I noticed in the NB Games results that Queens (NC) had a young lady run sub 17 in the 5k. Her name is Tanya Zeferjahn. She is listed as a redshirt freshman on their website but her birthday is 1984. I figure there must be a typo there but 24 would still be old for a redshirt senior.
If you google her, you find that she ran for Cal State San Bernardino and from what I can find, she closed out her XC career in 2005. She is later listed as running for Cal Coast TC in some meet results.
https://www.csusbalumni.com/cgi-any/newspages.dll/pages?bid=&htmlfile=volunteer_newspages3.htm&nfid=&record=508
I am pretty sure this is the same girl....same name and same high school. So if this is the same girl, how does she have eligibility remaining? Is Simmons pulling a fast one?
How does Simmons do it?
Report Thread
-
-
Tanya ran 4 years at SBern and was a good runner there. Making it to nationals individually. She has spent the past few years running for club teams in So Cal and doing fairly well. Her 10 semesters have be close to expired given that she used at least 8 of 'em while running at San Bernardino. There's no way she's a Frosh (as listed on the NCAA list), and i'd think it would be impossible for her to be listed as anything other than a Senior given that she'd need to use her 10th semester just to be eligible for next year's track seasons.. They didn't have indoor or outdoor track @ San Bern. so her issues would only be in total semesters of full time college.
-
There was an article on San Barnardino's website recently talking about her now running for Queen's University.
http://www.csusbathletics.com/news/2009/4/29/WXC_0429092511.aspx
It says she graduated from San Barnardino in 2006 but since they did not have track while she was there, she could now compete somewhere else? Is this true? She is 6 years removed from high school, with 4 years of college running under her belt, and still allowed to compete another 4 years. She was listed as a freshman at Indoor Nationals this year and is listed as a redshirt freshman on their website. Does anyone know the rules? I don't compete or coach against her or Queen's but I am just curious about how this is possible and is it done very often? Will she be allowed 4 years of track at Queen's? -
In DII an athlete has 10 semesters of Full Time work to finish their eligibility regardless of how many semesters of competition that they've competed in that particular sport. In Tanya's case you would have to imagine that if she graduated in 4 years from SB then she spent 8 full time semesters in doing so. She ran 4 years of XC for them. Now she might have 2 full time semesters left to use whatever eligibility she might have for track at Queens. If she went this fall in order to become eligible for indoor, then that would be her 9th full time. Spring '09 would be her 10th full time semester, thus ending her career. If she only went part time in the Fall then she might be able to squeeze one more track season out with that semester. Not sure why she's listed as a Frosh, except to make it look impressive having a frosh running so fast for recruiting purposes.
-
aahhh...OK. That makes sense now. Thanks for clearing that up. And being a grad student at most schools would only require 9 hours to be considered full time.
-
So those 10 semesters can be spread over however long you wish? In DI you get 5 years from the time you first enroll as a member of the team.
If in DII you can spread those 10 semesters around, then that's more like NAIA. -
So spreading 10 semesters over any number of years is good for athletes.
Why you hate?
If she never ran track , or played soccer, or even football, her first year in that sport - athletically- she is a freshman.
Academically its different. -
She is def. within the NCAA rules and guidelines the only real question is should she be listed as a freshman or a junior/senior depending on if she matriculated in the fall or the spring.
Most likey she should not be listed as a freshman since she does not have four years of eligability left (at best she has two semester - out of 10 - left - at worst she is done after this spring). So Simmons is doing nothing outside of NCAA rules, just getting good kids to go back to school - but the athletic department should prob. list her athletic year of eligability differently. -
Listing her as a FRESHMAN helps his recruiting. It's simple. If you a recruit and see the team has a freshman running sub 17:00 you'll be more interested than if she is a senior. Simple bait and switch to get recrutis interested.
-
Why U Hates wrote:
So spreading 10 semesters over any number of years is good for athletes.
Why you hate?
If she never ran track , or played soccer, or even football, her first year in that sport - athletically- she is a freshman.
Academically its different.
How can you be a Freshman when it would be impossible to ever use your Junior or senior season's of eligibility? And it's not the administration who dictates what class she is listed as eligibility-wise, it's the coach that does all of that. -
You coaches are so darn silly in your jealousness of Scott. He is a great coach and has success and you can't stand it so you spend hours thinking about and complaining about one word in a media guide. Grow up and spend that time becoming better coaches yourself and stop worrying about what Scott is doing.
-
Who cares THIS much?
Tool!
"How can you be a Freshman when it would be impossible to ever use your Junior or senior season's of eligibility? And it's not the administration who dictates what class she is listed as eligibility-wise, it's the coach that does all of that." -
good god, who gives a rip?
compared to any other sports, track and x.c. are piles of sh1t. arguing over sh1t like this is like 2 maggots fighting over a chunk of corn in a turd.
in all likeliehood the web page is maintained by an unpaid student intern in the s.i.d.
