The source for Rice sports news

Mississippi Flag draws NCAA criticism in wake of social changes

By

The NCAA has revised its policies regarding the Mississippi State flag, potentially impacting Conference USA member school Southern Miss.

Social changes sweeping the nation continue to impact college sports, including Conference USA. The state of Mississippi is one of the most recent to come under fire. Restrictions surrounding the state flag, which bears a Confederate logo, have become increasingly more intense.

First, the SEC announced they would not be holding conference championship events in Mississippi until the flag was changed. Conference USA added their concerns soon after, stopping short of a total ban on par with the SEC. Instead, their admonition came across as more of a concern.

The NCAA followed with the hammer. Their demands were crystal clear: if the flag flies, the NCAA will not allow championship events of any kind in the state.

NCAA Chairman and Ohio State president Michael V. Drake was explicit in his statement:

There is no place in college athletics or the world for symbols or acts of discrimination and oppression. We must continually evaluate ways to protect and enhance the championship experience for college athletes. Expanding the Confederate flag policy to all championships is an important step by the NCAA to further provide a quality experience for all participants and fans.

Public universities in the state of Mississippi have not flown the flag for several years. Southern Miss, Conference USA’s tie into this discussion, does not fly the flag either. But it is flown in the state of Mississippi, making the future uncertain.

Southern Miss is tentatively scheduled to host the Conference USA Baseball championship in 2022, but it’s possible there could be conflict before then. If, for example, the Golden Eagles qualify to host a regional in baseball they would not be allowed to do so under the new NCAA policy.

Public pressure for change has never been higher. The financial ramifications of losing collegiate championship events are not trivial.

Subscribe on Patreon for exclusive Rice football recruiting updates, practice notes and more.

Recent Posts

Impact of NCAA Division 1 Council return to play and transfer decision

By

Two important decisions were handed down by the NCAA this week. New return to play rules could play an important role in the return of college football.

The NCAA had been under the microscope in recent weeks, for good reason. The organization played an integral part in the new normal exacted upon the nation by COVID-19 and the resulting limitations. New recruiting rules and restrictions combined with several other pressing matters came to a head in a meaningful Wednesday vote.

Return to Play

https://twitter.com/NicoleAuerbach/status/1263199201485377537

The first, and most pressing resolution, was the decision to allow athletic activities to resume beginning June 1. The sport most impacted this is football, namely summer conditioning workouts which traditionally begin sometime in June during most years.

The NCAA’s decision to allow in-person events to resume allows for what could be a decidedly uneven playing field. Some states and schools have strict guidelines to adhere to already. The NCAA cannot override those edicts.

Now individual schools and conferences are caught in between a rock and a hard place. Resuming activities will give their players the optimal time needed to get back into football shape, but it also comes with an uncertain cost to safety. On the other hand, for every day or week reopening is delayed these teams could fall significantly behind their peers.

The Roost Podcast: Listen now to our Extended Offseason Interview Series

What happens if Rice gets the all-clear to return to practice one month before Army? Two months? Or what if the American conference issues separate guidance the delays return but Conference USA allows individual schools to choose. Rice and Houston, who are currently scheduled to open the 2020 season against each other, could return to practice at different times even though their campuses are five miles apart.

How this plays out in reality remains to be seen, but the ramifications of this decision, whether right or wrong, could impact whatever season happens this academic year.

No one-time transfer waivers, yet

The concept of a one-time transfer waiver has been gaining steam over the last several months. Under the proposition, individual student athletes would not have to sit out if transferring to another school for the first time. Immediate eligibility is the norm for several sports, but football and basketball are among the holdouts.

That decision has been tabled until next year.

Subscribe on Patreon for exclusive Rice football recruiting updates, practice notes and more.

Recent Posts

NCAA D1 Council votes for extra year of eligibility for spring-sports

By

The NCAA D1 Council voted in favor of an extra year of eligibility for all spring-sport athletes. Several Rice athletes will get back a season of eligibility.

The biggest story surrounding the future of Rice baseball centered on what would become of the current squad. Suspended roughly a quarter of the way into the 2020 season, the Owls awaited the verdict of the NCAA D1 Council.

Proposals had been thrown around over the last several weeks. The big question was what changes, if any, would be made to ensure the “appropriate” level of relief was granted to spring sport athletes. Now it’s official. The NCAA D1 Council has voted to award an extra year of eligibility to all spring-sport athletes.

https://twitter.com/NicoleAuerbach/status/1244754555591688192

Reports cite a letter written by student-athletes to the NCAA as a contributing factor toward the positive decision.

At South Main, this ruling will presumably have a direct impact on Rice Baseball, Tennis, Golf, Swimming and Track and Field. How it will play out in the coming weeks is less certain.

A key piece in the ruling was the financial burden of these added scholarships. Per a report by The Athletic, schools will have the ability to decide on the level of financial commitment on a per athlete basis. No decision has been reached on how that ruling will be applied at Rice.

At the extreme, that could play out as partial or no scholarship support to players who currently hold full scholarships. The NCAA says the Student Assitance Fund may be used to cover the cost of these scholarships.

More: Erica Ogwumike talks end of season, Rice career on The Roost Podcast

Spring sports operate under much different scholarship requirements than their fall counterparts. The one-athlete to one-scholarship ratio is much less cut and dry in the spring compared to sports like football and basketball.

More details like how these players will be counted regarding roster limitations will be forthcoming. Today, the big decision was made. No Rice baseball player will lose their season. It’s possible the Owls still lose players like Trei Cruz to the draft, but those who want to return will have a spot. The NCAA did the right thing. Read the full release here.

Subscribe on Patreon for exclusive Rice football recruiting updates, practice notes and more.

Recent Posts

NCAA eligibility recommendation spawns more questions

By

The rapid cancelations of spring athletics put student athletes in a tragic spot. NCAA eligibility waivers could be an answer, but how would they work?

The continuously churning sports news cycle got more complicated on Friday when Jeff Goodman tweeted this regarding potential changes to NCAA eligibility processes:

Goodman was working off a communication that would be published later in the day. His report caught the spirit of what the NCAA would release later that day, but wasn’t completely accurate. The NCAA announced later Friday afternoon that they had “agreed that eligibility relief is appropriate” for athletes competing in spring sports. This would include sports like baseball, softball, track and field, swimming, tennis and others.

Agreeing that something should be done is not the same as a mandate. If the 2021 spring sports calendar were to happen tomorrow, there would be no new eligibility rules in place. Before any of this promise can be enacted, several more questions need to be answered:

1. How are scholarships counted?

Different levels and different sports have different scholarship limitations. In many sports, only a portion of the team can be on full academic scholarships for a given semester. Will scholarship limits be expanded? Who pays for the additional scholarships?

2. Will rosters be expanded?

Beyond scholarship situations, college rosters have limitations on the numbers of players they can have at any one time. If all seniors are granted an additional season, how does a school reconcile the unexpected returning players with a new signee class already committed to enroll in the fall? Do rosters expand? If so, to how many spots and for how long?

3. Who gets the extra eligibility?

Restoring an additional year of eligibility to all parties is going to be a challenging puzzle to solve. Would restoring the year to only seniors be a possibility? What about the MLB Draft? If a player is selected this year and opts not to return to school, does that extra year of eligibility disappear? Could the school allocate it to another player?

4. What about the winter sports?

The spring sports are in their initial weeks, but most school’s basketball seasons were in their final days, some down to a final game. Is it “fair” to restore eligibility to those players who were denied NCAA Tournament berths? I’m sure there would be seniors that would much rather get another shot at March Madness than start working a nine-to-five.

5. What about school?

And that brings us to school. These are student athletes we’re talking about and several players in this sample were graduates already. Would they have to enroll in a master’s program to maintain their additional season of eligibility and if they’ve finished a degree would they have to start another?

We have more questions than answers right now, by a wide margin. The NCAA is routinely dragged through the mud for making comical decisions, but this cause is much more commendable. Executing this recommendation is going to be the hard part. Just like the concerns over the pandemic that forced these questions, things might get more complicated before any answers emerge.

Subscribe on Patreon for exclusive Rice football recruiting updates, practice notes and more.

Recent Posts

College Football transfer rules could be changing soon

By

Changes could be coming to the college football transfer rules. The NCAA could enable one-time transfer exemptions for all sports as soon as April.

There have been rumblings of changes to the NCAA transfer policy for some time. Those ideas have reemerged recently in the national discourse. The Big Ten got things rolling in earnest a few weeks ago by announcing their support of a “one-time transfer exemption.” That policy, if enacted, would allow athletes competing in any sport to transfer to another school without being forced to sit out a year as a penalty.

A more open transfer policy is already in place in all Division 1 sports with five notable exceptions: football, men’s basketball, women’s basketball, baseball and men’s ice hockey. This new proposal would bring those five spots into alignment with the rest of collegiate athletics.

The ACC quickly followed suit:

With two Power 5 conferences in support of a revised policy, the NCAA stepped in. They provided a few clarifications to the proposals, announcing potential conditions for a new rule. This proposal, created by a working group, could be enacted as quickly as April of this year. If that were to be the case, the rule would be in place before the beginning of the 2020 football season.

If the transfer rules were indeed relaxed, some language could be added to the rules to account for the fluctuation in players from school to school. The biggest change would revolve around the size of annual signing classes, currently capped at 25 players per year. Transfers currently count against that number.

So how does this impact Rice football?

The short answer is I’m not sure. I’m cognizant of the fears that Power 5 programs will all of a sudden swoop in and steal away all of the top talent from Group of 5 programs.

But let’s not pretend that’s not a threat as things currently stand. And the mobility isn’t limited upward. Rice signed six graduate transfers last year and three more this year, the majority of which came from Power 5 schools. They’ve not taken many regular transfers under head coach Mike Bloomgren, instead, they’ve relying on the JUCO and grad transfer markets.

Rice has seen several players enter the Transfer Portal this offseason. It’s reasonable to believe that a more lax transfer policy would see that number increase. But the doom and gloom preached by some seems a tad excessive. A capable starter at a program like Rice would have to weigh the trade-offs of a Rice degree and playing time with perhaps a lesser role at another institution, albeit one with a bigger football brand.

Beyond that, Rice will be playing by the same rules as everyone else. They’ll have just as much access to talent relative to their peers in Conference USA and the Group of 5. The gap between the bigger state schools is sizable already. I don’t see more transfers tipping the playing field by a noticeable margin.

I’m curious to hear what you think. Do you support these potential changes? How would you propose such a policy were implemented?

Subscribe on Patreon for exclusive Rice football recruiting updates, practice notes and more.

Recent Posts