It will be interesting to see what the ramifications of this are.
Court ruling that JUCO years don't count against eligibility
- Thread starter Cyclonepride
- Start date
I know Morning Rush gets a lot of crap but I was listening this AM about this. Travis did bring up the DSM Buccaneer players, which I never thought of.
My first thought was CuJo went to JuCo but this is still his 4th year in D1 so that doesn't affect him
Gonna see a lot more 26 year old college players
Makes for a more "professional game". That is what we are looking for, no?
Same thing in College hockey just happened this year. Any players in the CHL, can go to NCAA now.
Trying to think who at Iowa State would benefit here. Only one I can come up with is James Neal. Played one year at JUCO, came to Ames and redshirted then has played the last two seasons. He would be a RS-Senior this coming year, but this would mean he could have 2 more years of eligibility if he wanted it potentially. That certainly wouldnt hurt to have a guy like that who keeps on developing and contributing around longer.
Curious what Travis said about the DSM Buccaneer players? CHL and USHL are essentially high school hockey leagues with age restrictions, which now looks like a new pool of players are available for NCAA hockey.
How long until 4 years of eligibility is a thing of the past for all college athletes and they can stay/play as long as they want?
Can we bring back some of our old Indian Hills guys for basketball?
This plus the Roster limit changes seems like we will see an increase in Greyshirting.
Walk ons that are cut will either retire from football and stay at the school or they’ll drop to a lower level or JUCO to play ball. If they’re not burning eligibility then I can see a higher number of guys at JUCOs.
Walk ons that are cut will either retire from football and stay at the school or they’ll drop to a lower level or JUCO to play ball. If they’re not burning eligibility then I can see a higher number of guys at JUCOs.
Anyone know the basis for this ruling? I'm curious what the rationale here is. Doesn't a governing body have the right to set its own rules?
I'd be curious to see how this impacts the NCAA clock. With current rules, a student could drop out after a year at an NCAA institution and their clock would've run out after 5 years regardless of the years played, unless some sort of some hardship waiver is granted. I see starting at JUCO delaying the start of the NCAA clock, but once that clock's started, it won't pause unless that rule changes.
Typically, an athlete that comes from JUCO is either ready to move pro or isn’t contributing much. Certainly there will be outliers of this, but it isn’t like we’re going to get two more years of a guy like Seneca.
I have eligibility remaining, having played 0 years of varsity basketball while at ISU.
If TJ needs a 6'1" forward, with limited range, who athletically looks like he is running underwater, a 24" vertical, but a couple of sweet slow-motion old-man game post moves... I am the guy.
More of a "compressed 4" than a "stretch 4".
This was my first thought too. Such bullsh*t that she got denied a medical redshirt and could not play again after playing in a whopping career total of like half a season at the NCAA level.
Never said we were going to get a guys like Seneca. Simply identifying one player on our roster that would benefit from this. James Neal might now be a pro, but silly to think an extra year of eligibility wouldn't benefit him and the team.
It makes it more of a safety issue IMO. A 25 year old player, who is fully developed, playing against a 19 year old who is still filling out their body. Maybe I'm thinking too much about it, but it doesn't seem to be good for player safety from a 30,000 foot perspective
