[quote="Tom, post:404, topic:4488"]So a guy was ineligible in 2011 due to core course issues, despite having good grades and test scores. Goes to the military, returns from the military and takes a few college classes and does fine.
NCAA rules him ineligible due to those core course issues, which, by the book is correct.
He'll get a waiver. This is just the type case that waivers were meant to handle.
It should not be the type of case that waivers were meant to handle. This is the type of case that needs it's own RULE !!!
Whatever the reason why you think THIS situation needs a waiver is the criteria that should be written into the rule book.
No way. The rule book is thick enough (414 pages this year). You don't need to write a rule for every situation that might occur. This one probably hasn't happened more than 4-5 times in the last decade. Try to cover everything and you wind up with a 1000 page rule book that no one can understand. This is best handled by a waiver request.
How do you know it's only happened 4-5 times in the last decade? Are you an NCAA insider as well as a Penn State basketball insider?
Why is the rule book too thick? Are you also the gatekeeper of official rule book thickness?
I don't see what is so difficult about it. If there is an reason why this should be a waiver, then tell me what that reason is, and make a rule based on the situation so that all can benefit from that rule. Why is that concept so obtuse?
Yup, you're right. I've heard hundreds of coaches complain about how we don't have enough rules. :
"The rule book is too simple", they say. "Give us more rules to follow"
What world do you live in? The reason you have waivers is for situations just like this, where you have a very unique set of circumstances. It makes absolutely no sense at all to try to codify every possible scenario. Why is THAT so obtuse?