Looking forward to 2020

[wlaxnut]

https://www.uslaxmagazine.com/college/w ... ohio-state

I wouldn’t be shocked if Ohio State makes a tournament or two next year. It’s shaping up to be a real scrap in the Big10. Obviously it’ll be Maryland up top but 2-4 should be competitive and by extension a lot of fun to watch.

[wlaxnut]

https://gocolgateraiders.com/news/2019/ ... edule.aspx

(Ignore the 2019 year in the link. This does show the 2020 schedule)

[wlaxnut]

Read all about it.

https://bceagles.com/news/2019/10/28/la ... -2020.aspx

https://www.insidelacrosse.com/amp/ilwo ... ssion=true

[wlaxnut]

So, Ms. North gets to play next year after all. I'm glad to hear that. I think it's just. To make a student athlete sit out a whole year made no sense to me. I'm sure there is rationale to it if explained by the ACC muckety-mucks, but I'm glad eligibility is no longer an issue for Charlotte North. BC is a mystery going into 2020. Lots of questions after so many solid mainstay players were graduated. Questions in goal, on defense and offense. I still don't think they'll make it to the final four, but they will compete hard and be entertaining.

[Laxfan500]

Why even bother making the rule in the first place. Sets a dangerous precedent.
Transfer anyway and appeal...

[Bart]

Why even bother making the rule in the first place. Sets a dangerous precedent.
Transfer anyway and appeal...

I agree.......why even bother making it a rule

[Dr. Tact]

So, Ms. North gets to play next year after all. I'm glad to hear that. I think it's just. To make a student athlete sit out a whole year made no sense to me. I'm sure there is rationale to it if explained by the ACC muckety-mucks, but I'm glad eligibility is no longer an issue for Charlotte North. BC is a mystery going into 2020. Lots of questions after so many solid mainstay players were graduated. Questions in goal, on defense and offense. I still don't think they'll make it to the final four, but they will compete hard and be entertaining.

This is not a comment on the specific athlete, but on the transfer rule. Sitting for a year of residency has been a rule forever (driven by football and basketball). I think that the NCAA should be consistent across all sports. If some sports require sitting a year, then IMO, they all should. If the NCAA wants to be fair and equitable across all sports, then they should have the same rule. Sit or not sit, I don't care, just make it consistent.

Again just my two cents....

I'll stay consistent Nut...I think BC will surprise you. I know that would make you happy.

[wlaxnut]

This is not a comment on the specific athlete, but on the transfer rule. Sitting for a year of residency has been a rule forever (driven by football and basketball). I think that the NCAA should be consistent across all sports. If some sports require sitting a year, then IMO, they all should. If the NCAA wants to be fair and equitable across all sports, then they should have the same rule. Sit or not sit, I don't care, just make it consistent.

I'll stay consistent Nut...I think BC will surprise you. I know that would make you happy. :D

What do you think the original intent of the rule was? Were student athletes exploiting a loophole? If so, what was it?

As far as BC--it's a very different team next year. Whether they surprise or not is moot. It won't be the same team, though the laundry's the same. Gone are so many players I liked--the Big Three, Taylor Walker, Brooke Troy, Hannah Hyatt. They won't seriously compete for the big crown but I'm sure they'll be entertaining, and I'm sure I'll be taking up space in the stands for a few games with Syracuse, UNC, Navy and VT due to visit. I have to say, I'm probably a little more excited about Michigan and Notre Dame next year. I'm also intrigued to see what Ohio State does with the new coach. Looking forward to Penn St too. So many teams to follow. Northwestern will be interesting to chart the progress of, now that it's Izzy's team. She's undoubtedly the main attraction after Lasota's departure. Thanks all the same though, doc.

[Dr. Tact]

What do you think the original intent of the rule was? Were student athletes exploiting a loophole? If so, what was it?

Well this site states the following and cites the NCAA...."Requiring student-athletes to sit out of competition for a year after transferring encourages them to make decisions motivated by academics as well as athletics. Most student-athletes who are not eligible to compete immediately benefit from a year to adjust to their new school and focus on their classes."

https://www.sbnation.com/college-footba ... st-sit-out

[8meterPA]

Dr, I initially agreed with your thought about applying across all sports consistently and then thought about it a different way. As you said, football and basketball were the main culprits and let’s face it, they’ve turned into farm clubs for the pros....kids leave after a couple years without a degree. If there would no transfer rules in place, what would stop kids from literally just chasing the ncaa crown (Alabama in football or duke in basketball) never going to class and just transfer from school to school.

Lacrosse is much different kids are going for their degree for the most part as there no riches in pro lacrosse....the kids very much remain student athletes in every way. So I don’t mind the transfer rule being waived for lax as long as they don’t end up at Maryland!

If anyone follows college football, look up info on Ohio state qb who transferred from Georgia. Kid lives off campus, doesn’t attend class in person, everything is online so he can spend all his time studying football. He’ll be gone after this year and go pro after only 2 years of college.

[Bart]

I know in 2017 the power 5 conferences + ND "guaranteed" their athletes scholarships to not be canceled for athletic reasons for 4 years. I could not find if this was the case for all sports in the power 5 or just the head count sports and not equivalency sports. Anyone know the answer to this?

[Dr. Tact]

Dr, I initially agreed with your thought about applying across all sports consistently and then thought about it a different way. As you said, football and basketball were the main culprits and let’s face it, they’ve turned into farm clubs for the pros....kids leave after a couple years without a degree. If there would no transfer rules in place, what would stop kids from literally just chasing the ncaa crown (Alabama in football or duke in basketball) never going to class and just transfer from school to school.

Lacrosse is much different kids are going for their degree for the most part as there no riches in pro lacrosse....the kids very much remain student athletes in every way. So I don’t mind the transfer rule being waived for lax as long as they don’t end up at Maryland!

If anyone follows college football, look up info on Ohio state qb who transferred from Georgia. Kid lives off campus, doesn’t attend class in person, everything is online so he can spend all his time studying football. He’ll be gone after this year and go pro after only 2 years of college.

Good points...In the spirit of my comments above...If the rule only applies to the money sports, change their rules too. Having less rules across the NCAA that make it easier to understand would be a benefit to all. I dont care if quarterback X wants to transfer 3 times with his 4 years (no redshirt), if the schools want him and it doesnt take any more of the allotted scholys, then go for it. As one can see with California, the power may be shifting to the (student) athlete....

[DMac]

This “residence requirement” exists, according to the NCAA, to help players do better in school.

Requiring student-athletes to sit out of competition for a year after transferring encourages them to make decisions motivated by academics as well as athletics. Most student-athletes who are not eligible to compete immediately benefit from a year to adjust to their new school and focus on their classes.

Another explanation is the coaches and administrators who run the NCAA prefer to have as much control as possible over players.

This sounds like a lot of garbage to me. If the reason a transfer has to sit out for a year is so they can adjust to their new school/environment/routine, why is an eighteen year old freshman who is away from home for the first time allowed to play at all? I've always thought this rule is a lot of nonsense and that the last sentence in the quote is the real and only reason. The only people in the whole game of college sports, from the AD to the towel boy/gal, who have any kind of restrictions put on them is the athlete. It's a lot of baloney, IMO.

[wlaxnut]

Dr Tact and 8meterPA—

Thank you both very much. I appreciate the insight and research done to answer my original question. I can see how the NCAA might have decided that this was a good rule to establish.

8meterPA—got a chuckle from your Maryland remark. I’m with you there.

[wlaxnut]

An answer I got from someone on Twitter:

“I found a cached document online. In sum it says 1-year intra-conf no play rule applies to players recruited, where ath dept "interceded" during admission process, or received athletic financial aid immediately prior to transfer. Charlotte applied for and was granted a waiver. Here's what rule says: ‘the waiver request must demonstrate objective evidence that proves the student-athlete’s extraordinary personal hardship merits a waiver of the normal application of the policy.’”

[Maryland75]

So there are ways around the ruling. I really question why there is a rule at all. Seems to me that an athlete should be able to play for any school they can get into. If I remember correctly Halle Majorana transferred from Maryland to Syracuse after the 2014 season and played immediately for Syracuse. Of course they were in different leagues by then.

[livelovelax]

Watch out for the Dukes of JMU. The level of talent that they are getting and their culture will keep them in the top 15 for the foreseeable near future. They have a top goalie and their zone defense is outstanding. They also have alot of players that can play so it would not surprise me to see them use 20 players a game. I was impressed with the improvement of Georgetown as well this fall. Great full field ride gonna make it tough for their opponents.

[wlaxnut]

Watch out for the Dukes of JMU. The level of talent that they are getting and their culture will keep them in the top 15 for the foreseeable near future. They have a top goalie and their zone defense is outstanding. They also have alot of players that can play so it would not surprise me to see them use 20 players a game. I was impressed with the improvement of Georgetown as well this fall. Great full field ride gonna make it tough for their opponents.

Love watching teams execute the full field ride. Boston College has been doing that the past few years. It will be interesting if they are still as effective at it without Apuzzo. I’ve never seen anyone ride like her.

https://youtu.be/YZ7KRSZB0AY

[Lax247]

Ok so saw this on Twitter:
#BestofLaxEdition US Lacrosse Magazine
Best Women’s Player of 2019
Finalists:
S.Apuzzo
D. Arsenault
M.Taylor
And... C. Wurtzburger???
Hold up so you disregard 3 other players
That were Finalists for the Tewarrton??
As well as:
Emily Haywrhruck
Lizzie Colson
Lindsay Ronbeck
Kelly Larkin
Caroline Steele
AllyKennedy
Katie hoeg
Jamie ortega
L Rosenweig
K Sears
And many more...
Best high school player of 2019 ok I get that
But to be in a conversation with some of the best college players in the game ??

[wlaxnut]

Ok so saw this on Twitter:
#BestofLaxEdition US Lacrosse Magazine
Best Women’s Player of 2019
Finalists:
S.Apuzzo
D. Arsenault
M.Taylor
And... C. Wurtzburger???
Hold up so you disregard 3 other players
That were Finalists for the Tewarrton??
As well as:
Emily Haywrhruck
Lizzie Colson
Lindsay Ronbeck
Kelly Larkin
Caroline Steele
AllyKennedy
Katie hoeg
Jamie ortega
L Rosenweig
K Sears
And many more...
Best high school player of 2019 ok I get that
But to be in a conversation with some of the best college players in the game ??

Could very well have been a mistake. That publication makes them frequently.