Hayduke wrote:
True story... was redshirting indoor track... I arranged own transportation to an indoor meet and ran unattached. However I wore my team jersey and lost the season because of that!
Yea, it all depends if your compliance director does their job. Some are really understanding of their role and just accept they don't have to do anything until a scandal pops up. Others are narcs are do what they're supposed to and become the ire of the entire department.
Yeah most of Spencer’s meets were close driveable meets tho. He has family in Boston where he raced a lot so that made it a lot easier. I think penn state he had to come up with funds to stay in a hotel and USA indoor in NY was payed for.
Nope wrote:
REAL. wrote:
As long as the student-athlete is eligible and on the full-time roster they can travel with the team.
Athletes who are red-shirting (aka the only reason to run "unattached") cannot travel under the schools budget or at least couldn't at my school, idk if that's an NCAA rule or a school rule.
There is no probably with a school paying for an unattached athlete to go compete.
Exhibit A: early season xc meets where athletes are taken not to race, but do a workout on the course a day before. (Stanford does this constantly.)
Exhibit B: alternates that are taken to regionals, nationals, etc but do not race. Sometimes an injured athlete is brought to nationals, even when the school knows they won't be racing. (Claysons Shumway at Nationals this year)
Exhibit C: in football, the entire team, including redshirts travel to every game in the season.
Exhibit D: in highschool, athletes are constantly going to meets across the country and the meet pays for the athletes travel expenses. We don't know if this was the case at BU, so maybe we should just assume.
It really comes down to a schools budget. If the school has deep pockets like Arkansas or BYU and they feel the desire to send some athletes unattached because they are trying to decide if they want to redshirt them or not, then they have the ability to do that. Also, if any of these girls were out of eligibility, the school could still support them (eg athletes being funding by school after graduation and NCAAs to prep for USAs/OT.)
minde15 wrote:
Schools are allowed to pay for a couple out of season competitions for their athletes, red shirting athletes included.
This. If OP has an issue with it, he just doesn't understand the NCAA rules. These guys aren't travelers, and only get one or two shots a year to put down good times at sea level.
Why in the world would anyone have a problem with this?
People are making assumptions that the athletes didn't pay their own way for travel, lodging meals, and the little known NCAA stipulation that they can't even receive any coaching either.....so no pre race discussion, no splits etc.
If there is a real concern, then someone from their conference should report the issue to the conference office and let the compliance departments sort it out.
Yes, they CAN travel with the team.....BUT if the school pays and the kid competes, it burns the redshirt.
If you want to run unattached and keep your redshirt, the student must pay for EVERYTHING AND CAN'T BE COACHED AT THE MEET.
Football athletes travel, go through full warmup etc, but they don't burn their redshirt until they enter the game and play.
Cross country kids can travel and do a workout on the course, since they didn't compete, they didn't burn redshirt.
There is NO PROVISION for a school paying, the kid running unattached, and still keeping redshirt. NONE.
................................ wrote:
Football athletes travel, go through full warmup etc, but they don't burn their redshirt until they enter the game and play.
Cross country kids can travel and do a workout on the course, since they didn't compete, they didn't burn redshirt.
There is NO PROVISION for a school paying, the kid running unattached, and still keeping redshirt. NONE.
I am not a football fan especially due to all the privileges they receive versus other athletes like the following. I have heard several times or read here in the forums several times in the last month or so that college football players may play in up to 4 games while still keeping it a redshirt season.
New rule for football only applies to no other sport.
Arkansas and BYU just went 1-2 at the Women’s D1 NCAA meet. Both are institutions that have multiple compliance officers. They will play by the rules because they know people are watching and they will not jeopardize their athlete’s eligibility. With an Olympic year on the horizon you will see other top notch athletes redshirting. Assume that they have consulted with their compliance officer before they do anything. That is what top D1 coaches and athletes do.
Exhibit E: it's between seasons, and an elite athlete goes to U.S. nationals or, as here, for some record attempt. Happens every year. What's be wrong with an institution supporting athletic excellence, especially between seasons.
Idiots. There rules are that if you're redshirting/unattached, your University can't pay for any travel expenses, entry, or even "coach" you if they're on-site. You also aren't allowed to wear team-issued gear of any kind. You can preserve eligibility and have University take care of everything as well as race in your usual team singlet if, and only IF, it is a National team qualifying event.
Period.
I thought this thread was going to make fun of the balding middle age runner showing up to run 16 mins 5k as an unattached athlete.
The NCAA rules have always been dumb.
That's no excuse for people to get bent up out of shape for a potential rules violation over dumb rules.
Are people hoping for the athlete to lose eligibility?
Are they hoping the team gets sanctioned?
Getting travel paid so you can race does not benefit the person. It's not a vacation.
It doesn't benefit the team now. They are not representing them.
Sure, it helps development for the future.
That's bad?
abused rules for sure wrote:
Idiots. There rules are that if you're redshirting/unattached, your University can't pay for any travel expenses, entry, or even "coach" you if they're on-site. You also aren't allowed to wear team-issued gear of any kind. You can preserve eligibility and have University take care of everything as well as race in your usual team singlet if, and only IF, it is a National team qualifying event.
Period.
We aren't unaware of the rules we just think they are idiotic and ignored whenever possible. Who cares. anyone who cares about reporting and enforcing these types of rules is an annoying type A who has mistaken rules for morality. No one is harmed by these athletes traveling to meets and being coached even if they aren't in uniform. People are harmed by the enforcement of these rules though. So the immoral side, in this case, is the rule reporter/know it all snitch. Honestly, who do you think you are helping by reporting things like this?
When did this rule come about? When I was in school, it was common for, say, a redshirt freshman to go to junior nationals, or even seniors, with the school/team. Wasn't there a famous quote by Matt Withrow that he was good enough for the national xc team but not the Wisconsin varsity? Did y'all demand an investigation about his travel to senior nationals?
Oh, upon re-reading your screed I see that you agree it's fine for nationals...