(04-17-2020 02:39 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(04-17-2020 01:32 PM)2Buck Wrote:  

(04-17-2020 12:35 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  The way I interpret this is basically these players will have a second redshirt if they've already used one. Much the same as having a medical redshirt, but in this case you will not need an injury shortened season in order to qualify. This does not affect scholarship limitations. There simply will be fewer freshman athletes on a full ride.

That's what seems a little unfair to me. Keeping the cap of number of scholly players is going to cause freshmen to lose a year of covered education. This could really factor into recruiting, programs with lots of returning seniors may have weak classes. IDK, maybe keep the cap on the number of scholly players that can participate but still allow schools to cover the cost of freshmen not playing (like a red shirt).

Guess I might be confused and/or making this more complicated than it is. Programs that had talented seniors will benefit from getting another year vs younger programs, but are freshmen really getting hosed by this?

Some seniors will be hosed, some freshmen will be hosed. When we kept Cardon Johnson around for a sixth year a freshman got hosed. The same for Semenov staying around, a freshman got hosed. We let Justin Thorpe go under the same conditions, this hosed the senior but benefited a freshman.

Apples vs Oranges comparison.

You are comparing a specific situation impacting a single athlete vs a situation impacting every senior and scholarship athlete in the NCAA.

(04-19-2020 12:01 PM)ShadyP Wrote:  

(04-17-2020 02:39 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  

(04-17-2020 01:32 PM)2Buck Wrote:  

(04-17-2020 12:35 PM)BleedingPurple Wrote:  The way I interpret this is basically these players will have a second redshirt if they've already used one. Much the same as having a medical redshirt, but in this case you will not need an injury shortened season in order to qualify. This does not affect scholarship limitations. There simply will be fewer freshman athletes on a full ride.

That's what seems a little unfair to me. Keeping the cap of number of scholly players is going to cause freshmen to lose a year of covered education. This could really factor into recruiting, programs with lots of returning seniors may have weak classes. IDK, maybe keep the cap on the number of scholly players that can participate but still allow schools to cover the cost of freshmen not playing (like a red shirt).

Guess I might be confused and/or making this more complicated than it is. Programs that had talented seniors will benefit from getting another year vs younger programs, but are freshmen really getting hosed by this?

Some seniors will be hosed, some freshmen will be hosed. When we kept Cardon Johnson around for a sixth year a freshman got hosed. The same for Semenov staying around, a freshman got hosed. We let Justin Thorpe go under the same conditions, this hosed the senior but benefited a freshman.

Apples vs Oranges comparison.

You are comparing a specific situation impacting a single athlete vs a situation impacting every senior and scholarship athlete in the NCAA.

Well, bless your heart, I feel so stupid. I grew up on a farm.

Quote:James Madison softball announces that as part of the NCAA's spring sport eligibility relief, Madison Naujokas, Kate Gordon and Odicci Alexander will return for the 2020-21 academic year.

https://jmusports.com/news/2020/5/15/sof...niors.aspx

Wonder if that gets us back in St Pete tourney?

What Seniors are not returning?

I think just Natalie Cutright. The other seniors on roster at the start of the season were Roadcap and Arnold. I think Cambry was injured and might be transferring for her final year. Roadcap was academically ineligible.

I haven’t checked the team website lately and was in for quite a surprise. There has definitely been a shakeup of the roster. If you look at the roster compared to the last two years, there are only two players from the 2019 class remaining and maybe two from the 2018 class still with the team.

Was looking over the current roster. Looks like we have most if not all of the starters back from last years team. Did notice we are decidedly average to below average in the height department compared to the top level teams. This is especially noticeable with our pitchers, who average 5'6". That's a position usually filled w/ the very tall. (the Ford and Goode era for example).

We have 3 players on the team over 5'8" and 6 players under 5'4".
For comparison:
Florida has 5 players over 5'8" and just 1 under 5'4"
Oklahoma has 12 players over 5'8" and 3 under 5'4"
UCLA has 9 players over 5'8" and just 1 under 5'4"

That said, I am very excited to see how our mighty mites perform this year.

(11-26-2020 09:13 PM)olddawg Wrote:  Was looking over the current roster. Looks like we have most if not all of the starters back from last years team. Did notice we are decidedly average to below average in the height department compared to the top level teams. This is especially noticeable with our pitchers, who average 5'6". That's a position usually filled w/ the very tall. (the Ford and Goode era for example).

We have 3 players on the team over 5'8" and 6 players under 5'4".
For comparison:
Florida has 5 players over 5'8" and just 1 under 5'4"
Oklahoma has 12 players over 5'8" and 3 under 5'4"
UCLA has 9 players over 5'8" and just 1 under 5'4"

That said, I am very excited to see how our mighty mites perform this year.

Well, Madison was the shortest Prez.