BYU's Old Runners, Fair or Not?

has to be said wrote:

Here's how I see it.

In the Little League divisions in baseball, when I was 13 I couldn't play on a team with the division of the 9 year olds.

LL has it's stuff together.

While the differences get less between an 18 year old and a 25 year old...There are still real differences.

You're using extremes. By your logic a 23 year old fifth year senior racing an 18 year old isn't fair. Are you going to ban anybody over 20?

After 20-21 I really don't think there's little physically than can help someone gain any more an advantage than anybody else. Age at that point is not a determining factor, its everything else.

Aside from that, they're not receiving special treatment, anyone can take two years (or more) between HS and college to delay eligibility.

I'm a man, I'm 40 wrote:

Or look at Oklahoma State's quarterback who was 26 or something like that and had been paid as a professional baseball player. Age aside, it seems wrong to me to let someone be paid as a professional in one sport and then compete as an amateur in another.

Why should the fact that he played pro baseball mean he can't be an amateur college runner? What if he worked as an accountant for a couple years before going to college? What if he made some money in hotdog eating competitions? What does that have to do with running in college?

You're basically saying once you make money in ANYTHING you are an amateur at NOTHING. Which, of course, makes no sense.

BYU always, in every sport every year has 25 to 27 year athletes

I'm a man, I'm 40 wrote:

Or look at Oklahoma State's quarterback who was 26 or something like that and had been paid as a professional baseball player. Age aside, it seems wrong to me to let someone be paid as a professional in one sport and then compete as an amateur in another.

NOT!

I'm a man, I'm 40 wrote:

Or look at Oklahoma State's quarterback who was 26 or something like that and had been paid as a professional baseball player. Age aside, it seems wrong to me to let someone be paid as a professional in one sport and then compete as an amateur in another.

The NCAA has had this rule for a couple of decades. I bet there is not a team in college football that has not had an athlete in this situation. So it is fair since everyone is abiding by the same rules. Any other school could have signed Weeden.

I think there is a difference in an 18 and a 23 year old.

In sports, there is a junior category (the age of which varies a bit). In some sports like cycling, there is a U23 category to bridge the gap between juniors and seniors.

Went to BYU...they can man every team...all sports every year starting team with 24 to 26 year olds. Even 27. We are not talking about one dude on the team. Its a semi pro or pro team. Go to BYU and see.

luv2run wrote:

The NCAA has had this rule for a couple of decades. I bet there is not a team in college football that has not had an athlete in this situation. So it is fair since everyone is abiding by the same rules. Any other school could have signed Weeden.

Wait, I thought the Jeremy Bloom ruling preventing an athlete from competing professionally in one sport while competing in the NCAA for another.

luv2run wrote:

I think there is a difference in an 18 and a 23 year old.

In sports, there is a junior category (the age of which varies a bit). In some sports like cycling, there is a U23 category to bridge the gap between juniors and seniors.

So what's your point? NCAA isn't a junior division. Its a collegiate. There's no age for collegiate.

It is fair, because anyone can do that. Anyone can take a few years to start college or even join the peace corps during college. Not to mention I can't see a mission helping any runner, as they are hardly able to work out at all and usually gain weight. Seems like a disadvantage to me

SuppySup wrote:

has to be said wrote:

Here's how I see it.

In the Little League divisions in baseball, when I was 13 I couldn't play on a team with the division of the 9 year olds.

LL has it's stuff together.

While the differences get less between an 18 year old and a 25 year old...There are still real differences.

You're using extremes. By your logic a 23 year old fifth year senior racing an 18 year old isn't fair. Are you going to ban anybody over 20?

After 20-21 I really don't think there's little physically than can help someone gain any more an advantage than anybody else. Age at that point is not a determining factor, its everything else.

Aside from that, they're not receiving special treatment, anyone can take two years (or more) between HS and college to delay eligibility.

That's not really a true extreme.

Additionally, a 5th year senior, having started at 18, is a reasonable consideration.

anonomie me wrote:

SuppySup wrote:

You're using extremes. By your logic a 23 year old fifth year senior racing an 18 year old isn't fair. Are you going to ban anybody over 20?

After 20-21 I really don't think there's little physically than can help someone gain any more an advantage than anybody else. Age at that point is not a determining factor, its everything else.

Aside from that, they're not receiving special treatment, anyone can take two years (or more) between HS and college to delay eligibility.

That's not really a true extreme.

Additionally, a 5th year senior, having started at 18, is a reasonable consideration.

Reasonable consideration for what? For racing in the NCAA's?

If so, than what does a 25 year old have that a 23 year old doesn't?