Can NCAA fix players quitting and self red shirting?

[18IsTheMan]

Seems like this is something that is going to increase in frequency. It’s bad enough that coaches have little control over their roster from year to year, but now they are losing control of the roster DURING the season.

There should be a rule that if a player is on the roster to start the season then they are committed. If a player chooses to quit the team midseason, they don’t get to keep their redshirt.

 

[KingWard]

Contracts with clauses.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

Contracts with clauses.

Same for free agency transfers

 

[Gamecock72]

Only with a CBA.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Only with a CBA.

I don't think there's any reason it would take a CBA. Obviously, that's where we are heading, but there's no reason the NCAA can't make a rule in the mean time.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

I don't think there's any reason it would take a CBA. Obviously, that's where we are heading, but there's no reason the NCAA can't make a rule in the mean time.

They could/should make a lot of rules but seem to only have a few strange favorites which took quite some time to address.
This fake injury thing really needs to be addressed quickly - it's getting way out of hand and spreading rapidly.

 

[Piscis]

I don't think the NCAA can but I know the NIL collectives can. Put a clause in the NIL contracts that quitting/redshirting/claiming injury when the medical staff says a player is good to play voids the agreement and the player owes money paid back to the NIL on a pro rata basis based on games played.

 

[Yard_Pimps]

I don't think there's any reason it would take a CBA. Obviously, that's where we are heading, but there's no reason the NCAA can't make a rule in the mean time.

There are many reasons it will take a CBA. For one without the NFL CBA they also would be operating illegally. This only gets better with a CBA any other way and the players will challenge and win in court.

 

[Benjdan]

The only way to stop it is pull scholarships. Give the scholarship to a walk on that is actually participating in team activities. This isn’t a free ride.

 

[Baltcock96]

Seems like this is something that is going to increase in frequency. It’s bad enough that coaches have little control over their roster from year to year, but now they are losing control of the roster DURING the season.

There should be a rule that if a player is on the roster to start the season then they are committed. If a player chooses to quit the team midseason, they don’t get to keep their redshirt.

Nope. Look beyond D1 to D3. D3 atheletes are non scholarship atheletes. There are a myriad of reasons to leave a team. Especially at the lower levels where you can find some peculiar circumstances.

 

[18IsTheMan]

There are many reasons it will take a CBA. For one without the NFL CBA they also would be operating illegally. This only gets better with a CBA any other way and the players will challenge and win in court.

I can't think of any reasons it would take a CBA. I understand a CBA is where we are heading, but there's not reason it would take one to make this simple rule.

 

[92Pony]

I think one thing the NCAA has proven, is that it can't fix ANYTHING. So, the answer to your question is, "No".

 

[Yard_Pimps]

I can't think of any reasons it would take a CBA. I understand a CBA is where we are heading, but there's not reason it would take one to make this simple rule.

Other than the courts have proven the NCAA doesn’t have the power to make it harder to move from one school to another or take playing time away. Which is what you are wanting to do.

 

[18IsTheMan]

Other than the courts have proven the NCAA doesn’t have the power to make it harder to move from one school to another or take playing time away. Which is what you are wanting to do.

Not at all. They can quit and walk away midseason. Easy peasy. Just can't keep their redshirt.

This is pure common sense, which is probably the biggest obstacle to implementing it.

 

[Greer]

Seems like this is something that is going to increase in frequency. It’s bad enough that coaches have little control over their roster from year to year, but now they are losing control of the roster DURING the season.

There should be a rule that if a player is on the roster to start the season then they are committed. If a player chooses to quit the team midseason, they don’t get to keep their redshirt.

You can drop a class and retake it can't you?

 

[Greer]

I don't think there's any reason it would take a CBA. Obviously, that's where we are heading, but there's no reason the NCAA can't make a rule in the mean time.

I think the NCAA is powerless. It is a matter of time until football re-organizes.

 

[Gamecock72]

I don't think there's any reason it would take a CBA. Obviously, that's where we are heading, but there's no reason the NCAA can't make a rule in the mean time.

With a CBA, they can fix a lot of what is wrong and have set in stone enforceable rules for everyone. A CBA is what is best for college sports in my opinion with how everything is now. Without it, they can't have any limits on NIL and are very limited on transfer rules. A CBA is the best way to satisfy the SCOTUS ruling.

 

[Piscis]

With a CBA, they can fix a lot of what is wrong and have set in stone enforceable rules for everyone. A CBA is what is best for college sports in my opinion with how everything is now. Without it, they can't have any limits on NIL and are very limited on transfer rules. A CBA is the best way to satisfy the SCOTUS ruling.

A CBA pretty much presupposes a union and unions generally destroy whatever industry they become entrenched in. A union full of hyper emotional super ego 18-22 year olds would be a disaster. Academic requirements and probably enrollment in school would be the first casualties of a college football player union. The football teams would be nothing more than a private business with naming rights from colleges.

I, for one, would not watch a minute of college football played by union employees.

 

[PrestonyteParrot]

A CBA pretty much presupposes a union and unions generally destroy whatever industry they become entrenched in. A union full of hyper emotional super ego 18-22 year olds would be a disaster. Academic requirements and probably enrollment in school would be the first casualties of a college football player union. The football teams would be nothing more than a private business with naming rights from colleges.

I, for one, would not watch a minute of college football played by union employees.

Exactly. If I wanted to watch professional football I would be watching the NFL, which I despise.

 

[Piscis]

Exactly. If I wanted to watch professional football I would be watching the NFL, which I despise.

I have zero interest in watching the football equivalent of AA/AAA baseball. I'd rather all the P4, G5, whatever class college football teams go the Ivy league route and have no scholarships and only field teams made up of players who had to be admitted to the school through regular admission channels before they could join the football team.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

I think the NCAA is powerless. It is a matter of time until football re-organizes.

They are thanks to the SCOTUS ruling on NIL.

 

[KingWard]

They are thanks to the SCOTUS ruling on NIL.

I think they could still play an enforcement role regarding academic obligations attached to playing for a college as a student, and that would be worthwhile, as far as it goes. Perhaps they ought to refine that and stick to that.

 

[USCBatgirl21]

I think they could still play an enforcement role regarding academic obligations attached to playing for a college as a student, and that would be worthwhile, as far as it goes. Perhaps they ought to refine that and stick to that.

They still have the usual academic rules. Those were not affected by the NIL ruling. But they can’t attach said rules to NIL.

 

[KingWard]

They still have the usual academic rules. Those were not affected by the NIL ruling. But they can’t attach said rules to NIL.

They need to maximize the leverage they have lest every semblance of the student-athlete paradigm be lost forever.

 

[Piscis]

They still have the usual academic rules. Those were not affected by the NIL ruling. But they can’t attach said rules to NIL.

They can in a de facto sense. If a player doesn't meet the academic requirements they are not eligible to play college football and therefore cannot receive NIL payments.

 

[gamecox4982]

I would do it ever play until the SEC made a rule to stop it.

 

[Gamecock72]

A CBA pretty much presupposes a union and unions generally destroy whatever industry they become entrenched in. A union full of hyper emotional super ego 18-22 year olds would be a disaster. Academic requirements and probably enrollment in school would be the first casualties of a college football player union. The football teams would be nothing more than a private business with naming rights from colleges.

I, for one, would not watch a minute of college football played by union employees.

So how would you fix things and still not go against the SCOTUS ruling?

And I would argue that unions have mostly been great for professional sports. Sure there have been some ugly moments here and there, but I do believe they had merit and in the end came out better for it.

 

[Gamecock72]

I think they could still play an enforcement role regarding academic obligations attached to playing for a college as a student, and that would be worthwhile, as far as it goes. Perhaps they ought to refine that and stick to that.

The only issue is that the Supreme Court said that non-monetary things were considered benefits, not compensation. So, I see no way you could do that and still be compliant with the Supreme Court.

 

[KingWard]

The only issue is that the Supreme Court said that non-monetary things were considered benefits, not compensation. So, I see no way you could do that and still be compliant with the Supreme Court.

Uh, I think I'd like our resident legal experts to weigh in on this, for the sake of clarification. @Rogue Cock

 

[Rogue Cock]

Uh, I think I'd like our resident legal experts to weigh in on this, for the sake of clarification. @Rogue Cock

Weigh in on what exactly? Several issues were brought up in my quick perusal of the thread.

 

[Yard_Pimps]

They can in a de facto sense. If a player doesn't meet the academic requirements they are not eligible to play college football and therefore cannot receive NIL payments.

Don’t buy that, any individual in the UsA can receive NIl. Now the question would be why would an entity or person pay. It they are absolutely eligible

 

[Rogue Cock]

I think they could still play an enforcement role regarding academic obligations attached to playing for a college as a student, and that would be worthwhile, as far as it goes. Perhaps they ought to refine that and stick to that.

The moment they enroll for classes the scholarship is theirs and can not be removed or limited for that term.

 

[Rogue Cock]

So how would you fix things and still not go against the SCOTUS ruling?

And I would argue that unions have mostly been great for professional sports. Sure there have been some ugly moments here and there, but I do believe they had merit and in the end came out better for it.

NFL unions work well because players are employees. Right now student-athletes are not employees thus no unions or CBAs. With a couple of cases going through the courts that could change and all hell will break through.

 

[Rogue Cock]

The only way to stop it is pull scholarships. Give the scholarship to a walk on that is actually participating in team activities. This isn’t a free ride.

Can’t pull a scholarship once they are enrolled for that term.

 

[Rogue Cock]

I don't think the NCAA can but I know the NIL collectives can. Put a clause in the NIL contracts that quitting/redshirting/claiming injury when the medical staff says a player is good to play voids the agreement and the player owes money paid back to the NIL on a pro rata basis based on games played.

That would be pay-to-play. Not allowed currently. Collectives are structuring the payment structure for NILs and are paying the athlete based on the completion of the NIL requirements, one of which can not be pay-to-play.

 

[Rogue Cock]

Same for free agency transfers

Federal court cases in Tennessee and Virginia got rid of the one free transfer rule imposed by the NCAA.

 

[Rogue Cock]

Seems like this is something that is going to increase in frequency. It’s bad enough that coaches have little control over their roster from year to year, but now they are losing control of the roster DURING the season.

There should be a rule that if a player is on the roster to start the season then they are committed. If a player chooses to quit the team midseason, they don’t get to keep their redshirt.

Can’t force someone to play or to work….that would be involuntary servitude. You can kick them off the team as we did last year or the year before.

 

[KingWard]

Uh, I think I'd like our resident legal experts to weigh in on this, for the sake of clarification. @Rogue Cock

I was inquiring as to the NCAA's ability to enforce academic requisites for receiving athletic scholarships and remaining eligible to play. As I said above: "I think they could still play an enforcement role regarding academic obligations attached to playing for a college as a student, and that would be worthwhile, as far as it goes. Perhaps they ought to refine that and stick to that."

 

[Gamecock72]

NFL unions work well because players are employees. Right now student-athletes are not employees thus no unions or CBAs. With a couple of cases going through the courts that could change and all hell will break through.

And I think that should change. Besides, they will be getting paid directly from the schools starting next season as a result from that settlement with the NCAA

 

[Piscis]

Don’t buy that, any individual in the UsA can receive NIl. Now the question would be why would an entity or person pay. It they are absolutely eligible

Yes, anyone can receive NIL money if someone wants to pay them but why would an NIL collective give money to a person who is not eligible to play? The NCAA could establish academic requirements and all of its members could agree to abide by them. There is no constitutional right to play college football and, at least at the moment, college football players have to be enrolled as students at the school they play for. The NCAA can set the rules as to what academic/admission requirements players must meet to be enrolled as a student.