CBS: Report: Big Ten open to explore hoops, football freshman ineligibility

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
63,065
Reaction score
20,746
Points
113
per CBS:

Maryland's student newspaper, The Diamondback, is reporting it has obtained documents that show the Big Ten is on board with the notion of reverting back to freshman ineligibility for scholarship athletes.

It's a philosophy that's decades old; the NCAA lifted its ban on freshman playing sanctioned sports in 1972. Last week, CBSSports.com's Jon Solomon broke the story that Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott was leading a charge, supported by other commissioners in college athletics, of adopting the ancient practice.

It's an ideology many believe has rightfully been off the table for more than 40 years because it's not practical or ideal for college programs to sit 17- and 18-year-olds who have the talent and ability to contribute to their schools immediately.

According to the docs the The Diamondback obtained, the Big Ten is in the early stages of starting/contributing to a "national discussion" over the practicality and likelihood that this previously universal practice could one day again take hold.

Football and men's basketball would be the primary sports affected and most hotly debated.

“What I like about the concept of the proposal is it puts right up front the basic issue: Are we basically a quasi-professional activity or primarily an educational activity?” university President Wallace Loh said. “And if you support it, you are basically saying very clearly the No. 1 priority is the education of the students.”

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebas...reshman-ineligibility-for-basketball-football

Go Gophers!!
 

I'm not sure what my opinion is on this. You're welcome.
 

Never happen but would explode the message boards.

This year, the whole Gopherhole would be about how good Nate Mason is, how he dominates in practice etc and reports on Konate and Diehue. It would be a year-long version of reports on the football spring practices.
 

If this happened in hockey I think it would really hurt the game of college hockey. A lot of star players would just go to junior hockey and then to the pros.
 

Hockey has other age problems, particular the ones that come down from Canada. I would support redshirt for football and basketball except for two issues. One is that more people may graduate early and then leave for another school. Secondly the issue of more students playing only two years and then off to the pros if you're good enough.

Thoughts?
 


I know this comment is more suited for a hoops thread but if all the power conferences including the Sleazy Ethics Conference agree to adopt this, Coach Cal wouldn't be able to flee from college basketball fast enough.
 

I know this comment is more suited for a hoops thread but if all the power conferences including the Sleazy Ethics Conference agree to adopt this, Coach Cal wouldn't be able to flee from college basketball fast enough.
1) It will really emphasize picking quality coaches and keeping them, because turnarounds are going to take a lot longer, than they do now. A major turnaround, e.g. after Brew where t cpborad of skilled players and defensive players is really weak will take an extra year. If a coach makes any recruiting mistakes, they are toast.
2) JUCOs will be at an absolute premium for turnaround situations, both for hoops and FB. There will be no way around it. If JK had to wait a year to use freshmen as RS freshmen only, the wolves would have been a lot louder. At the end of the day, fans really expect improvement in year two when for bankrupt programs (where we were), year 3 is a gift and year 4 is a rational expectation. Add a year onto turnaround situations and life gets a lot tougher if you let your program slip.
3) I assume this mean that there is an automatic RS year. If it does not and they don't increase the scholarship limit they are nuts.
 

It would possibly kill college basketball as we know it. Might be great for the d-league.

Would kids graduate early from HS anymore and enroll? Kids could graduate college sooner and transfer anywhere with possibly two years to play.

Can't imagine it happening.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 

Stupid idea.

Purely done to put pressure on Silver under the guise of academic focus. Its better for the NBA if their future stars are playing in college (nationally broadcast on ESPN etc) as opposed to playing in front of crowds overseas.
 



If this happened in hockey I think it would really hurt the game of college hockey. A lot of star players would just go to junior hockey and then to the pros.

Umm, most kids go to juniors already. Wouldn't hurt hockey at all. All that would happen is guys would sit out their first year of college. And it's possible the language may exclude anyone 2+ years out from high school graduation, which means hockey would notice it not at all.
 






Red-shirting everyone - maybe then they wouldn't turn pro after their sophomore year.
 

Stupid idea. Purely done to put pressure on Silver under the guise of academic focus. Its better for the NBA if their future stars are playing in college (nationally broadcast on ESPN etc) as opposed to playing in front of crowds overseas.

I think the NBA would ultimately prefer they go D-League and get their games on ESPN. this is why this rule confuses me with basketball.

Kids who don't want to sit will just skip college and play in the D-league. Helps add star power there for the NBA.
 

I think the NBA would ultimately prefer they go D-League and get their games on ESPN. this is why this rule confuses me with basketball.

Kids who don't want to sit will just skip college and play in the D-league. Helps add star power there for the NBA.

The rule has no consideration for pro leagues. The idea here is what is best for collegiate athletics, period. There will always be kids who are very talented, but just aren't meant for college. They can find some other option.
 




Top Bottom