Jump to content

The NCAAT men's and women's tournament....


Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, NotIThatLives said:

1. Math, roughly 25% taking up scholarships with roughly 25% freshman coming in to take new spots.  Maybe we can open up some more prep schools and just tell all the freshman to stay home? 

2. Life.  Sometimes it sucks.  Move on and grow from it like some adults.  Key word, some.(not personal, very general) 

Correct me if I'm wrong.  Weren't you saying about a month ago some pretty hard things about participation trophies and such?  If so, why such the change of heart?

How does giving seniors an extra year of eligibility after the NCAA tournament got cancelled due to a global pandemic hysteria have anything to do with participation trophies...?  They weren’t given the opportunity to compete due to unprecedented circumstances.  I don’t see how allowing seniors one more opportunity to compete (which is already a very common practice allowed for a variety of reasons) is giving them a “participation trophy.”

And your comment about the freshmen and opening new prep schools is a non sequitur.  The NCAA granting seniors an extra year of eligibility wouldn’t mean the schools those seniors play for have to keep them on the roster.  There are more than enough schools with more than enough roster spots that seniors could transfer to if they wanted.  And if none of those options looked appealing, the seniors could always choose to just walk away.  Granting an extra year of eligibility is just an option, not a mandate.

Sure, life sucks.  But that’s not a justification to refuse to consider a solution that is 1) fair and 2) really wouldn’t be that difficult to implement.  Especially considering the bizarre circumstances.  But “participation trophies,” I guess.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 121
  • Created
  • Last Reply
3 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

How does giving seniors an extra year of eligibility after the NCAA tournament got cancelled due to a global pandemic hysteria have anything to do with participation trophies...?  They weren’t given the opportunity to compete due to unprecedented circumstances.  I don’t see how allowing seniors one more opportunity to compete (which is already a very common practice allowed for a variety of reasons) is giving them a “participation trophy.”

And your comment about the freshmen and opening new prep schools is a non sequitur.  The NCAA granting seniors an extra year of eligibility wouldn’t mean the schools those seniors play for have to keep them on the roster.  There are more than enough schools with more than enough roster spots that seniors could transfer to if they wanted.  And if none of those options looked appealing, the seniors could always choose to just walk away.  Granting an extra year of eligibility is just an option, not a mandate.

Sure, life sucks.  But that’s not a justification to refuse to consider a solution that is 1) fair and 2) really wouldn’t be that difficult to implement.  Especially considering the bizarre circumstances.  But “participation trophies,” I guess.

A few years ago Verdell Jones was hurt in the conference tournament his senior year and he was not given an extra year since he missed the tournament.  What is the difference between what happen this year to players getting hurt during a game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

A few years ago Verdell Jones was hurt in the conference tournament his senior year and he was not given an extra year since he missed the tournament.  What is the difference between what happen this year to players getting hurt during a game.

I agree with your position.
Seniors have been able to participate in 95% of their careers. Does it suck that athletes lost out on their fourth year tourney opportunity? Yes but life is not always fair and people run into hurdles. The seniors played most of the season, the “student-athletes” completed another academic year but they, like all other students, have now reached the point where they graduate and/or have used up their eligibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Drroogh said:

I was listening to WLW in Cincinnati yesterday and they talked about a tweet from Lunardi who had a picture of the actual bracket from the NCAA as of Thursday.  The host went through the local teams and where they were seeded and who they were going to play and when and where.  He said IU was a 11 seed playing BYU a 6 seed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I was listening to WLW in Cincinnati yesterday and they talked about a tweet from Lunardi who had a picture of the actual bracket from the NCAA as of Thursday.  The host went through the local teams and where they were seeded and who they were going to play and when and where.  He said IU was a 11 seed playing BYU a 6 seed.

Of course IU would have been paired against the best 3pt shooting team in the country... Eight players over 40% from 3 and three others over 35%. Averaged almost 25 attempts/game.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Drroogh said:

You know.  I think that would mean a lot to schools that don't make it that often and/or seniors where this was their last or only chance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, FW_Hoosier said:

How does giving seniors an extra year of eligibility after the NCAA tournament got cancelled due to a global pandemic hysteria have anything to do with participation trophies...?  They weren’t given the opportunity to compete due to unprecedented circumstances.  I don’t see how allowing seniors one more opportunity to compete (which is already a very common practice allowed for a variety of reasons) is giving them a “participation trophy.”

And your comment about the freshmen and opening new prep schools is a non sequitur.  The NCAA granting seniors an extra year of eligibility wouldn’t mean the schools those seniors play for have to keep them on the roster.  There are more than enough schools with more than enough roster spots that seniors could transfer to if they wanted.  And if none of those options looked appealing, the seniors could always choose to just walk away.  Granting an extra year of eligibility is just an option, not a mandate.

Sure, life sucks.  But that’s not a justification to refuse to consider a solution that is 1) fair and 2) really wouldn’t be that difficult to implement.  Especially considering the bizarre circumstances.  But “participation trophies,” I guess.

My apologies for firing a shot.  I do like what you say there to "consider a solution."  Heard on 1070 that if the spring sports season is not salvaged then talks are already in the works to give another year of eligibility.  That makes sense since they lose essentially their entire season.  I'm still not sure how the math works out.  There are 350 d1 schools.  Do you give all seniors that were eligible to make the tourney, in good academic standing?  Or should they do a selection show(yes) and then if your team was to make the tourney they can come back?  Should they only be allowed to come back to their original school or should they be allowed to grad transfer with this new year of eligibility?  If there are let's say an average of 2.5 scholarship seniors per team (conservative guess, I searched for a true number) then we are looking at 875 scholarships being taken up.   There would be a feeding frenzy, creaning the likes the ncaa had never seen before to essentially cater to 66 teams x 2.5 seniors.  Lots of cans of worms.  Sure some guys would say, thanks but no thanks, some would try to get into NBA or other pro avenues, so maybe we are only dealing with 100 actually eligible and willing instead of the 875.  If that's the case, what rules around this would you suggest?  I'm now open to considering it.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, 13th&Jackson said:

Of course IU would have been paired against the best 3pt shooting team in the country... Eight players over 40% from 3 and three others over 35%. Averaged almost 25 attempts/game.

thing was that did not make sense was that they already had the time of tip offs for these games.  Most of the time the tip off times are not announced until late on selection Sunday or Monday morning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NotIThatLives said:

My apologies for firing a shot.  I do like what you say there to "consider a solution."  Heard on 1070 that if the spring sports season is not salvaged then talks are already in the works to give another year of eligibility.  That makes sense since they lose essentially their entire season.  I'm still not sure how the math works out.  There are 350 d1 schools.  Do you give all seniors that were eligible to make the tourney, in good academic standing?  Or should they do a selection show(yes) and then if your team was to make the tourney they can come back?  Should they only be allowed to come back to their original school or should they be allowed to grad transfer with this new year of eligibility?  If there are let's say an average of 2.5 scholarship seniors per team (conservative guess, I searched for a true number) then we are looking at 950 scholarships being taken up.   There would be a feeding frenzy, creaning the likes the ncaa had never seen before to essentially cater to 66 teams x 2.5 seniors.  Lots of cans of worms.  Sure some guys would say, thanks but no thanks, some would try to get into NBA or other pro avenues, so maybe we are only dealing with 100 actually eligible and willing instead of the 850.  If that's the case, what rules around this would you suggest?  I'm now open to considering it.  

The way I look at it, there’s really not much for the NCAA to do beyond just granting the extra year of eligibility.  At that point, it’s all on the schools to decide what they want to do.  Simply granting another year of eligibility doesn’t guarantee anyone a roster spot.  Each school would be able to decide if they want to Crean someone to keep a senior, let the senior walk, etc. I’m already for getting rid of the transfer rules in general, so that’s how I’d deal with that.  As for who would get eligibility, I initially said just give it to every senior, but if they actually selected a field, that could narrow things down a bit as well.

Take Indiana for example.  Assuming Lander reclassifies and Anderson transfers, we have one open spot.  Bet you Archie would like to fill that spot with Green over some grad transfer.  That wouldn’t leave a spot for DeRon, which would create a tough decision for IU.  But who knows, maybe one of the juniors would graduate and decide to leave, which would open up a spot for him.  Or maybe Archie would tell him there’s no spot for him and he would transfer.  Regardless, these are issues the schools would deal with, not the NCAA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

The way I look at it, there’s really not much for the NCAA to do beyond just granting the extra year of eligibility.  At that point, it’s all on the schools to decide what they want to do.  Simply granting another year of eligibility doesn’t guarantee anyone a roster spot.  Each school would be able to decide if they want to Crean someone to keep a senior, let the senior walk, etc. I’m already for getting rid of the transfer rules in general, so that’s how I’d deal with that.  As for who would get eligibility, I initially said just give it to every senior, but if they actually selected a field, that could narrow things down a bit as well.

Take Indiana for example.  Assuming Lander reclassifies and Anderson transfers, we have one open spot.  Bet you Archie would like to fill that spot with Green over some grad transfer.  That wouldn’t leave a spot for DeRon, which would create a tough decision for IU.  But who knows, maybe one of the juniors would graduate and decide to leave, which would open up a spot for him.  Or maybe Archie would tell him there’s no spot for him and he would transfer.  Regardless, these are issues the schools would deal with, not the NCAA.

Insightful post. Thanks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

The way I look at it, there’s really not much for the NCAA to do beyond just granting the extra year of eligibility.  At that point, it’s all on the schools to decide what they want to do.  Simply granting another year of eligibility doesn’t guarantee anyone a roster spot.  Each school would be able to decide if they want to Crean someone to keep a senior, let the senior walk, etc. I’m already for getting rid of the transfer rules in general, so that’s how I’d deal with that.  As for who would get eligibility, I initially said just give it to every senior, but if they actually selected a field, that could narrow things down a bit as well.

Take Indiana for example.  Assuming Lander reclassifies and Anderson transfers, we have one open spot.  Bet you Archie would like to fill that spot with Green over some grad transfer.  That wouldn’t leave a spot for DeRon, which would create a tough decision for IU.  But who knows, maybe one of the juniors would graduate and decide to leave, which would open up a spot for him.  Or maybe Archie would tell him there’s no spot for him and he would transfer.  Regardless, these are issues the schools would deal with, not the NCAA.

I'm willing to keep an open mind and again I apologize for the way I came at you initially.  

I hope they have the selection show even if it's just for fun.  It gives the nation something to talk about and ease stress.  

I would limit those seniors on teams selected.  We could then discuss framework for rules on all that.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It’s interesting how much we, including me, value athletics at academic institutions. 
What if an on-scholarship music student worked countless hours over four years to become first chair but now the year-end recital they worked so hard for and graduation they always dreamed of are both now cancelled. Should their scholarship be extended an additional year, if they are interested, so they can participate in the activity they have been working towards and dreaming about?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, FW_Hoosier said:

The way I look at it, there’s really not much for the NCAA to do beyond just granting the extra year of eligibility.  At that point, it’s all on the schools to decide what they want to do.  Simply granting another year of eligibility doesn’t guarantee anyone a roster spot.  Each school would be able to decide if they want to Crean someone to keep a senior, let the senior walk, etc. I’m already for getting rid of the transfer rules in general, so that’s how I’d deal with that.  As for who would get eligibility, I initially said just give it to every senior, but if they actually selected a field, that could narrow things down a bit as well.

Take Indiana for example.  Assuming Lander reclassifies and Anderson transfers, we have one open spot.  Bet you Archie would like to fill that spot with Green over some grad transfer.  That wouldn’t leave a spot for DeRon, which would create a tough decision for IU.  But who knows, maybe one of the juniors would graduate and decide to leave, which would open up a spot for him.  Or maybe Archie would tell him there’s no spot for him and he would transfer.  Regardless, these are issues the schools would deal with, not the NCAA.

I do feel for these layers but why do they deserve another year just because they missed out on a chance to play in the tournament.  I asked this once is what is the difference from this to when Verdale Jones getting hurt his senior year in the big ten tournament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, IU878176 said:

It’s interesting how much we, including me, value athletics at academic institutions. 
What if an on-scholarship music student worked countless hours over four years to become first chair but now the year-end recital they worked so hard for and graduation they always dreamed of are both now cancelled. Should their scholarship be extended an additional year, if they are interested, so they can participate in the activity they have been working towards and dreaming about?  

I am wondering what if they cancel the graduation ceremonies in May and my daughter misses graduation.  Will IU let her stay another year so she can go through graduation ceremonies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

^^^ Yes. Devonte. It would be good to see not only if IU made it, but also where we landed.

Thanks for the link Hoosier Jax.

 

I posted something earlier but on WLW from Cincinnati last night had a story where Lunardi had tweeted out a picture of the NCAA bracket as of Thursday.  It had IU in as 11 seed playing BYU

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I am wondering what if they cancel the graduation ceremonies in May and my daughter misses graduation.  Will IU let her stay another year so she can go through graduation ceremonies.

I graduated from IU-Bloomington.  But never went to the graduation ceremony.  Was I ahead of my time ?  LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, milehiiu said:

I graduated from IU-Bloomington.  But never went to the graduation ceremony.  Was I ahead of my time ?  LOL

She really is hoping they have gradation and I would really like to see her get her dream.  Graduation at IU is on May 9th and she will have two different ceremonies with one being the whole school in Memorial stadium and her social work school will be at Bloomington North HS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

She really is hoping they have gradation and I would really like to see her get her dream.  Graduation at IU is on May 9th and she will have two different ceremonies with one being the whole school in Memorial stadium and her social work school will be at Bloomington North HS.

I will say a prayer, so that your daughter can realize her dream.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...