Major Potential Shift In NCAA Transfer Rules

Donate To GopherHole
http://scout.com/college/basketball...out-on-potential-new-transfer-rule--107036402

Scout gets comments from men's basketball coaches on the potential transfer rule change-all negative. Everyone's a scoundrel.


“It would turn into one of the dirtiest recruiting periods that you've ever seen,” Indiana coach Archie Miller told Scout.

Every lay up and handshake line would turn into a recruiting pitch. Every interaction with an opposing player or parent would be an opportunity to lay the groundwork for a potential move.

“You'll have guys talking to your players when they are in your gym,” Miller added. “Coaches will recruit players right after games and now you can go directly to the source, it would cripple teams and programs.

And of course the mid-majors:

"I think it's ridiculous,” Xavier’s Chris Mack said of the potential rule.

“There's a constant narrative on social media about the mass exodus of kids and how it's appalling so many kids opt to transfer,” he added. “So now we want to make it easier to transfer? I don't see any logic in that line of thinking. Doesn't surprise me, but it's a step in the wrong direction in my opinion. I transferred years ago and I sat out a year. Did me a world of good. It's not the negative people make it out to be."
 

We've seen something similar with the grad transfers already. Not sure I'd want to be a coach that invested a scholarship year into a redshirt to develop a player only to have them use their last year of eligibility somewhere else. The rich will get richer.
 

WindyCityGopher said:
Again, there are plenty of "civilian" students who attend college on all types of scholarships, including full academic ones, who are not held to the same guidelines, because there is no governing body controlling their decisions like there is for athletes. If a top student on a full academic ride wants to transfer to another school they feel is better for them and their future prospects, and they can get the same financial assistance, they're free to go without limitation. Why can't an athlete? They're all considered students. How does that not seem reasonable?
Click to expand...

But even a student athlete can transfer at any time, and maintain a full scholarship at the new school, right? They just can't play their sport in actual games until 1 year has passed. That is the rule for the sport, it doesnt apply to a student being a student.

As far as the current rule goes, I think they should eliminate any school blocking a student from transferring to another school for any reason. Even a rival. That is not right.
 

WindyCityGopher said:
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

I agree with Bilas on this 100%. They're students, why shouldn't they have the same rights as other students to transfer schools without penalty?
Click to expand...

Any student in any program who transfers may be subject to a penalty of sorts if credits are not accepted at the school to which the student is transferring. That's a minor point in this discussion, but if this is implemented, it will be interesting to see if there is a difference between whose credits are accepted and whose aren't.

Good arguments on both sides, but I tend to agree that this could be a real mess and that at the end of the day it's night and the top-tier schools abscond with even more talent.
 

This topic is a microcosm of the paying players topic. In theory it makes all the sense in the world. In practice it could do real damage to the sport. I'm really conflicted.
 


Fortunately, this is nowhere close to being enacted

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

DLguy said:
How not. If Amir Coffey, the student, wanted to transfer to another school, what is stopping him? Nothing. However, if he wants to be awarded a scholarship and get all the benefits that go along with that and play basketball for a school sponsored team, he must transfer within guidelines. How does that not seem reasonable?
Click to expand...

++++ Agree
 

Another example why Mike DeCourcy is best college basketball writer out there

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

SelectionSunday said:
<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Click to expand...

Giving young and often immature guys the freedom they want to move to whatever program is hot or fits their needs and avoid facing their current issues is not a good idea. This would feed more into the posse mindset where guys get together and talk about where it would be cool to play together to win a championship. It becomes less and less about making decisions that include education and more about how to take care of me in the here and now.
 




WindyCityGopher said:
Again, there are plenty of "civilian" students who attend college on all types of scholarships, including full academic ones, who are not held to the same guidelines, because there is no governing body controlling their decisions like there is for athletes. If a top student on a full academic ride wants to transfer to another school they feel is better for them and their future prospects, and they can get the same financial assistance, they're free to go without limitation. Why can't an athlete? They're all considered students. How does that not seem reasonable?
Click to expand...

I see your point, but in the end, this won't benefit college basketball or football players as a whole, just the very best. Free agency would put a dagger in what is left of competitive balance. Fans of lower level teams aren't going to pay money to be feeder programs. Teams will drop sports or move down a level in competition. That means less overall scholarships. As long as everybody realizes that this is a possible result of a rule like this, then I can respect your viewpoint, but we can't pretend that the overall health of revenue generating college sports isn't at risk.
 


BTW, kudos to everyone in this thread for making it an interesting discussion. Lots of valid (and thought-provoking) points of view presented on both sides, while keeping it civil and friendly. This is why I love GH.
 



Ignatius L Hoops said:
http://scout.com/college/basketball...out-on-potential-new-transfer-rule--107036402

Scout gets comments from men's basketball coaches on the potential transfer rule change-all negative. Everyone's a scoundrel.


“It would turn into one of the dirtiest recruiting periods that you've ever seen,” Indiana coach Archie Miller told Scout.

Every lay up and handshake line would turn into a recruiting pitch. Every interaction with an opposing player or parent would be an opportunity to lay the groundwork for a potential move.

“You'll have guys talking to your players when they are in your gym,” Miller added. “Coaches will recruit players right after games and now you can go directly to the source, it would cripple teams and programs.

And of course the mid-majors:

"I think it's ridiculous,” Xavier’s Chris Mack said of the potential rule.

“There's a constant narrative on social media about the mass exodus of kids and how it's appalling so many kids opt to transfer,” he added. “So now we want to make it easier to transfer? I don't see any logic in that line of thinking. Doesn't surprise me, but it's a step in the wrong direction in my opinion. I transferred years ago and I sat out a year. Did me a world of good. It's not the negative people make it out to be."
Click to expand...

Bingo!!

Lets just take Minnesota for instance. So we have lynch, Mason, Coffey developed into great players. Do we really want Michigan st, Duke, Kentucky recruiting these 3 guys off our team every time they become good players? This would be the dumbest thing ever to happen to college sports.

The blue bloods wouldn't recruit high school kids anymore they would recruit develop college studs instead.

Not only that the high school kid that commits to said program would be pushed aside by sophomore or juniors who have played college basketball already.
 

bga1 said:
Giving young and often immature guys the freedom they want to move to whatever program is hot or fits their needs and avoid facing their current issues is not a good idea. This would feed more into the posse mindset where guys get together and talk about where it would be cool to play together to win a championship. It becomes less and less about making decisions that include education and more about how to take care of me in the here and now.
Click to expand...

Great article
 

https://twitter.com/NCAAResearch

Some NCAA research on transfers:

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

<script async src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
 

justthefacts said:
This topic is a microcosm of the paying players topic. In theory it makes all the sense in the world. In practice it could do real damage to the sport. I'm really conflicted.
Click to expand...

I am not really conflicted at all. The field is already uneven. In order to even it out you must be willing to pay you head coach 11 million a year (Alabama). You must be willing to take over 100 student athletes to Europe (Michigan). You must be willing to invest 166 million in new athletic village (Minnesota). You must be willing to give a 36 year old 3.5 million (Minnesota). At least we are finally willing to try to even the playing field after 50 years of getting our butts kicked.

It is not fair that a coach can leave for greener pastures with no penalty, but a student athlete can't. However, last time I checked most stuff in life is not fair. Implement allowing student athletes to transfer at will and it will be the death knoll for college sports as we know it now. There is no conflict here.

I for one would no longer care about college sports at all. Why should I continue to root for what would have to be a loser for the next 50 years. Unless, hmmm, along with it they lowered the scholarships available for Division ! football teams to 65 or 70. Unless we lowered the number of Division 1 basketball full rides to 9 (allowing for some partial rides perhaps 8 full and 2 partials.
 

DLguy said:
That is the rule for the sport, it doesn't apply to a student being a student.
Click to expand...

This is spot on. The rules making the sport seem more "fair" from a competitive standpoint are what makes fans like us want to invest their time following them, which in turn is what generates the big $$$. It's why nobody cares there's no transfer restrictions (as I understand) for other college sports besides fb and bb, and nobody cares about comparisons to regular students. It's why I like the NFL more than MLB or the NBA...a real salary cap that puts all teams in relatively the same boat.

Now, one could then argue, these types of "rules"/restrictions make the college fb and bb seem professional in nature, and thus players should be paid. I'm not against that in the abstract, but it would have to be done in a way that treats all schools equally. I.e., not complete "free agency" in the way the Kessler lawsuit seeks. The way it should really work is dumping the T9 requirement of all athletes in all sports treated equally, and instead paying all P5 football players and high-major bb players some "set" amount based on overall revenues of the sport in the prior year(s), and then more stringent policing against extra benefits.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom