I've seen a few arguments for and against. Any thoughts?
No
You cannot force a kid to play under the circumstances if he believe among other things it could harm his long term health
Thus in my opinion, removing a year of eligibility would be unfair
Of course you cannot force anyone to play but that is not the question ... the NCAA extended eligibility for seniors from last season's spring sports ... but schools like Wisconsin categorically stated "time to move on".No
You cannot force a kid to play under the circumstances if he believe among other things it could harm his long term health
Thus in my opinion, removing a year of eligibility would be unfair
I've seen a few arguments for and against. Any thoughts?
This is exactly what I have been thinking....CFB might be back to the 105 scholarship limit, if only temporarily.This season would make for a good redshirt year for those who choose not to play. For players who have already redshirted though, this gets trickier. We may end up with what amounts to a lot of "6th year seniors" the next few seasons. There are also implications to consider with the 85 scholarship limit unless exceptions are granted.
It will be ‘allowed’ by the NCAA, but programs aren’t going to do it. Not when there will already be budget shortfalls due to the virus.This is exactly what I have been thinking....CFB might be back to the 105 scholarship limit, if only temporarily.
NoI've seen a few arguments for and against. Any thoughts?
No
You cannot force a kid to play under the circumstances if he believe among other things it could harm his long term health
Thus in my opinion, removing a year of eligibility would be unfair