NCAA to scrap the redshirt year?

[CShine]

Found this little snippet at the very end of an article about Tommy Tuberville and Auburn.


If Tuberville and other college coaches have their way, redshirts will soon be a thing of the past. The American Football Coaches Association is pushing hard for players to have five years of eligibility instead of having five seasons to play four. Tuberville says NCAA president Myles Brand is a supporter of the idea.

"We're still pushing," Tuberville said. "Hopefully, we won't have to talk about redshirts much longer."


http://www.al.com/sports/huntsvilletimes/index.ssf?/base/sports/1166523557153420.xml&coll=1&thispage=2

[All_Day_28]

not a bad idea... or is it??

[yermom]

they have been talking about this for a while along with the 12 game regular season

[oufan1]

Why does Tuberville get to change all the rules? Wasnt he in on the new clock rules too?

[Widescreen]

Because they were shafted in 2004. His reward is he gets to slowly rewrite the rulebook.

[sooner n houston]

Sounds good to me.

[Scott D]

"We're still pushing," Tuberville said. "Hopefully, we won't have to talk about me having a job much longer."

fixed.

[StoopTroup]

If they are going to do it...

I think you should be on track to graduate to qualify for the 5th year.

I also think if you leave early to the NFL you should have to pay your education back out of the NFL Contract.

The free ride the Player was given could be put into a fund to help other students with Scholorships.

[A-M]

If they are going to do it...

I also think if you leave early to the NFL you should have to pay your education back out of the NFL Contract.

The free ride the Player was given could be put into a fund to help other students with Scholorships.

This sounds great to me. If they are going to get all of that money, it sure would not hurt them to give a little bit of it back to the university that made it possible for them to become a pro.

[royalfan5]

This sounds great to me. If they are going to get all of that money, it sure would not hurt them to give a little bit of it back to the university that made it possible for them to become a pro.
I would argue that they have already more than paid for their scholarship by virtue of the revenue they created by being a successful part of the football team.

[MrKurt]

This sounds great to me. If they are going to get all of that money, it sure would not hurt them to give a little bit of it back to the university that made it possible for them to become a pro.How about:

If the universities and NCAA are going to make so much money off of them, they should probably be paid a decent rate for their efforts.

[StoopTroup]

I would argue that they have already more than paid for their scholarship by virtue of the revenue they created by being a successful part of the football team.

OK...then lets make them wait 3 years before they can go to the draft and scrap the re-payment.

[Rogue]

It's where a coach would come from, logically. Why burn a year of a scholly on a player that won't play that year when you could, instead, make all of your scholarships meaningful and not rush "student-athletes" through to get a "4 year degree" when that is anything but the norm these days.

Likewise for fans to want their pound of flesh and disincentivize athletes leaving early but these kids aren't indentured servants, they are trying to make themselves more marketable. If athletics is the way to do that versus staying for a degree then bonny for them for making a system work for them for a change.

If the 5-year eligibility deal works out, I wonder if it will unintentionally limit medical redshirts for kids that need them.

[royalfan5]

OK...then lets make them wait 3 years before they can go to the draft and scrap the re-payment.
They already have the 3 year rule for college football.

[StoopTroup]

They already have the 3 year rule for college football.
OK...make it four...

I goofed....I remember the Clarrett situation...he had to wait two after his Frosh Season....I forgot.

[royalfan5]

OK...make it four...

I goofed....I remember the Clarrett situation...he had to wait two after his Frosh Season....I forgot.
Why should football players be artifically restrained from pursuing their professional careers though?

[bluedogok]

Why should football players be artifically restrained from pursuing their professional careers though?
Why not? There are many other careers have age/experience restrictions placed upon them.

[royalfan5]

Why not? There are many other careers have age/experience restrictions placed upon them.
Being a football player doesn't require a college education, and how many careers have age restrictions higher than 18?

[SCOUT]

Being a football player doesn't require a college education, and how many careers have age restrictions higher than 18?

I would guess that the NFL is more interested in the football experience and physical development.

This is no different than any myriad of other professions. Some require degrees or experience, or maturity etc.

[royalfan5]

I would guess that the NFL is more interested in the football experience and physical development.

This is no different than any myriad of other professions. Some require degrees or experience, or maturity etc.
But why not allow the NFL teams to decide for themselves when a player is ready?

[yermom]

it's an NFL rule, not an NCAA rule

[SCOUT]

But why not allow the NFL teams to decide for themselves when a player is ready?
Because the league they are a part of has already decided. If a team wanted to break off and start a new league they could. Let's call it the USFL. They can hire football players at any age they choose.

[sooneron]

In regard to this whole 5 year thing, I'm not sure if I do like it. This could have implications on the rule of 85. What happens if one guy that has played 4 years decides that with one more year,he gets a better draft or drafted for that matter? This will cut a team's schollies avail for the following year, all of a sudden.

[OU Adonis]

Being a football player doesn't require a college education, and how many careers have age restrictions higher than 18?

Bartender,Policeman,President,Vice-president...

Those are a few off the top of my head.

[OU Adonis]

In regard to this whole 5 year thing, I'm not sure if I do like it. This could have implications on the rule of 85. What happens if one guy that has played 4 years decides that with one more year,he gets a better draft or drafted for that matter?

They need to increase the 85 to 120 and have 30 scollys a year.

Screw parity.

And also, what would you call that 5th year? Senior Senior? 5th Year senior?

Nothing rolls off the tongue easy.

[royalfan5]

Bartender,Policeman,President,Vice-president...

Those are a few off the top of my head.
All of which have public safety/service requirements. A fullback isn't protecting the public, he's blocking linebackers. There's a difference.

[royalfan5]

They need to increase the 85 to 120 and have 30 scollys a year.

Screw parity.

And also, what would you call that 5th year? Senior Senior? 5th Year senior?

Nothing rolls off the tongue easy.
Then you would probably have to deal with a lot of schools dropping football or stepping down a level. That would be a huge increase in cost for the lower D-1 schools because of the title IX implications and the threat to their competitivness. If you make it harder for lower tier schools to compete, where is their incentive to keep a program to serve as early season fodder for the big boys with less of a realistic chance to compete?

[royalfan5]

Because the league they are a part of has already decided. If a team wanted to break off and start a new league they could. Let's call it the USFL. They can hire football players at any age they choose.
That just goes to show the socialism of unions, the NFLPA is behind that rule much more than the teams. They want to protect veteran players jobs.

[sooneron]

They need to increase the 85 to 120 and have 30 scollys a year.

Screw parity.

And also, what would you call that 5th year? Senior Senior? 5th Year senior?

Nothing rolls off the tongue easy.
I called mine, super senior year!

I think one issue that should be approached is medical redshirts. They need to be more lenient with how much a guy played in one season.

[yermom]

i thought the idea was to ditch those as well, 5 years, period

[SoonerDood]

They already do everything Tommy Tuberville says anyway. Why not one more?

[bluedogok]

All of which have public safety/service requirements. A fullback isn't protecting the public, he's blocking linebackers. There's a difference.
In many states being a bartender or wait staff that serves alcohol has an age requirement of 21.

No one is guaranteed a position in the NFL, if someone who doesn't meet the NFL 3 years removed from high school requirement wants to get a job then they get a job in many places. They don't have to go to the NFL, there is nothing that guarantees you the chance to make millions of dollars playing a game because you have some talent. Just look at Clarrett, he is the poster child for young and dumb and he had no business being in the NFL at a young age. It isn't just the physical demands it is the mental demands of professional sports that most 18 year olds cannot handle.

There is one Lebron for every 100,000 Clarrett/Marcus Vicks out there. Can you blame the leagues if they don't want to deal with them? Even the NBA has an age requirememnt now, and them drafting youth based on potential rather than performance has pretty much damaged the NBA.

[sooneron]

Why does royalfan want college football to suck?

[royalfan5]

In many states being a bartender or wait staff that serves alcohol has an age requirement of 21.

No one is guaranteed a position in the NFL, if someone who doesn't meet the NFL 3 years removed from high school requirement wants to get a job then they get a job in many places. They don't have to go to the NFL, there is nothing that guarantees you the chance to make millions of dollars playing a game because you have some talent. Just look at Clarrett, he is the poster child for young and dumb and he had no business being in the NFL at a young age. It isn't just the physical demands it is the mental demands of professional sports that most 18 year olds cannot handle.

There is one Lebron for every 100,000 Clarrett/Marcus Vicks out there. Can you blame the leagues if they don't want to deal with them? Even the NBA has an age requirememnt now, and them drafting youth based on potential rather than performance has pretty much damaged the NBA.
Do you really think the NFL would rush out and draft a bunch of freshmen and sophmores? I sincerely doubt you would see a flood of 18 and 19 year olds in the NFL, teams aren't going to pick players that can't play right away in the NFL. It's a much different situation from the NBA. Why not allow for the occasional freak of nature if NFL teams want to roll the dice? And in many states you only have to be 19 to serve alcohol. I wouldn't call Clarett an NFL player as he was released before opening day. You could make the argument that he would have been much better off in the NFL system than he was sitting out two years due to the NFL rules, because of his NCAA troubles.

[royalfan5]

Why does royalfan want college football to suck?
It's just that I'm libertarian. It makes me detest regulations, especially when they are supposedly for the good of someone.

[sooneron]

It's just that I'm libertarian. It makes me detest regulations, especially when they are supposedly for the good of someone.
I'm a realist, they're for the good of the organization.

[SCOUT]

That just goes to show the socialism of unions, the NFLPA is behind that rule much more than the teams. They want to protect veteran players jobs.
Wow, I really have to disagree with you here. While I do agree that unions can be problematic, I don't think this is an instance. This is an example where an employer has set a requirement for those they wish to employ. They are not being told who to hire by the government, a union etc.

This is an example of free market rather than socialism.

[royalfan5]

I'm a realist, they're for the good of the organization.
The good of the organization, not the good of the people.

[royalfan5]

Wow, I really have to disagree with you here. While I do agree that unions can be problematic, I don't think this is an instance. This is an example where an employer has set a requirement for those they wish to employ. They are not being told who to hire by the government, a union etc.

This is an example of free market rather than socialism.
The age limit is the NFLPA's idea. It's an example of the employee's limiting who the employer can hire. That's not a free market.

[SCOUT]

The good of the organization, not the good of the people.
That sounds socialist to me ;)

An NFL franchise is in business to make money, not to benefit "the people."

[royalfan5]

That sounds socialist to me ;)

An NFL franchise is in business to make money, not to benefit "the people."
I think he was talking about the NCAA rules.

[SCOUT]

The age limit is the NFLPA's idea. It's an example of the employee's limiting who the employer can hire. That's not a free market.
It may have been their idea, but it is something that benefits each franchise significantly. If teams had to guess which players would pan out, they would be throwing away good money after bad. With an age requirement they are betting on more known quantities. If you think the teams are against this rule, I think you are overlooking some of the benefits.

[royalfan5]

It may have been their idea, but it is something that benefits each franchise significantly. If teams had to guess which players would pan out, they would be throwing away good money after bad. With an age requirement they are betting on more known quantities. If you think the teams are against this rule, I think you are overlooking some of the benefits.
Teams also wouldn't benefit from their opponets screwing up as much either. If a team is dumb enough to draft on pure potential, it should have to face the consequences, instead of being protected from it's mistakes. Also, why would teams want to artifically restrict their talent pool. I think NFL teams a less in favor of this rule than you might think.

[Phil]

The age limit is the NFLPA's idea. It's an example of the employee's limiting who the employer can hire. That's not a free market.

Well, the key is that it's in the NFL CBA, which is why Clarett's legal argument went poof.

[SCOUT]

Teams also wouldn't benefit from their opponets screwing up as much either. If a team is dumb enough to draft on pure potential, it should have to face the consequences, instead of being protected from it's mistakes. Also, why would teams want to artifically restrict their talent pool. I think NFL teams a less in favor of this rule than you might think.

The same reason Big 5 consultancies aren't hiring out of high school. It is risk avoidance. If the owner of say Kansas City know that some nut like Al Davis isn't going to artificially inflate salaries by betting on high school kids, that is a good thing for the owners.

Limiting your hiring risk is a pretty common practice. Even with those limitations, there are plenty of consequences.

[Edmond Sooner]

All of which have public safety/service requirements. A fullback isn't protecting the public, he's blocking linebackers. There's a difference.

You don't seem to grasp the fact that the NFL is a private, not a government, organization. A "libertarian" should understand the distinction, and know better.

[jwlynn64]

All of which have public safety/service requirements. A fullback isn't protecting the public, he's blocking linebackers. There's a difference.

Yeah, my bartender has saved my life many times! ;)

[jwlynn64]

Do you really think the NFL would rush out and draft a bunch of freshmen and sophmores? I sincerely doubt you would see a flood of 18 and 19 year olds in the NFL, teams aren't going to pick players that can't play right away in the NFL. It's a much different situation from the NBA. Why not allow for the occasional freak of nature if NFL teams want to roll the dice? And in many states you only have to be 19 to serve alcohol. I wouldn't call Clarett an NFL player as he was released before opening day. You could make the argument that he would have been much better off in the NFL system than he was sitting out two years due to the NFL rules, because of his NCAA troubles.

You are so wrong here. If not for some of their self imposed rules, the NFL could very easily turn into a league much like European Soccer teams. These teams go out and sign early prospects and run them through lower level leagues.

The small price they pay to lock up some potential stud is well worth their risk. They also have a farm system falling into place now in the Arena Football League and NFL Europe.

If they decided to do this, and don't think that they couldn't do it if they wanted to, they could really screw the NCAA.

[Crucifax Autumn]

With a system like that college football would be as successful and exciting as college baseball...

*groan*

[Frozen Sooner]

Wow, I really have to disagree with you here. While I do agree that unions can be problematic, I don't think this is an instance. This is an example where an employer has set a requirement for those they wish to employ. They are not being told who to hire by the government, a union etc.

This is an example of free market rather than socialism.

It's actually neither.

It's a government-sanctioned monopsony. The NFL has an exemption to anti-trust law, as does MLB.

[tommieharris91]

I always thought Tagliabue was as much for the age limit as much as the NFLPA. Anyone know Goddell's thoughts on it?

I also think Stern was behind the NBA age limit (which that league badly needed).

[crimson&cream]

I would argue that they have already more than paid for their scholarship by virtue of the revenue they created by being a successful part of the football team.
How about the fact both parties entered into an agreement that for that Education you'll play four yrs of FB now if you get five and break for the NFL before you fullfill the agreement you pay back to the Univ the cost of the scholly. PLayers & Univ need to start being held accountable for the agreements they enter into. A person or Org's word should start meaning something again.

[jwlynn64]

I think that the agreement they have is that:

Player - I'll play as hard for you as I can while abiding by all the whacky NCAA rules. I'll do so until I either graduate or something comes along that is better for me.

College - We'll give you every opportunity to compete for a position on this football team. If you make it, we will continue to pay your your way through school. If, at any time, we feel that there is someone better to fill your shoes, we will let you know that we are not continuing your scholarship the next year.

Under this agreement, both the school and the player know that their position in the other parties life is always subject to change. That is why it is important to both parties to make sure that they feel comfortable with the other. It's worked pretty good so far.

Now, about those whacky NCAA rules.... ;)

[yermom]

i like the idea of a contract for 5 years, i mean if the kid gets hurt he still gets to go to school, right? that's only fair

if he's gonna run off to the NFL and get drafted in the early rounds then paying back for the years he's missing on the contract shouldn't be that tough

[royalfan5]

How about the fact both parties entered into an agreement that for that Education you'll play four yrs of FB now if you get five and break for the NFL before you fullfill the agreement you pay back to the Univ the cost of the scholly. PLayers & Univ need to start being held accountable for the agreements they enter into. A person or Org's word should start meaning something again.
Football scholarships are a series of renewable 1 year contracts. Player's aren't guaranteed 4 years when they sign. I have no problem with this. Why shouldn't players lose their scholarships if they don't perform? Kids on academic scholarships lose their if they don't perform. What is the logic in making the players pay back their scholarships, isn't the revenue they create through the football team paying for their scholarships? Their participation during the season more than covers the cost of their scholarship, as well as many others in the non-revenue sports. Would you inisist that schools pay back the students for the unused value of their scholarship if the coach encourages them to go elsewhere?

[jwlynn64]

i like the idea of a contract for 5 years, i mean if the kid gets hurt he still gets to go to school, right? that's only fair

if he's gonna run off to the NFL and get drafted in the early rounds then paying back for the years he's missing on the contract shouldn't be that tough

What about players that leave college due to family hardships? What about players that are asked to leave the team due to poor performance on the field or in the classroom?

Not everyone that leaves could afford to pay the college back and not everyone that the college doesn't want on the team anymore deserves to continue to get scholarships to continue to go to school.

The scholarship program isn't broke so lets not try and fix it. Some of the idiotic NCAA rules are bad, let try and fix those instead.

[EstablishedSooner1967]

He wanted to play USC in 05.... I kind of wish he would have and not OU considering the outcome.