ADVERTISEMENT

HS age of graduates

hogghawk

HB MVP
Aug 14, 2010
1,088
1,124
113
How times have changed. I was an early 90’’s graduate and was 18. There were more kids that graduated at 17 then 18 in my class. Fast forward to today and there are more kids 19 and several pushing 20 right before graduation. Got me thinking about how old some of these kids will be by the end of their college careers if the ncaa changes to 5 years of eligibility. Does the ncaa do away with the redshirt year and the Olympic redshirt as well? Christ there will be up to 9 years difference in kids wrestling in college depending on the age of the high school graduates. Most of these older high school graduates is because mommy and daddy are trying to get the upper hand in sports. At some point the age of the athlete needs to be part of the formula for eligibility at both the high school and college levels in my opinion.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3boysmom
I think 9 years difference is an exaggeration. Could happen, but one off, not likely. That said, it really makes no difference to me. In reality, most of the guys who are older end up under performing at the end of their careers. If you are not special (AA) early in your career, most times age 24 -25 doesn't help. For the few that stick it out and end up finally AA ... happy for them sticking it out. If I had the choice I wouldn't have left college until I was 30 ... messing with the 17, 18 year old freshman girls might have been a little creepy however.
 
I think 9 years difference is an exaggeration. Could happen, but one off, not likely. That said, it really makes no difference to me. In reality, most of the guys who are older end up under performing at the end of their careers. If you are not special (AA) early in your career, most times age 24 -25 doesn't help. For the few that stick it out and end up finally AA ... happy for them sticking it out. If I had the choice I wouldn't have left college until I was 30 ... messing with the 17, 18 year old freshman girls might have been a little creepy however.

This.


Chris Hansen GIF

Also this.

Anyway, I agree some of the 9 year stuff is insane but it sounds like they are trying to get rid of that. Otherwise, I believe most high school associations do not allow 20 year olds to compete so they already have that part handled. I can't think of a legit reason for them to go younger.
 
I think 9 years difference is an exaggeration. Could happen, but one off, not likely. That said, it really makes no difference to me. In reality, most of the guys who are older end up under performing at the end of their careers. If you are not special (AA) early in your career, most times age 24 -25 doesn't help. For the few that stick it out and end up finally AA ... happy for them sticking it out. If I had the choice I wouldn't have left college until I was 30 ... messing with the 17, 18 year old freshman girls might have been a little creepy however.
If you wrestle as a 18 year old as a true freshman in college versus a guy graduated from high school in may and turned 20 before the fall you could easily get to 27 with 5 years of eligibility and two redshirt years. One of them being an Olympic. Several Iowa high school state champs are pushing the 20 by graduation. Just saying. At some point in time age needs to be part of the eligibility rule no matter what the ncaa wants to do with years of competition. That’s my point.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hawkeye in DFW
Most states require that you be five by the time kindergarten starts (~Sept 1) so most (~83%) students are 18 when they graduate.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WSC72
Patrick McCaffrey will be 25 this month. No doubt he’s playing against some 18 y/o. That hasn’t made him any better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: loonhawk
If you wrestle as a 18 year old as a true freshman in college versus a guy graduated from high school in may and turned 20 before the fall you could easily get to 27 with 5 years of eligibility and two redshirt years. One of them being an Olympic. Several Iowa high school state champs are pushing the 20 by graduation. Just saying. At some point in time age needs to be part of the eligibility rule no matter what the ncaa wants to do with years of competition. That’s my point.

It isn't that you're wrong, but that's threading a very specific needle. Has this ever happened?

Patrick McCaffrey will be 25 this month. No doubt he’s playing against some 18 y/o. That hasn’t made him any better.

Nelson Brands is 26.
 
It isn't that you're wrong, but that's threading a very specific needle. Has this ever happened?



Nelson Brands is 26.
I don’t think it has probably happened yet besides the Penn state wrestler who went on the mission a few years back. If this 5 year eligibility thing takes a hold, it may be frequent. Point is that a simple rule with some age requirements could keep it more in line of what a college athlete has been for years. Only kids who ever should have gotten the extra year was the pat lugo’s and that senior class. They got robbed. This seems like a giant covid hangover that doesn’t want to end to me.
 
I don’t think it has probably happened yet besides the Penn state wrestler who went on the mission a few years back. If this 5 year eligibility thing takes a hold, it may be frequent. Point is that a simple rule with some age requirements could keep it more in line of what a college athlete has been for years. Only kids who ever should have gotten the extra year was the pat lugo’s and that senior class. They got robbed. This seems like a giant covid hangover that doesn’t want to end to me.

It depends if they grant exceptions like Olympic redshirts, Mormon missions, injury 6th years, or not. Regardless, it won’t be a whole lot different than now since so many guys redshirt anyway. Redshirting is silly and unnecessarily complex. They need to go to a straight 5 years ASAP.

The covid extra year was an exception and it’s almost in the rear view mirror. It was an emergent situation. Such a unique event wasn’t policy before 2020 and it won’t be part of policy after. (And you also can’t Monday morning QB it. It was absolutely a necessary rule at the time based on fears of more cancelled seasons, but I digress.)
 
If you wrestle as a 18 year old as a true freshman in college versus a guy graduated from high school in may and turned 20 before the fall you could easily get to 27 with 5 years of eligibility and two redshirt years. One of them being an Olympic. Several Iowa high school state champs are pushing the 20 by graduation. Just saying. At some point in time age needs to be part of the eligibility rule no matter what the ncaa wants to do with years of competition. That’s my point.
Why not in international / Olympic competition as well? This is not age based kids tee ball anymore. Or adolescent wrestling tournaments. We are in the unlimited age tournaments now. All of these guys are men. The age doesn't make a difference. More often than not the older guys have HEW and cannot keep up with the younger guys anyway. That's my point.
 
(And you also can’t Monday morning QB it. It was absolutely a necessary rule at the time based on fears of more cancelled seasons, but I digress.)
I think most people at the time knew it was dumb.
They could have said you can sit out this season and not use a year of eligibility, and if the championships are cancelled the year won't count, but if there is a championships held and you compete, it takes a year of eligibility.

Then we wouldn't have had 5 time AAs (and champ).

For anyone curious, here is a link to the Iowa rules & policies (which includes the under 20 rule)
 
  • Like
Reactions: redghost1974
I think most people at the time knew it was dumb.
They could have said you can sit out this season and not use a year of eligibility, and if the championships are cancelled the year won't count, but if there is a championships held and you compete, it takes a year of eligibility.

Then we wouldn't have had 5 time AAs (and champ).

For anyone curious, here is a link to the Iowa rules & policies (which includes the under 20 rule)

This ignores all the Covid tests athletes had to take and the consequences of a negative one. They eliminated all the competitive risks and question marks. There were just so many unknowns. Heck, the season didn’t even start on time. It was a positive move for the athletes, and a good one.
 
Last edited:
This ignores all the Covid tests athletes had to take and the consequences of a negative one. They eliminated all the competitive risks and question marks. There were just so many unknowns. Heck, the season didn’t even start on time. It was a positive move for the athletes, and a good one.
They could have given the athletes the option to just sit a year, or at least not compete at nationals, or even the option that 'if you compete in post season' its a year of eligibility. Would have covered all the bases.

i would hope that it is not handled the same way in the future, but you are right, not worth litigating
 
Last edited:
This ignores all the Covid tests athletes had to take and the consequences of a negative one. They eliminated all the competitive risks and question marks. There were just so many unknowns. Heck, the season didn’t even start on time. It was a positive move for the athletes, and a good one.
No, it wasn't.
There was nothing positive being done by the NCAA during all this.
 
  • Like
Reactions: just_somebody
They could have given the athletes the option to just sit a year, or at least not compete at nationals, or even the option that 'if you compete in post season' its a year of eligibility. Would have covered all the bases.

i would hope that it is not handled the same way in the future, but you are right, not worth litigating

The rule gave people the option to sit the year.

There was just a world of unknowns at the time. Do you not remember how chaotic things were that fall? This was a simple, easy resolution to just not have the year count. Consequence free for anyone who wanted to participate.

So there were some 5 year AAs or whatever. Why is that a big deal? Why do we care that much? We also got to see guys like Spencer Lee and Michael Kemerer compete for another year because of it.

No, it wasn't.
There was nothing positive being done by the NCAA during all this.

Oh. lol
 
If they go to 5 years eligibility, but keep the same redshirt rules, the worst case seems to be something like this:

Kid turns 20 in February right after his HS Senior season, so he'd be 21 before NCAA Championships his first year of college. Compare that to a kid that graduates HS at 17 and turns 18 during the summer before college. You could potentially have a 28 year old compete against an 18 year old at NCAAs.

Age by NCAA Championships
Redshirt 21
Fr 22
Oly RS 23
So 24
Inj RS 25
Jr 26
Oly RS 27
Sr 28
 
The rule gave people the option to sit the year.

There was just a world of unknowns at the time. Do you not remember how chaotic things were that fall? This was a simple, easy resolution to just not have the year count. Consequence free for anyone who wanted to participate.

So there were some 5 year AAs or whatever. Why is that a big deal? Why do we care that much? We also got to see guys like Spencer Lee and Michael Kemerer compete for another year because of it.



Oh. lol
ll drop it
 
  • Like
Reactions: T8KUDWN
Same thing happens in track and field but even worse. This years champ byu had an average age of like 25 because of their “missions”. Other schools are bringing in Africans who are pushing 30. It’s crazy.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT