|
Strobe posted:Good job missing the forest for trees. Any true freshman regardless of athletic ability would benefit from a year spent training and conditioning. These kids are still developing, and injuries can happen to anyone. As would any any football player in college, regardless of what year they're in. It's silly & the SEC will likely never be for it; it'll be even funnier if it's adopted on a per-conference basis.
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 03:06 |
|
|
Yeah generally I think the guys who need a year to train get a year to train, and I don't see any reason why the occasional Adrian Peterson-like talent who arrives practically NFL-ready at age 18 should have to sit out. This is a solution in search of a problem.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:
Agreed, there's no way the man who just added powerhouse Rutgers to the conference could be that stupid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
kittenmittons posted:Agreed, there's no way the man who just added powerhouse Rutgers to the conference could be that stupid. I want to agree with you but I can't make fun of the Big Ten's march towards voluntary obsolescence as long as they've got the championship belt.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:13
|
|
|
Why must the B1G lead the way in everything that is bad and terrible about college football?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:16
|
|
|
Frackie Robinson posted:I don't understand freshman ineligibility. Do they think it's going to make guys more likely to go to class if they're not playing? The one and done phenomenon is only an issue is basketball, and only effects a tiny percentage of players in that case. It's both to help academically weak students get a good base in their education and better training before competing, as well as discouraging those who aren't actually interested in a college education from wasting colleges' time and scholarships. The latter is probably the bigger reason. One-and-dones will be encouraged to go find a semi-pro league to hone their skills for the NBA, since if they go to a college they'll have to waste a year going to classes and learning stuff. This was the original intent of the freshman ineligibility rule when it was first adopted in the early part of the 20th century. Players hopping from one college team to another (sometimes multiple times in the same season) without ever going to classes was a significant problem and the one-year residency rule put a stop to it. Nowadays we have lots of recruiting and scholarship rules which can accomplish much of the same thing, but it will still help with the problem of athletes who aren't interested in an education using college athletics as free training for a professional career.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:17
|
|
|
How is that even a problem though. I mean it's a much bigger loving deal that these colleges are using athletes to win games without any care of whether or not they get an education. You make it sound like it's the athletes that are exploiting the schools.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:20
|
|
|
I wonder if spring enrolees could still be eligible in the fall
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:23
|
|
|
Raku posted:How is that even a problem though. I mean it's a much bigger loving deal that these colleges are using athletes to win games without any care of whether or not they get an education. You make it sound like it's the athletes that are exploiting the schools. My hope is that this is a start for dealing with both. Clearing out athletes who aren't interested in an education would go along with stressing a better education the rest of the athletes. We'll have to see where it goes. I'm pleased that they're recognizing that there needs to be more emphasis on education for college athletes. I have no idea what the overall plan is at this point.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:29
|
|
|
Raku posted:How is that even a problem though. I mean it's a much bigger loving deal that these colleges are using athletes to win games without any care of whether or not they get an education. You make it sound like it's the athletes that are exploiting the schools. Deteriorata posted:My hope is that this is a start for dealing with both. Clearing out athletes who aren't interested in an education would go along with stressing a better education the rest of the athletes.  .And I still have no idea how a mandatory redshirt year would even be relevant to changing this.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Crotch Bat posted:Why must the B1G lead the way in everything that is bad and terrible about college football? The Pac 12 was the first to bring it up.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:49
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:My hope is that this is a start for dealing with both. Clearing out athletes who aren't interested in an education would go along with stressing a better education the rest of the athletes. The only problem is that college is the only way to the pros. There's not other option but college for someone with NFL aspirations. Edit: and I don't feel this would change anything with education or that the schools care to rock the billion dollar boat and change how they work to keep athletes eligible. Neil Armbong fucked around with this message at 20:06 on Feb 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 18:53
|
|
|
This will stress the importance of the communications degrees they're herded into
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 19:25
|
|
|
I know I've hated having D'Angelo Russell on my basketball team this year.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:41
|
|
|
It also means you only get two playing years of out of the guys that would leave for the NFL after their junior season. I can't decide what to think about this. Both sides have pros and cons, but neither have a big enough pro or con for me.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 20:51
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:My hope is that this is a start for dealing with both. Clearing out athletes who aren't interested in an education would go along with stressing a better education the rest of the athletes. My issue with this is that it treats a college education as some kind of holy endeavor. Spoiler alert, a whole lot of regular college students don't give a poo poo about their education either and just breeze through easy classes in order to get a degree. Kids only going to college because they want to play football for a bit before going to the NFL because that's their only reasonable option shouldn't be seen as a crime or as some kind of horrible problem that needs fixing. There are plenty of student-athletes that actually give a poo poo about graduating and getting a degree, and those guys can and do accomplish that all the time. And I mean come on, do people really think that not letting some 18-year-old kid play football for a year is going to make him give a poo poo about his psychology degree when he's been told since 7th grade how great he'll be in the NFL? I don't know, I just feel like there are plenty of much more serious problems that need to be tackled with college football before trying to force kids who just want to go to the NFL (and help make their schools millions in the process) to go to their Intro to Sociology classes. Maybe if the issue was safety and there was a disproportionate number of freshmen getting injured every year or something, but I haven't seen that brought up since the focus seems to be on "fixing" the one-and-done "problem".
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
It just seems to me like a rule done exclusively because of 1 and done basketball players. Why harm football, the larger moneymaker, for it? The eligibility rule is already there, redshirting is already there, is there some issue with true freshman getting snaps? And the NBA commish has been hinting at raising the age for draft eligible players since he took over as it is.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 21:16
|
|
|
I should point out that I only think this is dumb in football. I agree that the one-and-done rule in basketball is a terrible band-aid and something like baseball's "get drafted or stay for X years" would be better. I just think that making all freshmen ineligible is a super misguided way to achieve the nebulous goal of making kids give a poo poo about something they clearly don't give a poo poo about and is just going to lead to the rule being repealed or completely changed in like 3 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
VDay posted:My issue with this is that it treats a college education as some kind of holy endeavor. Spoiler alert, a whole lot of regular college students don't give a poo poo about their education either and just breeze through easy classes in order to get a degree. Kids only going to college because they want to play football for a bit before going to the NFL because that's their only reasonable option shouldn't be seen as a crime or as some kind of horrible problem that needs fixing. There are plenty of student-athletes that actually give a poo poo about graduating and getting a degree, and those guys can and do accomplish that all the time. And I mean come on, do people really think that not letting some 18-year-old kid play football for a year is going to make him give a poo poo about his psychology degree when he's been told since 7th grade how great he'll be in the NFL? I would argue that fundamentally that's not a problem that college athletics should be solving. A better solution would be for the NFL to use some of its enormous profits to fund a developmental league as an alternative to college football.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:A better solution would be for the NFL to use some of its enormous profits to fund a developmental league as an alternative to college football. Might as well wish for a unicorn or world peace or something.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 21:37
|
|
|
VDay posted:My issue with this is that it treats a college education as some kind of holy endeavor. Spoiler alert, a whole lot of regular college students don't give a poo poo about their education either and just breeze through easy classes in order to get a degree. Kids only going to college because they want to play football for a bit before going to the NFL because that's their only reasonable option shouldn't be seen as a crime or as some kind of horrible problem that needs fixing. There are plenty of student-athletes that actually give a poo poo about graduating and getting a degree, and those guys can and do accomplish that all the time. And I mean come on, do people really think that not letting some 18-year-old kid play football for a year is going to make him give a poo poo about his psychology degree when he's been told since 7th grade how great he'll be in the NFL? This isn't really about solving any problem, its about covering their rear end. People are starting to realize that student athletes aren't really a thing, so they are desperate to make people think that isn't true. Whether it does so doesn't really matter.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 21:49
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:I would argue that fundamentally that's not a problem that college athletics should be solving. A better solution would be for the NFL to use some of its enormous profits to fund a developmental league as an alternative to college football. Do you think the NFL, which claims it's a tax exempt organization, routinely asks local governments for hundreds of millions of dollars for stadiums, and until recently denied that football caused brain injuries, is going to fund something out of pocket for the benefit of some 18 year olds?
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
Grittybeard posted:Might as well wish for a unicorn or world peace or something. I am thoroughly aware of that. It's more that the argument that college football is somehow obligated to accommodate non-students so they can have professional careers is not a very strong one.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
Deteriorata posted:I would argue that fundamentally that's not a problem that college athletics should be solving. A better solution would be for the NFL to use some of its enormous profits to fund a developmental league as an alternative to college football. I think college football is way too established as a major sport for some kind of developmental league to ever take off or be a true alternative. You would have to pile on some major obstacles to entry to the NFL at the college level in order to convince a top recruit to go play for the Albuquerque ant-eaters or whatever rather than going to Alabama/Oklahoma/OhioSt/etc, sitting out a year, then getting national exposure for two years. And that's ignoring the obvious issue that the NFL would never actually create this league, which would be ludicrously expensive to even set up. It's why I think pretending that student-athletes can get back to being True Honorary College Students is a naive pipe dream, and everyone's time would be much better spent figuring out a reasonable way to just pay the kids for bringing in millions to their schools as part-time employees. Deteriorata posted:I am thoroughly aware of that. It's more that the argument that college football is somehow obligated to accommodate non-students so they can have professional careers is not a very strong one. Sure it is. These non-students bring in millions of dollars to the universities, so forcing them to pretend to be students just for the sake of appearances is silly. If you want your university's student-athletes to be students first then cut the budget of your football team, cut their practice times, their team meetings, and "voluntary" team activities, and let them focus on school. But don't hurt their potential future earnings just so you can sleep better at night pretending that the kids your football coach recruited by promising playing time, national exposure, a chance to get to the NFL, and probably cold hard cash is there to better himself as a student. VDay fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Feb 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 21:50
|
|
|
As far as basketball is concerned I like giving the athlete the option to go pro after high school. If you decide to go to college, you're locked in for 3 years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 21, 2015 22:02
|
|
|
Dattserberg posted:As far as basketball is concerned I like giving the athlete the option to go pro after high school. If you decide to go to college, you're locked in for 3 years. That's how college baseball operates and it seems fair enough. I think hockey has a similar policy, but I'm not aware of all the details.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
RumbleFish posted:That's how college baseball operates and it seems fair enough. I think hockey has a similar policy, but I'm not aware of all the details. Baseball and Hockey have significant minor league systems, though, and are willing to absorb players that need time to develop. The NBA just recently added the D-League. I could see them adding this capability and just sending players off to the international leagues, but it'd take some significant changes to the way that league operates.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 00:50
|
|
|
I think they should let the sports be majors. Let practice be a class and so on. Yeah most guys with their degree in footballology won't use their degree or be particularly employable, but, poo poo, I used my degree in International Relations to get me a full time position in retail before becoming a tech editor and graphic designer for an space consulting firm so it's not like I'm using all the things about how treaties work on the job.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 04:26
|
|
|
Sash! posted:I think they should let the sports be majors. Let practice be a class and so on. Yeah most guys with their degree in footballology won't use their degree or be particularly employable, but, poo poo, I used my degree in International Relations to get me a full time position in retail before becoming a tech editor and graphic designer for an space consulting firm so it's not like I'm using all the things about how treaties work on the job. A lot of the football players here major in Kinesiology which is kind of like that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
computer parts posted:A lot of the football players here major in Kinesiology which is kind of like that. Yeah, we had a lot of guys in that too. We kinda mocked it as the Gym Teacher Degree. Also had a lot of guys in "Labor and Industrial Relations," which always made me think it was some sort of program to produce no-necks to be mob toughs.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 04:56
|
|
|
So, not that this is the NFL combine thread, but sometimes you really don't know how good your upperclassmen were till they get there to demonstrate. Chris Conley, graduating UGA WR, ran a 4.35 40, vertical of 45 inches (record was 46), and a board jump of 11'7" which ties the combine record. I saw those results and went  and then was instantly sad that he won't be playing for us next year.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 05:13
|
|
|
KKKLIP ART posted:So, not that this is the NFL combine thread, but sometimes you really don't know how good your upperclassmen were till they get there to demonstrate. Chris Conley, graduating UGA WR, ran a 4.35 40, vertical of 45 inches (record was 46), and a board jump of 11'7" which ties the combine record. I saw those results and went That wasn't even the fastest WR either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 08:16
|
|
|
The dirty little secret of baseball is that you either skip college and make $1,100 a month being herded like cattle around the minor leagues or you go to college anyway and your pitching arm falls off because your coach is some dip-spewing fuckface.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 09:19
|
|
|
LARGE THE HEAD posted:The dirty little secret of baseball is that you either skip college and make $1,100 a month being herded like cattle around the minor leagues or you go to college anyway and your pitching arm falls off because your coach is some dip-spewing fuckface. And then there's like an 0.0001% chance you turn into Barry Larkin or Stephen Strasburg (whose arm has already fallen off once)
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 09:47
|
|
|
To me, Matt Cassel remains the example for gaming any pro system. He never played. He got a college degree. He was smart enough in dissecting things to be given a chance, parlayed that into a very small sample size of NFL action and was handsomely rewarded with millions of dollars. And he never has to play again.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 10:55
|
|
|
LARGE THE HEAD posted:To me, Matt Cassel remains the example for gaming any pro system. He never played. He got a college degree. He was smart enough in dissecting things to be given a chance, parlayed that into a very small sample size of NFL action and was handsomely rewarded with millions of dollars. And he never has to play again. Brad Johnson had a similar trajectory except he was slightly better than Cassel as a full time starter for a few years.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:14
|
|
|
Miami has two players quitting the team, Antonio Crawford and a kicker
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 22:39
|
|
|
LARGE THE HEAD posted:To me, Matt Cassel remains the example for gaming any pro system. He never played. He got a college degree. He was smart enough in dissecting things to be given a chance, parlayed that into a very small sample size of NFL action and was handsomely rewarded with millions of dollars. And he never has to play again. He's the Charlie Weis Of 'franchise' quarterbacks.
|
|
#
?
Feb 22, 2015 23:01
|
|
|
Since we always making fun of "Ndamakong Suh, all-time Big 10 lineman" I must note that SECN is currently showing a Kansas-Mizzou basketball game from 2009.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 02:34
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 03:06 |
|
|
Dattserberg posted:As far as basketball is concerned I like giving the athlete the option to go pro after high school. If you decide to go to college, you're locked in for 3 years. I think locking them up at any point is pretty dumb. I don't think, like, Carmelo Anthony really needed two more years of school. But anyway the requirement that they be one year out of high school is an NBA rule, not NCAA.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2015 02:52
|
|
