Once a player graduates with an undergraduate degree and has eligibility remaining that player may then transfer to another school for graduate studies and continue playing immediately at the new school. The rule also stipulates that they must pursue an area of study that is not offered at their previous school. Many athletes have done this, the most recent big name to do this was Russell Wilson at Wisky - played immediately without sitting out a year.
DJ - You are spot on with this analysis. I don't always agree with you on some of your opinions, but you could not have stated this better. Thank you.
Wow, another interesting tidbit is that Eric J Barron, the President at FSU for this whole fiasco and cover up is now the President-elect at Penn State (takes office on May 2nd). You would think that Penn State would steer clear of anyone with any hint of sexual misconduct cover ups under their watch. What a cluster f....
Thank you Ramzy. You nailed it again!! I will forward this to anyone who has an email address in the athletic office.
Here is the Athletic Dept contact list for anyone interested:
Parity. Somewhere lost in all this discussion of what is right for the student athlete, parity seems to be thrown by the wayside. Even professional leagues have parity rules. NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, you name it - there are salary caps and other vehicles in place to form some kind of parity. We all know that their best efforts at this fall short of real parity, but it exists, non the less, so that Cleveland Browns fans believe that somehow, some way, the Brownies could possibly win it all. It is what gives hope to the lesser teams in the league. Remove that hope of parity and the league falls apart.
The NCPA and Drexel U report cited by DJ is almost is just one of many reports on the subject. It is laughable. Just like some of the reports with the opposite point of view. The real truth of the matter lies somewhere in between. And, above all, we must not loose track of parity.
One could argue that parity really does not exist in this world of college athletics. But, it is there. Why else would March Madness be so popular? There is a feeling that the little guy will rise up and beat the Goliath's of the NCAA. Start paying players like the report suggests, and any hope of that goes out the window, because the little guys will not even be in the game. Is this what we really want for college sports? Another professional league of prim a donas? There is a reason many college fans don't attend professional events with the same regularity they do college games. Make the college game the same as the pros, and you loose that distinctive difference. Why pay the big bucks to attend a college game filled with players who are not good enough to be in the pros when you can just go to a pro game instead.
It is a slippery slope we are talking about. College athletics will change, but will the changes be sustainable?
Most employment contracts, particularly in tech industries or other innovative fields, call for the employer to take ownership of any development/improvement/new technology developed by the employee, whether it be on the clock or away from work. Some companies reward their employees handsomely for these advances, some not so much. But, most, if not all, do not reward the employee anywhere close to the compensation offered to the senior officers of the business. So, yes, many employees are OK with that simply because they are happy to have a decent job with a good future. That's not to say that there are not disgruntled employees out there, or companies that bend over backward to reward innovation. But there are many people who are willing to sacrifice the limelight for the good of all involved in their company.
So are we M*ch*gan, so are we!!!
This also means that the student athlete scholarships will not be classified as income in Ohio. So Ohio schools will be able to tell prospective athletes that their scholarships are indeed scholarships, not income that is subject to fed / state taxation and any association dues. Just a different perspective than what you have pointed out.
Interesting takes on the student athlete / employee / union thing. Here we are reading opinions of Dan Wetzel and Marc Edelman about why student athletes should be treated like employees. Why is it that the strongest opinions on these situations come from people who never played the game? OK, that could be said about many on both sides of the issue, but it just seems that the 'treat them like employees, unionize them' thing is being championed by hordes of these people who lack real life experience in college athletics, whether it be in participation or direct administration.
Wetzel is just some hack who discovered he had a penchant for penning substantive articles about sports. He did not even envision being a sports writer when he first went to school. Just wrote for the student newspaper because he needed something to do. Yet, we have millions of people who follow his scribes as gospel. Isn't he the same hack who referred to tatgate as the worst scandal in college athletics, only to come to the defense of Johnny M as a poor college kid who deserved to take advantage of the lime light?
And then there is Edelman. First of all, he is a graduate of TSUN Law School. For the most part his bio reads as a How To in taking advantage of athletes and sports nuts in general. He founded and operates an organization for arbitrating problems in the fantasy sports team world. Yep, that is the guy we should all be listening to.
Never assume that individuals like this have in mind what is best for the world of college athletics. What they really have in mind is what is best for them in college athletics. Unionizing and treating players like employees is going to put themselves in a better situation for their professions. That really is the bottom line.
I am a long time season ticket holder. I have my choice of what level my seats are located. I would never even consider A or B Decks. My current tickets are in D deck (yes there is a D deck!) which is basically at the upper edge of C deck, backing up to the press box. We love our seats and would not trade them for any other seats in the stadium. On rare occasion I have had to purchase an extra ticket to a game because of family wanting to attend the game with us. I will always take the purchased ticket (in lower decks) because any of our guests much prefer the seats in D deck. Whenever I am in the lower seats I always migrate to the upper level around half time to 'squeeze' into our friendly section in D deck. Much better viewing up there. We never miss a play. Heck, I would even prefer the last row in C deck in the end zone to any other level in the stadium. So, I really don't get the criticism of the nose bleed seats in Ohio Stadium. And, FWIW, if I am in Columbus for a game, any game, I am in my seat in the stadium until the team sings Carmen!!!
That's awesome, but what the heck is with the blu* jerseys on the field? I can only imagine what Urban had to.say to that team!
LOL - Sent an email to Joe, and he actually answered it:
Actually, when my grandfather arrived from Italy, it was DiBlundo. So we've already dropped our syllable. Now it's Ohio State's turn.
From: Sent: Wednesday, March 26, 2014 9:00 PM
To: Joe Blundo
Subject: Blundo Name Drop
Dear Joe, Please drop Blundo from your name. Just something about Joe Blundo that sounds really stupid. You would be doing yourself a real favor if you just went with Joe from now on.
I like the emphasis on taunting/sportsmanship. The NFL has been behind the anti-bullying campaign and rightly so. It's about time they made it a point of emphasis in rule enforcement on the field as well.
Actually, you can get in here to make a comment without voting. Just click the link to Older Polls on the poll frame, and you will get a list of all polls, including the current one. You then can click on any poll to see the results and make comments.
There was no way I was going to vote for either of those two asshats, so I figured out how to get in here to make a comment. Necessity is the mother of invention, or in this case discovery. Still like your comment though! An upvote for you my good sir.
Damn, I thought it was Pie Day! Imagine all the embellishments we could have with that!!
What? Did April Fools Day come early this year? This poll is a joke, no?
Don't knock it, unicorns are a great find.
Wow! Power, straight ahead football works great when you have a never ending supply of large quality O linemen, like Bama. Doesn't work so well when you go up against Ds that match your size and depth. And, can be a real problem if your O linemen just don't measure up in the first place. What will it be for UM? Well, we shall see, the proof is in the pudding.
It just doesn't seem like there are a plethora of quality linemen at UM, but I could be wrong. And as for Nussmeier, why on earth did he leave Bama? Coaching with Saban is probably challenging, but working under Hoke has to be, well you can only imagine! Just my .02, but if he is such a good OC, why did Saban seek Kiffin to replace him even before he left? (Kiffin was hired as a 'consultant' for the offense to spice it up for their bowl game.) I think Saban knew that the simpler approach to the running game just doesn't hack it in this day and age of big, fast defenses.
Incoherent? Yeah, but I understood what he was trying to say. Maybe it's because I understand coach speak, or worse yet, politician speak. That said, I do prefer coaches who are more direct. But, most of us understand that there is one facade that some coaches present to the press that is quite different than what they use with their team. In Luke's case I think it is a little that he is very tired of these questions coming up time after time (yes, he needs to be a little more thick skinned), and he is trying not to scoff off these questions. I know for fact that he is not like this with his players at practice.
Woody could get quite verbal, almost verbose, at times with the press, but he was entirely a different person when he was coaching. Heck, even Urban presents a different side to the press than what you will witness at practice/on the sideline. That said, one of the things they all have in common is that they are/were all great recruiters. I don't think that would be the case with Luke if his delivery was similar to this one interview in front of recruits/parents.
So Luke is getting panned for an expanded answer to a simple question. Perhaps he should have kept it simple like Griffey - er wait, seems like he got panned for keeping it simple.
I think Luke would be panned for any answer he gave. There are enough people out there who will jump on him for whatever he says until he produces the results they want on the field regardless of the hand he is dealt. Hopefully the addition of Ash/LJ and keeping most of the D healthy will help bring the Silver Bullets back to where we all want them to be.
Keep in mind that the clock stopping rules were different then. Every time the ball went out of bounds the clock stopped until the next snap (today that only happens in the last 2 min. of each half, other wise the clock starts as soon as the ball is set on the field). Also, there were far fewer official (or media) time outs. So, the offense needed a spirited pace just to keep up with the clock.
Saban's comments about continuous action are really funny, because the pace of the game that Woody coached in the 70's was about as near continuous as you can get in college football. Remember that in those days only 2 games per year could be televised. So the only clock stoppage giving a team time to recoup during play on a non televised game was the result of a team time out or injury. Every punt, kick off, or change of possession was followed by a snap within 30 secs of placing the ball. When the networks took over and added more commercials during broadcasts the NCAA adopted rules that in effect eliminated actual game time so the broadcast game would could be played in the same 3 hour time span as the previous non broadcast games. The net effect was that we lost a lot of actual playing time within the broadcast format. A game played under the old rules of stopping the clock whenever it went out of bounds could consume about 3:45+ when televised instead of a network determined 3 hour time slot.
Thus, the hurry up offenses of today are just attempting to get in the number of plays that used to be the standard for top echelon teams of the 60's and 70's.
Continuous flow? There is no such thing even close to that in college football because of all the TV timeouts. Coaches need to make the most of the time they do have on the field because the rules favoring broadcast concerns stripped away any semblance of continuous flow.
NFL teams don't average as many plays per game, Kelly with the Eagles was not able to average as many plays there as he did at Oregon? No shit! Perhaps it has more to do with the defenses actually being coached to stop hurry up offenses. Once they get the ball back to their own offense, the play slows down, hence fewer plays. They don't run fewer plays because of player safety or concerns for parity in the league.
Something should be done about things that give unfair advantage to offending teams? Well, the hurry up offense does not create an unfair advantage for any teams. Their opponents all have the option to run the same hurry up scheme. How about blatant over signing, only giving one year scholarships, under the table benefits that are structured to prevent any public knowledge of the perpetrators and recipients, etc? Yeah, they should really go punished Saban.
Concern for player safety? How about a coach who blatantly steps over an injured player in practice and continues practice for the rest of the team as said player writhes in pain in the middle of the field? Sure, Saban, you are really concerned about player safety.
Nick tries to come off as a well spoken proponent of this proposal, but he is just another Bert more concerned about neutralizing opponents through asinine rules. Take a hike, Nickie.....
Exactly, Krodawg! The point about FNG's is not OSU competing against HS games, it is about College Football competing against HS games. Like it or not, 99.999% of the participants in college football come from the HS ranks. And, the only way they continue playing in HS is if the schools themselves can afford to field the teams - and a major part of their revenue comes from attendance at Friday night games. It is just a stupid idea to interfere with attendance at Friday night HS games by offering major college football games on Friday nights.
Ohio State can fill most any stadium whenever the game would be scheduled. But, Universities with poor attendance are not going to magically fill their stadiums by playing on Friday nights. Make no mistake about it, this move is driven by the networks because they believe they can get people to sit on their butts in front of the tube on Friday nights instead of doing other things, like attending local HS games. But the net effect of that could be a cancer to the sport as it could make many HSs look at the viability of fielding their teams in the first place.
People need to look at the big picture instead of just what would please themselves at any moment. HS football needs to thrive across the country (not just in your backyard) if college football is to continue it's popularity.