Conference Commissioners Considering Freshman Ineligibility

RTR91

Super Moderator
Nov 23, 2007
39,407
6
0
Prattville
This appears primarily because of basketball but will affect all sports. Link

The item was No. 7 on a 10-point list for NCAA reform ideas that Pac-12 presidents and chancellors sent their Power Five colleagues last May.

7. Address the “one and done” phenomenon in men's basketball. If the National Basketball Association and its Players Association are unable to agree on raising the age limit for players, consider restoring the freshman ineligibility rule in men's basketball.

Several conference commissioners say it's time to consider making freshmen -- or at least some of them -- ineligible, again, for the first time since the NCAA rule changed in 1972.


One-and-done players in men's basketball are the main reason some commissioners want this discussion to occur, and it's not clear whether freshman eligibility interest would decrease should NBA commissioner Adam Silver get his way by pushing the NBA's age limit from 19 to 20 years old.


“I've had conversations with several commissioners about (freshman ineligibility),” Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott said. “We are pushing, and I think you will see much more serious conversations about it in the coming months and year.”
 

AlexanderFan

Hall of Fame
Jul 23, 2004
11,076
7,524
187
Birmingham
Calipari rule would involve not being able to sign kids that Nike pays for everything their aau teams do as long as they sign with him. Not to mention the coaches.

Sent from my HTC6525LVW using Tapatalk
 

Rama Jama

All-American
Jan 4, 2011
3,303
240
82
Tuscaloosa
This would adversley affect teams like Alabama and LSU who send so many players to the pros. Don't really see a need for this rule.
I disagree completely. Scholarships need to be for 5 years in that case. If so, kids would get a year to acclimate to the speed of the game and learn the self discipline to be successful students as well. The kids who go pro after 3 years are missing out on much of the college experience because they spend all their time either in practice or in class. There used to be freshman teams that played a few games back when they had enough players. This will likely never happen because it would cost more money and would not generate additional revenue, but if the NCAA or conferences truly are interested in the welfare of the student athletes they'd change it. Take a second to think about it though. How many kids realistically contribute to their teams in a meaningful way in their freshman year in football? At Alabama, that number would be maybe 2 or 3 if you throw out special teams.
 

bodiddle

All-SEC
May 14, 2006
1,338
0
0
I disagree completely. Scholarships need to be for 5 years in that case. If so, kids would get a year to acclimate to the speed of the game and learn the self discipline to be successful students as well. The kids who go pro after 3 years are missing out on much of the college experience because they spend all their time either in practice or in class. There used to be freshman teams that played a few games back when they had enough players. This will likely never happen because it would cost more money and would not generate additional revenue, but if the NCAA or conferences truly are interested in the welfare of the student athletes they'd change it. Take a second to think about it though. How many kids realistically contribute to their teams in a meaningful way in their freshman year in football? At Alabama, that number would be maybe 2 or 3 if you throw out special teams.
I agree with RollTide 1224
 

RTR91

Super Moderator
Nov 23, 2007
39,407
6
0
Prattville
This would adversley affect teams like Alabama and LSU who send so many players to the pros. Don't really see a need for this rule.
Not likely. Think about it - HaHa wouldn't have played in 2011. The pro scouts would have only had two years of tape on him when he became draft eligible. He most likely would have stayed another year.
 

Ldlane

Hall of Fame
Nov 26, 2002
14,253
398
102
I think we should expand the rosters and add JV teams and games like it used to be because of the wear and tear of playoff football.
 

rolltide_21

Hall of Fame
Dec 9, 2007
11,463
7,533
187
NW AL
I don't like it. Think about other years where Bama had impact freshman- 2008, no NC in 2009 w/out TR, Yeldon in 2012 (gained 1k yards), or Amari in 2012. How would we have done this year without Cam Ronbinson? While it's only 2-3 players they are usually impact positions like the ones mentioned above. Why don't they just change basketball to three years like all other sports? (Baseball may be the only other exception. Someone more informed than me could speak to that sport).

Edit: I know one of the reasons they will not change it to 3 years is because the NBAPA won't raise the age limit behind 19. I wonder when we will see more HS players going the international route to develop. It's been done in the last few years but the results haven't been really noticeable.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator
Staff member
Nov 8, 2004
9,569
12,865
237
Tuscaloosa
This helps most athletes. It helps most schools. It hurts truly elite athletes and the schools who recruit them a consistent basis. Alabama, USCw, tOSU, and the like.

Keep in mind: the current rule about being out of high school a minimum of three years isn't an NCAA rule. It's part of the collective bargaining agreement between the NFL and the NFLPA.

It's a provision the players' union wants to protect its veterans from being replaced by younger, presumably less expensive, alternatives.

If this passes, it will be interesting to see if the NFLPA responds.
 

RTR91

Super Moderator
Nov 23, 2007
39,407
6
0
Prattville
Could you elaborate on how it helps the athletes? Wouldn't the players still have all the same responsibilities (practice, meetings, etc)?

It seems like it would also hurt athletes that need a redshirt year as an upperclassman.
It would help guys mature and adapt to the college game.

I'm not sure this would eliminate a redshirt year, so guys can still get a medical redshirt if needed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

4Q Basket Case

FB|BB Moderator
Staff member
Nov 8, 2004
9,569
12,865
237
Tuscaloosa
Could you elaborate on how it helps the athletes? Wouldn't the players still have all the same responsibilities (practice, meetings, etc)?

It seems like it would also hurt athletes that need a redshirt year as an upperclassman.
Keep in mind, I'm talking about most collegiate athletes. As in, the 95%+ that have no chance at professional athletics, and slim to no chance of playing in college as freshmen.

Freshman ineligibility precludes (or at the very least, reduces) unrealistic expectations. True, they practice and work out like the first-stringers. But they have no pressure to perform on Saturday. It's an entirely different mindset from expecting / hoping / praying to play.

It allows an acclimation to college-level classwork, time management, and the social aspects of campus life, without the specter of actual game performance hanging over you.

If, because, taken in a vacuum, a game itself takes only a short time, you think there's no difference in the overall drain, you don't understand the difference between being the leading man and being the understudy's understudy's understudy.

Lastly, it allows a year of physical maturation. The difference between an 18-year-old HS graduate and that same kid 15 months later is huge, even in the general student population, setting aside entirely 15 months in the S&C program inherent in a Top-10 program.

No, Landon Collins wouldn't have benefitted. Neither would have TJ Yeldon, or HaHa, or any of a dozen other elite athletes we've had at Alabama.

We're spoiled. While athletes of that caliber typically represent 10 - 20% of a Saban recruiting class, they represent considerably less than 1% of all HS players who sign FBS scholarships.

That's why I say the proposal would benefit most collegiate athletes.
 
Last edited:

GrayTide

Hall of Fame
Nov 15, 2005
18,810
6,245
187
Greenbow, Alabama
In a perfect world without money as the prime driver (for the individual player and the school) having freshmen ineligible would allow them to adjust to college life, their class work and mature, but we do not live in a perfect world so this ain't going to happen.
 
Last edited:

rgw

Suspended
Sep 15, 2003
20,852
1,351
232
Tuscaloosa
The NBA age restriction only helped them by giving prospects an opportunity to play at a higher talent level for scouting purposes. It was a terrible rule for the NCAA. Universal freshman ineligibility would probably force the NBA to allow high school players back into the draft...and we could get the old status quo back.
 

bama579

Hall of Fame
Jan 15, 2005
5,413
885
137
The Chukker or Archibalds
The NBA age restriction only helped them by giving prospects an opportunity to play at a higher talent level for scouting purposes. It was a terrible rule for the NCAA. Universal freshman ineligibility would probably force the NBA to allow high school players back into the draft...and we could get the old status quo back.
You are probably on target with the NBA assertion . . We tend to think of elegibility as how it affects football.
 

gtgilbert

All-American
Aug 12, 2011
3,168
4,046
187
Keep in mind, I'm talking about most collegiate athletes. As in, the 95%+ that have no chance at professional athletics, and slim to no chance of playing in college as freshmen.

Freshman ineligibility precludes (or at the very least, reduces) unrealistic expectations. True, they practice and work out like the first-stringers. But they have no pressure to perform on Saturday. It's an entirely different mindset from expecting / hoping / praying to play.

It allows an acclimation to college-level classwork, time management, and the social aspects of campus life, without the specter of actual game performance hanging over you.

If, because, taken in a vacuum, a game itself takes only a short time, you think there's no difference in the overall drain, you don't understand the difference between being the leading man and being the understudy's understudy's understudy.

Lastly, it allows a year of physical maturation. The difference between an 18-year-old HS graduate and that same kid 15 months later is huge, even in the general student population, setting aside entirely 15 months in the S&C program inherent in a Top-10 program.

No, Landon Collins wouldn't have benefitted. Neither would have TJ Yeldon, or HaHa, or any of a dozen other elite athletes we've had at Alabama.

We're spoiled. While athletes of that caliber typically represent 10 - 20% of a Saban recruiting class, they represent considerably less than 1% of all HS players who sign FBS scholarships.

That's why I say the proposal would benefit most collegiate athletes.
It's more than just the Collins, Yeldons and HaHas of the world. There are a ton of TF that get to play some small role, even if just special teams their first year, and that small role is really what helps them adjust to the speed, size and atmosphere of the game. Those small roles they can play are really beneficial for their development on the field. Guys like Upshaw, Dickson, Duvall, Williams, Allen and Evans all got small, specialty roles in certain packages. that was even the case with CJM his first year. They got to focus on a small part of the overall responsibilities, AND apply that in game situations, for their position without the expectation they had to do it all from day 1. If that developmental step is put off to the second year, OR they are expected to step right into a major role the second year even though they've never taken a game snap, I think it could be a disadvantage to the player.

It would also really impact roster management numbers. teams can only have 85 schollys. If you've got 25 TF that can't play at all that means you've only got 60 scholly players to fill out your depth chart including special teams.
 

New Posts

Latest threads

TideFans.shop : 2024 Madness!

TideFans.shop - Get YOUR Bama Gear HERE!”></a>
<br />

<!--/ END TideFans.shop & item link \-->
<p style= Purchases made through our TideFans.shop and Amazon.com links may result in a commission being paid to TideFans.