Woah, Bart. I thought you found the comment about an asterisk to records being set interesting, so I was adding my $0.02 about that - not about whether I thought the decision made to grant an extra year of eligibility was fair to the players or not.Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 5:21 pmFirst. Don’t care about the records. Was just an observation from last night. Count them or not, really don’t care.wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 4:05 pmPost season. Cummings and Treanor had two of the highest if I recall correctly.Bart wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:01 pmWhat are the circumstance of those players in the record books? Are these more career games due to play in the post season? Continuation of the season they are in?wlaxphan20 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 12:20 pmWhat circumstances? The only one I can really think of is the shot clock, and I think there is something in the record book that mentions that it was introduced in 2017.
If it’s about “extra games from 2020” that point is actually invalid IMO. I made a post about this last year. There are a number of players in the record books, who had traditional 4 year careers, and who still played more total career games than players who had the 5-6 games from the canceled 2020 season in addition to their 4 years.
edit:
https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=352494#p352494
https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php? ... er#p358696
https://fanlax.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=356698#p356698
Second, you are comparing apples to oranges. A gift of eligibility vs post season play that a team earned. Sorry don’t see it the same but that’s my opinion.
Someone brought up a player with a medical redshirt. Those redshirts have a set of criteria that need to be met. How many of these current players would have met that criteria (games played) in 2020 that would have allowed them to redshirt? So while I don’t really care about the records I think the ruling in 2020 was short sighted and hurt more athletes in terms of opportunities than helped. I’m sure not many will agree but that’s how I see it.
That’s fine if we don’t agree. IMO I thought i was comparing apples to apples - number of games played in a career and if players with a COVID season had an advantage in that sense.
I find the asterisk discussion interesting as well, but I think there’s too much hyper focus on the “extra games” people believe players were granted and not enough focus on just how much more opportunity the shot clock has created. That’s just my observation.
The ruling in 2020 is what it is. I think the NCAA would have faced a lot of backlash either way, but hindsight is always 20/20. Yeah, redshirts have set criteria, but I don’t think any entity in the country had a “set criteria” for their response in 2020. Fair, unfair, whatever your opinion is, I didn’t really think that’s what this was about.
Maybe I’m reading into this too much, and I get that this is a sensitive subject for a lot of people who were personally impacted, but I’m not really sure what I said to warrant the tone of your response.