Ohio Basketball Topic
Topic: Why only four years of eligibility?
Page: 1 of 1
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
4/2/2022 6:13 PM
Watching the intros to the Villanova-Kansas game, and noticed how many of the folks were announced as "graduates." Obviously that's a function of the Covid extensions, but it made me think: wouldn't the NCAA benefit greatly by extending eligibility?

Given that many of the universities at elite NCAA athletics programs offer graduate programs, why not incentivize athletes to stick around and pursue graduate degrees by extending eligibility. We've seen what that can look like with guys like BVP and Carter, and it's unclear to me why college athletics are undergraduate-only (with exceptions due to the 5th year rule, etc).

Most NCAA players aren't going to the NBA; less of Europe pays well than people think, and a ton of the best upperclassman in college basketball have no future in professional basketball. So why not play for 6 or 7 years while they pursue a Master's/PhD?

Wouldn't this be better for the actual on the floor product, too? And more consistent with the NCAAs mission around "student athletes"? If the goal's an education, why put a ceiling on it?
mail
The Optimist
4/2/2022 7:20 PM
My main concern with offering additional eligibility is that it'll limit opportunity for younger guys. It'd be very interesting to see more data on how this extra year of eligibility has hurt high school seniors.
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
4/2/2022 7:58 PM
The Optimist wrote:expand_more
My main concern with offering additional eligibility is that it'll limit opportunity for younger guys. It'd be very interesting to see more data on how this extra year of eligibility has hurt high school seniors.
I can see that, for sure. Probably a fixable thing though; one approach would be to expand the number of available scholarships, but make a subset only available to those who are pursuing a graduate degree.

I wonder if this might also put a dent in the transfer portal movement. When a kid's only there for four years, it's hard to give away two years on the bench, and the reality is there are a ton of freshman -- especially at the mid-major level -- who aren't ready to contribute for a few years. If they could develop for two years and still have another 4 to play, I suspect it would incentivize more patience.
mail
bornacatfan
4/2/2022 8:01 PM
I just saw an article lamenting the limited opportunities for high school kids as a result of the Portal and what the article said was a 5th year of eligibility going forward. Wondered about that since I read it. Obviously, the COVID year is going to see a class or 2 of high school and preps get left out of the normal process but I do not think we will go back to recruiting HS players like we used to.

I don't think a 5th year of eligibility is far off but I do not think it is a good idea....

I often wonder if the APR is still a thing? How can a transfer possibly stay on track switching schools? Hard enough if you are joe everyday student to get stuff to transfer. Maybe with the immediate transfer, there is no way to do APR....maybe we actually conceded that we are not responsible to make athletes go to class and acknowledged that they are not really there for a degree anyway.
mail
person
Deciduous Forest Cat
4/2/2022 8:56 PM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
My main concern with offering additional eligibility is that it'll limit opportunity for younger guys. It'd be very interesting to see more data on how this extra year of eligibility has hurt high school seniors.
I can see that, for sure. Probably a fixable thing though; one approach would be to expand the number of available scholarships, but make a subset only available to those who are pursuing a graduate degree.

I wonder if this might also put a dent in the transfer portal movement. When a kid's only there for four years, it's hard to give away two years on the bench, and the reality is there are a ton of freshman -- especially at the mid-major level -- who aren't ready to contribute for a few years. If they could develop for two years and still have another 4 to play, I suspect it would incentivize more patience.
There are five spots on the floor. Someone's going to be on the bench. I don't understand this logic at all.
mail
person
Pataskala
4/2/2022 10:28 PM
Maybe we should go back to having JV teams so that players get some real PT and have a chance to develop. Some schools in the ACC still have them; UNC for one. They play other schools' JV teams as well as D2 or 3 and JUCO teams. They use some scholly players as well as walk-ons, with the walk-ons having a chance for a scholly.
Last Edited: 4/2/2022 10:30:30 PM by Pataskala
mail
bornacatfan
4/2/2022 11:57 PM
Pataskala wrote:expand_more
Maybe we should go back to having JV teams so that players get some real PT and have a chance to develop. Some schools in the ACC still have them; UNC for one. They play other schools' JV teams as well as D2 or 3 and JUCO teams. They use some scholly players as well as walk-ons, with the walk-ons having a chance for a scholly.
UNC JV is usually on Hargrave schedule.
mail
person
mf279801
4/3/2022 12:26 AM
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:expand_more
I wonder if this might also put a dent in the transfer portal movement. When a kid's only there for four years, it's hard to give away two years on the bench, and the reality is there are a ton of freshman -- especially at the mid-major level -- who aren't ready to contribute for a few years. If they could develop for two years and still have another 4 to play, I suspect it would incentivize more patience.
Can’t necessarily speak to master’s programs, but doing a PhD at the same place you did your undergraduate work is typically looked down upon
mail
person
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
4/3/2022 2:53 PM
Deciduous Forest Cat wrote:expand_more
There are five spots on the floor. Someone's going to be on the bench. I don't understand this logic at all.
Yep, of course somebody's going to be on the bench. But presumably players like playing actual basketball -- in games -- and many transfers are driven by lack of playing time, and the fact that each year they play fewer minutes than they'd like burns 25% of their eligibility. You can make those "development" years much more palatable to players and make it feel much less urgent to find a situation that offers playing time by extending eligibility.
Showing Messages: 1 - 9 of 9
MAC News Links



extra small (< 576px)
small (>= 576px)
medium (>= 768px)
large (>= 992px)
x-large (>= 1200px)
xx-large (>= 1400px)