You may be correct, but I am not buying the fact they want to change a process due to the administrative work that in entails.
|
That's actually one of the main reasons legislation gets through. That's why minors can now count toward eligibility. They just got sick of getting waiver after waiver after waiver. If you're always granting waivers, then why have the rule? This also isn't really coming from the schools. And, you later say that it's about big
[quoteThey claim "student-athlete" and academics when we all know the big business behind it. So for me to assume that a pretty big change with the way athletes are handled by the NCAA makes me pause.[/quote]
I can understand that, but while pausing do you ever think about how the pretty big change is making the revenue sports MORE like the non-revenue sports when it comes to what the rules are for transfers?
I really don't care what they do. I know everyone is going to find a doomsday scenario with virtually every change the NCAA makes. In reality, I just don't think this matters all that much. If it were up to me, the rule would be 2.6 across the board for all sports. If you're at or above it you don't have to do a year in residency. If you're below it, then you do. But, I don't really feel strongly enough about it to really care what they do. Either way, a kid is getting to play for four seasons. If they were to take a season away, then I'd have an issue. If they were to add a fifth season, then I'd have an issue. That's not what they're doing, so I really don't care and I really don't think it matters, especially for sports where the majority of players fail to meet the requirements for not having to sit out a year anyway.
