Eliminate redshirting

[MPhillips]

1 minute ago, ionel said:

Why is it good?

I'm not arguing it is...

[ionel]

Just now, MPhillips said:

I'm not arguing it is...

Well if it ain't good then it must be ...

[MPhillips]

Just now, ionel said:

Well if it ain't good then it must be ...

That checks out.

[98lberEating2Lunches]

5 hours ago, 1032004 said:

for every 4 athletes that receive a full scholarship for 5 years, that could be converted to 5 athletes getting a full scholarship for 4 years

Except rarely does a wrestler get a full scholarship and many schools don't give the full 9.9.  I don't think it was about spreading out the wealth.  Kept going on about perverse motives.

 

5 hours ago, 1032004 said:

apparently has no issue with grayshirting

This is something with which a person from a privileged class might tend to be less likely to take issue.

[1032004]

1 hour ago, ionel said:

Why is it good?

I mean besides the fact that some folks just disagree or like it ...

Allows kids to get used to the rigor of D1 athletics and college academics as well as adjust to living on their own for likely the first time in their lives 

[Dark Energy]

On 11/6/2022 at 9:13 PM, Dark Energy said:

Harder to do.  Gap years are a thing. If a kid / family wants to delay the start of their career, making money, etc … so that the dad can feel better about the kid’s college wrestling accolades, not much to be done.  
 

But the school and staff should not sanction it and even promote it.  
 

It’s all about twisting sport into something more important than it should be for a school.

Quoting my reply about grey shirts.  Sounds pretty negative to me.  But I see some here are not interested in honest debate and instead want to somehow besmirch me or have themselves having fun sounding like an arrogant schmuck.  
 

Privilege - hah.  Glad to know your fighting stance.  

Ok - back to discussion.  Let’s do the math.  9.9 athletic scholarships available.   Will simplify from here but the point will be the same … assume all getting the scholarship money use for five years.   That is 20 people and let’s round the limit to 10 to make math easier.  So each is getting 0.5 scholarship.  Over a simple 20 year period how many kids get this 1/2 ride?  Easy, 4 increments of 5 years x 20 kids = 80. 
 

Let’s now say they all just get for 4 years. Now, the math is 5 increments of 4 years x 20 = 100 kids.

Go ahead and get more precise, the outcome will be the same. More kids get more scholarships if the time frame is 4, not 5 years. 
 

Can do the math again another way and find that you could keep the number of kids at 80 and choose to INCREASE scholarships for the 4 year approach and spend the same amount of money.

Or do a combo, mix of more kids getting scholarship and get more money.  Nice.

I totally get that redshirts make life easier for athletes and it makes it easier to win.  I get it.  I bet we can come up with many ideas to help with this.  For example

1) require only 10 credit hours to be full time

2) give them automatic grade lifts in their classes

3) give full rides to all including stipends

4) don’t actually make them go to class

5) pay them as employees and allow 8 years of eligibility 

Crazy and absurd.  Point is that limits need to be put in place somewhere.  It is a question on where those limits are drawn.  I’m someone that believes that the limits are not in the right place.

I do not like the institutionalizing of incentives to take 5, not 4 years, to graduate.  It wastes time, and takes REAL opportunity away from others.  
 

 

Edited November 8, 2022 by Dark Energy

[1032004]

8 minutes ago, Dark Energy said:

Quoting my reply about grey shirts.  Sounds pretty negative to me.  But I see some here are not interested in honest debate and instead want to somehow besmirch me or have themselves having fun sounding like an arrogant schmuck.  
 

Privilege - hah.  Glad to know your fighting stance.  

Ok - back to discussion.  Let’s do the math.  9.9 athletic scholarships available.   Will simplify from here but the point will be the same … assume all getting the scholarship money use for five years.   That is 20 people and let’s round the limit to 10 to make math easier.  So each is getting 0.5 scholarship.  Over a simple 20 year period how many kids get this 1/2 ride?  Easy, 4 increments of 5 years x 20 kids = 80. 
 

Let’s now say they all just get for 4 years. Now, the math is 5 increments of 4 years x 20 = 100 kids.

Go ahead and get more precise, the outcome will be the same. More kids get more scholarships if the time frame is 4, not 5 years. 
 

Can do the math again another way and find that you could keep the number of kids at 80 and choose to INCREASE scholarships for the 4 year approach and spend the same amount of money.

Or do a combo, mix of more kids getting scholarship and get more money.  Nice.

I totally get that redshirts make life easier for athletes and it makes it easier to win.  I get it.  I bet we can come up with many ideas to help with this.  For example

1) require only 10 credit hours to be full time

2) give them automatic grade lifts in their classes

3) give full rides to all including stipends

4) don’t actually make them go to class

5) pay them as employees and allow 8 years of eligibility 

Crazy and absurd.  Point is that limits need to be put in place somewhere.  It is a question on where those limits are drawn.  I’m someone that believes that the limits are not in the right place.

I do not like the institutionalizing of incentives to take 5, not 4 years, to graduate.  It wastes time, and takes REAL opportunity away from others.  
 

 

My apologies, you “have a problem” with grayshirting, you just don’t care to do anything about it and don’t seem to mind that eliminating redshirting will exponentially increase the number of grayshirts, yes mostly for the “privileged.”

Can a band member participate in band for 5+ years as long as they fulfill all the necessary requirements?

[Dark Energy]

3 hours ago, 1032004 said:

My apologies, you “have a problem” with grayshirting, you just don’t care to do anything about it and don’t seem to mind that eliminating redshirting will exponentially increase the number of grayshirts, yes mostly for the “privileged.”

Can a band member participate in band for 5+ years as long as they fulfill all the necessary requirements?

Is the school saying — ‘hey, you didn’t get first chair, here is another year of scholarship for you?  Feel free to extend your stay.  Also, we will give less money to other band members since we are giving an extra year to you.’

I’ll answer - no, they are not.

And what is this privilege crap?

Most athletic scholarships are not full rides.  With 5 year scholarships, let’s say kid is paying 50%.  Now they have to pay it for 5 years with a redshirt.  Not 4!  If family is struggling to pay for college, 4 is the way.  Going 5 is easier for those that have the money to pay!!

Grayshirt - I’m not a fan.  I don’t have a solution.  I’d like to eliminate.  Just don’t know how.  Open to ideas.  Can start a new thread if you like.

Hell, some kids may need to work a year before going to college to help pay for it.  Not privilege.  Don’t want to penalize them.  

[BigRedFan]

On 11/7/2022 at 11:27 AM, ionel said:

let's see the data, if a majority should be easy to find the data.  Most all undergrad programs are designed to be completed in 4 years (could be a couple exceptions like Architecture).  @Wrestleknownothing is now rocket scientists status and we know very good with data, maybe he can help put together some tables. 

I just looked it up, being the skeptic that I am.  33% of public school students complete in four years, while 52% of private school students do so.

[Scouts Honor]

On 11/5/2022 at 8:49 PM, Dark Energy said:

The concept is stupid.  

Go to college, earn your degree - then play sports while there.  

Not good enough to start - oh well.  Next year.  Get hurt, that sucks.  Move your life along.
 
Eliminate redshirts.

Do we redshirt Tuba players?  Do we redshirt chemical engineers?  Do we redshirt actresses?  Do we redshirt pre-Med majors?  Do we redshirt aspiring diplomats?

 

" But I see some here are not interested in honest debate and instead want to somehow besmirch me or have themselves having fun sounding like an arrogant schmuck.  "

 

as opposed to the heartfelt original post? 

[ionel]

14 minutes ago, BigRedFan said:

I just looked it up, being the skeptic that I am.  33% of public school students complete in four years, while 52% of private school students do so.

And for 23 and younger?

[Dark Energy]

18 minutes ago, Scouts Honor said:

" But I see some here are not interested in honest debate and instead want to somehow besmirch me or have themselves having fun sounding like an arrogant schmuck.  "

 

as opposed to the heartfelt original post? 

Ha!  Fair.  Did sound arrogant.  

[1032004]

5 hours ago, Dark Energy said:

Is the school saying — ‘hey, you didn’t get first chair, here is another year of scholarship for you?  Feel free to extend your stay.  Also, we will give less money to other band members since we are giving an extra year to you.’

I’ll answer - no, they are not.

And what is this privilege crap?

Most athletic scholarships are not full rides.  With 5 year scholarships, let’s say kid is paying 50%.  Now they have to pay it for 5 years with a redshirt.  Not 4!  If family is struggling to pay for college, 4 is the way.  Going 5 is easier for those that have the money to pay!!

Grayshirt - I’m not a fan.  I don’t have a solution.  I’d like to eliminate.  Just don’t know how.  Open to ideas.  Can start a new thread if you like.

Hell, some kids may need to work a year before going to college to help pay for it.  Not privilege.  Don’t want to penalize them.  

Do many band members get scholarships? (Yes I know some do but would have to believe it’s a small minority).  I guess they could have an unrelated academic scholarship and lose that, but I doubt they’d get kicked out of the band after participating for 4 years, but feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

Yes, I would bet that most grayshirts even outside of the Ivy League but especially within it are taken by those with “privilege” (AKA at least upper middle class parents), because a lot of people probably can’t afford to grayshirt without getting scholarship or financial aid money, and needing to work full time would likely put a damper on the purpose of grayshirting in order to prepare for athletics. Cornell maybe the exception since from what I gather their housing may be at least partly subsidized by alumni.

Do you agree that eliminating redshirting would result in exponentially more grayshirting?

 

[Dark Energy]

42 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Do many band members get scholarships? (Yes I know some do but would have to believe it’s a small minority).  I guess they could have an unrelated academic scholarship and lose that, but I doubt they’d get kicked out of the band after participating for 4 years, but feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

Yes, I would bet that most grayshirts even outside of the Ivy League but especially within it are taken by those with “privilege” (AKA at least upper middle class parents), because a lot of people probably can’t afford to grayshirt without getting scholarship or financial aid money, and needing to work full time would likely put a damper on the purpose of grayshirting in order to prepare for athletics. Cornell maybe the exception since from what I gather their housing may be at least partly subsidized by alumni.

Do you agree that eliminating redshirting would result in exponentially more grayshirting?

 

No, not exponentially more.  But I do not know for certain.  Many kids don’t redshirt.  They do their four and are done.  
 

How do we feel about high schoolers purposefully take 5 years to finish high school so as to be more successful with their high school wrestling career?

This is not all that different a situation.  Sounds way more gross, I know.  But why?

[1032004]

43 minutes ago, Dark Energy said:

No, not exponentially more.  But I do not know for certain.  Many kids don’t redshirt.  They do their four and are done.  
 

How do we feel about high schoolers purposefully take 5 years to finish high school so as to be more successful with their high school wrestling career?

This is not all that different a situation.  Sounds way more gross, I know.  But why?

For one, an extra year makes much more difference in HS than it does in college.

And a lot of kids are already redshirting in middle or high school anyway…

[Dark Energy]

1 hour ago, 1032004 said:

For one, an extra year makes much more difference in HS than it does in college.

And a lot of kids are already redshirting in middle or high school anyway…

Curious on the thinking … what difference are you referring to?  Wrestling ability?

And the middle / high school redshirt is ridiculous ^ 2.  Sad whenever I hear it.

[ionel]

47 minutes ago, Dark Energy said:

 

And the middle / high school redshirt is ridiculous ^ 2.  Sad whenever I hear it.

Well don't forget about redshirting kindergarten.  This the one that really bothers me because research has shown for quite some time that starting early is very important for education/academic development.  So those holding kids back a year (preschool, 1st grade ) for sport reason are hurting them academically.  Maybe that's why they think they need a redshirt for academics in college. 

[1032004]

3 hours ago, ionel said:

Well don't forget about redshirting kindergarten.  This the one that really bothers me because research has shown for quite some time that starting early is very important for education/academic development.  So those holding kids back a year (preschool, 1st grade ) for sport reason are hurting them academically.  

Is that true?  I’d be curious to see this research

[1032004]

3 hours ago, Dark Energy said:

Curious on the thinking … what difference are you referring to?  Wrestling ability?

Strength mostly I’d say.  It’s math really.  A 19 year old is 5.6% older than an 18 year old, but a 23 year old is only 4.5% older than a 22 year old.

[ionel]

15 minutes ago, 1032004 said:

Is that true?  I’d be curious to see this research

Lots of research out there but to briefly summarize part of it:

 

QUALITY EARLY LEARNING

"Key early childhood research studies demonstrated that high-quality care and education from birth through age 5 results in higher IQ scores, higher school graduation rates and lower crime rates. Young children with high-quality experiences have also been shown to have better vocabulary, language, math and social skills, more positive relationships with classmates, and higher scores on school-readiness assessments."

 

So think if you hold your kid back at 5 so will have a better opportunity in sports.

[98lberEating2Lunches]

I'll check back when the ground swell of support to eliminate redshirting due to its obvious lack of benefits to students athletes, as expressed by student athletes themselves, wins the day.

[Theo Brixton]

Weird to be invoking "privilege" in any of this.

If wrestling post-high school needs to be tied to universities, I think it's fine to have a redshirt. It takes time for most to get the hang of balancing the rigors of collegiate wrestling and academics--especially if they are majoring in something that makes them employable afterwards. Many non-athletes take more than 4 years to graduate so 5 years isn't unheard regardless of athletics. 

What is getting out of hand are the endless extra years given for injuries, Covid, Olympic runs, whatever. Your clock should start after graduating high school--5 years. If you anticipate making an Olympic run, take that into consideration when planning your career. Want to greyshirt? Great, you just used a year of eligibility.

I'd also be fine with eligibility being tied to age to end the ridiculous habit of middle school redshirts. 

[1032004]

3 hours ago, Theo Brixton said:

Weird to be invoking "privilege" in any of this.

If wrestling post-high school needs to be tied to universities, I think it's fine to have a redshirt. It takes time for most to get the hang of balancing the rigors of collegiate wrestling and academics--especially if they are majoring in something that makes them employable afterwards. Many non-athletes take more than 4 years to graduate so 5 years isn't unheard regardless of athletics. 

What is getting out of hand are the endless extra years given for injuries, Covid, Olympic runs, whatever. Your clock should start after graduating high school--5 years. If you anticipate making an Olympic run, take that into consideration when planning your career. Want to greyshirt? Great, you just used a year of eligibility.

I'd also be fine with eligibility being tied to age to end the ridiculous habit of middle school redshirts. 

I agree with most of this post.  But to clarify, I think the only reason “privilege” has been brought up is regarding grayshirting.  Yes, I’d bet the majority of wrestlers taking grayshirts come from “privilege.”  The main argument I’ve seen against this is “lol privilege,” and one comment claiming someone “might need to work for a year” - does anyone have any examples of a D1 wrestler that took a grayshirt because he “needed to work for a year”?

[Dark Energy]

I also clearly pointed out that taking a redshirt would fall into the ‘privilege’ realm.  If you are paying for 50% of school (or 25%), having the option to pay for a 5th year is pretty privileged … no?  

Compare to Greyshirt - not paying for school or it is cheap (community college).  Which is more privileged?

@Theo Brixton - your solution would be better than today.  

[Dark Energy]

7 hours ago, 98lberEating2Lunches said:

I'll check back when the ground swell of support to eliminate redshirting due to its obvious lack of benefits to students athletes, as expressed by student athletes themselves, wins the day.

hmmm.  So, would you use this reasoning to support 2 redshirt years?  25 full scholarships plus being paid beyond scholarship?  Ability to transfer at any point?  No need to take more than 8 credits for student athletes?

Just trying to understand whether the only litmus test you use is ‘benefit to student athletes.’  
 

My guess is that you do think there should be limits to the benefits.  Because there is more to consider.  We just differ on the placement of those limits.