'13 CA DT Eddie Vanderdoes (UCLA)

[IrishInFl]

The view count on this thread is running like a diseased penis. Shut it down before it gets to 1M. Enough about this clown. Yes, I'm bitter.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/2RtDdctNOv0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

 

[WestCoast]

Originally posted by WhiskeyJack

It's more than that. He has to sit his freshman year and he loses a year of eligibility on top of that. So he'll have 4 years to play 3 seasons starting in 2014. If he loses a season to injury at some point, half of his college eligibility is down the drain.

Either I am not understanding how this works correctly, or I think what you're saying is only true where a player gets hurt during a season in which he participated and could not use a redshirt.

For example. A player changes his mind after signing NLI, goes to new school, sits out 1 year, gets hurt summer before the first season he could participate, so he then takes his redshirt and sits out that 2nd season. I believe he still has 3-years to play 3-years of eligibility.

Compare to: A player changes his mind, goes to new school, sits out 1 year, plays half the season, gets hurt. Gets well in the off-season and comes back next season. He now used 1 of his three years of eligibility, so he then he only gets two full seasons.

Incorrect?

 

[chicago51]

 

[Emcee77]

For example. A player changes his mind after signing NLI, goes to new school, sits out 1 year, gets hurt summer before the first season he could participate, so he then takes his redshirt and sits out that 2nd season. I believe he still has 3-years to play 3-years of eligibility.

Compare to: A player changes his mind, goes to new school, sits out 1 year, plays half the season, gets hurt. Gets well in the off-season and comes back next season. He now used 1 of his three years of eligibility, so he then he only gets two full seasons.

Incorrect?

No, I think you've got it right. That's how most published reports describe the rule.

 

[CanadalovesND]

Really ashamed by the title. Don't be like this mods. Don't be a bunch of angry, grown *** men just because an 18 year old did not want to come to your university of fandom. Fix it.

 

[NDohio]

Either I am not understanding how this works correctly, or I think what you're saying is only true where a player gets hurt during a season in which he participated and could not use a redshirt.

For example. A player changes his mind after signing NLI, goes to new school, sits out 1 year, gets hurt summer before the first season he could participate, so he then takes his redshirt and sits out that 2nd season. I believe he still has 3-years to play 3-years of eligibility.

Compare to: A player changes his mind, goes to new school, sits out 1 year, plays half the season, gets hurt. Gets well in the off-season and comes back next season. He now used 1 of his three years of eligibility, so he then he only gets two full seasons.

Incorrect?

In the case of EV and your scenario of an injury happening.

Year 1 - he sits as his penalty.

Year 2 - he gets hurt and doesn't play.

Year 3 - he plays.

Year 4 - he plays and his eligibility is done.

*As I understand it

 

[Grahambo]

I believe the NLI needs to be enforced and treated as a 4 year contract with a 5th year mutual option. The ability to transfer needs to be severely limited to the most extreme of cases such as the one with Alex Bullard.

I also think committing to a program and de-committing to a program needs to have some oversight to it as well.

At the end of the day, these kids are deciding the futures/careers of all these coaches. They need to be held accountable and sitting one year is not enough. There is too much freedom.

 

[ndfb3]

So if he does make the NFL and the Dolphins draft him, can he ask to be traded to the 49ers so he is closer to home?

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Really ashamed by the title. Don't be like this mods. Don't be a bunch of angry, grown *** men just because an 18 year old did not want to come to your university of fandom. Fix it.

I didn't change the title, but what's your issue with it? "UCLA person" offends you?

 

[Cackalacky]

I didn't change the title, but what's your issue with it? "UCLA person" offends you?

prolly the Vanderdoesn't....I like Vanderwon't

 

[chicago51]

So if he does make the NFL and the Dolphins draft him, can he ask to be traded to the 49ers so he is closer to home?

Yes

 

[Whiskeyjack]

prolly the Vanderdoesn't....I like Vanderwon't

Missed that. And totally leaving it.

 

[CanadalovesND]

I didn't change the title, but what's your issue with it? "UCLA person" offends you?

Vanderdoesn't.

That is not his name.

And nobody else has it that way, the school should be followed by "verbal", just like every other player thread.

 

[loomis41973]

Vanderaint

 

[Emcee77]

In the case of EV and your scenario of an injury happening.

Year 1 - he sits as his penalty.

Year 2 - he gets hurt and doesn't play.

Year 3 - he plays.

Year 4 - he plays and his eligibility is done.

*As I understand it

But as West Coast is pointing out, it matters when the injury happens.

If you break an LOI, you serve the Basic Penalty (you sit a year and simultaneously lose a year of eligibility), and then you have four years to play three. So if EV gets injured in fall camp of Year 2, before he ever plays a down, he still has three years. If he gets injured during the season, he probably loses the year of eligibility (unless he gets a hardship waiver) and has only two years left.

**Note: I've seen it reported that if you break an LOI, you sit the year penalty, and then you have three years to play three. However, the vast majority of people are reporting that you have four years to play three, so I believe that to be the correct interpretation of the rule (I tried to look it up on my own, but the LOI is ambiguous on this point, so I'm relying on others' interpretations).

 

[NDohio]

But as West Coast is pointing out, it matters when the injury happens.
If you break an LOI, you serve the Basic Penalty (you sit a year and simultaneously lose a year of eligibility), and then you have four years to play three. So if EV gets injured in fall camp of Year 2, before he ever plays a down, he still has three years. If he gets injured during the season, he probably loses the year of eligibility (unless he gets a hardship waiver) and has only two years left.

**Note: I've seen it reported that if you break an LOI, you sit the year penalty, and then you have three years to play three. However, the vast majority of people are reporting that you have four years to play three, so I believe that to be the correct interpretation of the rule (I tried to look it up on my own, but the LOI is ambiguous on this point, so I'm relying on others' interpretations).

Yep - good point in bold.

 

[WestCoast]

Originally posted by Grahmbo
I believe the NLI needs to be enforced and treated as a 4 year contract with a 5th year mutual option. The ability to transfer needs to be severely limited to the most extreme of cases such as the one with Alex Bullard.

I also think committing to a program and de-committing to a program needs to have some oversight to it as well.

At the end of the day, these kids are deciding the futures/careers of all these coaches. They need to be held accountable and sitting one year is not enough. There is too much freedom.

I don't think the transfer rules should be limited. I think it would be terribly punitive to only let a player transfer for limited reasons.

However, I do believe that if the college side of College football were emphasized most transfers would cease or be minimized.
(I could really care less what a transfer does to a coach who signs multi-million dollar contracts.)

In my dream world where I was the NCAA rule writer: A player desiring to transfer can do so for any reason, but has to sit out one year. That player must be in good standing academically at the exit school. Additionally that player's credits must transfer to the receiving school such that the player will be in the same academic year status at the new school (i.e if the student completed 4-semesters at the exit school, they need to be received as a Jr. academically at the receiving school.) If certain credits do not transfer, the player must sit out (with eligibility clock running) until they catch up.

I would also change the eligibility rules to 4-years to play 4 and a 5th year would only be available for students who completed an undergraduate program.

but it ain't gonna happen.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

Vanderdoesn't.

That is not his name.

And nobody else has it that way, the school should be followed by "verbal", just like every other player thread.

A couple suggestions:

• Don't publicly call out all of the mods as a bunch of butt-hurt fanboys when the title was changed by only one of us; and
• Commanding the mods to do anything is a quick way to get ignored.

I think it's pretty harmless, and after all the sh!t EV has put us through, we deserve a little group therapy. Maybe one of the other mods will feel differently. You might try PMing them with a polite explanation of why you find it offensive.

 

[ThePiombino]

A couple suggestions:

• Don't publicly call out all of the mods as a bunch of butt-hurt fanboys when the title was changed by only one of us; and
• Commanding the mods to do anything is a quick way to get ignored.

I think it's pretty harmless, and after all the sh!t EV has put us through, there's nothing wrong with a little group therapy. Maybe one of the other mods will feel differently. You might try PMing one of them with a polite explanation of why you find it offensive.

Seconded.

 

[Emcee77]

A couple suggestions:

• Don't publicly call out all of the mods as a bunch of butt-hurt fanboys when the title was changed by only one of us; and
• Commanding the mods to do anything is a quick way to get ignored.

I think it's pretty harmless, and after all the sh!t EV has put us through, we deserve a little group therapy. Maybe one of the other mods will feel differently. You might try PMing them with a polite explanation of why you find it offensive.

I couldn't agree more. Harmless fun in the wake of bad news to serve as a little group therapy. Mods did something similar to Demarcus Robinson when he was flip-flopping between Florida and Clemson, and once everyone grieved a little his thread title was changed back to "Florida Verbal". So lighten up, Francis. IE is for fun. If you want be Captain Serious, go hang out with star69 on the BGI board.

 

[chicago51]

UCLA Signee would be the most accurate. He did sign, hence why UCLA was able to publicly comment on him.

So say he decided now to leave UCLA to come back to ND or more likely just go somewhere else does it mean he would have to sit out another year since he now signed a second letter of intent?

Yes I do realize this is a pointless question.

 

[BeauBenken]

Vanderdoesn't.

That is not his name.

And nobody else has it that way, the school should be followed by "verbal", just like every other player thread.

Changed it for ya.

 

[Whiskeyjack]

So say he decided now to leave UCLA to come back to ND or more likely just go somewhere else does it mean he would have to sit out another year.

That would rip the space-time continuum. Sort of like dividing by zero. Best not to dwell on it.

 

[connor_in]

A couple suggestions:

• Don't publicly call out all of the mods as a bunch of butt-hurt fanboys when the title was changed by only one of us; and
• Commanding the mods to do anything is a quick way to get ignored.

I think it's pretty harmless, and after all the sh!t EV has put us through, we deserve a little group therapy. Maybe one of the other mods will feel differently. You might try PMing them with a polite explanation of why you find it offensive.

Maybe we should submit this to the Political Correctness police ???

 

[BeauBenken]

Don't care about Eddie anymore. I just care about getting this title right.

 

[Cackalacky]

Vanderdoes it after all

 

[connor_in]

So if he does make the NFL and the Dolphins draft him, can he ask to be traded to the 49ers so he is closer to home?

No...San Diego, so he can be CLOSER to home without being too close to home...you know like UCLA to his hometown.

 

[Cackalacky]

A couple suggestions:

• Don't publicly call out all of the mods as a bunch of butt-hurt fanboys when the title was changed by only one of us; and
• Commanding the mods to do anything is a quick way to get ignored.

I think it's pretty harmless, and after all the sh!t EV has put us through, we deserve a little group therapy. Maybe one of the other mods will feel differently. You might try PMing them with a polite explanation of why you find it offensive.

Especially cyborgs who do not obey the 3 laws of robotics. I would drop it

 

[Cackalacky]

That would rip the space-time continuum. Sort of like dividing by zero. Best not to dwell on it.

I can prove 0/0 = 2.

 

[Grahambo]

I don't think the transfer rules should be limited. I think it would be terribly punitive to only let a player transfer for limited reasons.

However, I do believe that if the college side of College football were emphasized most transfers would cease or be minimized.
(I could really care less what a transfer does to a coach who signs multi-million dollar contracts.)

In my dream world where I was the NCAA rule writer: A player desiring to transfer can do so for any reason, but has to sit out one year. That player must be in good standing academically at the exit school. Additionally that player's credits must transfer to the receiving school such that the player will be in the same academic year status at the new school (i.e if the student completed 4-semesters at the exit school, they need to be received as a Jr. academically at the receiving school.) If certain credits do not transfer, the player must sit out (with eligibility clock running) until they catch up.

I would also change the eligibility rules to 4-years to play 4 and a 5th year would only be available for students who completed an undergraduate program.

but it ain't gonna happen.

Do you think a football stipend should be given?