Is there a NCAA rule saying you cant be in high school for 5 years?
If there is then that would be extremely petty and does nothing but hurt high school kids chance for athletic schollys.
I think it's a CA rule, as well as OR. In OR, you can't play sports if you've completed 4 years worth of school terms and/or are 19 before the start of a school year.
So if it is a high school rule then how and why would this effect his eligibility at UO!?
with nothing really cited in the article.... It makes me wonder if the journalist was making a lazy guess or just assumes that it would.
Is there a NCAA rule saying you cant be in high school for 5 years?
If there is then that would be extremely petty and does nothing but hurt high school kids chance for athletic schollys.
I think it's a CA rule, as well as OR. In OR, you can't play sports if you've completed 4 years worth of school terms and/or are 19 before the start of a school year.
So if it is a high school rule then how and why would this effect his eligibility at UO!?
with nothing really cited in the article.... It makes me wonder if the journalist was making a lazy guess or just assumes that it would.
Does anyone actually know?
I not sure if it does affect his NCAA eligibility. I would think that he's eligible as long as he's taken the required core classes, has an acceptable GPA, and passed the SATs. There may be more to it as to put him in jeopardy.
Yea, I didn't understand how that affects him now, that is confusing if prep school guys are allowed in no problem, seems like its just an issue for his high school now.
canaduck wrote:Yea, I didn't understand how that affects him now, that is confusing if prep school guys are allowed in no problem, seems like its just an issue for his high school now.
Yeah unless it has something to do with academics or SAT, I don't see how the NCAA will keep him out of school. It seems like the worst punishment can be, is taking away wins from his HS team.
I played with a kid who was a "super" SR (meaning he got a waiver from OSAA to play a 5th year.) If the school allowed him to play, I would have to assume he just thought they knew what was what, and it was fine. No way could a kid pull something like that over on a school, he was the star player and they wanted him playing! Someone knew, and should have taken the proper steps to get approval from the governing body to allow him to play. I feel bad for him if this falls on him, he's a 18-19 yo who trusted his coaches and faculty at the school.
If he lied about his eligbility ( he knew it was his 5th yr of playing ball) then he has no honor.
Bye bye
Ya I'm sure a 17 yr old kid knows all of the NCAA rules and regulations.....
were talking his HS. You only get 4 yrs of HS ball not 5. AND yes I expect HS kids to know the HS rules.
Really? did you play high school ball and did you know every single NCAA rule? I doubt it, I played ball and that was something I wasn't aware of. I was never given a NCAA rule book and I doubt he did either.
It's the schools responsibility to make sure he's eligible to play, not his.
You would think that a school the caliber of St. Bonaventure's would know something like that and tell Hill and Oregon that it could possibly be wrong.
greenyellow wrote:You would think that a school the caliber of St. Bonaventure's would know something like that and tell Hill and Oregon that it could possibly be wrong.
Maybe they do know it, but did it anyway. I don't see how people can blame the kid for this. Would he know this? Probably not. And what if he flunked out one year so he NEEDED the extra year? If anything, playing ineligible players is ultimately the coaches fault, if the ineligibility if from the scholastic side.
