Big Ten considering making freshmen ineligible

[FearTheBeard]

"The Big Ten is seeking feedback from its members about the
possibility of making freshmen athletes ineligible for competition as
they adjust to college life.

In a statement to ESPN.com, the league says it is gauging interest
from its members about a "national discussion regarding a year of
readiness for student-athletes."

The league has provided background to its members about such a step but has made no official proposal at this point.

The Diamondback, the student newspaper at Maryland, reported Thursday
that the Big Ten is circulating a document titled, "A Year of
Readiness," which explores making freshmen in football and men's
basketball ineligible for competition.

Maryland's athletic council met Thursday afternoon to discuss the document, The Diamondback reported.

"If they do well because they spend more time, get more academic
advising ... their freshman year, they're going to graduate," Maryland
president Wallace Loh told the newspaper. "And I think it's worth
spending an extra year of financial support to ensure that they
graduate."

Pac-12 commissioner Larry Scott told CBSSports.com last week that he
has discussed freshman ineligibility with several commissioners and that
there will be "much more serious conversations about it in the coming
months and year."

Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby told CBSSports.com that there's "growing interest" in debating the possibility.

Freshmen were ineligible to compete in all NCAA sports until 1972.
Some athletes enrolling for the 2016 academic year will take academic
redshirt years as initial eligibility standards increase.

Big Ten football coaches and athletic directors didn't discuss
freshman ineligibility at their recent business meeting, but they expect
to do so in the coming months. Iowa coach Kirk Ferentz told ESPN.com
that he favors freshman ineligibility.

"That would be one of the healthiest things we could do for college
sports right now," Ferentz said. "Recruiting's kind of a runaway train,
and what a lot of people don't consider is there's a lot of serious
pressure that's put on some players' shoulders that I'm not sure is
healthy for them big picture-wise. ... It would allow the guy to
transition a little bit with a lot less fanfare and get their feet on
the ground and get a good foundation established."
"Ohio State athletic director Gene Smith doesn't think the freshman
eligibility policy should change based solely on some men's basketball
players spending just one year in college before turning pro.

"One-and-done is a small percentage -- it's not even 1 percent of our
student-athletes when you take all the schools," Smith told ESPN.com.
"That's way off base to me. Do we have challenges with young people who
aren't really prepared the way they should be to attack college
education? No doubt about it.

"I have not been a proponent of freshman ineligibility, but I keep my mind open that maybe it's something we have to consider.""

Ummmmm....NO!

I hate the one-and-done problem, but this would be a terrible idea, IMO.




Link

 

[Yasuo3750]

If everyone started doing that Europe would love it.

 

[Mpm277]

In a related story, Big Ten schools see a massive decline in obtaining top recruits.

 

[DiehardDukeFan4Life]

^^^^ That's exactly what I was thinking. If the Big Ten decides to follow through with that plan then their schools will lose out on a lot of top recruits and if the NCAA as a whole decides to go through with this plan then a lot of recruits will just bypass college and go to Europe for a year until they can enter the NBA draft. As much as we as fans hate the way a lot of top recruits are becoming one and dones because it hurts college basketball and if they decide to make freshman ineligible then that will hurt college basketball even more.

This post was edited on 2/20 12:17 AM by DiehardDukeFan4Life

 

[FearTheBeard]

Originally posted by Mpm277:
In a related story, Big Ten schools see a massive decline in obtaining top recruits.

Basketball-wise, that would probably only affect Ohio State and maybe Michigan.

 

[FearTheBeard]

Originally posted by DiehardDukeFan4Life:
^^^^ That's exactly what I was thinking. If the Big Ten decides to follow through with that plan then their schools will lose out on a lot of top recruits and if the NCAA as a whole decides to go through with this plan then a lot of recruits will just bypass college and go to Europe for a year until they can enter the NBA draft. As much as we as fans hate the way a lot of top recruits are becoming one and dones because it hurts college basketball and if they decide to make freshman ineligible then that will hurt college basketball even more.

This post was edited on 2/20 12:17 AM by DiehardDukeFan4Life

Exactly. They need to just work with the NBA and get them to adopt 1) You go straight to the NBA draft out of high school, but you don't qualify for a guaranteed contract even if you're selected in the first round (you can be sent to the D-League and make much less for a while)l; or 2) if you decide to go to college, then there is a two year minimum and/or 21 years old before you can enter the Draft.

Players get their way because they can still go straight to the NBA if they want, it protects the owners from having to sign an unproven player that may turn out to be a bust, and college basketball will improve dramatically with a two-year requirement.

 

[OldasdirtDevil]

This freshmen ineligible rule is inane imo, and is fraught with pitfalls.

First, any conference that would consider doing this (on their own) would be committing athletic suicide. But after reading it a little closer it seems that the Pac 12 is talking about it...and also suggests that other commissioners (conferences) are having talks about it. A proposition like this has to be 100% approved by all conferences, or no one will go along with it.

Secondly, the other thing is that this so called 'athletic/academic friendly' proposal is only for the two major revenue producing sports, football, and men's basketball (if I read correctly). No women's basketball? There are several problems with that imo. One is that it only involves male athletes...so, female athletes don't need this so called help? And also those 2 sports are predominately minority (black) players. Are they saying that black student/athletes aren't smart enough to do the work? It also doesn't include the other sports (male and female) such as lacrosse, swimming, baseball, tennis, etc. All those sports are probably predominately white. So just what is this 'freshmen ineligible' rule for, and who is it helping, and who is it discriminating against.? I think there will be legal consequences to trying to pull this off. I'm sure the NAACP will come calling if any conference tries to implement this.
It just seems like a knee jerk reaction to the one and done student/athlete, but if it is it's just crazy. I don't see how this proposal can work...without some serious changes to whom it affects.

OFC

 

[DiehardDukeFan4Life]

Originally posted by FearTheBeard:

Exactly. They need to just work with the NBA and get them to adopt 1) You go straight to the NBA draft out of high school, but you don't qualify for a guaranteed contract even if you're selected in the first round (you can be sent to the D-League and make much less for a while)l; or 2) if you decide to go to college, then there is a two year minimum and/or 21 years old before you can enter the Draft.

Players get their way because they can still go straight to the NBA if they want, it protects the owners from having to sign an unproven player that may turn out to be a bust, and college basketball will improve dramatically with a two-year requirement.

That's what I've thought for the longest time. If kids decide to go to college to play basketball then they should be required to stay in college for at least two years and I would even say maybe three years because college coaches put in several years of recruiting to get these kids to come play for them plus kids could finish their degrees in 3 years by taking classes over the summer. It's a win/win situation. All the time that coaches put into recruiting players pays off even more by having them for 2 or 3 years and the players graduate and get their degrees and they also get the extra needed experience before they go to the NBA.

 

[K-oach Q]

This will just never ever happen unless the Big X wants to do away with collegiate athletics. Not many are going to go to a school and sit out a year.

There is also way to much money that would be lost especially via football when recruits don't go to said programs.

Never gonna happen....

 

[Heyman25]

Money ultimately controls all decisions, thus this is a dead issue. OFC

 

[hoosurdukie]

I follow the big ten quite a bit and this would never happen a) like posted above no recruits would want to go to the big ten thus a decrease in revenue and b) look at all the impact freshmen that many of the big tens flagship universities have had just over the past few years: this year, Russell, Trimble (although Maryland isn't a flagship), Blackmon Jr. recent years, Vonleh, Mcgary, Harris, Burke, Sullinger, Dekker, Zeller, Oden, Conley, and many more.

Heck Iowa would have probably missed the tournament last year without the help of a freshman. Many teams probably couldn't be competitive without playing freshman due to the high turnover rate with transfers and sophomores and juniors leaving early. It just is not feasible.

 

[dbav]

Originally posted by Mpm277:
In a related story, Big Ten schools see a massive decline in obtaining top recruits.

I think this is the key. It would be a great thing if the NCAA did this, or if it was done for a sport like football, but you are really putting your member schools at a disadvantage if it is limited to the conference.