ysupenguins.com ...fan home for YSU Sports
YSU Penguin Athletics => YSU Penguin Athletics => Topic started by: robmat2571 on September 17, 2016, 02:49:49 PM
-
I am sitting here watching North Dakota State go toe to toe with Iowa. Is there any chance that they could get votes for the top 25 of the Big Boys? Has any 1-AA school ever cracked the top 25?
-
Hey, I-AA Fan... Still think NDSU is done ? Keep taking the crazy pills. All they do is win. Sheesh.
-
WOW!!!
-
23-21. Unreal!
-
Not bad for a team thats done, right IAA?
LOL
-
Going for 2 not converting..Getting a stop..Then driving the length of the field..Then kicking the game-winner..Simply incredible
-
NDSU knows how to win, it doesn't matter if it's E. Washington or Iowa. They drove on the ground 80yds with Iowa's defense knowing what they were about to do, but Iowa could not stop them!
Yes, I believe they belong in the FBS top 25. Now they have some big battles coming in our conference.
-
I think having Jodi and Brock would have helped us against WVU. I think we will match up well with them. As long as the receivers get better and the LBs get better along with one of our corner backs we should have a shot.
-
Rushing yards the 2nd half NDSU 203 lowa -7
-
They are done.
-
Lol. So delusional....
-
I am sitting here watching North Dakota State go toe to toe with Iowa. Is there any chance that they could get votes for the top 25 of the Big Boys? Has any 1-AA school ever cracked the top 25?
No
-
They should most certainly get votes this week.
-
No more hardware going to Fargo.
-
No more hardware going to Fargo.
I would be surprised if they don't get another championship. I think they are the team to beat. I'm not saying they can't be beat this year, but they could very well win another national championship this year. Haven't seen anything to show me they can't.
-
Also, the AP had a ton of voters ask if NDSU could get votes (apparently no one remembers that an FCS school can from back when App State did after beating Michigan). No FCS team has ever gone beyond just getting votes though and being listed in the "Others receiving votes". We shall see, I don't think they crack the top 25, but it would be awesome as hell. Great exposure for the FCS if they did.
-
How about this angle, games like Iowa and ndsu are bad for FCS. It just means that more and more 1A teams will stop scheduling FCS teams, heck I would. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose. Iowa now has zero chance of the play-offs. The big paydays will end soon and schools like us will be hurting.
-
How about this angle, games like Iowa and ndsu are bad for FCS. It just means that more and more 1A teams will stop scheduling FCS teams, heck I would. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose. Iowa now has zero chance of the play-offs. The big paydays will end soon and schools like us will be hurting.
Could not have been said any better. They need to be banned by the NCAA so that no region of the country is treated unfairly. Like the Midwest with the Big-10's refusal to play FCS teams.
-
With respect, not sure that argument makes total sense. Ban NDSU vs Iowa type games so more FCS vs FBS games are banned IAA? Also, don't think I agree either guinpen. First ever time that a ranked FBS team lost to an FCS team and didn't completely drop out of the coaches poll (Iowa is still ranked in the Coaches poll, at exactly 25). There are even talking heads on ESPN saying that losing to NDSU isn't really a bad loss either.
There is certainly more risk than reward for scheduling FCS teams, but its not just teams like NDSU that cause that issue. YSU, UNI, EWU, ect. ect. have been digging that grave for a while. Anytime a good FCS team beats an FBS team, the bad starts to outweigh the good. Therein lies the problem. If we like and need these money games, but we bring a competitive team, by your own argument we are causing our own misfortune down the road because the money games dry up due to our performance on the field. So... what we should just lose and take the money :-\?
-
They are done.
That’s it, stick to your guns! Too late to back out now, no matter how ridiculous you sound! We all knew how dumb your statement was last week, now the whole world knows! Am I correct in saying MVFC 2 BIG 1?
-
How about this angle, games like Iowa and ndsu are bad for FCS. It just means that more and more 1A teams will stop scheduling FCS teams, heck I would. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose. Iowa now has zero chance of the play-offs. The big paydays will end soon and schools like us will be hurting.
Could not have been said any better. They need to be banned by the NCAA so that no region of the country is treated unfairly. Like the Midwest with the Big-10's refusal to play FCS teams.
I disagree 100%. We all know how 1AA feels, but I still think there is a future back playing Kent, Akron, maybe adding Buffalo etc. This would rule that out and I don't think it makes sense. What does "region" have to do with it? These 1AA conferences think travel is nothing. If the Big 10 won't play us, we could go to the west or south.
-
They are done.
That’s it, stick to your guns! Too late to back out now, no matter how ridiculous you sound! We all knew how dumb your statement was last week, now the whole world knows! Am I correct in saying MVFC 2 BIG 1?
As many as 4 losses in conference, no less than 2. No conference crown, no national title. I will not go as far as to say no post-season though; so I guess I am backing off my statement somewhat. They are done.
-
With respect, not sure that argument makes total sense. Ban NDSU vs Iowa type games so more FCS vs FBS games are banned IAA? Also, don't think I agree either guinpen. First ever time that a ranked FBS team lost to an FCS team and didn't completely drop out of the coaches poll (Iowa is still ranked in the Coaches poll, at exactly 25). There are even talking heads on ESPN saying that losing to NDSU isn't really a bad loss either.
There is certainly more risk than reward for scheduling FCS teams, but its not just teams like NDSU that cause that issue. YSU, UNI, EWU, ect. ect. have been digging that grave for a while. Anytime a good FCS team beats an FBS team, the bad starts to outweigh the good. Therein lies the problem. If we like and need these money games, but we bring a competitive team, by your own argument we are causing our own misfortune down the road because the money games dry up due to our performance on the field. So... what we should just lose and take the money :-\?
That is just ego posting. How is this any different than YSU playing Slippery Rock (which all of you complained about)? Ignoring the fact that the NCAA has no other way to fund FCA ball, there is no way that it is fair, nor should it be allowed. All of us know these games are going to continue to happen, so this discussion is theoretical. Yet in reality, the NCAA tells FBS administrations that they can schedule an extra game if they will play an FCS program. Now a couple of conferences refuse to play the FCS team, yet they are permitted to keep the extra game and schedule FBS opposition? How is that fair in any way, shape, or form?
NDSU wins games because they play an antiquated style of ball. FBS defenses today are not designed to stop a team that has huge line depth and runs the ball for 400+yards. D linemen today are like ours ...tall and lanky. If NDSU played a "real" #10 FCS team and spread the ball on offense ...the game would be over in Q1 ...just as it would be for any other FCS team. That being said, Iowa is so over-rated.
Emphasis today is on winning the conference. The winner of the big-10 (regardless of record) is going to be one of the final-4 teams. Iowa could beat UM or OSU and still lose to NDSU ...it is simply a matter of focus. What Big-10 coach is going to recruit and waste time in summer camp practicing to play a pro-set run-based offense for 1-game, when they have to worry about Meyer and Harbaugh spreading it out all over the place in games worth multi-millions to their institutions? The game is all about money and this is where FBS and FCS institutions differ the most ...this is the largest reason they should not play each other. Furthermore, if you are going to allow the inter-divisional games, make certain that ALL IA/FBS teams comply with a very specific rule instructing them to play I-AA/FCS schools. Additionally FBS schools should be required to play a D-II school to help give the lower division their "share of the pie". Where does it all end?
-
1-AA you are delusional. North Dakota State has two wins over quality FCS programs, and beat a ranked Big 10 team on the road, and you call them antiquated? Then Alabama is antiquated as well.
Nothing wrong with lining up and running over the opponent, which is what they did to Iowa. When they need to throw they can, and their skilled talent is exceptional. Good backs and quality wide receivers.
YSU had made the playoffs once in 15 years, and you defend them; but blast the most successful program in the history 1-AA and FCS football.
-
1-AA you are delusional. North Dakota State has two wins over quality FCS programs, and beat a ranked Big 10 team on the road, and you call them antiquated? Then Alabama is antiquated as well.
Nothing wrong with lining up and running over the opponent, which is what they did to Iowa. When they need to throw they can, and their skilled talent is exceptional. Good backs and quality wide receivers.
YSU had made the playoffs once in 15 years, and you defend them; but blast the most successful program in the history 1-AA and FCS football.
You hit the nail on the head. Saban's success is predicated on an outdated style of ball; but really more unique than antiquated. They are good at it, thus their success. Remember, "antiquated" means 'unique'. SO if you feel more comfortable with that choice of term ...feel free. I used the term "antiquated" in describing NDSU's offense because the Bison's style of offense was ata one time, far from unique ...where not too many teams ever ran the ball the way Alabama does. NDSU's run game is even more diverse than Alabama's, but would you be shocked if Alabama beat NDSU 50-12? NO. Would you be shocked if the complete opposite happened? YES. WHY? Exactly what I posted.
In reality, Alabama has an option game that is second to none and NDSU's offense is not even similar.
Furthermore, I do not consider NDSU any better than a number of I-AA/FCS teams "in their day". Examples being UCF, EKU, Marshall, GASouthern, Appalachian State, (possibly even Boise State & Delaware) and yes even YSU. NDSU reminds me the most of Western Kentucky. Teams in the GFC had trouble with their powerful run game (much more like Alabama's), but teams outside of the GFC could not even compete with them in their day ...they easily won the national title and bolted to IA. Guess what? WKU does not run an option out of a triple-back i-formation anymore do they? Yet NDSU does.
-
1AA, you should pick a different topic than knocking NDSU and Alabama.
Yes, most of us would love to see them both lose, but it shouldn't make us delusional! I don’t agree that NDSU is “equal” with other multiply national championship schools. I saw YSU play for the national championship 6 times and I thought we had the best players on the field ONCE. I saw NDSU the last 5 and I thought they had a clear talent advantage ALL 5 TIMES. They are clearly a superior program. The most amazing game in YSU history? Not the 3 national championships when I didn't think we had the best talent, but relied on the best coach. The most amazing win in YSU history is beating NDSU in Fargo 2011
-
1AA, you should pick a different topic than knocking NDSU and Alabama.
Yes, most of us would love to see them both lose, but it shouldn't make us delusional! I don’t agree that NDSU is “equal” with other multiply national championship schools. I saw YSU play for the national championship 6 times and I thought we had the best players on the field ONCE. I saw NDSU the last 5 and I thought they had a clear talent advantage ALL 5 TIMES. They are clearly a superior program. The most amazing game in YSU history? Not the 3 national championships when I didn't think we had the best talent, but relied on the best coach. The most amazing win in YSU history is beating NDSU in Fargo 2011
Okay then use your example. Actually the Heacock win in Fargo was more impressive as we were so dominating on D in that one. However, in both cases we simply stacked the line and crossed our fingers. IN the Heacock game we had probably more depth on defense than NDSU had on offense. Did we make the postseason on any of these years? ... NDSU did. You could have argued the Heacock year (though not well), but we clearly were not post-season material in 2011.
Also just because I do not worship the ground the Bison graze on, does not mean I am insulting them. As to Alabama, I dislike Urban Meyer much more than Saban. I am a Penguin fan. I do not give a crap about Alabama or Ohio State ... ever. I care about NDSU one week out of the year.
I know that many of you may find this hard to believe, but I would not miss a YSU game against Slippery Rock for a chance to go to the NCAA FBS championship game or even the Superbowl ...so maybe I am weird.
Although I would miss a non-conference, non-post-season Penguins game for a chance to go to a World Series game featuring the Orioles. Even then I would hope to go on a day other than Saturday ;)
-
"I know that many of you may find this hard to believe, but I would not miss a YSU game against Slippery Rock for a chance to go to the NCAA FCS championship game or even the Superbowl ...so maybe I am weird."
Who's paying? Honestly, the FCS championship is such a mess of people etc., I wouldn't go unless YSU were playing (unlikely). But the Superbowl is kind of a bucket list event, and that would beat out “The Rock”!
I don't get the apparent uproar of bloggers so against a couple creampuffs along with a FBS team in the pre-league schedule. You need to bring kids into the program and when else is Mays going to play? He looks like the likely 2 year starter beginning in 2018 and he gets some time last Sat. Same is true for all over the team. Play of tough one, play a couple tune-ups and bring on the MVFC. I'm fine with the schedule. I'd have a lot more issues if I was paying OSU prices to see BGSU.
-
It's not ego posting because it was refuting the logic of those posts in the context of their message. What was said was not the same as what you are implying further down. Tell me this, do you feel that all FBS vs FCS games should cease? Because if you do then my original post is mute.
For clarification Im not against having a weaker opponent in an out of conference game like an NEC team, or even one D2 team like slippery rock if the other OOC game is against a decent school and we have one money game. I'm a fan and go to the games anyway, not saying people don't have the right to choose not to go as fans, just saying I still go.
What rule are you talking about that allows FBS to schedule an extra game after playing FCS? I'm only aware of the Hawaii exemption?
-
It's not ego posting because it was refuting the logic of those posts in the context of their message. What was said was not the same as what you are implying further down. Tell me this, do you feel that all FBS vs FCS games should cease? Because if you do then my original post is mute.
For clarification Im not against having a weaker opponent in an out of conference game like an NEC team, or even one D2 team like slippery rock if the other OOC game is against a decent school and we have one money game. I'm a fan and go to the games anyway, not saying people don't have the right to choose not to go as fans, just saying I still go.
What rule are you talking about that allows FBS to schedule an extra game after playing FCS? I'm only aware of the Hawaii exemption?
Sorry saying "ego" made it sound negative towards you and that is not what I meant to do. YO Show.
Yes I am against all I-AA/FCS vs. IA/FBS games. If we do not outlaw them through the NCAA, some schools will still get financial advantage over others.
Here are the 2006 Rules changes:
- The NCAA ruled that teams could schedule twelve regular-season games (up from eleven) beginning in the 2006 season. (NCAA teams in Alaska and Hawaii, and their home opponents, are allowed to schedule an extra game over and above this limit.)
- Instant replay is now officially sanctioned and standardized. All plays are reviewed by the replay officials as the play occurs. They may call down to the on-field officials to stop play if they need extra time to make a review. Each coach may also make one challenge per game. In the case of a coach's challenge, the coach must have at least one time-out remaining. If the challenge is upheld the coach gets the time-out back but the challenge is spent. If the challenge is rejected, both the challenge and the time-out are spent.
- Players may only wear clear eyeshields. Previously, both tinted and orange were also allowed.
- The kicking tee has been lowered from two inches tall to only one inch.
- Halftime lasts twenty minutes. Previously, it was only fifteen minutes.
- On a kickoff, the game clock starts when the ball is kicked rather than when the receiving team touches it.
- If a team scores at the end of the game, they will not kick the extra point unless it would affect the outcome of the game.
- On a change of possession, the clock starts when the referee marks the ball ready for play, instead of on the snap.
Our Jim Tressel (OSU coach) was very much a part of this rule change. The big-10 and the PAC-10 wanted a preseason game or a guaranteed home game for more revenues. The NCAA said "no" because they had just gotten rid of the BCS and were afraid that this would cause tournaments (like MBB). At the same time, they did not want to agitate the conferences and they had just won them back from the BCS.
So, yes even though the agreement to play I-AA schools was informal, the IA/FBS teams were "highly encouraged" to play an FCS school and they initially had payout maximums to ensure this. This served two purposes: 1) It guaranteed a IA/FBS home game and hopefully a win while still playing DI opposition, and 2) Gave a payout roughly equal to the entire season for the I-AA/FCS club and enough to cover participation in the I-AA championship, which was difficult for most I-AA teams to do and a very vocal complaint by the I-AA/FCS conferences/AD's.
This extra game helped both DI divisions. Now IA admins want to stop playing the I-AA/FCS school which brings back all of the financial issues and the main reason the game was offered in the first place. What I would like to see is a IA team able to chose not to play a I-AA team. but they only are allowed 11-games. The NCAA must mandate a 12th game is for I-AA vs. IA only. I would also like to see it be only the first game of the season & it must be played at least 1-week prior to the start of the season so that teams would have time to work on what they learned. Or better yet, simply ban inter-divisional play all together. The later is the better move unless the NCAA is going do all of these things and set an official minimum and maximum payout. Some FCS schools were making $200k while Tressel paid YSU $750k for each of two games. That was later reduced to $600k, but still 3X what most I-AA schools were receiving from IA schools. Now they payouts are getting so high, they can get a weaker IA/FBS team to play for the same amount.
Without playing a I-AA club, for IA there is no reason to have a 12th-game ...that is just lengthening the season and everyone already knew the play-off was coming ...that was the straw that broke the BCS camel's back.
-
So... what we should just lose and take the money :-\?
Sounds kinda rough and to the point but if you want the big money to continue long term - yes.
Any big time 1A school that loses to a 1AA school does not belong in the play-offs, period.
Any 1AA school that loses to a D2 does not belong in the play-offs, period.
YSU paid the price for even playing D2 schools by not getting into the play-offs. So we now play the little sisters of 1AA. No different then what the big 10 now does, replaced 1AA teams with their little sisters of 1A aka mac type schools.
-
Thank you IAA and guinpen for the clarification. Also, no hard feelings IAA. I am human and do possess an ego, so it is possible at times my personality comes through my posts. I'm sure stuff I've said have offended other people here. ;D
-
Nick DeLuca will have season ending shoulder surgery. He is expected to return next season and be granted a medical redshirt
-
Nick DeLuca will have season ending shoulder surgery. He is expected to return next season and be granted a medical redshirt
Too bad. Clearly the best player in 1AA football. He was the only thing holding NDSU from being totally "done," right 1AA? Kidding of course. I feel sorry when players are hurt, and l hope he recovers fully. But I'll bet he doesn't come back next year. This kid is NFL ready and will go with the draft.
-
Nick DeLuca will have season ending shoulder surgery. He is expected to return next season and be granted a medical redshirt
You are right Go Guins ...he played the first game so he is not eligible for a medical red-shirt on 2016. I guess they could offer him another year of eligibility, but it is not a common thing. If he graduates this year, he could pick-up the extra year, but my guess would be he would take that at the FBS level. Hoping to get a draft pick is his best option.
With or without him, NDSU is going down, starting this week.
-
With or without him, NDSU is going down, starting this week.
1AA, willing to part with some $$ on that? We old guys headed to fixed income always looking for a sure thing to supplement our income! Actually I never bet on sports. I always root my heart NOT my wallet. (BTW, I never heard of a team "going down" on a bye week!)
-
"Every waiver that meets the published criteria is granted, with rare exceptions.
Medical Hardship Requirements
To be eligible for a medical hardship waiver, a student-athlete has to meet the following criteria:
The student-athlete must suffer the injury during one of their four seasons of college competition or during the senior year of high school.
The injury must be incapacitating. That means it must be a season-ending injury.
The injury must occur prior to the start of the second half of the season.
The student-athlete must not have competed in more than 30% of the season or three contests, whichever is greater."
It appears he can get a medical redshirt, as he has only played in three games thus far this season, and 3/11 is less than 3/10 (30%). So it is highly likely he can get another year of eligibility. Whether or not he gets it is another story, but it is a very common thing as state above due to meeting the criteria.
-
That is great info Yo Show, they really changed that rule. I think it is just the terminology then; one is a hardship waiver and the other is a red-shirt. DeLuca will qualify for a medical hardship, if approved by the conference, the NCAA will give him an extra year of eligibility. In other words, he is granted a maximum of 6-years to complete his 4-years of eligible participation. Or, (under the old rule) if he has not already taken a red-shirt, he will be granted a 5th-year which is what should happen in this case. A player is normally allowed to take 5-years to play 4-seasons. The year that he does not play is his "red-shirt" year. Again in this case DeLca will be granted an extra year. Many times they do not grant the medical waiver is the player is on scholarship and has already had a red-shirt year. In this case, DeLuca will surely get it because he never took a red-shirt year. Had he not played any of that first game, he would have qualified for a red-shirt year.
In football, the result is the same, but if a student-athlete competes for even a single play of a contest against another NCAA-sanctioned school, he or she will use a year of competition and not be eligible for a red-shirt year. However, if they compete and subsequently suffer a season-ending injury/illness,
they may be eligible to receive that medical hardship waiver.
Think of it this way. If we bring in kid from HS and we think his injury is minor and it occurred during his senior year, we can ask that he be granted a medical waiver for his frosh year only. Then we can still offer him a red-shirt after that.
Great conversation. Stop in here for the best football info!!!
-
I know its part of why I come here ;) ;D
I believe you said it one time before, "YSU football fans were some of the smartest college football fans around"
-
That is great info Yo Show, they really changed that rule. I think it is just the terminology then; one is a hardship waiver and the other is a red-shirt. DeLuca will qualify for a medical hardship, if approved by the conference, the NCAA will give him an extra year of eligibility. In other words, he is granted a maximum of 6-years to complete his 4-years of eligible participation. Or, (under the old rule) if he has not already taken a red-shirt, he will be granted a 5th-year which is what should happen in this case. A player is normally allowed to take 5-years to play 4-seasons. The year that he does not play is his "red-shirt" year. Again in this case DeLca will be granted an extra year. Many times they do not grant the medical waiver is the player is on scholarship and has already had a red-shirt year. In this case, DeLuca will surely get it because he never took a red-shirt year. Had he not played any of that first game, he would have qualified for a red-shirt year.
In football, the result is the same, but if a student-athlete competes for even a single play of a contest against another NCAA-sanctioned school, he or she will use a year of competition and not be eligible for a red-shirt year. However, if they compete and subsequently suffer a season-ending injury/illness,
they may be eligible to receive that medical hardship waiver.
Think of it this way. If we bring in kid from HS and we think his injury is minor and it occurred during his senior year, we can ask that he be granted a medical waiver for his frosh year only. Then we can still offer him a red-shirt after that.
Great conversation. Stop in here for the best football info!!!
edit: I reread what you wrote a couple times, and I think we're mostly saying the same thing. I'm leaving my post intact because my first paragraph still applies to what you wrote. The rest of the post is, IMO, a clearer way of stating the rules for those that are confused.
That rule hasn't changed at all in two years, and hasn't changed significantly in many more. There has always been a rule stating at which point a season-ending injury doesn't count against your four years of competition.
What most people overlook is that there is a major difference in how the NCAA handles injured players who redshirted for developmental reasons versus injured players who did not.
The NCAA grants five years to compete in four(Five-Year Rule). That extra year is specifically for injuries or other events outside a student's control. Players and coaches have chosen to often use that extra year for development instead of its intended purpose. The NCAA says, fine, you can do that, but don't come crying to us if you get injured later on; you had an extra year, but you chose to use it already. In those cases, a student ends up with three seasons of competition over five years.
There is a second type of waiver for student-athletes that are injured twice in a career. That waiver gives you six years to compete in four(or six years to compete in three if the player had a developmental redshirt year).
In all of these cases, you have to submit medical records to the NCAA to back up your case.
In this particular case, DeLuca played as a true freshman and never had a redshirt year. The injury occurred in the first half of the season, and he played in less than 30% of the season, or three contests. Because of that, the rules allow him to retroactively declare this season as a medical redshirt year.
A similar case concluded last year with NDSU WR Zach Vraa. He also played as a true freshman and had a season-ending injury very early in a season. He got that year waived as a medical redshirt. A couple years later, he lost a second season to an injury. Because both events were outside his control, he was granted a sixth season in order to complete his four seasons of competition. He ended up the "old man" on the 2015 Bison and was the only member of that team to experience a loss at the end of a collegiate season(vs. EWU in the 2010 quarterfinals as a true freshman).
What is happening with DeLuca is common and likely happens a dozen or more times a season at the FCS level alone. I'd guess at least a hundred or two times across all DI sports each year.
-
I think you are right, I am just saying that a waiver is not a red-shirt. A waiver acknowledges that the player did play that season and waves the year off. A red-shirt is a player declaring that the year is one which he is sitting out of football, but does count as one the 5-years a student-athlete has to participate in 4-years worth of football (in this case). A waiver does not count as one of the 5-years that the player has with which to complete 4-years worth of football.
I might be making it more confusing ... hard to say.
God forbid that DeLuca goes into camp next year finds he is not eligible (not going to happen, but just for the heck of it). He could still qualify for a red-shirt; come back and play his 4th-year in 2018. If he were to take a red-shirt right now (instead of a medical waiver) he would have to graduate and take post-grad classes in order to participate next year. So it can be a big difference which of the two that you get. You always want to medical waiver if possible.
-
Holy sh**!!!! Stevie Wonder could see that NDSU is light years ahead of the rest of the FCS :o
-
Holy sh**!!!! Stevie Wonder could see that NDSU is light years ahead of the rest of the FCS :o
Everyone but our fearless leader 1AA (aka 1 "Stevie Wonder" AA)
They remind me of the good old Vince Lombardi teams in GB. Block better and tackle better and you usually win. Just good old powder football and solid D. Worked 50 years ago, works today, will work as long as we play football.
We're always going to have a Wing T, a Wishbone, a West Coast offense or a spread or whatever, but block and tackle never goes out of style. Our boy 1AA knows that as much as the rest of us, but he got himself in a box and beating them Nov. 5 is the only way out, so I hope he gets out!
The funny thing is, as good as they’ve been, and as good as they are, we had them beat last year until we quit playing.
-
They are done.
-
They are done.
That's it, stick to your guns! I'd expect nothing less.
I hope those bad boys from ISU don't beat them up too bad. We'll need them to be high ranked when we kick their butts in the Fargo Dome 11/5!
-
I see 2 conference losses and possibly 4. Because they are NDSU, that will get them in. Now YSU would not have chance. NDSU falls to UNI and SDSU. Possible losses are ILS and YSU, but I do not know who has the bye this year.
-
I see 2 conference losses and possibly 4. Because they are NDSU, that will get them in. Now YSU would not have chance. NDSU falls to UNI and SDSU. Possible losses are ILS and YSU, but I do not know who has the bye this year.
UNI is a mystery to me. They win a couple big games every year, but then manage to loose a couple they should win. IE, Iowa State isn't that good, but it's still Big 12. Then follow that up with 2 loses. (noting that Montana and Eastern Washington are both good) The team that stuffed the ball down Iowa's throat the whole second half is going to beat ILS and YSU to a pulp, and I see one more big game in NDSU so either UNI or SDSU goes down and that is 1 conference loss, not your as many as 4?!?!?! 1 maybe 2 if they get bored, but not 3 and certainly not 4. I'm going home for a Scotch, but your post reads like you beat me by at least a couple drinks!
-
I think you are right, I am just saying that a waiver is not a red-shirt. A waiver acknowledges that the player did play that season and waves the year off. A red-shirt is a player declaring that the year is one which he is sitting out of football, but does count as one the 5-years a student-athlete has to participate in 4-years worth of football (in this case). A waiver does not count as one of the 5-years that the player has with which to complete 4-years worth of football.
I might be making it more confusing ... hard to say.
God forbid that DeLuca goes into camp next year finds he is not eligible (not going to happen, but just for the heck of it). He could still qualify for a red-shirt; come back and play his 4th-year in 2018. If he were to take a red-shirt right now (instead of a medical waiver) he would have to graduate and take post-grad classes in order to participate next year. So it can be a big difference which of the two that you get. You always want to medical waiver if possible.
Nope, you are misunderstanding part of this. The waiver DeLuca will be applying for does not affect the '5' in the '4 in 5' rule, it's affecting the '4'. DeLuca will still have to complete four seasons of play within five years, but this current season won't be considered one of the four. If the waiver isn't granted, he's done. But it will be granted, and he'll have one last year(his fifth) to get his final year of competition(his fourth). Prior to this year, he had three seasons of competition in three years.
-
I think you are right, I am just saying that a waiver is not a red-shirt. A waiver acknowledges that the player did play that season and waves the year off. A red-shirt is a player declaring that the year is one which he is sitting out of football, but does count as one the 5-years a student-athlete has to participate in 4-years worth of football (in this case). A waiver does not count as one of the 5-years that the player has with which to complete 4-years worth of football.
I might be making it more confusing ... hard to say.
God forbid that DeLuca goes into camp next year finds he is not eligible (not going to happen, but just for the heck of it). He could still qualify for a red-shirt; come back and play his 4th-year in 2018. If he were to take a red-shirt right now (instead of a medical waiver) he would have to graduate and take post-grad classes in order to participate next year. So it can be a big difference which of the two that you get. You always want to medical waiver if possible.
Nope, you are misunderstanding part of this. The waiver DeLuca will be applying for does not affect the '5' in the '4 in 5' rule, it's affecting the '4'. DeLuca will still have to complete four seasons of play within five years, but this current season won't be considered one of the four. If the waiver isn't granted, he's done. But it will be granted, and he'll have one last year(his fifth) to get his final year of competition(his fourth). Prior to this year, he had three seasons of competition in three years.
exactly. That is what I thought I said. Again, there is no such thing as a medical "red-shirt"; that is just a term people use incorrectly. With a medical waiver, they waive off the consumed year of eligibility; With a red-shirt, they do not. You cannot have a red-shirt start during the season.