Maryland transfer QB Danny O'Brien a Stinkin' Badger; UPDATED 6/11: O'Brien leaves UW

Donate To GopherHole
wait!what? said:
There is only one clear solution to this free agency. Hardline - you graduate you no longer play.
Click to expand...
This solution is stupid. You can just limit how many times a team is allowed to bring in players like that during a certain time period so that teams can't abuse it.
 

Limiting the amount of moves? Ummm, your solution is fraught with civil liberty violations.

NFU- no follow up
 

Presumably people don't like this because it isn't 'fair' to the kids already on the roster. What is the difference between this and JC transfers in that regard?
 

badgergopher said:
Presumably people don't like this because it isn't 'fair' to the kids already on the roster. What is the difference between this and JC transfers in that regard?
Click to expand...
I like the idea in theory, but I think it is bad when it gets abused, like most things in life. And it's different because you can get a proven D1 player like Russel Wilson without him having to sit out a year.
 

badgergopher said:
Presumably people don't like this because it isn't 'fair' to the kids already on the roster. What is the difference between this and JC transfers in that regard?
Click to expand...

Whether it's actually true or not, the veneer of the recruitment of a JC transfer is that the player is coming in to shore up gaps in experience and depth, and if he wins the starting job, so be it. (I think most of us would agree that most JCs are actually recruited to be starters, but the appearances are generally that they aren't promised anything.) Conversely, if a program is after a proven starter who has already started multiple games/years at the DI-A level, it's pretty much a given that he's going to be the starter. The players behind him know they have no chance, while the young guys coming up at a position where a JC transfer is brought in, they at least have the hope that he won't be the 100% unquestioned starter by default.
 


dpodoll68 said:
Whether it's actually true or not, the veneer of the recruitment of a JC transfer is that the player is coming in to shore up gaps in experience and depth, and if he wins the starting job, so be it. (I think most of us would agree that most JCs are actually recruited to be starters, but the appearances are generally that they aren't promised anything.) Conversely, if a program is after a proven starter who has already started multiple games/years at the DI-A level, it's pretty much a given that he's going to be the starter. The players behind him know they have no chance, while the young guys coming up at a position where a JC transfer is brought in, they at least have the hope that he won't be the 100% unquestioned starter by default.
Click to expand...
JUCO players aren't a guarantee also.
 

badgergopher said:
Presumably people don't like this because it isn't 'fair' to the kids already on the roster. What is the difference between this and JC transfers in that regard?
Click to expand...

That's not my beef at all. First and foremost, I think it's a sham. What graduate program does Wisconsin have that Maryland (or North Carolina State) doesn't have? Second, what level of course load does the player transferring have to maintain? Is it a full academic load? If not, that would be strike two for me. Lastly (and I am dating myself here), I think this promotes an unhealthy concentration on an individual player over a program as a whole. That may make me old and provincial, but it's how I feel. The higher plane of individual has a place in this country (always has), but this just goes to almost a level of worship.

Russell Wilson seems to be a good kid and I don't hold anything against him personally. Badgers played within the rules to get him, so my disdain for the rule is not about that. And, for the record, I'd feel the same way if the Gophers got a kid in a similar situation to Wilson, Crist, or O'Brien.
 

50PoundHead said:
That's not my beef at all. First and foremost, I think it's a sham. What graduate program does Wisconsin have that Maryland (or North Carolina State) doesn't have? Second, what level of course load does the player transferring have to maintain? Is it a full academic load? If not, that would be strike two for me. Lastly (and I am dating myself here), I think this promotes an unhealthy concentration on an individual player over a program as a whole. That may make me old and provincial, but it's how I feel. The higher plane of individual has a place in this country (always has), but this just goes to almost a level of worship.

Russell Wilson seems to be a good kid and I don't hold anything against him personally. Badgers played within the rules to get him, so my disdain for the rule is not about that. And, for the record, I'd feel the same way if the Gophers got a kid in a similar situation to Wilson, Crist, or O'Brien.
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. Well put.

Some people have mentioned here that it can reward a student who take his studies very seriously and wants to pursue a graduate degree, but that's not the point.

Take Christian Ponder for instance. He finished his degree in just over 2 years, got an MBA and a second graduate degree in Sports Management. So if wanted to transfer to another school, and needs to pursue a graduate degree in...what? When is some school going to start developing a graduate program that only they have to make them more attractive to potential transfers?

"At Wisconsin, Wilson will attend graduate school and said he will pursue a business-related degree." jsonline.com Well...clearly N.C. State did not have a graduate program in "business-related". How does that even pass muster? I'm going somewhere because I want to pursue a graduate degree, and I'm unable to do so at my current school, but I don't know what that field is yet.

What a friggin' sham.
 

With regard to fairness to other players, if players don't want to be afraid of having a starter brought in ahead of them, they will not sign with teams that have a reputation for doing this.
 




I guess it doesn't bother me in cases where the player is unwanted like the case of Russell Wilson or some o these guys that were recruited for a prior system. And to be totally honest, I like it coming and going in this regard - I'm glad that Zach Brown was able to transfer to Pitt and get some PT this past year - good for him.

I would not like it if guys were 'seeking a ring' and leaving their program shorthanded but I don't think there's been much of that.
 






Parski1 said:
I didn't thank you.
Click to expand...

Hey Parski, do you know a Billy Jensen? I thought I read sometime on here a while ago that you played Baseball for the U, although I could be completely wrong. He's a friend of mine that played for the Gophers back in the day and he mentioned a friend with the last name Parski that he used to play with, spelt the same as your handle, so I thought I'd ask.

Congrats on your guys' win over MTU today. Hope you guys rep the Big Ten and win the NIT title. I am being serious by the way. I know it's disappointing to be in the NIT and not the NCAA tourney, but winning the NIT is still a pretty cool accomplishment and it gives your very young squad some momentum heading into next season.
 

Unregistered User said:
My thoughts exactly. Well put.

Some people have mentioned here that it can reward a student who take his studies very seriously and wants to pursue a graduate degree, but that's not the point.

Take Christian Ponder for instance. He finished his degree in just over 2 years, got an MBA and a second graduate degree in Sports Management. So if wanted to transfer to another school, and needs to pursue a graduate degree in...what? When is some school going to start developing a graduate program that only they have to make them more attractive to potential transfers?

"At Wisconsin, Wilson will attend graduate school and said he will pursue a business-related degree." jsonline.com Well...clearly N.C. State did not have a graduate program in "business-related". How does that even pass muster? I'm going somewhere because I want to pursue a graduate degree, and I'm unable to do so at my current school, but I don't know what that field is yet.

What a friggin' sham.
Click to expand...

My problem with that argument is this: two different players take their studies very seriously, do everything right, and graduate in four years. One of these guys redshirted, the other didn't. Therefore, only the one who redshirted gets the opportunity to transfer without sitting out a year. Neither player may have had a choice in redshirting or not. Why does one get this advantage and the other doesn't? Both have done everything right.

Either you allow every player to transfer after their junior season or no one at all. That's my opinion anyways.
 

GophersInIowa said:
My problem with that argument is this: two different players take their studies very seriously, do everything right, and graduate in four years. One of these guys redshirted, the other didn't. Therefore, only the one who redshirted gets the opportunity to transfer without sitting out a year. Neither player may have had a choice in redshirting or not. Why does one get this advantage and the other doesn't? Both have done everything right.

Either you allow every player to transfer after their junior season or no one at all. That's my opinion anyways.
Click to expand...

I understand your point, but in that situation the guy who redshirted has only played 3 years before transferring while the guy who didn't redshirt got to play 4 years before transferring. In that situation, I see no clear cut advantage, even if redshirting/not reshirting was out of their control. There are just so many other cirmumstances that go into determining what is fair...what if the guy who didn't redshirt started as a true freshman? What if he started the previous year, but the guy who redshirted was buried on the depth chart. It's just so hard to determine fairness that there needs to be a hard line drawn one way or another. Nothing can left up to interpretation because there are just so many unjust/unique/crappy situations year in and year out for players...it would just be a free for all every year...that or some people who truly deserved the chance to transfer and play would be left out...even if that might be the case now with the current rules.

Sorry for the ramble. It's a tough situation regardless.
 

With how poor graduation rates seem to be in many football programs across the country, I am ok with this because it gives the kids some more incentive to finish up their degree. When they are done playing football, having a college degree and a year toward a masters is much better than potentially needing to come back just to wrap up a bachelors degree that they never finished.
 

GophersInIowa said:
My problem with that argument is this: two different players take their studies very seriously, do everything right, and graduate in four years. One of these guys redshirted, the other didn't. Therefore, only the one who redshirted gets the opportunity to transfer without sitting out a year. Neither player may have had a choice in redshirting or not. Why does one get this advantage and the other doesn't? Both have done everything right.

Either you allow every player to transfer after their junior season or no one at all. That's my opinion anyways.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying, but that's why I ended the sentence you bolded with "but that's not the point". And I meant that for the argument that followed.

I'm just think it's a joke about the circumstances surrounding the transfer rules, as it applies to pursuing a major not offered by the players current school.

The quote that I used from jsonline.com was written the day that Wilson committed to Wisconsin, and in the story (as I quoted) "At Wisconsin, Wilson will attend graduate school and said he will pursue a business-related degree."

How can the NCAA approve a transfer where the student says they want to pursue a degree not offered by their current school, commit to another school, and not even state what that graduate degree is?

I'm not hacking on wisky (for once). The used and followed the rules to their advantage in this situation. I would feel the same way if it was a backup guard going from Boise to Central Florida.
 

Badger2010 said:
Hey Parski, do you know a Billy Jensen? I thought I read sometime on here a while ago that you played Baseball for the U, although I could be completely wrong. He's a friend of mine that played for the Gophers back in the day and he mentioned a friend with the last name Parski that he used to play with, spelt the same as your handle, so I thought I'd ask.

Congrats on your guys' win over MTU today. Hope you guys rep the Big Ten and win the NIT title. I am being serious by the way. I know it's disappointing to be in the NIT and not the NCAA tourney, but winning the NIT is still a pretty cool accomplishment and it gives your very young squad some momentum heading into next season.
Click to expand...

I have a question to ask you as well - Why are Badger fans in Gopherhole? Are there not plenty of boards you Bucky's can join? What's the deal with posting here with Gopher fans? I would think you would want to be with your kind.
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
With how poor graduation rates seem to be in many football programs across the country, I am ok with this because it gives the kids some more incentive to finish up their degree. When they are done playing football, having a college degree and a year toward a masters is much better than potentially needing to come back just to wrap up a bachelors degree that they never finished.
Click to expand...

Different situation. These situations involve a player not having to sit out a year - post graduation, to pursue a graduate degree at another school. The kicker is that the "new" school offers a graduate degree in an area of study not offered by the player's current school.

All the players in these situations must have earned their degree. It is not an opportunity to go somewhere else to finish undergrad work.
 

Badger2010 said:
I understand your point, but in that situation the guy who redshirted has only played 3 years before transferring while the guy who didn't redshirt got to play 4 years before transferring. In that situation, I see no clear cut advantage, even if redshirting/not reshirting was out of their control.
Click to expand...

I guess we'll just have to disagree on that. I think it's absolutely an advantage. One player has the opportunity to use this rule, the other doesn't and neither had any control over getting/not getting this opportunity.
 

Parski1 said:
I have a question to ask you as well - Why are Badger fans in Gopherhole? Are there not plenty of boards you Bucky's can join? What's the deal with posting here with Gopher fans? I would think you would want to be with your kind.
Click to expand...

I will take that as a no then haha.
 

I wonder what tune Gopher fans would be singing if they were in this same position to bring in a starter/potential star.
 

Kuato Lives! said:
I wonder what tune Gopher fans would be singing if they were in this same position to bring in a starter/potential star.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone has a problem with Wisconsin or anyone else doing this because its within the rules. I'd welcome a good player to U because the rules allow us to do it. But I'd still think it should be changed.
 

GophersInIowa said:
I don't think anyone has a problem with Wisconsin or anyone else doing this because its within the rules. I'd welcome a good player to U because the rules allow us to do it. But I'd still think it should be changed.
Click to expand...

That's where I'm at as well.
 

You guys are aware that this QB spent some of his life growing up in Minnesota arent you?
 




You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom