The CardBoard
Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. (/thread-19280.html)


Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - BobK - 03-30-2020

http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/division-i-council-extends-eligibility-student-athletes-impacted-covid-19

Has anyone seen a list of sports

Right now assuming

Track & Field
Baseball
Softball
Lacrosse
Beach

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - bbm233 - 03-30-2020

"Council members declined to extend eligibility for student-athletes in sports where all or much of their regular seasons were completed."

Golf and tennis will be interesting to adjudicate - I assume eligibility would be extended in both. Tennis hadn't really started conference play, and golf national championships are in May, even though they start play in the fall. If you are Arbuthnot in WTen or Shimp/Snyder in MGolf, is it tempting to come back, or do you move on with whatever plans you were making?

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - Lorcan - 03-30-2020

Per ESPN:

"The waivers will be applied for student-athletes competing in spring sports: baseball, softball, tennis, golf, outdoor track and field, lacrosse, rowing, men's volleyball, beach volleyball and women's water polo. The decision does not include winter sports such as basketball, hockey, swimming and diving, and gymnastics."

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/28972856/ncaa-approves-extra-year-eligibility-spring-athletes

This means that Arbuthnott and Higuchi could both be back next season. 

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - BobK - 03-30-2020

Thank you. Excellent news on tennis and golf and the others I didn’t name

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - 82lsju - 03-30-2020

I wonder how many will be offered a scholarship to return given it appears to be optional and how many decide to move on if they have to pay, I also wonder if someone might stop out for fall and winter and return just for the spring, from the original link

Quote:In a nod to the financial uncertainty faced by higher education, the Council vote also provided schools with the flexibility to give students the opportunity to return for 2020-21 without requiring that athletics aid be provided at the same level awarded for 2019-20. This flexibility applies only to student-athletes who would have exhausted eligibility in 2019-20.

Schools also will have the ability to use the NCAA’s Student Assistance Fund to pay for scholarships for students who take advantage of the additional eligibility flexibility in 2020-21.


RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - ColoradoTree - 04-08-2020

One thing that I've been wondering since this was announced was how it would affect our teams versus other teams. Stanford (along with most other Power 5 schools) is not exactly starved for resources, and shouldn't find it too overwhelming to fund additional needed scholarships. That said, donors everywhere just had a big bite taken out of their portfolios, and they may not be as receptive to a request to fund some additional temporary scholarships as they might otherwise be.  

But beyond the question of how we pay for it, there's the question of whether current seniors in spring sports want to come back for another full year. I'm less of an expert on other spring sports, but for women's tennis, I can't remember the last time we had a fifth year player. Like most of their fellow students, they graduate after four years and they move on. Do Emily Arbuthnott and Emma Higuchi have jobs lined up? If so, are those jobs still going to be there in the current economic situation? Is there a co-term option they're interested in pursuing, or a more traditional master's or PhD program? (Arbuthnott, for one, had a 4.14 GPA as an Economics major at the end of last year, so presumably she's still roughly around there. I'm not sure how many undergrads our Econ PhD program accepts, or if they ever accept anyone, but if it could materialize, to get an Econ PhD from Stanford while playing another year of college tennis is a pretty amazing situation.) 

There's also the disruption to the team dynamic, as women's tennis has a pretty straightforward conveyor belt. 8 scholarships, and ideally you have it set up to be two a year. So, allowing for freshmen who might jump over someone else in the lineup, you theoretically have two seniors, two juniors, and two sophomores in the lineup, with two freshmen waiting in the wings, all on scholarship. Lather, rinse, repeat, year after year. 

But if you start having fifth-year players in the mix for the next few years, what does that do to the team dynamic? Recruiting? Playing time, like in any sport, is a brobdingnagian deal in tennis recruiting. If all of a sudden you have ten scholarship players and you might not see the court regularly until your junior year? And instead of two younger scholarship players that might potentially jump you in the lineup, it's four? 

Don't get me wrong, it was the right call, and I'm glad the NCAA made it. But like anything in life, making the right call doesn't mean there aren't any consequences that flow from that decision. Just different ones. 

Imagining our roster next year, and while it's a good problem to have to have so many good players available, there are going to be some players who deserve to play who are ticked off they're not playing:

5th years: Emily Arbuthnott, Emma Higuchi
Seniors: Michaela Gordon, Janice Shin
Juniors: Sara Choy and Niluka Madurawe
Sophomores: Angelica Blake and Nicole Mossmer
Freshmen: India Houghton and Ana Geller

What do you even do there? Does Higuchi even have a role? I would see it as (1) Gordon, (2) Arbuthnott, (3) Blake (though I bet she'd jump Emily with another year under her belt), (4) Choy, (5) Houghton (she's a real one), and (6) Shin. Maybe. But Madurawe has proven she belongs in the lineup, and Higuchi sure as heck has, too. Injuries happen, and you can never have too much depth, but I might prefer one or both of Arbuthnott or Higuchi moving on with their lives after this. Every scholarship player on this roster is good enough to play singles on this roster. Yes, everyone gets a fifth year to potentially let the logjam work its way out, but the deal that was sold to recruits is no longer the deal we're able to offer. And perhaps most importantly, if you're not playing matches, you're not developing nearly as quickly as you would otherwise. (One possible solution that's unique to college tennis: have the ITA relax enforcement of its roster rules so that teams can cycle through a number of players more readily than they can currently so that playing time can be distributed a bit more broadly than it can now.)

With the economy looking the way it is, I'd expect a bumper crop of grad transfers across college tennis for the next few years. A lot of Stanford student-athletes getting co-terms. If the job you'd hoped for isn't there right now, might as well build your resume and play tennis to pay for it while you're at it. I'd expect this to primarily benefit mid-majors or lesser Power 5 teams, as teams like UNC, Stanford, and UCLA can't really get much better than they are, but a senior who's stuck at #5 at Stanford might find the idea of playing at the top of the lineup at, say, Columbia (and thus testing yourself against other teams' #1s and #2s instead of their #5s) a more attractive option than being buried in the lineup here.

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - mbdude - 04-08-2020

Colorado Tree said "One thing that I've been wondering since this was announced was how it would affect our teams versus other teams. Stanford (along with most other Power 5 schools) is not exactly starved for resources, and shouldn't find it too overwhelming to fund additional needed scholarships."

The Ivy League will not be granting 5th year eligibility for spring sports

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - ColoradoTree - 04-08-2020

(04-08-2020, 01:13 PM)mbdude Wrote:  Colorado Tree said "One thing that I've been wondering since this was announced was how it would affect our teams versus other teams. Stanford (along with most other Power 5 schools) is not exactly starved for resources, and shouldn't find it too overwhelming to fund additional needed scholarships."

The Ivy League will not be granting 5th year eligibility for spring sports

Looks like the Ivy League's policy that "athletic opportunities are for undergraduates" would rule out incoming grad transfers, too.

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - BobK - 04-08-2020

Talking Baseball. Stanford had this season three Grad students. I don’t know if two years programs or not. Also two Srs. One a walk on the other hurt just before the season ended. But don’t know his situation

We have a brobdingnagian class coming in. The affect of the Frosh on the scholarship situation should be minimal. Baseball is one of the few sports with a roster limit which has been waived by the NCAA

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - bbm233 - 04-09-2020

Does anybody know what the rules are regarding being enrolled in advance of your season but then returning in the spring to play? I have a niece who plays DIII LAX (non-scholarship), who was very much looking forward to her last year of competition. She is considering taking a gap year and returning to take the one class she has left for her degree but also to compete next spring. We don't know if she can just show up next March and play without having been enrolled all year. As noted elsewhere in this thread, finishing up and hitting the job market this summer is not likely to yield your dream job, so why not defer real life for a year and finish school the way you hoped?

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - BobK - 04-09-2020

brobdingnagian question for all spring sport athletes I’ve looked but can’t find the answer

RE: Spring athletes NCAA ruling. - BobK - 04-09-2020

Wisconsin just announced that 5th year athletes would not be invited back.
I suspect more colleges will be saying this