|
Post by elonfirefighter on Apr 30, 2007 12:55:09 GMT -5
The NCAA fascists are about to make some drastic changes in the men's baseball rules. The 11.7 grants remains in place, but the minimum grant will be a 1/3 scholarship with a maximum of 28 recipients. There will be a one year sit-out for all transfers after the '08 season. I did not see any reference to in-state v. out of state in determining the split up as per the government schools. If anyone has any additional data, please share it.
|
|
|
Post by elon_phan on Apr 30, 2007 16:16:23 GMT -5
What was the minimum grant previously?
Any chance this could help conferences like the SoCon if it makes it more difficult for the top conferences to stockpile talent?
|
|
|
Post by elonfirefighter on Apr 30, 2007 20:46:45 GMT -5
im not sure what it is right now, im thinking there is no cap. yea this should prevent transfers from jumping ship and stock piling of talent
|
|
|
Post by elon_phan on May 2, 2007 22:03:52 GMT -5
Rules Changes Could Kill College Baseball COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) -- Clemson coach Jack Leggett couldn't believe the bind new NCAA guidelines have him in. His Tigers couldn't either.
Leggett explained how recently passed rules guaranteeing no less than one-third of a scholarship to no more than 27 players meant the longtime coach would have to choose between funding loyal returnee or highly regarded prospects.
"'What? Are you serious?"' was their reaction, Leggett recounted Tuesday.
"In my heart and soul, I feel like I'd place my self in a position where I'd have to be unethical" in forcing someone to transfer "or unfair to someone dying to come to Clemson who wants an opportunity," Leggett said.
Leggett and other college baseball coaches are figuring out how best to handle legislation approved last week by the NCAA Division I Board of Directors.
The Baseball Academic Enhancement Working Group put forth its proposals to shore up what it considered slow progress toward degrees among college baseball players at some NCAA institutions. It recommended a one-year waiting period for transfers, similar to football and basketball rules; making sure athletes were eligible academically in the fall instead of using that time to improve grades before spring; and establishing penalties where schools who fall below a four-year average of 900 on the NCAA's Academic Progress Rate scale would play fewer games.
Leggett said he could live with all those proposals. The one he vehemently disagrees with is locking in minimum scholarship levels and capping how many baseball players receive funds.
"That's very tough to swallow," Leggett said. The new rules would start Aug. 1, 2008. College baseball has long been a balancing act for coaches, charged with bringing in pro-caliber talent with a limit of 11.7 scholarships for a roster that can approach 40 players. Leggett said past Tiger stars like Khalil Greene, Jeff Baker, Michael Johnson and Tyler Colvin all excelled with just a quarter-scholarship or less, ensuring Leggett could spread available funds throughout his team.
South Carolina coach Ray Tanner remembered one of his most difficult moments in recruiting future first-round Major League Baseball draft pick, Drew Meyer -- telling the shortstop and his parents that he'd only get a partial scholarship so the team could attract other talented players. "You manage your money and you do the best you can," Tanner said. "Now, that's being changed a lot and I think it's going to hurt our game."
Tanner also took exception with the NCAA rules forcing players to sit out a year if he wanted to transfer.
Baseball players generally seek other opportunities because they're not playing as much as they'd hoped, Tanner said. "I'm OK with that," he said. "This is America."
John Pawlowski, coach of the College of Charleston, said mid-major programs like his could gain better footing initially with top-level prospects uncertain of playing time with bigger NCAA teams. "On the front end, it's going to help us," he said.
But Pawlowski thought once a player enrolled at a major school, it was less likely he would choose to leave and sit out a year at a mid-major.
Tanner said he hasn't talked with any baseball coaches in favor of new rules. He knew it would be a contentious issue back in March when his phone rang with a call from Leggett, his chief state rival, while Tanner was at a St. Patrick's Day Parade with his family. "It was nine in the morning and he was fired up," Tanner said, smiling.
Leggett, in his 14th season as Clemson's coach, rarely inserts himself in controversy, preferring to outwork opponents and let his team's play shine through. This time, though, Leggett hopes he and other coaches get their opinions heard before the rules take affect.
Current Academic Progress Rate guidelines will work over time, he said.
"You've got so many coaches and so many programs doing the right thing," Leggett said. "I just hate to see an overreaction to try and bring everybody down to a different level and college baseball is in really great shape."
|
|
|
Post by firebird on May 3, 2007 19:55:03 GMT -5
The word is that we will also be growing from 11.7 to 13 & change allowed scholarships. Not that it helps us... we only have funding of 7.8 or something like that right now.
|
|
|
Post by elon_phan on May 3, 2007 21:09:46 GMT -5
The word is that we will also be growing from 11.7 to 13 & change allowed scholarships. Not that it helps us... we only have funding of 7.8 or something like that right now. What do you mean by "change allowed scholarships"?
|
|
|
Post by firebird on May 4, 2007 7:49:10 GMT -5
I'm a novice at this, so don't shoot me if I get it wrong. My understanding of the scholarship situation is that the NCAA allows division I schools to provide 11.7 scholarships for deserving/eligable players. I have heard from someone who I'm sure knows better than I that the NCAA may be uping that to 13+.
|
|
|
Post by firebird on May 4, 2007 11:27:53 GMT -5
I see what you're asking EP. What I meant was thirteen and change. Meaning more than thirteen but less than fourteen. Looking at this again the way I wrote it really does look confusing. Hope this clears things up.
|
|
|
Post by elon_phan on May 6, 2007 20:37:28 GMT -5
I see what you're asking EP. What I meant was thirteen and change. Meaning more than thirteen but less than fourteen. Looking at this again the way I wrote it really does look confusing. Hope this clears things up. Thanks - I just read it incorrectly.
|
|