It's a slow news summer, but recently the NCAA released new eligibility rules and they're quite interesting and much-needed. Now players get five season of eligibility, period. The clock starts ticking with one of the following:
- enrolling in college full-time (including juco)
- the start of the academic year immediately following the athlete's 19th birthday, if born before Sept 1st
From either of those points (whichever occurs first), the athlete is on the clock. This immediately has some impact. Prep school can now use up a year of eligibility based on the birthday rule. The whole juco -> redshirt path is also obsolete. I think we'll see a good number of freshmen being played now in D1, because redshirt years are also no longer a factor.
I took a peek at our roster this morning, and this has some good effects on our team. It's important to note that players who exhausted their eligibility last year are still done, but several true-senior players on our team will be able to come back the season after next:
- Ayden Greene
- Jacquez White
- Kaleb Spencer
- Jordan Bass
- Sherrod Covil, Jr.
That is some solid impact, and James Franklin will be able to field a more veteran team in his second year than we initially thought. That's pretty cool. I'm especially excited about Greene gaining an additional season, as he has seemed talented but hasn't had the breakout season that we have hoped for yet. This buys him more time and experience.
Also cool is that Luke Reynolds (true junior) will now be able to play three season for us. He was an absolute dog in the spring game, so if he can keep up that level of play then look out world.
As far as downsides go, the only one that sticks out to me is that we might see even more freshmen transferring across D1 now if they aren't getting minutes or cracking depth charts their first year, because they can no longer be stashed as a redshirt and will be actively burning eligibility. Yippee.
Overall though, I'm a big fan of this rule change and it was much-needed. Goodbye freakazoid super-super-super seniors, we will not miss you.
Comments
This should also reduce in-season opt outs by guys who plan to transfer after less than 4 games. Might still see some of it for injury prevention purposes once a guy decides he's going to transfer but that's about it.
Is there an exception for things like BYU players doing mission work?
Yes, there is an exceptions list for official religious missions, active duty military service, and pregnancy under the new rule.
Is there a rule in Mormonism that states the mission has to be done by a certain age? If a kid has a chance of playing D1 ball at any college really, they should go get their ball playing done, hopefully make some pocket change, and then go on their mission, and then continue on to the next chapter of their life.
Genrally, men can go betwen 18 and 25 and women between 18 and 29. Most go early so you don't have to pause school/jobs that are firmly estasblished, but anytime in that range is fine with some cases of beyond that range being approved given the right circumstances. Mine was 19-21 after my freshman year.
I believe religious missions and military service can delay the 'immediately' part.
Edit: drinking
Ayden Green and Jacquez White are the two to have an eye on IMO. Both have NFL potential but haven't put together an NFL season yet. If they are like 5/6/7th round good, then we may be able to keep them around an extra year.
But also, I'm not sure that's good for us. I still think most 4-star and up players come to school with (somewhat) realistic ambitions of reaching the NFL. More draft picks is still better for recruiting high school and the portal.
I agree. Greene was a high-3* recruit and White was unrated, so if either can make it to the NFL they will have done well for themselves.
I think the definition of a 4-star player by 247 is they are projected to be either a day 2 or 3 draft pick or a high-priority free agent signing at worst, so yeah NFL ambitions are definitely warranted by 4* recruits.
I forget the numbers but 5* is first round expectations and the hit rate is really high if you accout for injuries.
4* was at like 33% NFL hit rate.
3* is even lower because there are so many 3* recruits, but there are more 3* recuits in the NFL than 4* because of the sheer number of them.
EDIT: I wasnt clear on what numbers I forgot, it was the hit rate, not the number if 5*
Yeah, I think there are specifically 32 5* recruits for that very reason — 32 NFL teams therefore 32 first round picks each year. At least on 247. Not sure what other services do!
5-star is expected to be a first round draft pick, and there are 32 5-star recruits each year. 4-star has a broader definition - Expected to be a difference maker on a Power 5 football team - something like that.
What do we call guys now in their 5th year? Once upon a time that dude would be referred to as a redshirt senior. But now do we just call him a 5th year senior? Supersenior? Whatever happened to tradition?! /s
Haha I had this same thought. I'm sure the world will take the boring route and call them "fifth-year" but I'd prefer super senior lol
That sounds right up the alley of the school off the other exit 118...
The Corps calls them Skipper.
geriatric.
From an academic perspective, I was a 6th year+ Senior
I like the rule and the exceptions mentioned for things like missions, pregnancy and military service seem reasonable. But is there any reason to think that the first time someone feels like the rules shouldn't apply to them and sues, won't these be thrown out too? Wondering if there was any reason to think that these rules will apply any more than the other eligibility ones.
My first thought was that 'mission' or 'religion' seem to be loosely defined/flexible words.
First of all, I think there is/will be more self policing (by conference commissioners and whatnot) around eligibility. This is speculation, but I think coaches want clear rules on eligibility. 5-for-5 is easy to enforce/there's less grey area. Either it's 5 years or it's not.
Secondly, the NCAA does pretty well in eligibility lawsuits, winning about two thirds of them, and almost all of the suits in federal court. When they do lose, it's typically due to
We haven't really seen anyone directly challenge the idea of eligibility limits, we've just seen a thousand different "there is this exception and it should also apply to my *insert increasingly crazy set of circumstances*."
It'll be interesting to see if anyone really just goes at it. This gets rid of all the exceptions, and I'm sure they're hoping that simplifies everything. No more exceptions that can be
twisted and taken advantage ofcreatively applied.I hope you are right.
Did you not see the part about a religious mission?
And football is a religion in the south so....
I can see pregnancy get challenged as a self-medical redshirt that only applies to females. Unequal, etc.
I think males get a 'pat leave' exemption (my words, not their's) as well
Something like that will have to happen or the whole thing crumbles.
On the surface, these rules seem much more straightforward and prevent many loopholes.
1 - Has your eligibility window started?
2 - Did you play a sport during the year?
If the answer to both is "yes", then you're probably not getting an exception unless it's medical.
Provided the money is the same/close, I think we'll see players opt to find a school where they can play during their first year or two rather than sit on a P2-4 bench...maybe even few flips this year before signing day. Could be a boost to the G level schools.
Maybe. But most of these guys have nfl aspirations. Coaches are going to sell them on the idea that practicing against the best will help them become the best.
I think this is where the sales pitch of the recruiter is so essential. "You'll play against the best" vs "you'll get plenty of actual film playing in games" vs "look how many guys who've played for me make it to the league" etc. both to the players themselves as well as their parents/coaches who will influence them pretty heavily.
i'm thinking the impact will be below the 4 star level...the kid that knows he's going to sit and burn a year of eligibility and thinks a year or two of experience will get him further, faster. The G level coach is going to say, do you want to burn your eligibility sitting a year or 2 while getting recruited over, or do you want to step into the rotation now and show people what you can do?
When money is (close to) equal, that's when the intangibles come into play - some kids might pick the school we're their best friend is going, some kids might pick the school where they have best relationship with the coach, some kids may prioritize play time, some kids may prioritize development... you get the idea.