With this bunch, nothing is ever easy.

Stewart Mandel describes a current proposal to allow football players to participate in up to four games in a season without giving up the opportunity to redshirt as “seems like a no-brainer”.

Not so fast, my friend.

“Apparently, there is a group out there that has been resistant,” the American Football Coaches Association’s executive director told The Athletic this week. “It’s powerful enough where some of the administrators have concerns whether it’s going to pass or whether we should even propose it. You can’t bring it up again for another two years.”

It’s not the football coaches, who are in favor of it.  They don’t have a vote, anyway.  It’s not the Football Oversight Committee, either.  Nor does it appear to be any of the P5 conferences, as it’s an ACC proposal being shepherded by Bob Bowlsby of the Big XII. Obviously, it’s good for the players.  So, where, then?

Though Berry could not specify where the pockets of resistance are coming from, it’s safe to assume they’re likely coming from the academic side. The NCAA Board of Directors — which must give the final stamp of approval — consists almost entirely of university presidents.

“It’s more about misunderstanding than anything else, and feeling like there would be some abuse to this and gamesmanship by the coaches, but this would not be easy to game,” he said. “Are there some side benefits where a player might mature over the course of the season to the point where they become viable? Yes. But some of the intent of this is that you don’t have enough viable players by the end of the season due to injury.”

This is what comes of letting school without football programs have a direct say about football-specific proposals.  Way to go there, fellas.

**************************************************************************

UPDATE:  John Infante points out a problem.

A) While it’s unclear if mid-year enrollees are academically eligible for bowl games, Bylaw 16.8.2.1 prevents the institution for paying for midyear enrollees to attend bowl games. So they would have to pay their own way (travel, hotel, food, etc.) to play in the game. https://t.co/yERPs3TmnN

— John Infante (@John_Infante) March 22, 2018

The mid-year stuff is something Mandel pointed to as a matter that needs clarification.

And it’s hard to argue with this.

Just give football players five seasons to play. Heck, give all athletes five seasons to play. In fact, give them SIX seasons to play, provided they graduate after five. (I draw the line at six since that’s the Fed Grad Rate time limit.)

— John Infante (@John_Infante) March 22, 2018

Now that would be player-friendly.

**************************************************************************

UPDATE #2:  And here’s the topper.

My guess as to where opposition to that proposal is coming from is from the Group of 5 and lower-level Power 5 schools that fear playing their freshmen in four games, and then having them transfer.

— John Infante (@John_Infante) March 22, 2018

There’s that whole “unrealistic reality world” thing cropping up again.

Advertisement