Shortened Missions for Athletes?

[webbles]

never mind as the link was fixed

Edited July 1, 2025 by webbles

[Notatbm]

Another gem from ETB:

“The Lord wants every young man to serve a full-time mission. Presently only a third of the eligible young men in the Church are serving full-time missions. This is not pleasing to the Lord. We can do better. We must do better. Not only should a mission be regarded as a priesthood duty, but every young man should look forward to this experience with great joy and anticipation.

A young man can do nothing more important. School can wait. Scholarships can be deferred. Occupational goals can be postponed. Yes, even temple marriage should wait until after a young man has served an honorable full-time mission for the Lord.

Now, why do I mention this to you young women this evening? Because you can have a positive influence in motivating young men to serve full-time missions. Let the young men of your acquaintance know that you expect them to assume their missionary responsibilities, that you personally want them to serve in the mission field, because you know that’s where the Lord wants them.

Avoid steady dating with a young man prior to the time of his mission call. If your relationship with him is more casual, then he can make that decision to serve more easily and also can concentrate his full energies on his missionary work instead of the girlfriend back home. And after he returns honorably from his mission, he will be a better husband and father and priesthood holder, having first served a full-time mission.”

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/general-conference/1986/10/to-the-young-women-of-the-church?lang=eng
 

Note the second paragraph… 

[Notatbm]

4 hours ago, bluebell said:

This is a clip from when Pres. Hinckley was alive and the prophet, so a long time ago.  And he didn't seem to say anything nefarious.  He basically said that if you leave your mission because it's too hard, you will regret it.  I know he used the words 'ruin your life' but he used them in conjunction with the story he shared about meeting members who had left for such reasons and how sorrowful they were.  I'm sure plenty of people disagree with him, which is their right. 

Has anyone bothered to see if Elder Holland's views have become more nuanced since this clip that is a at least a decade, if not almost two, old?  I'm guessing you aren't the same person you were in the 2000s. He's probably not either.  

 

On paper, the church has not changed its stance on serving all two years for males. Where they change their stance is if their star qb quits his mission to go to byu to play football. If they let him come back after bailing on his mission early- they give their blessing to everyone to do it. 
 

Id be fine with that. It is just a double standard and that would be the official beginning of the end for the missionary program as we know it. Everything is optional. 
 

I bet elder holland hasn’t changed a bit. He probably still has much disdain for mission quitters. 
 

Edited July 1, 2025 by Notatbm

[webbles]

6 minutes ago, Notatbm said:

On paper, the church has not changed its stance on serving all two years for males. Where they change their stance is if their star qb quits his mission to go to byu to play football. If they let him come back after bailing on his mission early- they give their blessing to everyone to do it. 
 

Id be fine with that. It is just a double standard and that would be the official beginning of the end for the missionary program as we know it. Everything is optional. 
 

I bet elder holland hasn’t changed a bit. He probably still has much disdain for mission quitters. 
 

His brother had only a 17 month mission so that he could play at USC as a tight end.  This isn't about BYU or star quarterback.

[Notatbm]

17 minutes ago, webbles said:

His brother had only a 17 month mission so that he could play at USC as a tight end.  This isn't about BYU or star quarterback.

This particular discussion is about Ryder Lyons. Brand new pick for qb for byu.  Read the very first post of the op. 

[webbles]

56 minutes ago, Notatbm said:

This particular discussion is about Ryder Lyons. Brand new pick for qb for byu.  Read the very first post of the op. 

This discussion is about whether or not the 1 year mission that the news articles have mentioned about Ryder is really going to happen.  Ryder's older brother is really similar.  He left on his mission in January; Ryder is planning to leave on his mission in January (he will graduate early from high school).  Ryder's older brother only served 17 months (instead of the normal 24 months).  He returned home early so that he could do strength training and be ready to play at USC as a tight end.  Ryder is probably planning on doing something very similar.

You keep saying that the only reason they are shortening Ryder's mission is because he is a BYU quarterback, but we have an extremely similar situation that is dealing with a USC tight end.  So the shortened mission is not BYU related.

[let’s roll]

1 hour ago, Notatbm said:

They were going to let you go four months early for school? That’s quite a bit different than a year. 

He can serve a one year service mission (which is available to all).  Would you think less of him if he opted to do so?  Do you think less of the 60% of missionaries from your Stake who you report retuned home early from their missions?  If this young man said he would serve two years and came home after one, would you think less of him?

Edited July 1, 2025 by let’s roll

[Notatbm]

12 hours ago, let’s roll said:

He can serve a one year service mission (which is available to all).  Would you think less of him if he opted to do so?  
 

Do you think less of the 60% of missionaries from your Stake who you report retuned home early from their missions?

 

 If this young man said he would serve two years and came home after one, would you think less of him?

I’m pretty sure you don’t get to choose a 1yr service mission. Last I heard those are reserved for those who can not serve full time proselytizing missions. Usually due to medical/mental or other situation-not a football scholarship. 
 

of the 60% ish who just up and quit? Yep. Those with med issues different story. If someone who doesn’t go on a mission at all is deemed to be a piece of crap and a disobedient person, then someone who comes home early just to quit is no better. They wasted their parents money and the church’s time. 

yea I would. If he said he was going to serve two years and basically lied because he is quitting at one year. Yea

for the record I think the whole church culture  surrounding missions, honorable vs dishonorable release, served two years,  bribing kids to go on missions, girls not marrying guys because they are not rm, leaders saying out one side their mouth you have to go and in the next sentence say they missions are optional… the whole game is a complete circus. All this drama over trying to trauma bond boys to the church. It is a dismal failure cuz about half the rms ( you know the only guys worth a damn to the church) are leaving the church after their missions. Whats going on out there? The program is backfiring. 
 

The issue is not if he leaves the mission early. Hell half the kids quit nowadays anyway. The issue is if BYU will accept him after he committed to two years and then he up and quits so he can play football. If they allow it (the church is in full control if he actually ends up at byu) then they will have forever changed the culture of missionary service and will essentially be rewarding a return missionary for lying about his intended term of service. I’m pretty sure that isn’t the example they are looking for. Problem is they want this QB so they are gonna play his game  and the church will continue to shame those who come home early for other than illness or emergencies. The Shaming will come from mission presidents, stake presidents, bishops, families girlfriends etc. the organization will stand by and allow it to continue because it helps keep some in the field. 

Edited July 1, 2025 by Notatbm
Typos

[Notatbm]

1 hour ago, webbles said:

This discussion is about whether or not the 1 year mission that the news articles have mentioned about Ryder is really going to happen. 
 

Ryder's older brother is really similar.  He left on his mission in January; Ryder is planning to leave on his mission in January (he will graduate early from high school).  Ryder's older brother only served 17 months (instead of the normal 24 months).  He returned home early so that he could do strength training and be ready to play at USC as a tight end.  Ryder is probably planning on doing something very similar.

 

You keep saying that the only reason they are shortening Ryder's mission is because he is a BYU quarterback, but we have an extremely similar situation that is dealing with a USC tight end.  So the shortened mission is not BYU related.

1- I agree

2- his brother has nothing to do with this other than precedence. He didn’t go to byu so that school couldn’t give two flips about a mission 

3-the shortened mission if it happens is absolutely byu related. This is the university of the church he committed to a two year mission for (or will have). If he quits the mission to play ball at BYU, the church is in a tough spot as to whether they admit him. If they do they will basically give approval going forward to lie to the church about your intentions. That can be a game changer for all males. It essentially will give them cultural approval to quit a mission for any reason. The church’s own website states a full mission for males is two years. By allowing him to quit and play ball at their school, they become all bark and no bite. 
 

That is getting others fired up because if allowed, it is a clear double standard. Two years for all males unless you play football really well. If so maybe a year and a huge paycheck too. 

 

Edited July 1, 2025 by Notatbm

[Tony uk]

12 hours ago, Calm said:

I believe young single missionaries can go on teaching missions until they are 25 if male, 29 for women (don’t know why there is a difference).  There is also the option now to do service missions for that age group, not sure what the application process is.  26 years and older adults can start senior service missions.  For regular missions, single women and men and couples over 40 without dependents under 18 at home can serve.  

In the info part of the senior missionary portal, it says senior elders can serve regular missions—meaning for them away from home, but won’t be in companionships while senior sisters may be in a companionship or not.  In the handbook it’s still saying senior elders can only serve service missions while regular missions are referred to as teaching missions, so I am not sure what is going on.  It may be service missions include away from home now and single senior elders will only serve those or the handbook is out of date.

If there aren’t the usual service missions for the 18/19-25 group in their area, these young ones can do the same stuff as senior missions.  

Since I have no clue about this difference between junior and senior service missions, someone else will need to explain that distinction.

https://seniormissionary.churchofjesuschrist.org/srsite/as/faq-brightspot?lang=eng

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/manual/general-handbook/24?lang=eng

Many thanks for the reply and the link. Glad to read that the people who maybe regarded as 'Senior', are still allowed, where able to participate in mission.

[bluebell]

14 hours ago, Notatbm said:

I’m sure it has been worked out for him to not get any blowback at byu for quitting early. Also as I understand it, a scholarship deferral (for mission service) at byu is for two years. Early return requires reapplication. If that is true, then a deal has surely been worked out wink wink. 

 

Get “a pass”

forgive my phone for it autocorrects at its own discretion

So there's no evidence right now to support the idea that the church is encouraging this member to serve a shortened mission.  

[Notatbm]

23 minutes ago, bluebell said:

So there's no evidence right now to support the idea that the church is encouraging this member to serve a shortened mission.  

Did I say there was? We will know once he serves his mission ( however long his sentence may be) , how long that service was and if BYU accepts him on the team. If he only serves a year, goes to BYU after, we will know the church approves of members quitting their missions early (even up to a year early) in order to play sports and make money. A different university taking him is a whole lot different than byu. BYU is the church and the church says makes serve 24 months with a few exceptions. None of the exceptions are for careers or playing sports , 

 

we will see what happens 

[let’s roll]

10 hours ago, Notatbm said:

I’m pretty sure you don’t get to choose a 1yr service mission. Last I heard those are reserved for those who can not serve full time proselytizing missions. Usually due to medical/mental or other situation-not a football scholarship. 

Having worked on the Service Missionary program in one Area of the Church in concert with Church HQ, my experience is that the Program is not as rigid as you assume.  Priesthood leaders have discretion to utilize and adapt the program as directed by the Spirit.  If this young man went to his Bishop and Stake President and said he would like to serve the Lord and the young men and women of his Area via a one year (or even 6 month) service mission facilitating emotional resilience and goal setting discussions in EFYs, Seminary and Institutes and Ward and Stake Firesides, using his testimony and personal experiences as a highly motivated and accomplished young man who has learned from navigating obstacles, it’s not hard to see why Priesthood leaders would be enthusiastic about facilitating that mission.

[Notatbm]

20 minutes ago, let’s roll said:

Having worked on the Service Missionary program in one Area of the Church in concert with Church HQ, my experience is that the Program is not as rigid as you assume.  Priesthood leaders have discretion to utilize and adapt the program as directed by the Spirit.  If this young man went to his Bishop and Stake President and said he would like to serve the Lord and the young men and women of his Area via a one year (or even 6 month) service mission facilitating emotional resilience and goal setting discussions in EFYs, Seminary and Institutes and Ward and Stake Firesides, using his testimony and personal experiences as a highly motivated and accomplished young man who has learned from navigating obstacles, it’s not hard to see why Priesthood leaders would be enthusiastic about facilitating that mission.

The church website currently has this to say (see below) about service mission eligibility. They are for those who cannot serve proselytizing missions for various reasons. They do not list exceptions for those who don’t want to serve a proselytizing mission, but are otherwise able to. Please produce any other church documentation stating kids can dictate to the church what kind of mission they will serve:

 

“Preaching the gospel to gather scattered Israel will always be the primary purpose of missionary service, so the Lord, through His leaders, will call most young people to find, teach, and baptize converts. Others, unable to serve in this manner, may be called to serve the Lord as a service missionary. Additionally, missionaries who return home early from a proselyting mission for long-term health reasons may be reassigned to serve the Lord as a service missionary. Some other candidates may, with our appreciation for their desire to serve, be honorably excused from any formal missionary service.

….

Service Mission Eligibility

Those who may be called to a service mission include worthy young men (ages 18–25) and young women (ages 19–25) unable to serve a proselyting mission for physical, mental, or emotional reasons. In addition, proselyting missionaries who return home early due to accident, illness, or other health conditions and have the desire and ability to continue their service to the Lord may be reassigned to a service mission when recommended by their stake president and General Authorities in the Missionary Department and when approved by the Quorum of the Twelve.“

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/service-missionary/the-first-presidency-enclosure-to-leaders?lang=eng

Edited July 1, 2025 by Notatbm
Forgot to paste a paragraph

[let’s roll]

16 minutes ago, Notatbm said:

The church website currently has this to say (see below) about service mission eligibility. They are for those who cannot serve proselytizing missions for various reasons. They do not list exceptions for those who don’t want to serve a proselytizing mission, but are otherwise able to. Please produce any other church documentation stating kids can dictate to the church what kind of mission they will serve:

I invite you to reread the first two sentences of my post.  He that hath ears….

I don’t know the source of your distain for the missionary program or your decision to trumpet the myopic views and actions of some of God’s children in regards to that program.  Like any other revealed truth, as it is implemented by mortals, the results will always be less the perfect, some will try and see immediate benefits, some will try and struggle to see immediate benefits but come to identify those benefits over time and some will abandon, for a season or forever, their efforts.  Since all deserve our love and support, especially those in the latter category (which you admit to think less of because of their decision) perhaps the program would be better than the “circus” you perceive it to be if we all were more supportive of the desires of our brothers and sisters to serve and more nurturing to those who struggle in implementing that desire.  One thing is certain, the throngs of members of the Church who received invitations from missionaries and acted on those invitations to their eternal benefit don’t believe, as you do, that the program has backfired.

[Notatbm]

48 minutes ago, let’s roll said:

I invite you to reread the first two sentences of my post.  He that hath ears….

Ok I read the two sentences. So in your experience in one area, some unnamed church leader at church hq has some discretion to allow anyone (unnamed special category of member or member celebrity?)  to dictate what they will do and how long they they’ll  do their mission service? Like someone who wants to tailor their mission experience to their own personal whims? Where is this and who is the leader? Doesn’t sound like a church-wide program. If in fact our aspiring BYU QB was to learn about it either you or the church would have to reach out to him and tell him how he can game the system and get special consideration for his desires because it is quite obviously a secret program.  I can’t see the church doing this for everyone. They would have to hire legions of vacation planners to accommodate all the wild ideas they surely would be presented. 

[webbles]

12 hours ago, Notatbm said:

1- I agree

2- his brother has nothing to do with this other than precedence. He didn’t go to byu so that school couldn’t give two flips about a mission 

3-the shortened mission if it happens is absolutely byu related. This is the university of the church he committed to a two year mission for (or will have). If he quits the mission to play ball at BYU, the church is in a tough spot as to whether they admit him. If they do they will basically give approval going forward to lie to the church about your intentions. That can be a game changer for all males. It essentially will give them cultural approval to quit a mission for any reason. The church’s own website states a full mission for males is two years. By allowing him to quit and play ball at their school, they become all bark and no bite. 
 

That is getting others fired up because if allowed, it is a clear double standard. Two years for all males unless you play football really well. If so maybe a year and a huge paycheck too. 

 

So, it is acceptable for a mission president to work with a missionary so that he can return home early to play football as long as it isn't with BYU?  And can the missionary, after returning home and playing for one year, transfer to BYU and be accepted?

Also, did you read the Church News article (the one about his brother)?  It says:

Quote

Walker Lyons graduated from high school early so he could start his mission and return in time to train for the next football season. His first day was Jan. 23, and he spent the first few weeks doing online training in his California home.

That makes it look like the Church News knew he was going to be returning home early.  So I don't see how the church is in a tough spot when they apparently are already allowing it.

Edited July 1, 2025 by webbles

[Notatbm]

25 minutes ago, webbles said:

So, it is acceptable for a mission president to work with a missionary so that he can return home early to play football as long as it isn't with BYU?  And can the missionary, after returning home and playing for one year, transfer to BYU and be accepted?

where did I say that? The said the heathen school doesn’t care about mission service. Quitting a mission doesn’t mean anything to them other than they get their QB earlier than planned. No one is required to work with their MP to quit their mission. They can just leave. 

25 minutes ago, webbles said:

Also, did you read the Church News article (the one about his brother)?  It says:

That makes it look like the Church News knew he was going to be returning home early.  So I don't see how the church is in a tough spot when they apparently are already allowing it.

Yep - and on one hand I’m surprised the church will allow him to attend BYU as a reward for disobeying the lord and not fulfilling his two year obligation or duty as. Some call it. Quitting a mission early to play ball shows whoever is granting the ecclesiastical endorsement  that they feel football is more important to the member in question than obeying the lord and serving a full time mission. 
 

on the other hand the church is full of double standards and if it happens I will not be surprised. 
 

What is really important is how the church and its leaders treat the rank and file going forward. The church has pretty much lost control of its youth and if this does happen it will be worse. 

[Notatbm]

1 hour ago, let’s roll said:

I invite you to reread the first two sentences of my post.  He that hath ears….

I don’t know the source of your distain for the missionary program or your decision to trumpet the myopic views and actions of some of God’s children in regards to that program.  Like any other revealed truth, as it is implemented by mortals, the results will always be less the perfect, some will try and see immediate benefits, some will try and struggle to see immediate benefits but come to identify those benefits over time and some will abandon, for a season or forever, their efforts.  Since all deserve our love and support, especially those in the latter category (which you admit to think less of because of their decision) perhaps the program would be better than the “circus” you perceive it to be if we all were more supportive of the desires of our brothers and sisters to serve and more nurturing to those who struggle in implementing that desire.  One thing is certain, the throngs of members of the Church who received invitations from missionaries and acted on those invitations to their eternal benefit don’t believe, as you do, that the program has backfired.

Throngs?? Most of the converts go inactive within just a few months after baptism. How is that not backfiring ? Speaking of throngs. Why so many rms leave the church? Converts and rms both bailing. Sounds like the missionary program is backfiring. 

[bluebell]

3 hours ago, Notatbm said:

Did I say there was? We will know once he serves his mission ( however long his sentence may be) , how long that service was and if BYU accepts him on the team. If he only serves a year, goes to BYU after, we will know the church approves of members quitting their missions early (even up to a year early) in order to play sports and make money. A different university taking him is a whole lot different than byu. BYU is the church and the church says makes serve 24 months with a few exceptions. None of the exceptions are for careers or playing sports , 

 

we will see what happens 

No, but you accuse the church of encouraging something, and I was asking if there was any evidence to support that accusation.

I appreciate you admitting that there isn’t. You’re right though, that could change in the future.

[let’s roll]

1 hour ago, Notatbm said:

Ok I read the two sentences. So in your experience in one area, some unnamed church leader at church hq has some discretion to allow anyone (unnamed special category of member or member celebrity?)  to dictate what they will do and how long they they’ll  do their mission service? Like someone who wants to tailor their mission experience to their own personal whims? Where is this and who is the leader? Doesn’t sound like a church-wide program. If in fact our aspiring BYU QB was to learn about it either you or the church would have to reach out to him and tell him how he can game the system and get special consideration for his desires because it is quite obviously a secret program.  I can’t see the church doing this for everyone. They would have to hire legions of vacation planners to accommodate all the wild ideas they surely would be presented. 

That’s not what the first two sentences say.  If you’re choosing to twist the words to try to support your position, that’s your prerogative.  If you’re choosing truly thinks that’s what those sentences say then there’s a different issue.
 

There were two prophets in Jerusalem.  God commanded one to go and one to stay.  I invite you to ponder why that was so…in doing so you might get some insight into the relationship between Deity and priesthood leaders (plural), including the fact that it often doesn’t have the uniformity and rigidity you seem to perceive.

Edited July 1, 2025 by let’s roll

[webbles]

1 hour ago, Notatbm said:

where did I say that? The said the heathen school doesn’t care about mission service. Quitting a mission doesn’t mean anything to them other than they get their QB earlier than planned. No one is required to work with their MP to quit their mission. They can just leave. 

You keep ignoring his brother's experience just because it is USC.  So it feels like you are fine with a mission president working with a young man to leave early as long as it isn't BYU.  Or do you have a problem with what happened to his brother?  Do you think his mission president was wrong?  Do you think he was getting preferred treatment?

 

[Notatbm]

6 hours ago, let’s roll said:

1. Having worked on the Service Missionary program in one Area of the Church in concert with Church HQ, my experience is that the Program is not as rigid as you assume.  
 

2. Priesthood leaders have discretion to utilize and adapt the program as directed by the Spirit.

Sentence #1 you worked in one area of the church with church hq. Apparently there is some kind of flexibility there. What that is who knows

sentence #2 discretion by priesthood leaders to adapt the program. Apparently the spirit tells them what to do. 
 

Reference the spirit here. Is this the same spirit that told the entire first presidency the salamander letter was real? If so then we are not dealing with a reliable one influence. 
 

that said-tell us how many kids came to the area you were working with and were provided a program to accommodate their sports career or were the accommodations made for missionaries with sick parents, severe financial hardship, disabilities etc? I imagine there were no accommodations made for aspiring athletes who do not want to serve all two years because their career prospects are more important than everyone else’s.

 

Why don’t you post some examples of missionaries who had special programs designed for them… you know to accommodate sports careers or other career aspirations. We aren’t talking about disabled kids or kids with huge train wrecks at home they are dealing with here. I’m talking about otherwise physically and mentally fit kids who can serve full time proselytizing missions yet somehow they need a special accommodation for whatever reason. 

Edited July 1, 2025 by Notatbm

[Notatbm]

1 hour ago, webbles said:

You keep ignoring his brother's experience just because it is USC.  So it feels like you are fine with a mission president working with a young man to leave early as long as it isn't BYU.  Or do you have a problem with what happened to his brother?  Do you think his mission president was wrong?  Do you think he was getting preferred treatment?

 

Why is his brothers experience at USC relevant? Are they a Mormon church school? Do they want their male students to serve Mormon missions? Don’t think so- that’s why what his brother did is irrelevant for this mission discussion.

I am saying byu has the choice here to make a special exemption from missionary service or a full mission. BYU has the choice. If a kid like this or his brother quit a mission to play for a college there isn’t a school out there who would care if he quit his mission and it isn’t an issue. The issue is BYU admits students based on an ecclesiastical endorsement. Just recently quitting your mission just to play sports should prompt BYU to tell him to finish his mission first ( just like pretty much everyone else is told) and not accept him until he does. That is what they should do if this happens. He will probably get a pass though. We will see. If he does all two years or some semblance of that so be it. If he quits at about the 1 year mark then this controversy will raise its ugly head. Remember the church feels serving a full time mission is the best thing you can ever do. 
 

the heathen schools don’t care about the Mormons or their missions. BYU should given our prophet just stood up and told the world a full time mission for male members is not optional. We know what the definition of a full time mission is for a healthy kid..  two years.

If byu doesn’t care , accepts the kid who just quit his mission t play sports then the church sets the precedence that missions are not only totally optional, but you should quit any time you like for any reason. I’m thinking that is not the message they want to send. We will see what happens. 
 

it used to be it was faith promoting to put aside your career and school aspirations to serve a full mission. Many “hero” stories out there of people who lost scholarships and or professional sports careers to serve a mission. Those guys were the real “Saturday warriors.” Now apparently it looks as if the quitters are gonna start becoming the new standard for faith promoting church service or lack thereof. 

[webbles]

1 hour ago, Notatbm said:

Why is his brothers experience at USC relevant? Are they a Mormon church school? Do they want their male students to serve Mormon missions? Don’t think so- that’s why what his brother did is irrelevant for this mission discussion.

I am saying byu has the choice here to make a special exemption from missionary service or a full mission. BYU has the choice. If a kid like this or his brother quit a mission to play for a college there isn’t a school out there who would care if he quit his mission and it isn’t an issue. The issue is BYU admits students based on an ecclesiastical endorsement. Just recently quitting your mission just to play sports should prompt BYU to tell him to finish his mission first ( just like pretty much everyone else is told) and not accept him until he does. That is what they should do if this happens. He will probably get a pass though. We will see. If he does all two years or some semblance of that so be it. If he quits at about the 1 year mark then this controversy will raise its ugly head. Remember the church feels serving a full time mission is the best thing you can ever do. 
 

the heathen schools don’t care about the Mormons or their missions. BYU should given our prophet just stood up and told the world a full time mission for male members is not optional. We know what the definition of a full time mission is for a healthy kid..  two years.

If byu doesn’t care , accepts the kid who just quit his mission t play sports then the church sets the precedence that missions are not only totally optional, but you should quit any time you like for any reason. I’m thinking that is not the message they want to send. We will see what happens. 
 

it used to be it was faith promoting to put aside your career and school aspirations to serve a full mission. Many “hero” stories out there of people who lost scholarships and or professional sports careers to serve a mission. Those guys were the real “Saturday warriors.” Now apparently it looks as if the quitters are gonna start becoming the new standard for faith promoting church service or lack thereof. 

The person who gets to decide on whether he comes home early is the mission president.  Why should BYU care about whether he returned early or not if the mission president approved it.  That is who gets to make the decision.  Because a mission president did this for a player at USC, it means that BYU isn't a factor in whether he comes home early or not.  It is between him and his mission president.  I don't think BYU should ever reject a returned missionary who was released by his mission president.  That would be a really bad.

In 2ish years, we should definitely revisit this.  I bet that he will serve between 17 and 20 months.  Earlier than 17 months makes no logistical sense and I don't see him wanting to do less than what his brother did.  If he does more than 20 months, then he would have a red shirt year that he could still use but I don't know if that is worth it vs being on the practice squad.  BYU might prefer him to do the full 24 months because of the logistics, though.