Gach, Robbins waiver updates from Marcus

[Gopher Teeth]

Completely agree. I don't like the idea of guys packing up to leave for greener pastures with little to no barriers. It leaves teammates high and dry and could potentially cause mass exodus from those teams.....completely destroying a program.

And while I realize that the rules are not the same for coaches....which isn't quite fair....I'd argue that a coach can be replaced easier than a significant portion of a squad.

If more kids can leave, more kids can come. I don’t see the downside being significant. The only programs that would have to worry is if the coached is hated so everyone leaves and no one comes in, and at that point it’s time to get rid of the coach.

 

[MplsGopher]

But there research dollars are high enough to be AAU, unlike Nebraska W/O a medical school or at least one that is not directly associated with Lincoln.

It's not just raw research dollars, because those come from a number of places (including the school spending its own money by giving it directly to its PI's with no competition). What particularly matters is how competitive the school's PI's are in winning competitive, federal grants.

Both have ag schools, and so both get a decent chunk from the USDA, as does most every's state's ag school (including the U's). But it's really not that much, in the grand scheme.

 

[stocker08]

If more kids can leave, more kids can come. I don’t see the downside being significant. The only programs that would have to worry is if the coached is hated so everyone leaves and no one comes in, and at that point it’s time to get rid of the coach.

That may be. But I also think it encourages kids who develop at less prestigious programs to jump ship at an opportunity to play for blue bloods. I don't see how it wouldn't widen the talent gap when Juniors and Seniors at middling programs get the opportunity to play for a title contender. While the problem may not be rampant....there's little question that the beneficiaries of a no penalty transfer rule would be the teams that are already title contenders year after year. Players are unlikely to transfer out of those places....but I'm sure they wouldn't have trouble finding players that would happily transfer in.

 

[MplsGopher]

That may be. But I also think it encourages kids who develop at less prestigious programs to jump ship at an opportunity to play for blue bloods. I don't see how it wouldn't widen the talent gap when Juniors and Seniors at middling programs get the opportunity to play for a title contender. While the problem may not be rampant....there's little question that the beneficiaries of a no penalty transfer rule would be the teams that are already title contenders year after year. Players are unlikely to transfer out of those places....but I'm sure they wouldn't have trouble finding players that would happily transfer in.

I wonder if there is some compromise to be found, in developing some kind of "transfer metric" and limiting a school's activity according to the metric? Similarish, to scholarship and roster limits?

Might be a tall task.


I am a bit conflicted. Because on one hand, I think players should have the freedom of something closer to free agency. It seems artificial to limit them, otherwise, and coaches get to do it as they please. But on the other hand, exactly like you said, it is the predictable outcome that the rich will get richer.

 

[EG#9]

I wonder if there is some compromise to be found, in developing some kind of "transfer metric" and limiting a school's activity according to the metric? Similarish, to scholarship and roster limits?

Might be a tall task.


I am a bit conflicted. Because on one hand, I think players should have the freedom of something closer to free agency. It seems artificial to limit them, otherwise, and coaches get to do it as they please. But on the other hand, exactly like you said, it is the predictable outcome that the rich will get richer.

I feel very similarly. It doesn't seem right that coaches can move on, but kids cannot. That said, it seems like the playing field gets tilted even further with a "free for all" transfer system. If the G League program becomes a success, you could see the majority of the top 10 or 20 recruits go that way. If the NBA allows high school draftees again, maybe 5-10 kids go immediately to the draft and another 20 go the G League route? Why I bring that up is that you could see the Kentucky's and Duke's of the world move from dominating the recruiting rankings each year to using other colleges as minor leagues and filling their rosters with players who have proven themselves at other schools. How would you police school's tampering with the kid shooting 45% from 3 at Santa Clara or the shot blocking big man at Wright State?

I honestly have no idea what the answer is. I always thought the "hardship" waiver was BS and prone to misuse. If a player is experiencing something in his life that requires him to leave his current school, shouldn't he be using that time that he was practicing/playing basketball to deal with the trauma going on in his life? Then the process is kept secret so there is no set standard as to who gets the waiver and who doesn't. I'd rather everyone be allowed immediate eligibility or no one be allowed immediate eligibility and neither of those options seem great either.

 

[builtbadgers]

I feel very similarly. It doesn't seem right that coaches can move on, but kids cannot. That said, it seems like the playing field gets tilted even further with a "free for all" transfer system. If the G League program becomes a success, you could see the majority of the top 10 or 20 recruits go that way. If the NBA allows high school draftees again, maybe 5-10 kids go immediately to the draft and another 20 go the G League route? Why I bring that up is that you could see the Kentucky's and Duke's of the world move from dominating the recruiting rankings each year to using other colleges as minor leagues and filling their rosters with players who have proven themselves at other schools. How would you police school's tampering with the kid shooting 45% from 3 at Santa Clara or the shot blocking big man at Wright State?

I honestly have no idea what the answer is. I always thought the "hardship" waiver was BS and prone to misuse. If a player is experiencing something in his life that requires him to leave his current school, shouldn't he be using that time that he was practicing/playing basketball to deal with the trauma going on in his life? Then the process is kept secret so there is no set standard as to who gets the waiver and who doesn't. I'd rather everyone be allowed immediate eligibility or no one be allowed immediate eligibility and neither of those options seem great either.

There will be a free pass for athletes that coaches that leave for any reason. Others will have to sit. After this year they will be done with waivers. Nearly all waivers will go through this year.

 

[alchemy2u]

There will be a free pass for athletes that coaches that leave for any reason. Others will have to sit. After this year they will be done with waivers. Nearly all waivers will go through this year.

Sounds reasonable. Flush it all through this year and clean up all of the misuse that is going on. The current system is too vulnerable to favoritism and vindictive schools blocking moves. Give the player a choice if the coach leaves or the players have to wait until they graduate/go pro.

 

[Livingat45north]

There will be a free pass for athletes that coaches that leave for any reason. Others will have to sit. After this year they will be done with waivers. Nearly all waivers will go through this year.

Why will that happen? Not arguing with you, just wondering why. Usually the previous and current years set the precedent for the next year unless of course some major rule change is coming shutting down waivers.

 

[builtbadgers]

Why will that happen? Not arguing with you, just wondering why. Usually the previous and current years set the precedent for the next year unless of course some major rule change is coming shutting down waivers.

NCAA wants out of the waiver business except for the rare exception of a true emergency. Coaches want the player granted the rights to move if they have been fired, quit, retire. It has never stayed the same , only become more muddled.

 

[MplsGopher]

NCAA wants out of the waiver business except for the rare exception of a true emergency. Coaches want the player granted the rights to move if they have been fired, quit, retire. It has never stayed the same , only become more muddled.

I guess this is reasonable. It deals with the main argument for free transfers, that coaches can leave whenever they want.

However, I wonder why your "true emergency" caveat will work any better than what they have now? The language now is pretty clear: you're only supposed to get a family hardship waiver if it's your immediate family member that needs you to transfer (closer to) home in order to help them. And yet here we are, with it being abused all the time.

So why will it suddenly work better going forward? Who determines what a "true" emergency is?

 

[gophereric30]

I guess this is reasonable. It deals with the main argument for free transfers, that coaches can leave whenever they want.

However, I wonder why your "true emergency" caveat will work any better than what they have now? The language now is pretty clear: you're only supposed to get a family hardship waiver if it's your immediate family member that needs you to transfer (closer to) home in order to help them. And yet here we are, with it being abused all the time.

So why will it suddenly work better going forward? Who determines what a "true" emergency is?

Isnt the

I guess this is reasonable. It deals with the main argument for free transfers, that coaches can leave whenever they want.

However, I wonder why your "true emergency" caveat will work any better than what they have now? The language now is pretty clear: you're only supposed to get a family hardship waiver if it's your immediate family member that needs you to transfer (closer to) home in order to help them. And yet here we are, with it being abused all the time.

So why will it suddenly work better going forward? Who determines what a "true" emergency is?

If the new transfer rule gets voted in next year, you wont need a reason for transferring other than I'm transferring. NCAA doesnt want to have to make rulings one way or another. I think might be a one time transfer if I recall correctly.

 

[MplsGopher]

Isnt the

If the new transfer rule gets voted in next year, you wont need a reason for transferring other than I'm transferring. NCAA doesnt want to have to make rulings one way or another. I think might be a one time transfer if I recall correctly.

Built's post reads to me that all transfers will be denied an exemption of the sit-out, unless there is a "true emergency" that warrants it.

If you're saying it's going to be that you get to transfer once in your eligibility, no questions asked, as is done in every other sport than football and basketball ... that I would vote yes on.


That's what it was supposed to be, this year. But it got squashed by powerful men in smoke filled rooms at the last second.