Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
Author Message
Bookmark and Share
TexasTerror Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 515
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 21
I Root For: SHSU
Location:
Post: #1
Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
Significant news if it gets passed by whatever governing bodies need to do work on this subject to approve.

The student-athletes advisory council is pushing for automatic bids to be granted starting in year #3 of the NCAA transition process. With the WAC having multiple schools at varying steps of the process and potentially more in standby, could be something to follow.

Anyone have more intel?




01-28-2021 02:06 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


TexanFan Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 299
Joined: Apr 2020
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Tarleton
Location:
Post: #2
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
I vote yes to the three year AQ.
(This post was last modified: 01-28-2021 02:11 PM by TexanFan.)
01-28-2021 02:09 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OhioBoilermaker Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 151
Joined: Jan 2021
Reputation: 9
I Root For: Purdue, NMSU
Location:
Post: #3
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
"RISE of the ASUN" is so cringe.
01-28-2021 05:21 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Inkblot Offline
Bench Warmer
*

Posts: 116
Joined: Feb 2019
Reputation: 7
I Root For: Oklahoma State
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
The only reason that postseason ineligibility for reclassifying members is a thing is that they don't want a high volume of schools moving up. It started in the mid-90s for new NCAA members, after NAIA schools were joining by the dozens. For reclassifying members, I'm not quite sure when it started, but I think it was a little later.
01-28-2021 10:44 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


OscarWildeCat Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 331
Joined: Nov 2020
Reputation: 18
I Root For: ACU & UGA
Location:
Post: #5
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
(01-28-2021 10:44 PM)Inkblot Wrote:  The only reason that postseason ineligibility for reclassifying members is a thing is that they don't want a high volume of schools moving up. It started in the mid-90s for new NCAA members, after NAIA schools were joining by the dozens. For reclassifying members, I'm not quite sure when it started, but I think it was a little later.

More than this, the four year transition process is to ensure that all scholarship athletes meet NCAA D1 standards rather than the more flexible and less stringent standards for D2 or NAIA. Four years allows time for scholarship freshmen accepted under the old standards have time to graduate.
01-29-2021 06:27 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OscarWildeCat Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 331
Joined: Nov 2020
Reputation: 18
I Root For: ACU & UGA
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
(01-28-2021 02:09 PM)TexanFan Wrote:  I vote yes to the three year AQ.

The four year requirement is a problem for recruiting. There’s no playoff option as a reward for a good season.
01-29-2021 06:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
NotANewbie Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 461
Joined: May 2013
Reputation: 32
I Root For: Tennesse, NMSU
Location:
Post: #7
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
(01-29-2021 06:27 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-28-2021 10:44 PM)Inkblot Wrote:  The only reason that postseason ineligibility for reclassifying members is a thing is that they don't want a high volume of schools moving up. It started in the mid-90s for new NCAA members, after NAIA schools were joining by the dozens. For reclassifying members, I'm not quite sure when it started, but I think it was a little later.

More than this, the four year transition process is to ensure that all scholarship athletes meet NCAA D1 standards rather than the more flexible and less stringent standards for D2 or NAIA. Four years allows time for scholarship freshmen accepted under the old standards have time to graduate.

Sounds reasonable, but what about the comparison to Prop 48 athletes. With one year of success meeting D1 standards, they are eligible, so why would there be a different requirement for those moving up?

It doesn't seem logical.
01-29-2021 03:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


OscarWildeCat Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 331
Joined: Nov 2020
Reputation: 18
I Root For: ACU & UGA
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
(01-29-2021 03:05 PM)NotANewbie Wrote:  
(01-29-2021 06:27 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-28-2021 10:44 PM)Inkblot Wrote:  The only reason that postseason ineligibility for reclassifying members is a thing is that they don't want a high volume of schools moving up. It started in the mid-90s for new NCAA members, after NAIA schools were joining by the dozens. For reclassifying members, I'm not quite sure when it started, but I think it was a little later.

More than this, the four year transition process is to ensure that all scholarship athletes meet NCAA D1 standards rather than the more flexible and less stringent standards for D2 or NAIA. Four years allows time for scholarship freshmen accepted under the old standards have time to graduate.

Sounds reasonable, but what about the comparison to Prop 48 athletes. With one year of success meeting D1 standards, they are eligible, so why would there be a different requirement for those moving up?

It doesn't seem logical.

Logic and NCAA regulations don’t belong in the same sentence.
01-30-2021 05:45 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Todor Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,289
Joined: Jan 2019
Reputation: 78
I Root For: NMSU
Location:
Post: #9
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
Everyone knows the process going in. It’s not like it’s a big surprise.
01-30-2021 07:08 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OscarWildeCat Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 331
Joined: Nov 2020
Reputation: 18
I Root For: ACU & UGA
Location:
Post: #10
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
(01-30-2021 07:08 AM)Todor Wrote:  Everyone knows the process going in. It’s not like it’s a big surprise.

Sure, and prior to the loosening transfer regulations for student athletes everyone knew the rules before signing Letters of Intent. The point is the NCAA has the authority to affect changes when current regulations aren’t in the best interests of stakeholders.
01-30-2021 08:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Vulpes88 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 407
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 10
I Root For: Tarleton
Location:
Post: #11
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
(01-29-2021 06:27 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-28-2021 10:44 PM)Inkblot Wrote:  The only reason that postseason ineligibility for reclassifying members is a thing is that they don't want a high volume of schools moving up. It started in the mid-90s for new NCAA members, after NAIA schools were joining by the dozens. For reclassifying members, I'm not quite sure when it started, but I think it was a little later.

More than this, the four year transition process is to ensure that all scholarship athletes meet NCAA D1 standards rather than the more flexible and less stringent standards for D2 or NAIA. Four years allows time for scholarship freshmen accepted under the old standards have time to graduate.

Why not just require freshmen accepted under the old standards to meet new requirement or be ineligible until they meet the D1 academic requirements?
01-30-2021 10:40 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OscarWildeCat Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 331
Joined: Nov 2020
Reputation: 18
I Root For: ACU & UGA
Location:
Post: #12
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
(01-30-2021 10:40 AM)Vulpes88 Wrote:  
(01-29-2021 06:27 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-28-2021 10:44 PM)Inkblot Wrote:  The only reason that postseason ineligibility for reclassifying members is a thing is that they don't want a high volume of schools moving up. It started in the mid-90s for new NCAA members, after NAIA schools were joining by the dozens. For reclassifying members, I'm not quite sure when it started, but I think it was a little later.

More than this, the four year transition process is to ensure that all scholarship athletes meet NCAA D1 standards rather than the more flexible and less stringent standards for D2 or NAIA. Four years allows time for scholarship freshmen accepted under the old standards have time to graduate.

Why not just require freshmen accepted under the old standards to meet new requirement or be ineligible until they meet the D1 academic requirements?

I think it was an attempt not to punish student athletes for actions taken by their school? Otherwise, I don’t know.

I do know it makes it hard for a school to recruit in equal terms while in transition since recruits are very aware there are no championships or playoffs in their future. I’m all for reducing the time frame to three years.
01-30-2021 11:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
AZcats Offline
1st String
*

Posts: 1,285
Joined: Dec 2014
Reputation: 96
I Root For: stAte, af, zona
Location: Pike's Peak
Post: #13
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
(01-30-2021 11:31 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-30-2021 10:40 AM)Vulpes88 Wrote:  
(01-29-2021 06:27 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-28-2021 10:44 PM)Inkblot Wrote:  The only reason that postseason ineligibility for reclassifying members is a thing is that they don't want a high volume of schools moving up. It started in the mid-90s for new NCAA members, after NAIA schools were joining by the dozens. For reclassifying members, I'm not quite sure when it started, but I think it was a little later.

More than this, the four year transition process is to ensure that all scholarship athletes meet NCAA D1 standards rather than the more flexible and less stringent standards for D2 or NAIA. Four years allows time for scholarship freshmen accepted under the old standards have time to graduate.

Why not just require freshmen accepted under the old standards to meet new requirement or be ineligible until they meet the D1 academic requirements?

I think it was an attempt not to punish student athletes for actions taken by their school? Otherwise, I don’t know.

I do know it makes it hard for a school to recruit in equal terms while in transition since recruits are very aware there are no championships or playoffs in their future. I’m all for reducing the time frame to three years.

It's a three year transition period for everyone moving to D2 except a D1-to-D2 move. A D1 moving to D2 is only a two year transition.
01-30-2021 12:12 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Vulpes88 Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 407
Joined: Dec 2019
Reputation: 10
I Root For: Tarleton
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Could Transition Process Be Expedited? Proposal on Table
(01-30-2021 11:31 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-30-2021 10:40 AM)Vulpes88 Wrote:  
(01-29-2021 06:27 AM)OscarWildeCat Wrote:  
(01-28-2021 10:44 PM)Inkblot Wrote:  The only reason that postseason ineligibility for reclassifying members is a thing is that they don't want a high volume of schools moving up. It started in the mid-90s for new NCAA members, after NAIA schools were joining by the dozens. For reclassifying members, I'm not quite sure when it started, but I think it was a little later.

More than this, the four year transition process is to ensure that all scholarship athletes meet NCAA D1 standards rather than the more flexible and less stringent standards for D2 or NAIA. Four years allows time for scholarship freshmen accepted under the old standards have time to graduate.

Why not just require freshmen accepted under the old standards to meet new requirement or be ineligible until they meet the D1 academic requirements?

I think it was an attempt not to punish student athletes for actions taken by their school? Otherwise, I don’t know.

I do know it makes it hard for a school to recruit in equal terms while in transition since recruits are very aware there are no championships or playoffs in their future. I’m all for reducing the time frame to three years.

Seems like if it were to not punish student athletes They could have done something better.

Definitely agree on recruiting being hindered.07-coffee3
01-30-2021 02:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2021 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2021 MyBB Group.