Started By
Message
re: What are your thoughts on the NCAA eliminating the hardship waiver?
Posted on 3/19/15 at 2:03 pm to Jagd Tiger
Posted on 3/19/15 at 2:03 pm to Jagd Tiger
quote:True, the NCAA is made up of member institutions - membership is voluntary.
there job is to do what the member schools want them to do, if they're doing the job badly, then whose fault does that make it?
What are the procedures for the NCAA inacting a rule change like this? Does every member program get a vote, does Mark Emmert make the final decision? Is it effective immediately or at a later date?
0
Posted on 3/19/15 at 2:05 pm to CrimsonTideMD
quote:
So it just seems cruel to prevent kids from having this option in rare occasion that it's needed.
It's not preventing them from transferring, they just have to sit out a year, but the NCAA can and most likely will in situations like Prosch grant an additional year of eligibility. I actually think it is a smart rule change.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 2:06 pm to CrimsonTideMD
quote:
I can see where this is a case by case issue
quote:Did the NCAA offer a reason for eliminating the waiver? Too big of a workload, takes too much time, not enough manhours? When is this thing effective, immediately? So many questions.
I have no objection to the case-by-case consideration.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 2:07 pm to StopRobot
quote:
Im fine with it because it seemed every athlete who wanted to transfer was filing one and you knew they werent all real.
That's on the NCAA. Parent that's sick? Ask them to provide documentation from a physician. It's really not that complicated. The burden of proof should be on the student/family anyway.
This post was edited on 3/19/15 at 2:10 pm
Posted on 3/19/15 at 2:12 pm to Aman
quote:If they allow an additional year of eligibility in cases like this, then I don't have an issue with the rule change. It's sad in a case where the parent is in critical condition and may not live see the kid actually play ball for a year. But the kid still gets a free education and an extra yr to play ball.
It's not preventing them from transferring, they just have to sit out a year, but the NCAA can and most likely will in situations like Prosch grant an additional year of eligibility. I actually think it is a smart rule change.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 2:13 pm to Aman
quote:
It's not preventing them from transferring, they just have to sit out a year.
I still dont think its in the best interest of the student.
If they have to sit a year, does that mean theyre no on scholarship for the year? If so, many won't be able to continue their enrollment/eductaion during that period. (which could also affect their health insurance, but that issues a tangent).
If they are on scholarship, practicing with the team, and just not allowed to play, that unnecessarily exposes them to an extra year of potential injury without oppurtunity for a pro contract.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 2:21 pm to CrimsonTideMD
quote:Obviously so many questions.
I still dont think its in the best interest of the student. If they have to sit a year, does that mean theyre no on scholarship for the year? If so, many won't be able to continue their enrollment/eductaion during that period. (which could also affect their health insurance, but that issues a tangent). If they are on scholarship, practicing with the team, and just not allowed to play, that unnecessarily exposes them to an extra year of potential injury without oppurtunity for a pro contract.
If a student-athlete requests a transfer, and applies for a hardship waiver that ends up getting denied, can they still go back to their original school and play under full scholarship? If the transfer and have to sit out a year, do they still get the benefits of the scholarship? Tuition/room/board all paid for while they are sitting out?
Posted on 3/19/15 at 2:28 pm to CrimsonTideMD
quote:
So it just seems cruel to prevent kids from having this option in rare occasion that it's needed.
Agreed. They should just really make sure the hardship is legit.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 4:53 pm to CrimsonTideMD
quote:
I still dont think its in the best interest of the student.
it is... it's just not in the best interest for the athlete.
quote:
If they are on scholarship, practicing with the team, and just not allowed to play, that unnecessarily exposes them to an extra year of potential injury without oppurtunity for a pro contract.
what exact % of ncaa athletes do you think are gonna play pro sports?
Posted on 3/19/15 at 4:55 pm to ehole
quote:
as a former ncaa athlete i'm 100% ok with it.
Is that supposed to add legitimacy to your opinion or something?
Posted on 3/19/15 at 4:57 pm to ehole
quote:
shouldn't have gone to tulsa originally.
frick that. His selfish dad shouldn't have gotten sick.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 4:58 pm to StopRobot
quote:
Im fine with it because it seemed every athlete who wanted to transfer was filing one and you knew they werent all real.
I'm sure it's a real struggle to uncover the legitimacy of a request.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 4:59 pm to AUbagman
if it is a good idea the NCAA will do the exact opposite. Its become a fricking clown show
Posted on 3/19/15 at 5:02 pm to TTsTowel
The NCAA really needs to die
Posted on 3/19/15 at 5:10 pm to AUbagman
quote:
Is that supposed to add legitimacy to your opinion or something?
you're right, i should just cede my opinion to somebody who doesn't know jack shite about college athletics or being a student athlete.
Posted on 3/19/15 at 5:13 pm to ehole
quote:
you're right, i should just cede my opinion to somebody who doesn't know jack shite about college athletics or being a student athlete.
I didn't tell you to cede anything, I just found it strange you threw that out there. There are some rule changes where that would give your opinion legitimacy, this isn't one of them.
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News