Maverick.AU 13,279 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 http://www.al.com/au...f_hardship.html I hate this, especially for Khari. Wish him and his father the best The whole add an extra year thing is just wrong in my opinion, especially for someone with that type of Illness. Takes me back to Jay Prosch, if this had been in place he would've had to sit and his mother would've never gotten to see him play at Auburn (She passed away the day after the Clemson game). This kind of thing just hits me right in the gut. The NCAA just baffles me sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LKEEL75 2,566 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 That is just wrong! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cptau 169 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The Hardship rule process may be broken and too easy to get, but it needs to be fixed and not thrown away. Most rule changes are effective at some future date not immediately. If a player moves outside the conference and the losing school agrees on hardship what does it matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TexasTiger 12,796 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Implement it next year. Unfair to do it immediately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerbelle 5,299 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The NCAA is just ridiculous. This makes no sense. Why punish athletes who are already in a difficult situation? No one else thinks it's a bad thing to let a kid with serious family issues change schools with no repercussions. I really hate the NCAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aujeff11 6,243 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The NCAA is just ridiculous. This makes no sense. Why punish athletes who are already in a difficult situation? No one else thinks it's a bad thing to let a kid with serious family issues change schools with no repercussions. I really hate the NCAA. ditto. The NCAA flexes it's muscles on hardship waivers but they act like they don't have a set when it comes to star players getting paid. The NCAA is a joke Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooltigger21 0 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 This ties in with the idea that at some point we're going to end up with two governing bodies for college athletics. These kind of decisions are going to drive a further wedge between the two sets of people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikey 16,545 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 The Hardship rule process may be broken and too easy to get, but it needs to be fixed and not thrown away. Most rule changes are effective at some future date not immediately. If a player moves outside the conference and the losing school agrees on hardship what does it matter? Agreed, it needs to be fixed, not discarded. I think there were some abuses and many more attempted abuses but there are some situations when the hardship rule is justified. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShugMan55 0 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Here's the rub. It is easy to say this is wrong. Jay Prosch is a perfect example of why the rule existed. But as a person who has managed organizations for decades I see the the NCAA's problem- what defines a hardship- which is usually a subjective ruling. Probably just another case of an organization being so overwhelmed with people trying to use a rule to their own advantage that they just throw up their hands and say screw it. Like most of you I have a few issues with the NCAA but I also have been on the other side of the fence. Maybe we shouldn't blame the NCAA, but blame those who refuse to be responsible for their own decisions. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustache eagle 2,388 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 College Athletics and athletic scholarships are an honor ... Not a "right". No one is guaranteed an athletic scholarship. No one is being prevented from going to any college in the country that they can be accepted in to. No one is being prevented from moving colleges. (Btw, I do think the NCAA is ridiculous and they are over reacting) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keesler 5,922 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Here's the rub. It is easy to say this is wrong. Jay Prosch is a perfect example of why the rule existed. But as a person who has managed organizations for decades I see the the NCAA's problem- what defines a hardship- which is usually a subjective ruling. Probably just another case of an organization being so overwhelmed with people trying to use a rule to their own advantage that they just throw up their hands and say screw it. Like most of you I have a few issues with the NCAA but I also have been on the other side of the fence. Maybe we shouldn't blame the NCAA, but blame those who refuse to be responsible for their own decisions. This is probably more along the lines of where the NCAA stood on the issue. Prosch is the perfect example of why the waiver existed and how it was administered. But for every Jay Prosch circumstance, there are dozens upon dozens of cases where some the circustances aren't as critical/desperate. I'm sure the NCAA has to deal with a very wide gray area in these cases, and tons of manhours are spent investigating and researching each and every case to see if indeed the situation is critical enough to justify a hardship waiver for the player.The NCAA is virtually impotent in many areas until they decide to get a hard on for some tick-tacky rule. Until there is an alternative governing body for college athletics, programs are forced to adhere to their rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuburnNTexas 7,127 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 In the article said "The NCAA approved 127 of 236 hardship waiver applications between July 2012 and June 2013, according to Yahoo! Sports." That proves they could handle the bogus claims what a small price to pay for those really in need. The NCAA is its own worst enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
triangletiger 1,599 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Here's the rub. It is easy to say this is wrong. Jay Prosch is a perfect example of why the rule existed. But as a person who has managed organizations for decades I see the the NCAA's problem- what defines a hardship- which is usually a subjective ruling. Probably just another case of an organization being so overwhelmed with people trying to use a rule to their own advantage that they just throw up their hands and say screw it. Like most of you I have a few issues with the NCAA but I also have been on the other side of the fence. Maybe we shouldn't blame the NCAA, but blame those who refuse to be responsible for their own decisions. I hear what you're saying and, no doubt, it was tremendous resource drain on the NCAA staff to review these cases. However, the more appropriate course would have been to streamline the process by providing clearer guidance and training for the staff as to wha constitutes 'hardship', not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShugMan55 0 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Here's the rub. It is easy to say this is wrong. Jay Prosch is a perfect example of why the rule existed. But as a person who has managed organizations for decades I see the the NCAA's problem- what defines a hardship- which is usually a subjective ruling. Probably just another case of an organization being so overwhelmed with people trying to use a rule to their own advantage that they just throw up their hands and say screw it. Like most of you I have a few issues with the NCAA but I also have been on the other side of the fence. Maybe we shouldn't blame the NCAA, but blame those who refuse to be responsible for their own decisions. I hear what you're saying and, no doubt, it was tremendous resource drain on the NCAA staff to review tut hese cases. However, the more appropriate course would have been to streamline the process by providing clearer guidance and training for the staff as to wha constitutes 'hardship', not to throw the baby out with the bathwater. There is no excuse for anything to be "to expensive" in college football with all of the great heaping wads of cash being made. I am only surmising but I would like to know how many of those denied threatened a legal action. I only say this because I am curious as to why the NCAA would move so quickly (not having a 1 year phase out) on such an obviously unpopular decision. As to revising the rule. If you have written a set of guidelines you know how difficult this is especially when defining something as subjective as a hardship. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gulftiger66 166 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 In the article said "The NCAA approved 127 of 236 hardship waiver applications between July 2012 and June 2013, according to Yahoo! Sports." That proves they could handle the bogus claims what a small price to pay for those really in need. The NCAA is its own worst enemy. They probably just got tired of doing all the work to investigate each waiver so they did away with them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maverick.AU 13,279 Posted March 19, 2015 Author Share Posted March 19, 2015 Per Twitter: @jasonkersey: I received an email from the @NCAA this morning basically confirming that Khari Harding won't be able to play for Tulsa this season So sickening. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auburn4ever 1,266 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Now that the NCAA has done this, the NCAA should allow Khari to transfer back to Auburn so he can finish his last 2 years of playing football on the Plains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerbelle 5,299 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Here's the rub. It is easy to say this is wrong. Jay Prosch is a perfect example of why the rule existed. But as a person who has managed organizations for decades I see the the NCAA's problem- what defines a hardship- which is usually a subjective ruling. Probably just another case of an organization being so overwhelmed with people trying to use a rule to their own advantage that they just throw up their hands and say screw it. Like most of you I have a few issues with the NCAA but I also have been on the other side of the fence. Maybe we shouldn't blame the NCAA, but blame those who refuse to be responsible for their own decisions. How can you say blame those who refuse to be responsible for their own decisions? No one can tell the future. Families can't predict a serious illness or medical emergency. Life happens and it is extremely unfair not to help these student athletes who need to move closer to their families. Why make their situation worse? Just because some people have tried to abuse it is no excuse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShugMan55 0 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 Here's the rub. It is easy to say this is wrong. Jay Prosch is a perfect example of why the rule existed. But as a person who has managed organizations for decades I see the the NCAA's problem- what defines a hardship- which is usually a subjective ruling. Probably just another case of an organization being so overwhelmed with people trying to use a rule to their own advantage that they just throw up their hands and say screw it. Like most of you I have a few issues with the NCAA but I also have been on the other side of the fence. Maybe we shouldn't blame the NCAA, but blame those who refuse to be responsible for their own decisions. How can you say blame those who refuse to be responsible for their own decisions? No one can tell the future. Families can't predict a serious illness or medical emergency. Life happens and it is extremely unfair not to help these student athletes who need to move closer to their families. Why make their situation worse? Just because some people have tried to abuse it is no excuse. I think you misunderstood what I was saying. I led with it with the Jay Prosch example which like Mr. Harding was why this rule existed and it was obviously a good rule. But I say again I have seen rules misused over and over in the business word until you finally say no more of this. Of course hardships should be granted, but if many of the applications are truly done because the player does not like the college he chose or is not getting playing time he wants, trying to pass it of as a medical hardship eliminates sitting out a year. And again what constitutes a hardship? A parent dying of cancer - hell yes. What about a favored uncle, sister, half sister, grandmother? Who decides what is a hardship, where the line is drawn and how do they defend their position (possibly in a court of law). And for what it is worth many things no longer exist because people abused the privilege. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CleCoTiger 1,957 Posted March 19, 2015 Share Posted March 19, 2015 "The NCAA" is nothing more than the representatives of its member institutions. "The NCAA" does nothing without approval of its member institutions. So...blame the member institutions. If the colleges and universities that makes up the NCAA did not want this change, we wouldn't have this change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cooltigger21 0 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 "The NCAA" is nothing more than the representatives of its member institutions. "The NCAA" does nothing without approval of its member institutions. So...blame the member institutions. If the colleges and universities that makes up the NCAA did not want this change, we wouldn't have this change. To a degree that's true. It is a large organization and interests are diverse. That was the reason for the autonomy for the power 5 and it is also why we are headed for another split to one almost pure amateur and one semi pro. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keesler 5,922 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 "The NCAA" is nothing more than the representatives of its member institutions. "The NCAA" does nothing without approval of its member institutions. So...blame the member institutions. If the colleges and universities that makes up the NCAA did not want this change, we wouldn't have this change. Yep Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuburnNTexas 7,127 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 Bottom line is they are supposed to be academic institutions doing what is best for the student. But instead they are businesses who don't care about the student. Over last 2 years they were able to determine who was legit in applying for hardship and who wasn't. They turned down over 1/2, but they also helped families that really needed it. This shows a total lack of compassion and speaks volumes about the people who voted to stop helping families in needs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keesler 5,922 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 The NCAA isn't preventing the student athlete from transferring to be closer to home & family to take care of personal issues that caused the hardship, they are just treating it like a normal transfer where they sit a year, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AuburnNTexas 7,127 Posted March 20, 2015 Share Posted March 20, 2015 The NCAA isn't preventing the student athlete from transferring to be closer to home & family to take care of personal issues that caused the hardship, they are just treating it like a normal transfer where they sit a year, right? That means a year without a scholarship so basically they are sticking it to the student. My family member is sick and even though both schools are willing to let you transfer and get a scholarship at the school closer to home the NCAA is blocking it. That means no school for a year or pay your own way for a year. That is spiteful and mean. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.