MBB: NESCAC

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

What schools have dropped down a level and have shown any sort of ambition? And what will make St. Anselm's a good D3 program?

It's hard during the transition time when there isn't a post-season to play for, but St. A's AD is Phil Rowe, who's got lots of experience at the D3 level and they're joining a conference that's pretty serious about athletics.  I think they'll try to compete - its whether or not the staff wants to wait through the non-eligible period or not.  Like I said, I could see it either way.

Not to mention, they've been trying to do this for a decade or more.  They want to be a d3 program.  I think they'll take it seriously.

Ryan what is the rule when moving from D2 to D3 in terms of how quickly they can play in postseason conference play and NCAA postseason play?

It's the same as any team coming in.  I think they're eligible in 29-30.  I believe there's a waiver available for reclassifying members that puts it at a three year process, if all goes well.

I understand the wait for going up, but don't see why they just don't let them play right away if you are going down.

In the end with all the player movement with the portal etc, for any team moving up or down, just let them play postseason right away.

It should actually be the other way.  If a St. Thomas can compete at d1 with d3 players, let them do it.  In this case, you're weaning the team off scholarship players.  As it is, there will be guys who have to chose between transferring, not playing, or giving up a scholarship.  There will be two classes of scholarship players in that situation when At. A becomes eligible.

[D3BBALL]

What schools have dropped down a level and have shown any sort of ambition? And what will make St. Anselm's a good D3 program?

It's hard during the transition time when there isn't a post-season to play for, but St. A's AD is Phil Rowe, who's got lots of experience at the D3 level and they're joining a conference that's pretty serious about athletics.  I think they'll try to compete - its whether or not the staff wants to wait through the non-eligible period or not.  Like I said, I could see it either way.

Not to mention, they've been trying to do this for a decade or more.  They want to be a d3 program.  I think they'll take it seriously.

Ryan what is the rule when moving from D2 to D3 in terms of how quickly they can play in postseason conference play and NCAA postseason play?

It's the same as any team coming in.  I think they're eligible in 29-30.  I believe there's a waiver available for reclassifying members that puts it at a three year process, if all goes well.

I understand the wait for going up, but don't see why they just don't let them play right away if you are going down.

In the end with all the player movement with the portal etc, for any team moving up or down, just let them play postseason right away.

It should actually be the other way.  If a St. Thomas can compete at d1 with d3 players, let them do it.  In this case, you're weaning the team off scholarship players.  As it is, there will be guys who have to chose between transferring, not playing, or giving up a scholarship.  There will be two classes of scholarship players in that situation when At. A becomes eligible.

I get where you are coming from, but St A's is basically losing everyone from this year's team, it will be very much like Hartford a few years ago but worse. Going to be very hard for that staff to bring in any elite players going forward, elite I mean D2, border line D1 players. I am just not sure a top D3 team would be worrying about St A's roster the next few years.

[D3BBALL]

Article on ESPN that pretty much sounds like the NCAA is going to give 5 years of eligibility and it going to happen by June. But the coach's association wants a say on how it is going to happen.

Not sure I would want either group making this decision.

[stlawus]

Article on ESPN that pretty much sounds like the NCAA is going to give 5 years of eligibility and it going to happen by June. But the coach's association wants a say on how it is going to happen.

Not sure I would want either group making this decision.

D3 needs to opt out.  The extra covid year resulted in a lot of nonsense in d3.  Can't have that dynamic be permanent.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

We've got four in five right now - it would just be going to five in five.  Not ideal, but not the end of the world.  Schools without grad programs are going to have guys leave for a fifth year - but the transfer thing isn't really going to die down anyway.  It's just the new way of things.

I think d3 can make different rules, but I'm not entirely sure - if this is a legal protection, they might not be able to do it.  We'll see.

The other element to consider is that it's not just five in five - it's a clock that starts at either HS graduation or 19th birthday (whichever is earlier).  It means nobody can play after 26.  That would affect non-traditional students, for sure - and if D3 doesn't follow it, might provide a landing spot for older students who haven't exhausted eligibility.

I'm thinking specifically of Yeshiva, who recruits a fair amount of guys from Israel, who can't come until they've finished their mandatory 18 month military service.  Although, I'm assuming the NCAA would have carve outs for things like that or Mormon missions, etc.

[Patrick Coleman]

Article on ESPN that pretty much sounds like the NCAA is going to give 5 years of eligibility and it going to happen by June. But the coach's association wants a say on how it is going to happen.

Not sure I would want either group making this decision.

D3 needs to opt out.  The extra covid year resulted in a lot of nonsense in d3.  Can't have that dynamic be permanent.

This is a D-I thing. If D-III wants to do it, it has to make its own rules.

[D3BBALL]

We've got four in five right now - it would just be going to five in five.  Not ideal, but not the end of the world.  Schools without grad programs are going to have guys leave for a fifth year - but the transfer thing isn't really going to die down anyway.  It's just the new way of things.

I think d3 can make different rules, but I'm not entirely sure - if this is a legal protection, they might not be able to do it.  We'll see.

The other element to consider is that it's not just five in five - it's a clock that starts at either HS graduation or 19th birthday (whichever is earlier).  It means nobody can play after 26.  That would affect non-traditional students, for sure - and if D3 doesn't follow it, might provide a landing spot for older students who haven't exhausted eligibility.

I'm thinking specifically of Yeshiva, who recruits a fair amount of guys from Israel, who can't come until they've finished their mandatory 18 month military service.  Although, I'm assuming the NCAA would have carve outs for things like that or Mormon missions, etc.

Agree they are going to have to make exceptions for examples such as hs graduates going straight to military service and I am sure some there will some others.

[D3BBALL]

Article on ESPN that pretty much sounds like the NCAA is going to give 5 years of eligibility and it going to happen by June. But the coach's association wants a say on how it is going to happen.

Not sure I would want either group making this decision.

D3 needs to opt out.  The extra covid year resulted in a lot of nonsense in d3.  Can't have that dynamic be permanent.

This is a D-I thing. If D-III wants to do it, it has to make its own rules.

From what I am being told it will be for all 3 divisions. With the player movement up or down, if they don't make it for all 3 divisions, they are just going to have more issues and more lawsuits, which they are trying to avoid because they seem to lose most of them.

[Patrick Coleman]

Article on ESPN that pretty much sounds like the NCAA is going to give 5 years of eligibility and it going to happen by June. But the coach's association wants a say on how it is going to happen.

Not sure I would want either group making this decision.

D3 needs to opt out.  The extra covid year resulted in a lot of nonsense in d3.  Can't have that dynamic be permanent.

This is a D-I thing. If D-III wants to do it, it has to make its own rules.

From what I am being told it will be for all 3 divisions. With the player movement up or down, if they don't make it for all 3 divisions, they are just going to have more issues and more lawsuits, which they are trying to avoid because they seem to lose most of them.

D-III would still have to make the rule for D-III.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

All the reporting I've seen is that this is something the Division 1 cabinet will vote on soon, which means it would only apply to D1.  This actually makes a lot of sense.  They aren't particularly interested in limiting opportunity to play college basketball, just limiting opportunity to make a ton of money doing it.

It would be interesting to know, though, if a 26 year old former professional could still qualify to play d3.  Most of those pro exemptions have come because the player in question is under 25 - but I'm not sure if that's entirely spelled out.

I bet Kevin Garnett is still in decent shape - even at 49, he could probably help a d3 team.

[midrangepullup]

All the reporting I've seen is that this is something the Division 1 cabinet will vote on soon, which means it would only apply to D1.  This actually makes a lot of sense.  They aren't particularly interested in limiting opportunity to play college basketball, just limiting opportunity to make a ton of money doing it.

It would be interesting to know, though, if a 26 year old former professional could still qualify to play d3.  Most of those pro exemptions have come because the player in question is under 25 - but I'm not sure if that's entirely spelled out.

I bet Kevin Garnett is still in decent shape - even at 49, he could probably help a d3 team.

I wonder if Division III coaches would ever tap into their former players' international networks? Many coaches have alumni who went on to play professionally overseas. In theory, coaches could ask them to identify experienced players (ages anywhere from 20 to 30) who never competed in the NCAA but might be interested in pursuing a graduate degree while playing. Could be a strange loophole.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

All the reporting I've seen is that this is something the Division 1 cabinet will vote on soon, which means it would only apply to D1.  This actually makes a lot of sense.  They aren't particularly interested in limiting opportunity to play college basketball, just limiting opportunity to make a ton of money doing it.

It would be interesting to know, though, if a 26 year old former professional could still qualify to play d3.  Most of those pro exemptions have come because the player in question is under 25 - but I'm not sure if that's entirely spelled out.

I bet Kevin Garnett is still in decent shape - even at 49, he could probably help a d3 team.

I wonder if Division III coaches would ever tap into their former players' international networks? Many coaches have alumni who went on to play professionally overseas. In theory, coaches could ask them to identify experienced players (ages anywhere from 20 to 30) who never competed in the NCAA but might be interested in pursuing a graduate degree while playing. Could be a strange loophole.

I mean, D3 has a lot of legal legs to stand on when it comes to maintaining eligibility, though.  Courts are striking NCAA rules down largely on competitive employment issues, that the NCAA is artificially denying players the opportunity to earn a competitive living.  D3 doesn't have those opportunities to withhold, so it's likely they'll be able to keep their own rules well into the future.

We're not far from some player suing because it's unfair they're required to be an enrolled student.  Given the way the courts have decided so far, that should be a pretty easy argument to win, too.