Why not just give players five years of eligibility at that point? 

2 hours ago, MikeH said:

Why not just give players five years of eligibility at that point? 

It's coming soon 

Make any of it make sense!!!

1 hour ago, Gerry Hamilton said:

It's coming soon 

Make any of it make sense!!!

Not necessarily. NCAA just got a call with my former compliance colleagues and essentially said they are holding out as long as possible. Big fear of lawsuits from kids who didn’t get to benefit from 5th year and want back pay damages for lost NIL value. They are going to hold off as long as they can. 

24 minutes ago, HDub1995 said:

Not necessarily. NCAA just got a call with my former compliance colleagues and essentially said they are holding out as long as possible. Big fear of lawsuits from kids who didn’t get to benefit from 5th year and want back pay damages for lost NIL value. They are going to hold off as long as they can. 

Interesting, makes sense. I'm assuming the 9 games will still be regular season games only, so essentially, you could take a player, sit him out for the non-conference games, and then they are eligible to play the rest of the season without burning a redshirt, which is just wild to me.

15 minutes ago, MikeH said:

Interesting, makes sense. I'm assuming the 9 games will still be regular season games only, so essentially, you could take a player, sit him out for the non-conference games, and then they are eligible to play the rest of the season without burning a redshirt, which is just wild to me.

Yeah. I don’t really know the rationale behind it. It’s wild. 
 

Currently, football kids can technically play in 9 games and redshirt. 4 regular season games + conference championship + 4 CFP games, but obviously very rare circumstance. Really no idea where the 9 came from.