|
|
Post by kersting13 on Jan 31, 2017 22:02:47 GMT -8
So does that mean Adley Rutschman's baseball scholarship is now a football scholarship? For all four years? Even if he decides to just do baseball only? How can Pat Casey use that scholarship now? Add it to the next class? I do not fully know the series of events specific to Rutschman but it goes down like this. If you have a scholarship in another sport (even partial) and opt to participate in football, and engage in competition, your scholarship must now be carried by football for that eligible season. If you never had a scholarship in a sport (say he walked on to the baseball team) and then went to football, there is no issue. He was never offered a scholarship anywhere. That would release the scholarship for use again, BUT when it can be used depends on the eligible period. Because football precedes baseball it is likely Casey could use an abandoned scholarship that coming season. Because football must take the scholarship, you don't see a ton of cross over athletes anymore. It isn't just that sports are so specialized and full year commitments now, it is also that football has to be okay with using a scholarship on you. This bylaw was in response to a scandal. I want to say it was Oklahoma, but I can't remember the detail. but basically they were using Wrestling team scholarships for football players. The students primarily were football players and barely (if at all) competed on the wrestling team. Other teams historically did the same thing with Track scholarships. It was giving many schools more like 90-95 scholarship players in reality. Teams doing this were never sanctioned of course, as it was simply a loophole. not illegal practice. Comically, football players are free to compete in any other sport they want with no consequence (other than time, energy, coach scorn etc). Oregon State used this to its advantage in trying to rebuild a Track presence. Having Wheaton, James Rodgers and others run in track meets on behalf of Oregon State. It is also true that unlike the COMPLETE BS Baseba1111 was peddling on page one of this thread, football players cannot be on "excellent academic rides/grants/minority schollies". Again, this is to avoid football teams being able to hand out 85 football scholarships while having their "walk-ons" on full-ride academic scholarships. It will be interesting to see if he attempts to continue to defend this 100% incorrect statement while excusing the rest of us for our ignorance. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Jan 31, 2017 22:38:30 GMT -8
I do not fully know the series of events specific to Rutschman but it goes down like this. If you have a scholarship in another sport (even partial) and opt to participate in football, and engage in competition, your scholarship must now be carried by football for that eligible season. If you never had a scholarship in a sport (say he walked on to the baseball team) and then went to football, there is no issue. He was never offered a scholarship anywhere. That would release the scholarship for use again, BUT when it can be used depends on the eligible period. Because football precedes baseball it is likely Casey could use an abandoned scholarship that coming season. Because football must take the scholarship, you don't see a ton of cross over athletes anymore. It isn't just that sports are so specialized and full year commitments now, it is also that football has to be okay with using a scholarship on you. This bylaw was in response to a scandal. I want to say it was Oklahoma, but I can't remember the detail. but basically they were using Wrestling team scholarships for football players. The students primarily were football players and barely (if at all) competed on the wrestling team. Other teams historically did the same thing with Track scholarships. It was giving many schools more like 90-95 scholarship players in reality. Teams doing this were never sanctioned of course, as it was simply a loophole. not illegal practice. Comically, football players are free to compete in any other sport they want with no consequence (other than time, energy, coach scorn etc). Oregon State used this to its advantage in trying to rebuild a Track presence. Having Wheaton, James Rodgers and others run in track meets on behalf of Oregon State. It is also true that unlike the COMPLETE BS Baseba1111 was peddling on page one of this thread, football players cannot be on "excellent academic rides/grants/minority schollies". Again, this is to avoid football teams being able to hand out 85 football scholarships while having their "walk-ons" on full-ride academic scholarships. It will be interesting to see if he attempts to continue to defend this 100% incorrect statement while excusing the rest of us for our ignorance. Just your blatantly farcical comments... no one else! A football player can attend school under any schollie he qualified for... including academic grants, minority student aide and academic assistance, student work programs, etc. The NCAA has ZERO control over institutional grants and schollies. The school and academic departments review academic qualifications and need not the football staff. There's the checks and balances. You don't think walk-ons can qualify for academic monies? The comparison of those to using other athletic schollies for athletes in another sport is apples to.... meatloaf! You realize other sports can give partial schollies? There are baseballers at OSU right now receiving $ from other areas along with a .33 ride. I don't need to talk out my arse on this topic... have had multiple former players play D1 sports, both nephews, and my kids. There are lots of "legit" ways college athletes at the D1 level get $. In fact kids on full rides are more stifled in that regard than walk-ons or partial schollie sports. |
|
beaver94
Sophomore
Posts: 1,632 
Member is Online
|
Post by beaver94 on Jan 31, 2017 22:52:54 GMT -8
The tiny bit of research I just did makes it sound like there a fine line between being able to receive academic monies for walk-ons. If the player is considered "recruited" by the school academic aid would count against the football or basketball scholarship count. Being recruited was based on three things:
A coach has in-person contact with the prospect off-campus;
The prospect takes an official visit to the campus; or
The school sent the prospect a National Letter of Intent or other written athletic scholarship offer.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Jan 31, 2017 23:27:38 GMT -8
The tiny bit of research I just did makes it sound like there a fine line between being able to receive academic monies for walk-ons. If the player is considered "recruited" by the school academic aid would count against the football or basketball scholarship count. Being recruited was based on three things: A coach has in-person contact with the prospect off-campus; The prospect takes an official visit to the campus; or The school sent the prospect a National Letter of Intent or other written athletic scholarship offer. Exactly... if walk-ons only get phone calls, take unofficials on their own dime, and obviously do not sign NLI they can get all the "school $" they can qualify for. In my experience thats how any walk-ons have it explained early on so they understand in-person contact can only be on campus. Rules differ... maybe even more different in the last 5 years... for sports that offer partials. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Jan 31, 2017 23:35:15 GMT -8
Not going to beat a deadhorse when I know something about it, but here is a short paste from the NCAA info packet my nephew received a couple years back:
"Full scholarships cover tuition and fees, room, board and course-related books. Most student-athletes who receive athletics scholarships receive an amount covering a portion of these costs. Many student-athletes also benefit from academic scholarships, NCAA financial aid programs such as the NCAA Division I Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund and need-based aid such as Federal Pell Grants."
|
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Feb 1, 2017 0:36:08 GMT -8
Sorry, Baseba1111, but you specifically called out 3 and 4* prospects getting non-athletic scholarships as not counting against the 85.
Just because an athlete can get both an athletic scholarship AND an academic scholarship AND Federal Pell Grants DOES NOT MEAN HE DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST THE FOOTBALL TEAM SCHOLARSHIP LIMIT. That's what we're talking about here.
Don't you think you would have heard about ONE single feel-good walk-on story about a football player who came to school on academic scholarship and is now a major contributor to the football team, but doesn't count against the limit?
Don't you think there would have been ONE single story in the Oregonian or Portland Tribune about the kid on academic scholarship who doesn't count against the 85 and how helpful that is to the team to have basically more than the limit?
Don't you think there would have been ONE single article in Sports Illustrated or another magazine looking into how School X has 85 guys on football scholarship and another 10 on sketchy 'academic' scholarships and it puts them at an advantage over other teams?
Just as you were totally off-base claiming a player could be on a separate athletic team's scholarship while also playing football, you are also off-base on this one as well.
|
|
beaver94
Sophomore
Posts: 1,632
Member is Online
|
Post by beaver94 on Feb 1, 2017 0:51:09 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Feb 1, 2017 9:30:52 GMT -8
This thread is just "grate."  |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Feb 1, 2017 10:28:09 GMT -8
It is also true that unlike the COMPLETE BS Baseba1111 was peddling on page one of this thread, football players cannot be on "excellent academic rides/grants/minority schollies". Again, this is to avoid football teams being able to hand out 85 football scholarships while having their "walk-ons" on full-ride academic scholarships. It will be interesting to see if he attempts to continue to defend this 100% incorrect statement while excusing the rest of us for our ignorance. Just your blatantly farcical comments... no one else! A football player can attend school under any schollie he qualified for... including academic grants, minority student aide and academic assistance, student work programs, etc. The NCAA has ZERO control over institutional grants and schollies. The school and academic departments review academic qualifications and need not the football staff. There's the checks and balances. You don't think walk-ons can qualify for academic monies? The comparison of those to using other athletic schollies for athletes in another sport is apples to.... meatloaf! You realize other sports can give partial schollies? There are baseballers at OSU right now receiving $ from other areas along with a .33 ride. I don't need to talk out my arse on this topic... have had multiple former players play D1 sports, both nephews, and my kids. There are lots of "legit" ways college athletes at the D1 level get $. In fact kids on full rides are more stifled in that regard than walk-ons or partial schollie sports. Baseball you are right... there are a TON of ways an ATHLETE can get other money to compete in sports. There are NOT a ton of ways for a FOOTBALL player to do it. They keep specifically banning it because of the problems it creates. because of the money in football. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 1, 2017 10:41:47 GMT -8
Sorry, Baseba1111, but you specifically called out 3 and 4* prospects getting non-athletic scholarships as not counting against the 85. Just because an athlete can get both an athletic scholarship AND an academic scholarship AND Federal Pell Grants DOES NOT MEAN HE DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST THE FOOTBALL TEAM SCHOLARSHIP LIMIT. That's what we're talking about here. Don't you think you would have heard about ONE single feel-good walk-on story about a football player who came to school on academic scholarship and is now a major contributor to the football team, but doesn't count against the limit? Don't you think there would have been ONE single story in the Oregonian or Portland Tribune about the kid on academic scholarship who doesn't count against the 85 and how helpful that is to the team to have basically more than the limit? Don't you think there would have been ONE single article in Sports Illustrated or another magazine looking into how School X has 85 guys on football scholarship and another 10 on sketchy 'academic' scholarships and it puts them at an advantage over other teams? Just as you were totally off-base claiming a player could be on a separate athletic team's scholarship while also playing football, you are also off-base on this one as well. As usual you do not read well... the conversation split off in many directions. Although maybe poorly written to address the many specific branches brought up here, it is you and kersting that 'arse talking'. If you or yours have never been part of the intricacies of recruited versus non-recruited athletes and the monies available from the school, the NCAA, the State/Federal government (especially for high risk minorities) you're completely an utterly clueless. And, "academic", State, Federal programs are far from sketchy. There are more controls in place than with schollies and recruiting (which are always being bent). Recruited vs Non-recruited is the key. Coaches can play that game with any type of athlete if the athlete really is sold and wants to attend your school. As for schollie on a separate athletic team... you can UNTIL you are a contributor on the football team. As as stated football takes over and takes the brunt of any multi-sport athletes... Enough... back to the real story and the recruits signing. |
|
|
|
Post by orangeattack on Feb 1, 2017 10:52:10 GMT -8
Sorry, Baseba1111, but you specifically called out 3 and 4* prospects getting non-athletic scholarships as not counting against the 85. Just because an athlete can get both an athletic scholarship AND an academic scholarship AND Federal Pell Grants DOES NOT MEAN HE DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST THE FOOTBALL TEAM SCHOLARSHIP LIMIT. That's what we're talking about here. Don't you think you would have heard about ONE single feel-good walk-on story about a football player who came to school on academic scholarship and is now a major contributor to the football team, but doesn't count against the limit? Don't you think there would have been ONE single story in the Oregonian or Portland Tribune about the kid on academic scholarship who doesn't count against the 85 and how helpful that is to the team to have basically more than the limit? Don't you think there would have been ONE single article in Sports Illustrated or another magazine looking into how School X has 85 guys on football scholarship and another 10 on sketchy 'academic' scholarships and it puts them at an advantage over other teams? Just as you were totally off-base claiming a player could be on a separate athletic team's scholarship while also playing football, you are also off-base on this one as well. A couple past anecdotes: Matt Sieverson came to Oregon State on a partial scholarship - he was promised 2 years on athletic scholarship and 3 years of grant-in-aid (academic) package.. then he played as a true frosh and never redshirted, so he only counted against the 85 schollie limit for one year, and the remaining year on scholarship would have been after his football eligibility was used up. The NCAA rule regarding scholarship allocation does not apply specifically to football - for multi-sport athletes who are on scholarship, the scholarship must be counted against the higher revenue sport. So a baseball player who is on scholarship and wants to walk on to the basketball team will need to have his schollie counted against basketball, because it is the higher revenue sport. That's why football players can walk on to any other athletic team in school, because football is always king in terms of revenue, and for no other reason. If they do not have an athletic scholarship, they are considered a walk-on, regardless of whether or not they have a full ride to school or not. If you are not on scholarship, you do not have access to the team nutritionist and the training table. |
|
|
|
Post by kersting13 on Feb 1, 2017 11:53:40 GMT -8
Sorry, Baseba1111, but you specifically called out 3 and 4* prospects getting non-athletic scholarships as not counting against the 85. Just because an athlete can get both an athletic scholarship AND an academic scholarship AND Federal Pell Grants DOES NOT MEAN HE DOESN'T COUNT AGAINST THE FOOTBALL TEAM SCHOLARSHIP LIMIT. That's what we're talking about here. Don't you think you would have heard about ONE single feel-good walk-on story about a football player who came to school on academic scholarship and is now a major contributor to the football team, but doesn't count against the limit? Don't you think there would have been ONE single story in the Oregonian or Portland Tribune about the kid on academic scholarship who doesn't count against the 85 and how helpful that is to the team to have basically more than the limit? Don't you think there would have been ONE single article in Sports Illustrated or another magazine looking into how School X has 85 guys on football scholarship and another 10 on sketchy 'academic' scholarships and it puts them at an advantage over other teams? Just as you were totally off-base claiming a player could be on a separate athletic team's scholarship while also playing football, you are also off-base on this one as well. A couple past anecdotes: Matt Sieverson came to Oregon State on a partial scholarship - he was promised 2 years on athletic scholarship and 3 years of grant-in-aid (academic) package.. then he played as a true frosh and never redshirted, so he only counted against the 85 schollie limit for one year, and the remaining year on scholarship would have been after his football eligibility was used up. The NCAA rule regarding scholarship allocation does not apply specifically to football - for multi-sport athletes who are on scholarship, the scholarship must be counted against the higher revenue sport. So a baseball player who is on scholarship and wants to walk on to the basketball team will need to have his schollie counted against basketball, because it is the higher revenue sport. That's why football players can walk on to any other athletic team in school, because football is always king in terms of revenue, and for no other reason. If they do not have an athletic scholarship, they are considered a walk-on, regardless of whether or not they have a full ride to school or not. If you are not on scholarship, you do not have access to the team nutritionist and the training table. yes, there are very rare circumstances in which this can possibly happen in football, unlike the scenario which basba1111 implied it happens all the time with 3 & 4 star athletes. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 1, 2017 12:00:13 GMT -8
A couple past anecdotes: Matt Sieverson came to Oregon State on a partial scholarship - he was promised 2 years on athletic scholarship and 3 years of grant-in-aid (academic) package.. then he played as a true frosh and never redshirted, so he only counted against the 85 schollie limit for one year, and the remaining year on scholarship would have been after his football eligibility was used up. The NCAA rule regarding scholarship allocation does not apply specifically to football - for multi-sport athletes who are on scholarship, the scholarship must be counted against the higher revenue sport. So a baseball player who is on scholarship and wants to walk on to the basketball team will need to have his schollie counted against basketball, because it is the higher revenue sport. That's why football players can walk on to any other athletic team in school, because football is always king in terms of revenue, and for no other reason. If they do not have an athletic scholarship, they are considered a walk-on, regardless of whether or not they have a full ride to school or not. If you are not on scholarship, you do not have access to the team nutritionist and the training table. yes, there are very rare circumstances in which this can possibly happen in football, unlike the scenario which basba1111 implied it happens all the time with 3 & 4 star athletes. There ya go... "all the time"  Happens all the time does is typically not taken literally... it happens, does, will continue. As per your attack on language points out you have little knowledge base and you only focus on points that can be misinterpreted. Keep going, dig deeper... as there are numerous posts that point out that your arse is indeed need of chapstick. Let it go you were wrong/uninformed/misterpreted/read into what you wanted then argued with personal attacks and no facts. |
|
Happens all the time does is typically not taken literally... it happens, does, will continue.