It will not affect many students in a school. I would say 15-20 at the most. If they have to transfer they cannot play sports so this will stop many from leaving. This is not the same rule they have in college where everything  is open!

On 4/5/2021 at 2:55 AM, nees1212 said:

I have heard that for all students K-12, this current school year would not count at all. All credit hours would revert back to the previous year, so current seniors would essentially be juniors entering their senior year again.

From what I've read this is incorrect:  "A retaken high school course under this subsection shall not count as an additional credit towards graduation unless the student failed the original course. Retaking a course under this section shall count towards full-time enrollment for the student."  That would imply that if a student passes a course this year that they would already have that credit and would not retake it.  This is why you see references to fifth-year seniors and others "supplementing" their academic transcripts.

On 4/5/2021 at 7:52 AM, The Flea Market said:

It will not affect many students in a school. I would say 15-20 at the most. If they have to transfer they cannot play sports so this will stop many from leaving. This is not the same rule they have in college where everything  is open!

Why can’t they play? They are moving for academic reasons. 

I don’t like it, if you want to let kids come back for academic purposes only that’s fine but they shouldn’t be allowed to play sports. If they were going to let kids come back and play sports why not do it the year before when kids actually missed the entire spring sports season and the state basketball tournament, it makes no sense to me for the kids to get a extra year this year when the sports season was a go all year. 

1 hour ago, Tkinslow said:

I don’t like it, if you want to let kids come back for academic purposes only that’s fine but they shouldn’t be allowed to play sports. If they were going to let kids come back and play sports why not do it the year before when kids actually missed the entire spring sports season and the state basketball tournament, it makes no sense to me for the kids to get a extra year this year when the sports season was a go all year. 

Because students were in person from August to the middle of March. It’s not “just a sports” rule. It’s been presented as an option for academic purposes and if your age falls under the standard age requirements you can just so happen to play sports too. 
 

10 hours ago, DearToday said:

Because students were in person from August to the middle of March. It’s not “just a sports” rule. It’s been presented as an option for academic purposes and if your age falls under the standard age requirements you can just so happen to play sports too. 
 

If it’s for academic purposes then that’s what it should be about because we all know who this helps let’s not act like we don’t. If you’re a struggling team then no kids are coming back but if you’re going to be good then kids will come back and make the gap even bigger between good and bad teams and in my opinion that’s an unfair advantage.

3 hours ago, Tkinslow said:

If it’s for academic purposes then that’s what it should be about because we all know who this helps let’s not act like we don’t. If you’re a struggling team then no kids are coming back but if you’re going to be good then kids will come back and make the gap even bigger between good and bad teams and in my opinion that’s an unfair advantage.

I was just answering when you said, “if they were going to let kids come back to play sports why not the year before.”

The majority that will be helped IMO are kids who are in elementary school that are missing vital information they need to be learning in person. 

I also don’t see the gap growing that much. I think some key solid players may return on teams, but your D1 kids aren’t going to come back. 

What does a coach  tell last year's junior (this year's senior) that now he won't be starting  as planned because the guy a class ahead of him is not graduating but is coming back?       That  has  to be tough on the kid but I guess it's no different than if a new kid unexpectedly transferred in and beat him out.

Will any kid that comes back and plays on the football stay in school after football season, probably not and that’s my issue because the coaches of the really good teams are going to go after some of these kids to come back (probably linemen) and it’s not for academic purposes in anyway.

I know it’s not football related but Kale Gaither of Madisonville has announced he will use a 5th year. To my knowledge this is the first major athlete to officially use a 5th year. I just hope it’s with academic purposes in mind.

There's going to be lots of hold backs and the vast majority are doing it for sports. Quit kidding yourselves.

12 hours ago, tcjkbt said:

What does a coach  tell last year's junior (this year's senior) that now he won't be starting  as planned because the guy a class ahead of him is not graduating but is coming back?       That  has  to be tough on the kid but I guess it's no different than if a new kid unexpectedly transferred in and beat him out.

As “planned”?  Come on, you gotta earn your position and that starts on day 1 on any season.  Out work then, out play them. If your coach is guaranteeing spots to any kids that’s a problem IMO. ?‍♂️  

5 minutes ago, LoudenSwain said:

As “planned”?  Come on, you gotta earn your position and that starts on day 1 on any season.  Out work then, out play them. If your coach is guaranteeing spots to any kids that’s a problem IMO. ?‍♂️  

Come on, surely you must acknowledge that this is a different situation than normal. You’re correct, you have to earn your spot, but it is a blow for something unprecedented like this to potentially deny a player a role they typically would have earned with the absence of an individual who would always have had their eligibility expire. 

Just now, DragonFire said:

Come on, surely you must acknowledge that this is a different situation than normal. You’re correct, you have to earn your spot, but it is a blow for something unprecedented like this to potentially deny a player a role they typically would have earned with the absence of an individual who would always have had their eligibility expire. 

I can see your point, but no different than I was in high school and a kid showed up from St Louis, outplayed us, and earned a starting spot. We weren’t “owed” anything, we shoulda worked harder in off season. 
 

Look, I see all sides. But my point is its April, and you got months to prepare for the upcoming season. That’s a good warning. Does is suck?  Maybe. But ask that kid returning how it was not attending school in person, not going to prom, not having a graduation. Then ask them how it feels to have the NCAA give all their kids an extra year, take those potential scholarships they would have earned in an otherwise normal year, yada yada yada. It never ends. 
 

man up. Take the job from them if you want it. 

1 hour ago, LoudenSwain said:

I can see your point, but no different than I was in high school and a kid showed up from St Louis, outplayed us, and earned a starting spot. We weren’t “owed” anything, we shoulda worked harder in off season. 
 

Look, I see all sides. But my point is its April, and you got months to prepare for the upcoming season. That’s a good warning. Does is suck?  Maybe. But ask that kid returning how it was not attending school in person, not going to prom, not having a graduation. Then ask them how it feels to have the NCAA give all their kids an extra year, take those potential scholarships they would have earned in an otherwise normal year, yada yada yada. It never ends. 
 

man up. Take the job from them if you want it.