Welcome to Discuss Fastpitch

Your FREE Account is waiting to the Best Softball Community on the Web.

Register Log in

Giving seniors an additional year not gonna be easy

May 6, 2015
1,381
83
How does this work for H.S. seniors that signed there NLI? Is the NLI an official contract that cannot be broken? Is there a contract that states how much money incoming the incoming freshman was guaranteed to receive?

Then you have the current college seniors. I thought their scholarships in P5 conference were relatively guaranteed and the college is not allowed to decrease their current scholarship money. I have a lot of questions and no answers. This just seems like it will be a mess.

The decision to give an extra year of eligibility does not affect my daughter, she is too young. Just trying to understand the money side of this decision.
all atheltic scholarships are year to year, coach/school can pull them or reduce from one year to the next at any time. calaslimey (KY BB) did this to several returning players a couple of years ago to make room for incoming frosh (he expects most of his kids to declare early, and if they dont, they risk this).
 
May 6, 2015
1,381
83
Now For each year they will be paying an additional scholarship to an already existing athlete for 4 years!
only if they choose to, they can decide not to offer any money, reduced money, same money, etc. this commits no money from any school to any athlete. most will probably offer the fifth year seniors greatly reduced or no money.
 
Apr 23, 2014
298
28
East Jabib
Maybe coaches relatively new to a team may use this opportunity to reduce scholarships to student athletes on the roster that they did not recruit and wouldn’t have recruited. The transfer portal is going to blow up.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Apr 28, 2014
1,549
83
This is where the integrity of the staff your daughter plays for becomes significantly important. We were told to shoot higher and take your time. The staff at DDs future home are high integrity and trustworthy. She's fortunate to have them as future coaches.
 
Nov 18, 2013
1,821
83
all atheltic scholarships are year to year, coach/school can pull them or reduce from one year to the next at any time. calaslimey (KY BB) did this to several returning players a couple of years ago to make room for incoming frosh (he expects most of his kids to declare early, and if they dont, they risk this).
P5 athletic scholarships are guaranteed for four years. A coach can tell a kid they won’t ever see the field, but they can’t pull their money.

Any increases in a students athletic scholarship are year to year.
 

RADcatcher

Possibilities & Opportunities!
Dec 13, 2019
886
63
California
only if they choose to, they can decide not to offer any money, reduced money, same money, etc. this commits no money from any school to any athlete. most will probably offer the fifth year seniors greatly reduced or no money.
My Post was pointing out extended eligibilty applys to all classes. And that their original budget was intended for 4 years per player not 5 years.
Topic was programs original budgets. ;)

Remember players can transfer whenever they want.

Colleges recruiting from colleges.....hmmmmm?
 
Aug 19, 2012
27
3
Thanks to Marriard and Orange Socks for moving me back a little from the edge.
Still feel this should have been limited to seniors only but perhaps that wouldn't have been possible.
We all lost stuff as a result of this pandemic, dragging it out to extend that loss across four years seems to just extend the hurt.
 
Mar 10, 2020
134
28
Well back on my soapbox:

This is what happens when you have the world's stupidest sports system run in the dumbest possible way.
Literally, nowhere else in the world is this discussion happening because you play until you want to stop in the club system. Age, higher education - none of that matters. In most cases, even skill level doesn't matter - if you want to play there is a place for you. Overseas this is just an interruption in play - and nothing more.

That a sport can be taken from you forever at 22-24 years of age even if you want to keep playing - that is a disgrace that people don't talk about anywhere near enough.

Off my soapbox:

There is no fair solution that was going to make everyone happy. Like most NCAA eligibility decisions, this one is stupid - but it is not as stupid as most. I am glad they fell on the side of giving players a chance to play longer rather than less.

Frankly, this was a unique opportunity and chance for the NCAA to totally revamp eligibility and a bunch of other stuff they could have reset all at once. Everything has already been totally interrupted - this is a great time to move on things; For example, I have seen a proposal that would have set eligibility to 6 years: 4 years undergrad and you could get 2 additional years if you graduated on time and entered into a grad program - good idea? Who knows but they are missing the opportunity to do a huge reset here.

There is good news though for the incoming players if the NCAA does nothing more:

As I have written before, in general, upperclass players make up a smaller % of rosters. It is not spread out 25% per class. Attrition, injuries, quitting, etc - most senior nights are rarely 4 players or more and more often only are 1 or 2 players (exceptions apply of course). Then some won't want to play or do an extra year, so the numbers of players we are talking about will go down further.

And then if they need/want to do grad school, that may well be a highly education-based decision so some are going to end up at schools where they can't play due to level of play or lack of time or other factors. And if the schools make it financially difficult for the fifth year that is going to add to that.

In the end - your kid is going to have to compete just a little bit harder if a player stays an extra year or if a grad transfer turns up with their extra year of eligibility. That isn't the worse thing in the world. An extra player or two might drop out a little earlier than they might of (freshman attrition before they even step on the field is high - and also high after one season). Some coaches will love the one-year rental transfer model - some won't.
Sounds like you were trying to find a comfortable compromise by making sense of the numbers. I did same number crunch looking at recruitment end. Small number per school impacts two things.
If each program has one returning 5th year senior on scholarship. That is one roster spot closed. One scholarship less.
Colleges generally have 1 to 4 recruits per year. At the lower end thats 25 percent less opportunity per program across the board.
Agree your numbers could be very close to accurate.
Small impact is debatable.
 
Dec 2, 2013
1,148
83
Texas
Sounds like you were trying to find a comfortable compromise by making sense of the numbers. I did same number crunch looking at recruitment end. Small number per school impacts two things.
If each program has one returning 5th year senior on scholarship. That is one roster spot closed. One scholarship less.
Colleges generally have 1 to 4 recruits per year. At the lower end thats 25 percent less opportunity per program across the board.
Agree your numbers could be very close to accurate.
Small impact is debatable.
You are assuming that Senior was using a full scholarship which is highly doubtful unless the player is a true phenom and then that would apply to top 20 teams.

1 to 4 recruits a year??? Did you mean to say 1 to 4 Seniors? I f you really mean to recruits, that is WAY off. I would say a VERY minimum of 5 recruits per freshman class. One team that I can think of had 14 freshman and 3 transfers. No lie. The freshman class is always the largest class. There is so much attrition year to year in college softball or various reasons that they have to have large recruiting classes. If a coach only brought in 1 freshman recruit, they would not be around next year.
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
35,884
Messages
537,356
Members
16,749
Latest member
lisaeiland
Top