PonyFans.com

Taking a break from the coach talk -- with the cancellation of the conference tournaments and NCAA Championships, several media wonks have raised the issue of the seniors and players planning to leave after the season on teams across the country, and whether they should be given another season. The presented argument is that while every team but one in the NCAA tournament ends its season with a loss, these outgoing players across the country deserve an extra season.

It's a nice empathetic gesture, but the answer has to be no. There are teams around the country, including both SMU teams, that have no seniors, and giving players around the country an extra fifth (or in some cases, sixth) year offers an advantage that senior-less teams like SMU never could match. Yes, the SMU players on both teams will be older and wiser and stronger, etc., but this move would extend to other teams an edge that teams like the Mustangs could not match.

Thoughts?

Basketball was all but over. Where the question comes into play is with spring sports, such as baseball. With the baseball season and College World Series already cancelled just as it was getting underway, what does that mean to the seniors who were counting on the last year to bump their stock? Same would go for any other spring sports.

Don't forget about all the frosh it screws over with less scholarship opportunities...

To me this is a great "life isn't always fair" moment.
The majority of athletes won't play professionally, anyway. To the seniors out there, well done ... and on to the next chapter.

Sounds like they are going to do it.

https://www.si.com/college/2020/03/13/ncaa-grant-spring-athletes-relief-season-eligibility-coronavirus

The NCAA will grant spring student athletes relief for a season of eligibility after canceling winter and spring championships due to the coronavirus outbreak, officials announced Friday.

"Council leadership agreed that eligibility relief is appropriate for all Division I student-athletes who participated in spring sports," the NCAA said in a statement. "Details of eligibility relief will be finalized at a later time. Additional issues with the NCAA rules must be addressed, and appropriate governance bodies will work through those in the coming days and weeks."

If they give all underclassmen on rosters an additional season of eligibility it would be fair, but it has to be for all underclassmen including current freshmen, sophomores, and juniors. In that case, schools like SMU would be fairly compensated. We may be at a disadvantage this season, but would be at an advantage the following season.

And the NCAA is considering adding winter sports

https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2 ... cancelled/

mustangxc wrote:If they give all underclassmen on rosters an additional season of eligibility it would be fair, but it has to be for all underclassmen including current freshmen, sophomores, and juniors. In that case, schools like SMU would be fairly compensated. We may be at a disadvantage this season, but would be at an advantage the following season.

So we get CJ White, Douglas Williams, and Everett Ray for an extra year.......:and Jankovich!

PonySnob wrote:

mustangxc wrote:If they give all underclassmen on rosters an additional season of eligibility it would be fair, but it has to be for all underclassmen including current freshmen, sophomores, and juniors. In that case, schools like SMU would be fairly compensated. We may be at a disadvantage this season, but would be at an advantage the following season.

So we get CJ White, Douglas Williams, and Everett Ray for an extra year.......:and Jankovich!

Imagine what they’ll be able to do with an extra year of 5 on 5 practice!

mustangxc wrote:If they give all underclassmen on rosters an additional season of eligibility it would be fair, but it has to be for all underclassmen including current freshmen, sophomores, and juniors. In that case, schools like SMU would be fairly compensated. We may be at a disadvantage this season, but would be at an advantage the following season.

That's the problem with doing this, though. It is a perpetual, rolling issue so long as you maintain the four-year-eligibility model.