|
Replies: 6
| visibility 2,285
|
All-TigerNet [10788]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7902
Joined: 10/18/16
|
Call Me Cold Hearted
Aug 12, 2020, 9:49 PM
|
|
but if the ACC, SEC, Big12, AAC and any other conference/independent left standing finish the fall football season, then NO player from any conference (or independent) that bowed out of 2020 sports should be given any extra eligibility. That would be an unfair advantage for the quitters.
Read this NCAA!
|
|
|
|
 |
Standout [308]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 427
Joined: 2/17/15
|
I see where you're coming from...
Aug 12, 2020, 10:00 PM
|
|
but I would hate to punish the kids that want to play and can't because their conference folded.
Now the kids that chose to sit out while their teams are playing should forfeit that year of eligibility.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7191]
TigerPulse: 70%
Posts: 20374
Joined: 8/18/06
|
Re: Call Me Cold Hearted
Aug 13, 2020, 1:31 AM
|
|
I guess the only response to that is to ask what would you do if you were a player?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hall of Famer [20518]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 11667
Joined: 10/15/02
|
Re: Call Me Cold Hearted
Aug 13, 2020, 5:38 AM
|
|
My son is a player in one of the conferences that isn't playing.
He's already had COVID - he got it two weeks after reporting back, from other football players who attended a party put on by the girls' volleyball team where the entire volleyball team - let that sink in a second - turned around and tested positive.
He was very sick for a week, almost wound up in the hospital a couple times, but did eventually beat it, and a heart EKG revealed no damage, thankfully. So he's back working out, anyhow, though there's no practice going on at the moment. Camp folded.
He wants to play. So do a lot of the guys on his team.
But you'd go ahead and take a year of eligibility away from him and his teammates - who reported back on time, and did what they were supposed to do, and got sick anyway - just to show the conferences who's boss?
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-TigerNet [10788]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 7902
Joined: 10/18/16
|
Re: Call Me Cold Hearted
Aug 13, 2020, 7:12 AM
|
|
I wouldn't want my 18 or 19 year old freshman, redshirt freshman or sophomore lining up against a 25 or 26 year old or older 6th year Senior either. It's not about who's the boss but keeping the talent pool level. Rules about the number of years played are in place for a reason.
I'm good if the teams that play in the fall get the same extra year of eligibility as the ones that quit on their players.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asst Coach [702]
TigerPulse: 87%
Posts: 795
Joined: 10/29/10
|
Re: Call Me Cold Hearted
Aug 13, 2020, 7:43 AM
[ in reply to Re: Call Me Cold Hearted ] |
|
Yes that's exactly what I'd do. The NCAA is bigger than one player. If the ACC cancels, and you're Travis Etienne, how fair is that? Life isn't fair and this whole deal is putting a lot of people squarely in the crosshairs of it. I feel bad for who it's messing up, but you've gotta try to keep it level.
|
|
|
|
|
|
110%er [7921]
TigerPulse: 90%
Posts: 10396
Joined: 11/28/03
|
Re: Call Me Cold Hearted
Aug 13, 2020, 8:45 AM
|
|
so essentially granting an extra year would mean giving every player currently enrolled a possible 6th year (can play five years plus a redshirt). Would be unfair to grant this only to teams who could not play so everybody would be eligible. Adding an extra year would mean the scholarship total would be 85 + 25 or 110 players for the next six years. Wondering how many schools would be willing to pick up this extra cost?
If it were me i would not grant a 6th year. It is a tough terrible situation but that is life. Football is not a right but a privilege. Sometimes things happen which we cant control and life does not go as we want. Learning to accept that and move on is part of being an adult. The players still get to go to school for free and will pick up where they left off next year on the football field assuming the school lets them play in 2021.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 6
| visibility 2,285
|
|
|
50
