FB: North Coast Athletic Conference

[wab64]

As a consequence of the meltdown of the economy, Wabash announced today that it will be suspending for at least one year, maybe longer, the planned renovations to Hollett Stadium, including the installation of field turf and a new scoreboard. 

       Sad news,Schwami. Everyone keeps falling all over themselves to find another word to describe economic conditions--meltdown-downturn-recession (lord forbid call it a "depression"). I suggest we should name it what they did with these things in the 19th century- a "Panic"! I recall cutting my teeth in American History with a paper on the Panic of 1819. Then there were others.

[Mr. Ypsi]

As a consequence of the meltdown of the economy, Wabash announced today that it will be suspending for at least one year, maybe longer, the planned renovations to Hollett Stadium, including the installation of field turf and a new scoreboard. 

For a second there, I thought you were announcing a suspension of football.  And it's not even April 1!

I tried for the ultimate coup, announcing that Mount Union had thrown in the towel due to the economy - but that was obviously TOO over the top and no one bit.  Someone announced the shutdown of Loras fb (IIAC) that day, and did get a couple of folks!

[seinfeld]

I must be mistaken about this, but I thought I was told by someone from Wabash a few years back that players weren't allowed to use a fifth-year of eligibility. Allowed is probably too strong of a word, but highly discouraged is probably more accurate. Is this true? If so, it must be an unusual case for two players at the same time to do so.

[wally_wabash]

I must be mistaken about this, but I thought I was told by someone from Wabash a few years back that players weren't allowed to use a fifth-year of eligibility. Allowed is probably too strong of a word, but highly discouraged is probably more accurate. Is this true? If so, it must be an unusual case for two players at the same time to do so.

If by "highly discouraged" you mean, "on your own dime", then yes.  At least when I was attending the College, my understanding was that aid packages did not extend beyond the traditional four-year academic cycle. 

Wabash has had a handful of guys come back and do a fifth year over the last few years.  The LGs also had a great player finish school and ride off into the sunset a year early, so it all evens out.   

[formerd3db]

I must be mistaken about this, but I thought I was told by someone from Wabash a few years back that players weren't allowed to use a fifth-year of eligibility. Allowed is probably too strong of a word, but highly discouraged is probably more accurate. Is this true? If so, it must be an unusual case for two players at the same time to do so.

I must be mistaken about this, but I thought I was told by someone from Wabash a few years back that players weren't allowed to use a fifth-year of eligibility. Allowed is probably too strong of a word, but highly discouraged is probably more accurate. Is this true? If so, it must be an unusual case for two players at the same time to do so.

If by "highly discouraged" you mean, "on your own dime", then yes.  At least when I was attending the College, my understanding was that aid packages did not extend beyond the traditional four-year academic cycle. 

Wabash has had a handful of guys come back and do a fifth year over the last few years.  The LGs also had a great player finish school and ride off into the sunset a year early, so it all evens out.  

If that means that Wabash discourages players from using a 5th year to complete their 4-year eligibility to include a legitimate and NCAA approved medical "redshirt" year due to an injury, then IMO, that is not right.  Of course, the college has the right to choose that policy, yet that would be disappointing.  My apologies if I missed something here in the discussion prior.  Thanks.

[wally_wabash]

I don't think that athletics plays much into that philosophy...I think the idea is that the College wants to see its students complete their course of undergraduate study in four years.  It is happening with more frequency that Wabash student athletes are using that fifth year...Dustin Huff did it, Jared Lange did it...I think there are a couple of others recently that I'm forgetting.  Anyway, the point is that the College wants to see kids graduate in four years.  If that doesn't happen for whatever reason (time away for personal reasons, ninth semester teaching programs, etc.), the College is going to welcome these kids back and get them to the finish line.  Now if some of those kids have an extra season's worth of eligibility, then it's a win/win. 

[DPU3619]

I must be mistaken about this, but I thought I was told by someone from Wabash a few years back that players weren't allowed to use a fifth-year of eligibility. Allowed is probably too strong of a word, but highly discouraged is probably more accurate. Is this true? If so, it must be an unusual case for two players at the same time to do so.

If by "highly discouraged" you mean, "on your own dime", then yes.  At least when I was attending the College, my understanding was that aid packages did not extend beyond the traditional four-year academic cycle. 

I'm under the impression that this is DePauw's policy, as well.  It's out of their pocket regardless of whether the eligibility is medically related or not.

[formerd3db]

I don't think that athletics plays much into that philosophy...I think the idea is that the College wants to see its students complete their course of undergraduate study in four years.  It is happening with more frequency that Wabash student athletes are using that fifth year...Dustin Huff did it, Jared Lange did it...I think there are a couple of others recently that I'm forgetting.  Anyway, the point is that the College wants to see kids graduate in four years.  If that doesn't happen for whatever reason (time away for personal reasons, ninth semester teaching programs, etc.), the College is going to welcome these kids back and get them to the finish line.  Now if some of those kids have an extra season's worth of eligibility, then it's a win/win. 

wally:

I agree with your point regarding the college(s) wanting to see their student-athletes graduate and focus as much on their education (or more) as their sport and try to do that in four years.  However, I disagree with you in that I feel it is unrealistic in all cases to have a hard fast rule that they need to obtain their degree in four years while limiting their allowed athletic participation within the same time frame.  First, it is very common (in some instances the "norm") for students to not be able to graduate in four years but rather 4 1/2 and/or even 5 simply due to the specific degree they are pursuing - curriculum requirements don't always allow for that in 4 years (I've seen that in many instances in college, including my own daughter's situation and she did not even participate in athletics in college).

Secondly, I again feel that it is simply unfair to penalize a student-athlete who is injured during the course of his/her season (obviously I"m talking about those who would legitimately qualify by NCAA rules for a medical red-shirt) by not allowing them to have the opportunity to have four total years like anyone else who is fortunate enough to not be injured during their four year career.  As long as those student-athletes are maintaining their academic eligibility and progressing towards their degree, there is no reason whatsover to disallow them from participating for four years (other than if their parents and/or their own financial situation i.e. if the student-athlete is paying/working for their own college education) is a factor which would prevent that.

Obviously, any college/university encourages and promotes their student-athletes to obtain their degrees regardless of the situation; again nothing wrong with strongly encouraging them to do it in fours.  However, no Rules/Regulations can cover all contingencies (nor should they) as their are certainly occasional situations that warrant otherwise.  As I mentioned previously, it is Wabash's right to have that rule, yet, I personally am not in favor of it.  As such, I would advise and council student-athletes who are looking at a school with such a rule to strongly consider it among all their decision factors in comparing their school choices during their recruiting process/looking at schools.  Again, just MO.  

[Mr. Ypsi]

I must be mistaken about this, but I thought I was told by someone from Wabash a few years back that players weren't allowed to use a fifth-year of eligibility. Allowed is probably too strong of a word, but highly discouraged is probably more accurate. Is this true? If so, it must be an unusual case for two players at the same time to do so.

If by "highly discouraged" you mean, "on your own dime", then yes.  At least when I was attending the College, my understanding was that aid packages did not extend beyond the traditional four-year academic cycle. 

I'm under the impression that this is DePauw's policy, as well.  It's out of their pocket regardless of whether the eligibility is medically related or not.

I've never seen data on this, but my impression is that this is pretty standard among private schools - FA for 4 years, with only fairly rare exceptions (e.g., medical problems that actually keep them out of school, as opposed to just out of athletics).

[formerd3db]

I must be mistaken about this, but I thought I was told by someone from Wabash a few years back that players weren't allowed to use a fifth-year of eligibility. Allowed is probably too strong of a word, but highly discouraged is probably more accurate. Is this true? If so, it must be an unusual case for two players at the same time to do so.

If by "highly discouraged" you mean, "on your own dime", then yes.  At least when I was attending the College, my understanding was that aid packages did not extend beyond the traditional four-year academic cycle. 

I'm under the impression that this is DePauw's policy, as well.  It's out of their pocket regardless of whether the eligibility is medically related or not.

I've never seen data on this, but my impression is that this is pretty standard among private schools - FA for 4 years, with only fairly rare exceptions (e.g., medical problems that actually keep them out of school, as opposed to just out of athletics).

I can tell you that at Hope, it is allowed in regards to legitimate medical reasons.  Based on specific situations that I am aware of, this has not been detrimental to either party i.e. the college or the student-athlete (other than perhaps the "pocket-book" of the student-athlete and/or his parent's "pocket-book", )

[Mr. Ypsi]

former,

It's not just privates.  It's my policy too!  Since #1 and #2 sons are 4 grade levels apart (less than 3.5 years, but you know how schools love those 'cut-off' dates!), I warned #1 that the gravy train ends after 4 years (I don't DO 2 college students at the same time ).

Fortunately for #1 (though no one else) he may get a reprieve.  #2 looks like he may not be going to school on time, and #1 (through no fault of his own) may take 4.5 or 5 years for his degree.  Despite being a near casualty at birth, guess he was born lucky after all!

[FightinScot]

I'd be willing to bet that the reason colleges won't give the same financial aid for 5th year seniors is because they are, at least in the case of medical redshirted players, done with their academic requirements (or real close) by the time that extra year rolls around. Should the college give the same financial aid, especially with the tendency for DIII schools to give "academic" scholarship to athletes to help recruit them, when all they're taking is PE classes? The COW offers courses in such rigorous subjucts as Golf, Archery, Astronomy and the Solar System...you get the point...that are taken quite often by these medical redshirt players. They're not working on their grad or major requirements, they're getting one last season before they hang em up while filling credit requirements with nothing classes, so this policy doesn't surprise me all that much.

[Mr. Ypsi]

I'd be willing to bet that the reason colleges won't give the same financial aid for 5th year seniors is because they are, at least in the case of medical redshirted players, done with their academic requirements (or real close) by the time that extra year rolls around. Should the college give the same financial aid, especially with the tendency for DIII schools to give "academic" scholarship to athletes to help recruit them, when all they're taking is PE classes? The COW offers courses in such rigorous subjucts as Golf, Archery, Astronomy and the Solar System...you get the point...that are taken quite often by these medical redshirt players. They're not working on their grad or major requirements, they're getting one last season before they hang em up while filling credit requirements with nothing classes, so this policy doesn't surprise me all that much.

Since d3 has a policy that athletes receive no more than +/- 4% the aid of non-athletes, this is a pretty serious charge.  Should the NCAA open an investigation of Wooster, or would you like to either withdraw or document your charge?

[FightinScot]

Since d3 has a policy that athletes receive no more than +/- 4% the aid of non-athletes, this is a pretty serious charge.  Should the NCAA open an investigation of Wooster, or would you like to either withdraw or document your charge?

Haha yea that came off differently than I wanted, so I'm going to try to amend and clarify. I'm sure that schools do not overlook academics when looking at potential student-athletes. Schools compete for student-athletes, one major area of competition is financial aid- some schools give more than others, and those gain an advandage. So I don't think its out of line to suggest that when an athlete is qualified for academic scholarship, that is put into their aid package- same goes for non-athletes. These are small schools we're talking about, getting qualified students to the school is always a priority. So, I don't think my claim that schools give athletes academic scholarships to recruit them is too out of line- nor is it a charge that illegal actions are taking place in Wooster's financial aid/admissions office or any other institution... well maybe Witt, investigate them out of their recruiting classes   

The PE class part was meant only in regards to 5th year seniors, not athletes in general. Medical redshirted players don't use the extra year to take their harder requirements- they get their stuff done in 4 years, then use their redshirt to play another season while taking less-than-strenuous classes. If anyone would rather spend their extra semester fulfilling high-level requirements than taking golf and personal conditioning classes, well...I guess you're just a different breed than me. People take their medical "year off" recovering physically and buckling down in the classroom- taking care of reqs so that extra time can be one last hurrah, on and off the field.

So, for the "academic'' scholarship to apply to a 5th year senior, the school would have to believe that there's a lot of "academics" going on, which, I am charging does not happen often in an extra semester. Financial aid applies to the 4 years when kids are getting their stuff done, not paying for one last glory run while taking fun classes. If a kid needs an extra year because of curriculum requirements, then they should keep their scholarship. Schools don't want to (and shouldn't have to) pay for an extra year of football if there's no real academic side to the semester. Call off the NCAA hounds, Ypsi 

[Mr. Ypsi]

FightinScot,

Good reply.  I'm not sure it would apply to all medical redshirts (and some students need more than 4 years for basics through no fault of their own - changes in major; courses not offered at possible times, etc.), but privates (d3, not USC ) wouldn't necessarily give FA for Matt Leinart's ballroom dancing class!

Fear not - I haven't sic'ed the NCAA hounds on Wooster (or, to your regret, on Witt either! )