Anyone whose eligibility expired this season will get another year, but it's up to individual schools.
March 30th, 2020 at 11:22 PM ^
Also, this is for all Spring athletes, not just seniors.
Nm. The espn link cleared it up.
Horrible job op.
While it may be good for the "outgoing" seniors if they decide to come back, this could take up a roster and scholarship spot and hurt any incoming freshmen as well as others on the team as their playing time could go down.
No easy answers either way as if the NCAA does lift the scholarship numbers per team/sport, it could cost schools a lot more.
The NCAA is allowing teams to expand their roster beyond the current scholarship limit.
This is undeniably the correct thing to do. Now, if only the NCAA would do the same thing for winter sport athletes...
And, you're entirely wrong about the "scholarship costs" of these athletes. Scholarship costs are an internal bookkeeping metric that have no relationship whatsoever to actual dollars. The UM Athletic Department paying a scholarship to the general university fund is simply shifting funds from one hand to the other. College athletics is a massive shell game to ensure that every program can show a paper loss.
There are real, hard costs to adding scholarship athletes. Sure, at Michigan the AD makes enough money and the school itself is big enough that the marginal cost of an additional student-athlete is immaterial, but it's not true everywhere. While the tuition "scholarship" itself might just be a paper transaction, room and board do have marginal costs, particularly if the available housing is at or above capacity.
It’s a tough break for the winter sport athletes but they absolutely should not get an extension. For most schools/athletes, the season had already ended. Even for NW and Nebraska in basketball, the season was over. It sucks for them, but when the NCAA decided to cancel all competitions, that was it for the winter sport athletes.
March 30th, 2020 at 11:03 PM ^
I mean it costs money to educate and house a student. Whether it costs as much as students get charged is another debate but providing free room, meals, and taking up spots in classes all has costs.
Incoming recruits should be released from letters of intent to re-evaluate the situation.
The marginal costs to adding a student to a class are nearly zero. Once you have the class anyway, adding another chair has limited effect. Similarly, the marginal food costs, while real, are also pretty low, especially if you can find a way to limit waste.
And, with the way that the economy has been cratered, expect fewer students on campus in the fall. There'd be plenty of space for any students that wanted to return to class. There's really no downside.
The whole country is sacrificing something due to this crisis. That idea gives a small group who are already well placed to move on with their lives something beyond what they lost. Many were already done with their seasons.
It would be great if we could do that for everybody. The downside to giving college athletes in winter sports an extra year is that it's ridiculous to single out that one group for special treatment.
Another downside is that the HS athletes who also lost part of their seasons will now lose out on opportunities next season. You can expand the rosters, but playing time will still be lost.
The waivers will be applied for student-athletes competing in spring sports: baseball, softball, tennis, golf, outdoor track and field, lacrosse, rowing, men's volleyball, beach volleyball and women's water polo. The decision does not include winter sports like basketball, hockey, swimming and diving, and gymnastics.
Since it didn’t include basketball or football, I’m guessing nearly 100% of the athletes are coming back. Otherwise their days of playing that sport at an organized high level are pretty much over.
March 31st, 2020 at 12:07 PM ^
Not necessarily true. While many may miss the sports they play, some of them are graduating and moving onto jobs, graduate school, military, their professional sports, etc.
.gif)
March 30th, 2020 at 10:52 PM ^
Good decision by NCAA? Nah, can’t go that far.
March 30th, 2020 at 11:05 PM ^
"good decision" and "NCAA" are, by definition, mutually exclusive
March 30th, 2020 at 11:06 PM ^
It'll be interesting to see how many people do come back. Baseball is the only money sport I can think of in the bunch, but it'll be weird for a lot of teams to have a bunch of young recruits as well as a bunch of one-year-older athletes who you were expecting to pass getting another crack at it. Like, you'll have two classes of seniors on a lot of teams.
Weird dynamics, but I'm happy for the athletes who now have the option.
They will try to do whats right but it will be a mess and probably a 1 year delay.
March 31st, 2020 at 10:51 AM ^
Most of these spring sport athletes are not on full scholarship right? That will probably limit the number that want to extend their athletic career at UM.