Alabama: 5 players tested Positive for COVID | Page 18 | Syracusefan.com

Alabama: 5 players tested Positive for COVID

hoopsupstate said:
Honoring a scholarship is not the same as maintaining eligibility.
Expand...

Fair point but I would be stunned if in light of all that is going on the NCAA doesnt give all these players that extra year if they didnt play
 
FreakTalksAboutSU said:
Fair point but I would be stunned if in light of all that is going on the NCAA doesnt give all these players that extra year if they didnt play
Expand...

The NCAA shut down all the Spring 2020 sports, and gave every Spring athlete an extra year of eligibility.

Unless the NCAA pulls the plug on all the Fall Sports, I don't think the NCAA will take action. Even then, they would have to cancel everything outright as opposed to pushing everything to the Spring.
 
upperdeck said:
scholies dont cost the school real money but they do cost the athletic dept money
Expand...

Other than shuffling money around, scholarships at these quantities don't have a significant discernible cost. Kind of like having a buffet set up for 500 people, what is the true "cost" for inviting one more person?
 
OrangeXtreme said:
The NCAA shut down all the Spring 2020 sports, and gave every Spring athlete an extra year of eligibility.

Unless the NCAA pulls the plug on all the Fall Sports, I don't think the NCAA will take action. Even then, they would have to cancel everything outright as opposed to pushing everything to the Spring.
Expand...

That's rough. If I am a senior who is on the cusp of being NFL caliber, but have asthma, it seems a tough position to be in. Professionals in that scenario are still getting paid millions to do nothing if they are vulnerable but have medical clearance to sit. Yet we cant find a way to give these kids another year to play for free? Would be very typical NCAA I suppose.
 
It seems the conferences that cancelled, an extra year of eligibility would be in order. If individual players do? It seems they should get the same consideration. NCAA is supposedly there for player safety...lol. HS program cancellation could also put a dent on recruiting.

And then...(this list includes revenue sharing)

 
dan7800 said:
Other than shuffling money around, scholarships at these quantities don't have a significant discernible cost. Kind of like having a buffet set up for 500 people, what is the true "cost" for inviting one more person?
Expand...
but at most schools the Ath money comes out of its own pot. At schools like SU they have a set amount of revenue thats often created by things they do and then the school takes back a large chunk of it. so if they generate 25 million they get to keep say 10 million and then they set a budget.. when stuff like this happens they still have to pay their expenses but they dont create the revenue. so its not just moving money from a to pay b.. its real cost to most of these depts. Just like the research depts have money but they cant just give it to the school for other costs.
 
upperdeck said:
scholies dont cost the school real money but they do cost the athletic dept money
Expand...
Doesn't it depend on the school. The P5 schools have all kinds of money coming in but lower level schools aren't profitable. One reason SUNY Oswego decided against going D1 for hockey was that the expence required would have forced it to kill off a bunch of other sports.
 
thats also because Oswego didnt do the math correctly. higher cost of scholies, they needed to decide if they could re-coop that cost, it would not have cost them other sports only if they couldnt come up with that added cost and they needed to also know what the true cost of the scholies is compared to the aid those players already get. D1 msay have allowed better ticket prices at a school that loves hockey and even $5 more would be $3-400,000 more in revenue. its only 18 scholies.. So yeah its a cost but its not millions.
 
upperdeck said:
thats also because Oswego didnt do the math correctly. higher cost of scholies, they needed to decide if they could re-coop that cost, it would not have cost them other sports only if they couldnt come up with that added cost and they needed to also know what the true cost of the scholies is compared to the aid those players already get. D1 msay have allowed better ticket prices at a school that loves hockey and even $5 more would be $3-400,000 more in revenue. its only 18 scholies.. So yeah its a cost but its not millions.
Expand...

The cost of carrying a D1 sport is not just the scholarship cost. The NCAA requires specific levels of support for the D1 programs relating to facilities, equipment, websites, medical staff, travel, etc. It is a financial burden for any school that doesn’t have alternative revenue streams (tv, merchandise).

It was the reason why LeMoyne dropped their baseball team from D1 to D2 even though the program was reasonably successful.
 
upperdeck said:
thats also because Oswego didnt do the math correctly. higher cost of scholies, they needed to decide if they could re-coop that cost, it would not have cost them other sports only if they couldnt come up with that added cost and they needed to also know what the true cost of the scholies is compared to the aid those players already get. D1 msay have allowed better ticket prices at a school that loves hockey and even $5 more would be $3-400,000 more in revenue. its only 18 scholies.. So yeah its a cost but its not millions.
Expand...
I don't think it's just scholarship costs though. To go D1 there is a minimum monetary investment required by the NCAA. At least that's what I was told back then (late '90's) by an instructor that I think had worked in the AD at another school at aome point. Is hockey a revenue sport at other schools?
 
The mantra has been... no students, then no student athletes. If not safe for students, not safe for student athletes...

SOOOOO... What they are doing is leaving it open ended, saying when it's safe they'll return students. Not safe for students BUT athletes stay, because, ya know someday it might be safe for students.

I can see this as a way for the NCAA to back track on their "policy", or put an asterisk that should read "If it's not safe for students(*someday in the future or eventually) , then not safe for student athletes.

They've had 8 positive players (about 10%) Because they live in a group college setting.
 
50,000? Yikes. Also, Texas HS football which had been canceled a few weeks ago will now take place.

 
Geezus you can’t keep extending eligibility. Are we going to have Scholarship rosters of 125 players instead of 85? Or are the current HS kids just SOL. I know that no current HS senior or junior gets a do over.
 
PhatOrange said:
Geezus you can’t keep extending eligibility. Are we going to have Scholarship rosters of 125 players instead of 85? Or are the current HS kids just SOL. I know that no current HS senior or junior gets a do over.
Expand...
HS rising sr's are SOL.(if no season). 2022 HS jr.s? SOL. There's a chance no one will see them play this year. College recruiting will miss out on the rising Sr's, and the board may not exist for Juniors. Colleges will be affected for the later 2021 gets, and then there will be a MAD crazy dash for 2022.

Recruiting will be affected.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
176,081
Messages
5,289,344
Members
6,196
Latest member
NMBCuse

Online statistics

Members online
245
Guests online
4,297
Total visitors
4,542
Totals may include hidden visitors.


P
Top Bottom