|
Post by Bornthrilla on Jan 24, 2020 21:30:53 GMT -5
Not if he was a prop. He would have to graduate on time in order to get an extra year, and then he would be considered a 5th year senior.
|
|
Freeze
Official BDF member
Posts: 2,340
|
Post by Freeze on Jan 24, 2020 22:10:42 GMT -5
McDaniel, Cox, Bullock, Porcher, Harrel......d-line is shaping up nicely. We Do Chicken!!! Lets stop the run fellas and get after some QBs in 2020.
|
|
|
Post by aggie2039 on Jan 24, 2020 22:39:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Jan 25, 2020 0:18:27 GMT -5
But none of the sections in the link you provided mention props.
Find the rules for props.
|
|
|
Post by aggie2039 on Jan 25, 2020 0:27:43 GMT -5
But none of the sections in the link you provided mention props. Find the rules for props. Is a prop a real thing? What does prop stand for?
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,191
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Jan 25, 2020 1:00:53 GMT -5
thrilla, could you please add cox to the way too early 2020 roster? this defense is beginning to look very "dominant"...
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Jan 25, 2020 10:34:47 GMT -5
Updated.
|
|
VA's Finest
Official BDF member
BDF Riders
Posts: 3,015
|
Post by VA's Finest on Jan 25, 2020 11:19:18 GMT -5
The NCAA enacted Proposition 48 in 1986.[1]
As of 2010, the regulation is as follows:
Before a high school student can be eligible to play Division I sports, he or she must meet academic requirements in high school.[2] Those standards include:
The successful completion of 16 core courses.[3] A sliding-scale combination of grades in high school core courses and standardized-test scores. For example, if a student-athlete earns a 3.0 grade-point average in core courses, that individual must score at least 620 on the SAT or a sumscore of 52 on the ACT. As the GPA increases, the required test score decreases, and vice versa. New Regulations Edit Beginning August 1, 2016, NCAA Division I will require 10 core courses to be completed prior to the seventh semester (seven of the 10 must be a combination of English, math or natural or physical science that meet the distribution requirements).[4] These 10 courses become "locked in" at the start of the seventh semester and cannot be retaken for grade improvement.
Beginning August 1, 2016, it will be possible for a Division I college-bound student-athlete to still receive athletics aid and the ability to practice with the team if he or she fails to meet the 10 course requirement, but would not be able to compete.
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Jan 25, 2020 11:22:29 GMT -5
Basically, a prop has to sit out a year ... and they only get that year back if they graduate on time.
I believe Michael Mayhew was a prop who earned his year back.
|
|
DECKS
Official BDF member
2008 Poster of the Year
Charter Member of the BDF
Posts: 10,401
|
Post by DECKS on Jan 26, 2020 8:38:50 GMT -5
What is the likelihood Michael Branch will be back?
|
|
saabman
Official BDF member
Posts: 11,797
Member is Online
|
Post by saabman on Jan 26, 2020 15:57:37 GMT -5
This is a better explanation .
The History of D-I Eligibility Requirements The NCAA enacted Proposition 48 in 1986. With "prop 48", the NCAA established eligibility requirements that student-athletes had to meet upon signing a National Letter of Intent with the college/university. Prop 48 mandates that in order for a student-athlete to qualify to play in Division I athletics as a Freshman, the athlete must carry a minimum 2.0 grade point average (GPA) in 11 core courses and a combined 700 score on the SAT.
While proponents of the plan praised Proposition 48 for championing the seemingly forgotten cause of academics, critics condemned the policy as racist. In their view, enforcing these stern requirements would prevent a disproportionate number of poor and African-American athletes from attending the colleges they desired.
The NCAA defended its controversial policy, stating that the new requirements would bolster graduation rates of all student-athletes. Studies indicate that Proposition 48 has met this objective—especially for low-income and African-American athletes. One of the main issues concerning Proposition 48 is the fact that it has affected lower-income students more than anyone else. In fact, studies have shown that while these same low-income students have produced lower test scores, they also have the most to gain by attending college. In the court case Cureton v. NCAA, Temple’s John Chaney apparently thought the heightened standards were an attempt to diminish the number of black student-athletes in Division I. Others, however, recognized the academic reasons for having such standards. Georgetown’s John Thompson simply felt the academic necessity was not worth the adverse effect the standards would have on low-income students of all ethnicities who were victims of inadequate secondary education.
The NCAA's eligibility requirements became even stricter when delegates to the 86th NCAA Annual Convention passed Proposition 16. Prop 16's impact arrived in two phases—the first on August 1, 1995, and the second exactly one year later. Under the first phase, NCAA leaders bumped up the number of required core courses from 11 to 13, and added two elective courses to their new minimum standard. Left unchanged by prop 16 were the SAT/ACT and GPA requirements.
In the second phase, the NCAA replaced one of the two electives with English. With this decision, student-athletes were now required to complete four years of English instead of three. And if that wasn't enough, new SAT/ACT and GPA requirements also changed in 1996. The NCAA instituted a sliding scale that combined SAT/ACT scores and GPA in a minimum of 13 core classes. Now, the student-athlete who earns a 2.0 GPA must combine it with a minimum 900 SAT score to be eligible for Division 1 competition. The student-athlete who earns a 2.5 GPA can score 700 and be eligible. With these changes, Proposition 16 effectively superseded Proposition 48.
|
|
|
Post by erbeard on Jan 27, 2020 8:00:54 GMT -5
What is the likelihood Michael Branch will be back? I too, am curious about his return. We still are lacking that anchor inside.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 28, 2020 20:29:56 GMT -5
Michael Branch is working out with the team ... He did not participate in senior day ...
|
|
oleschoolaggie
Official BDF member
2009 Poster of the Year, 2009 Most Knowledgeable Poster
Posts: 24,191
|
Post by oleschoolaggie on Jan 28, 2020 21:58:10 GMT -5
Michael Branch is working out with the team ... He did not participate in senior day ... that's a good sign, numberonebrave has already stated that branch expects to be back next season...
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Jan 30, 2020 0:48:06 GMT -5
Updated with McKinney.
|
|