|
Custer should have two more years of basketball eligibility remaining after this season, regardless of what you label him. Under NCAA rules a player has 4 years of playing eligibility to be used within a 5 consecutive year period. Custer used one year of eligibility at Iowa State and one this season, so he has two left, but he must use them both by 2019.
It might be that Custer expressed a preference to Loyola to be listed on the roster by his academic as opposed to athletic-eligibility status. Just a guess.
This illustrates a systemic problem whenever a player's academic and athletic-eligibility "age" get out of synch through transfers, medical or other redshirts. The current convention would be to label somebody like Custer who is academically a junior but has two more years' athletic eligibility as a R[edshirt]-Sophomore. I find this practice unsatisfying because it serves to emphasize the importance of athletic status over academic status.
I think a better practice would be to list the player by his academic year and then by his athletic-eligibility status in cases where these diverge. Most players would still be simply Freshman, Sophomore, etc. But for players like Custer, they would be listed as "Junior/ [Descriptor of Eligibility Status]".
The Descriptor could be a number indicating years of eligibility remaining (Custer Junior/II). Or, as I prefer, the descriptor could be a name denoting the appropriate level. I am fond of the names used in youth swimming for various skill levels, so I borrowed them: Guppy, Minnow, Fish, Shark.
Under my system, therefore, Clayton Custer is a Junior Minnow.
I hope this answered your question.
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
