players aren't going to have a case because, in return for them sitting a year, they are going to increase the number of scholarships offered.  And I am sure they are going to talk with their television partners about this.  I doubt it would impact college basketball all that much ratings wise.  For college athletics, more people tune in for the school and the pagentry.  Not the stars.  Duke will draw eyeballs because they are Duke.  

[avid1010]

i think we all understand this is about money, but if you think back (to when i was a kid - ~90's), college basketball was such a different product.  we would all buy jersey's because players were known nationally as they would be at a school for multiple years.  i believe i follow college basketball closely, but i have no clue who will suit up for the blue bloods next year as anyone remotely good is going pro.  the ncaa wants to fix that...because it means more $$$$.

[MU82]

i think we all understand this is about money, but if you think back (to when i was a kid - ~90's), college basketball was such a different product.  we would all buy jersey's because players were known nationally as they would be at a school for multiple years.  i believe i follow college basketball closely, but i have no clue who will suit up for the blue bloods next year as anyone remotely good is going pro.  the ncaa wants to fix that...because it means more $$$$.

Wait ... you mean it's not about the student-athletes?

[Galway Eagle]

On the contrary, this is Bo Ryan's recruiting forced on all programs.

Sarcasm just posted from a phone so it wasn't worth doing teal

[Pakuni]

Great news for every program not in the Big Tenteen ... Delaney officially recommending freshmen ineligibility under the guise of "balancing academics and athletics."

http://files.ctctcdn.com/c7876417001/2bfcbc02-7b5f-4ff5-9229-4f2a0f2d620e.pdf

[ChicosBailBonds]

Great news for every program not in the Big Tenteen ... Delaney officially recommending freshmen ineligibility under the guise of "balancing academics and athletics."

http://files.ctctcdn.com/c7876417001/2bfcbc02-7b5f-4ff5-9229-4f2a0f2d620e.pdf

Yeah, shame on him for making the attempt.  It's worth the discussion.  You may agree or disagree with the pitch, but IMO it is worth the discussion on the merits.

[Spotcheck Billy]

Great news for every program not in the Big Tenteen ... Delaney officially recommending freshmen ineligibility under the guise of "balancing academics and athletics."

http://files.ctctcdn.com/c7876417001/2bfcbc02-7b5f-4ff5-9229-4f2a0f2d620e.pdf

I see he doesn't feel women basketball players need to stay in the classroom as freshmen (freshwomen?) - apparently they aren't having the academic problems the men do

[Pakuni]

Yeah, shame on him for making the attempt.  It's worth the discussion.  You may agree or disagree with the pitch, but IMO it is worth the discussion on the merits.

Yes, it is a shame that he's trying to weaken non-Big 10 programs like Kentucky and gain more control over student athletes under the false pretense of academics.
Do you honestly believe that not allowing a kid to play football for a few hours a week for a few months of the year is really going to help him academically?

[Aughnanure]

It's going to be a justification for more scholarships.

[brewcity77]

Won't this just force more schools to take JUCOs and immediately eligible graduate transfers? What happens when a school graduates six, has two go pro, and has two transfers? Look at Washington this year, I believe they have 4 scholarship players coming back. If freshmen are ineligible, JUCOs and grad transfers are the only answer.

So if you favor this freshman ineligibility, you must also favor an increase in immediately eligible transfers, ai'na?

[ChicosBailBonds]

I see he doesn't feel women basketball players need to stay in the classroom as freshmen (freshwomen?) - apparently they aren't having the academic problems the men do

They aren't....that's a fact.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Yes, it is a shame that he's trying to weaken non-Big 10 programs like Kentucky and gain more control over student athletes under the false pretense of academics.
Do you honestly believe that not allowing a kid to play football for a few hours a week for a few months of the year is really going to help him academically?

Look back at the data when freshmen were ineligible......that's what he is eluding too.  It's also not just a few hours a week, it's about the stress of performing, travel, etc.  You are smarter than this.  

Why do some schools forbid cars as freshmen?  Force freshmen to live in dorms?  Disallow more than 18 credits?  Or any number of other freshmen only rules?   Because they don't like freshmen?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Won't this just force more schools to take JUCOs and immediately eligible graduate transfers? What happens when a school graduates six, has two go pro, and has two transfers? Look at Washington this year, I believe they have 4 scholarship players coming back. If freshmen are ineligible, JUCOs and grad transfers are the only answer.

So if you favor this freshman ineligibility, you must also favor an increase in immediately eligible transfers, ai'na?

Forget Washington, what about us? Can you imagine if all of our freshmen were ineligible next season?

1: Duane
2: JjJ
3: Cohen
4: Wally
5: Luke

Bench:
The twins
Mini Marotta

I do actually appreciate the academic and personal benefit that this rule could bring to the students. I can see it's merit. I just don't see anyway that it would be practical.

[Pakuni]

I do actually appreciate the academic and personal benefit that this rule could bring to the students. I can see it's merit. I just don't see anyway that it would be practical.

The academic and personal benefit is vastly overstated, IMO.
Freshmen are still going to practice 20 hours a week. They're still going to attend meetings. They're still going have mandatory time in the weight room. They're still going to have to attend film study.
Literally the only extra time this gives them is game time. And, I'm guessing that most players will be watching their teammates play - either on TV or in the stands - during those few hours a week, rather than sitting in the library studying.

Also, if any Big 10 program or any other school believes a freshman athlete isn't ready to deal with college life while also playing, they're free to redshirt the kid. Why make this mandatory and essentially punish all freshmen athletes when there's already a reasonable option for dealing with this for the kids who truly aren't ready? Obviously some kids won't be ready. Others will play heavy freshmen minutes and wind up academic All-Americans (see: Stanford's Chasson Randle). There's no need for a one-size-fits-all solution here.

I think we know why they're doing this, and it has nothing to do with Jim Delaney or the Big 10 looking out for the best interests of athletes.

[Lennys Tap]

Look back at the data when freshmen were ineligible......that's what he is eluding too.  It's also not just a few hours a week, it's about the stress of performing, travel, etc.  You are smarter than this.  

Why do some schools forbid cars as freshmen?  Force freshmen to live in dorms?  Disallow more than 18 credits?  Or any number of other freshmen only rules?   Because they don't like freshmen?

The only thing you like better than defending the status quo is petitioning for measures that take us backwards.

[muwarrior69]

Look back at the data when freshmen were ineligible......that's what he is eluding too.  It's also not just a few hours a week, it's about the stress of performing, travel, etc.  You are smarter than this.  

Why do some schools forbid cars as freshmen?  Force freshmen to live in dorms?  Disallow more than 18 credits?  Or any number of other freshmen only rules?   Because they don't like freshmen?

I don't remember that rule at MU as I took 18 credits both semesters as a freshman ('65-'66). I don't think they forbade cars back then either, but it was really difficult for a frosh to get a parking permit.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

The academic and personal benefit is vastly overstated, IMO.
Freshmen are still going to practice 20 hours a week. They're still going to attend meetings. They're still going have mandatory time in the weight room. They're still going to have to attend film study.
Literally the only extra time this gives them is game time. And, I'm guessing that most players will be watching their teammates play - either on TV or in the stands - during those few hours a week, rather than sitting in the library studying.

Also, if any Big 10 program or any other school believes a freshman athlete isn't ready to deal with college life while also playing, they're free to redshirt the kid. Why make this mandatory and essentially punish all freshmen athletes when there's already a reasonable option for dealing with this for the kids who truly aren't ready?

I think we know why, and it has nothing to do with Jim Delaney or the Big 10 looking out for the best interests of athletes.

I understand what you are saying, but you are misguided. I work with college athletes on a daily basis. The players who redshirt are often required to go to a lot of the meetings, they don't always travel with the team, they go to team practices but often don't have the same level of individual attention that active players do, there are many events that they are not required to go to. Plus, the pressure is different and that makes a world of difference.

As a caveat, I will say there is less of a benefit for basketball players. Because the team is smaller, they are usually required to do all the things non-redshirts do. What I described is more common in sports like football, baseball, and the Olympic sports.

[MU82]

4 pages of debate on something that ain't gonna happen.

I love the interwebs!

[brewcity77]

Look back at the data when freshmen were ineligible......

Look at the reality of college basketball today. Would you be satisfied with Marquette having 5 eligible players next year? Because that'd be the reality without eligible true freshmen.

The ONLY ways around it would be JUCOs or immediately eligible graduate transfers, both of which you have spoken out against. So which is the lesser evil?

[ChicosBailBonds]

I don't remember that rule at MU as I took 18 credits both semesters as a freshman ('65-'66). I don't think they forbade cars back then either, but it was really difficult for a frosh to get a parking permit.

MU doesn't have it that I'm aware of, but some schools do. They want you to "ease into" your first year.