<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>New College Eligibility Rules Announced</title>
		<description>Discuss New College Eligibility Rules Announced</description>
		<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 May 2013 11:30:34 --500</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>JComments</generator>
		<atom:link href="http://rugbymag.com/component/jcomments/feed/com_content/4697/10.html" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
		<item>
			<title>RugbyUtah says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-17122</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I believe the simple answer is "yes," you will be restricted if your degree takes longer than an additional 3 yrs after your CC graduation]]></description>
			<dc:creator>RugbyUtah</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2012 17:02:05 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-17122</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RugbyUtah says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-17121</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Here is a link to the SSCRA http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/sscra/a/sscra.htm]]></description>
			<dc:creator>RugbyUtah</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2012 16:53:22 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-17121</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>RugbyUtah says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-17120</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I have a couple of VERY significant issues which this now causes. It punishes people for either Military, Religious, or civil service. There is no such thing as 1 yr of active duty service, period. A LDS mission is 2 yrs right out of HS. Peace Corp is also a couple years. This punishes volunteerism at all levels. It will also most likely violate the Soldiers and Sailors act around discrimination of military personnel. Then try to apply this to a NCAA team, especially the women, and you have conflicting eligibility. This is so silly and will not solve any issues. It will not lead to better play, safer conditions, or more talented younger athletes, it will only lead to discrimination of volunteerism in the US and should be addressed at the legal level, especially if it does violate the soldiers and sailors act.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>RugbyUtah</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 12 Dec 2012 16:52:01 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-17120</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Hardworker says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14792</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Do you know why Life, BYU, Ark St. and Cal win? It has absolutely NOTHING to do with age. They win because they work their asses off. Just think, maybe if these big name schools (PSU, Ohio St., Texas A&M) trained smarter and harder, they could compete. Lets be honest, these new eligibility rules have only appeared because some colleges simply work, most others don't, and the parents of the losing schools aren't happy. If more schools worked under a "high performance" model, as Geesh says, rugby WOULD grow in America. As an American student-athlete myself (21 years old) I don't take pride in beating teams by 50+ points. I wish teams would push themselves and other colleges to reach an elite level. Better Competition is they way to grow the sport, not banning players who are a little older, or in the military (which personally makes me sick). There really shouldn't be such a large gap between the top 5 teams and the rest of the nation...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Hardworker</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Sun, 17 Jun 2012 10:13:50 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14792</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dstone says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14147</link>
			<description><![CDATA[As I read it - their is a "collegiate eligibility Grandfater Clause" which allows any 2011/2012 student to operate under the old rules. In other words, a 25 year old freshman from last year can still qualify for up to five more years of elegibility and play until he is 30. So many programs will continue to play older players and not be affected for several years.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dstone</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 09:54:41 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14147</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>AgeIsAJoke says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14143</link>
			<description><![CDATA[I know this is rugby but let's compare...Trent Richardson, first runningback taken in the NFL Draft, at 20 years old. But, I'm sure he couldn't hang with a 25 year old with 2 kids, could he?! Laughable! If the age issue was such a factor, why has BYU, (who seems to be the only Uni being called out for age) only won 2 Nat'l Championships? Everyone needs to follow the example of the Golden Bear: stop worrying about age, ethnicity, number of children, island of origin, military service,and all the other EXCUSES...AND TRAIN HARD AND BE FOCUSED...and maybe you will find yourself in a successful program.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>AgeIsAJoke</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Fri, 01 Jun 2012 01:44:44 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14143</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Tau says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14058</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@ Geesh...you're right i don't have kids...but i'm a student and I am 22 in college...but in high school i played club rugby right after high school when i was 18 and knew that it was one of the ways to improve my game...i mean look at countries where rugby is BIG they have 18 year olds playing in international level already, I mean Jonah Lomu was running over people when he was 19...so soccer might be the best option for your son! We do this for the love of the game...and of course its rugby you will get tackled and look bad its not a beauty contest and see who could be the youngest and prettiest out there... :)]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Tau</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 15:23:21 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14058</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Retired says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14039</link>
			<description><![CDATA[Okay, I'll make one last comment then check out of this stupid conversation. 1) For you Data people: You realize that to claim age as a factor, you have to have all other variables equal. So to say age is the issue, every other school must have the same coaching skills and staff size, alumni support, training schedule, game schedule, player IQ, diet, etc etc, and even player experience, because experience and age are two separate variables. 2) If Davenport or Lindenwood are winning, then move them up to D1A. Oh wait, then St Marys, PSU, Life, Cal, etc, all the young 'normal' teams, will beat them and your age argument goes out the window.... Or the flip side, Utah State and UVU, two Utah based teams with older players, yet they AREN'T winning... 3) Data, I would leave Cal out of your argument, because they prove age doesn't matter and have done so for decades...]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Retired</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 11:39:36 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14039</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Dutybound says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14036</link>
			<description><![CDATA[@geesh I am a father and I see your type of parenting all around. The type where every kid gets a trophy just for showing up. The kind that would dumb down a beautiful sport just so your precious little snowflake doesn't have to face any real challenges. In regard to your friend playing college rugby I feel strongly that amateurism should be enforced but his age alone should not be a factor. In regard to elligibilty I am for I being as rigerous as possible with our being discriminitory. In regards to blowing it out your neck. It is not directed at you and "others". It is directed solely at you for having the audacity to tell CIPP payer's we should not question were the money goes.]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Dutybound</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 10:58:41 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14036</guid>
		</item>
		<item>
			<title>Patrioticrugger says:</title>
			<link>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14032</link>
			<description><![CDATA[You news a comparison group for this "data" to mean anything. You should start with what the average age is on playoff teams etc and see if in fact BYU, Davenport and Linderwoods average age is substantially higher. So are you complaining that BYU is playing 24 year olds?]]></description>
			<dc:creator>Patrioticrugger</dc:creator>
			<pubDate>Wed, 30 May 2012 10:37:07 --500</pubDate>
			<guid>http://rugbymag.com/college-news/4697-new-college-eligibility-rules-announced.html#comment-14032</guid>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
