Unlimited transfer rule is made permanent

[Dave H]

as far as I know, the individual schools still have the right to determine eligibility. as long as the players are still considered student-athletes, then the players have to meet academic criteria to become eligible and remain eligible.

ergo, it would be very difficult if not impossible for a player to transfer midway through a season and immediately become academically eligible at the new school.

I get it. all the changes are difficult to cope with, and it seems like anarchy. but there are still some rules and some structure in major college sports. it's not total chaos, yet.

times change. rules change. when I was in High School, Freshmen were ineligible to play Varsity sports in college. Lew Alcindor (later Kareen Abdul-Jabbar) had to sit out his FR year at UCLA. Oh - dunking was also illegal in college hoops at the time. those rules changed. life went on.

here are some quotes from 1972 when FR were allowed to play college football and basketball:

When asked about the rule change, Rutgers football coach John Bateman told the media, “If freshmen can play, you don't have a very good program.” Chuck Neinas, commissioner of the Big Eight Conference (which eventually became the Big 12 Conference), said, “Our football coaches are unanimously against freshman on varsity teams."

Missouri athletic director Sparky Stalcup told the Kansas City Star that freshmen eligibility in basketball and football would be "a whole new ballgame."

"If the other major conferences do it, we'll have to." he said. "It's a recruiting gimmick."

You answered your own question...the school will just say they accept the student and they are eligible. They will just bend their standards like they always do to make it work.

This is not the same as the Frosh Rule change so your quotes are rather irrelevant.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

You answered your own question...the school will just say they accept the student and they are eligible. They will just bend their standards like they always do to make it work.

This is not the same as the Frosh Rule change so your quotes are rather irrelevant.

the quotes were meant to show resistance to change. then people adjusted, and today, the idea of not allowing FR to play varsity sports seems very antiquated. college sports will adjust to the new changes.

 

[disco]

I believe what some are envisioning is transfer players might enroll for spring semester. As far as I know there is no rule against any student utilizing dual enrollment, ie enrollment at two universities simultaneously. So, hypothetically sometime in late fall, December might a student athlete at school A technically enroll, walk-on at School B while quitting the team, finishing up final exams at School A (or just dropping classes because hey, dolla billz). Someone more skilled in college admissions and enrollment will need to comment if that’s even feasible given enrollment calendars, accelerated admittance etc. I think things can be made to happen if someone important needs to make them happen (at sports schools).

The last sentence sums it up well.

 

[Ope3]

Yeah, that portion of the system would also adjust. Essentially, scholarships and eligibility will be treated like "at will" employment. If a player becomes available and you want that player, just cut a player from your team.

Hell, you could argue scholarship limits are a restraint on trade.

Reusse on his podcast today said he heard from multiple sources that indeed scholarship limits will also be eliminated in the perhaps near future, as part of the terms in the settlement.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

Reusse on his podcast today said he heard from multiple sources that indeed scholarship limits will also be eliminated in the perhaps near future, as part of the terms in the settlement.

as I understand this, when they talk about "scholarship limits," they are talking about things like -- Baseball gets 12 full scholarships and has to split them up among 25+ players. so under the new system, every player gets a scholarship - no more partials. those are the "limits" that they want to eliminate, which force athletes to receive less than a full scholarship.

of course, we have to wait for the fine print on the final settlement, but I have not seen anything suggesting that the scholarship limit on Football would be increased. I have seen proposals that would limit roster sizes, so that schools couldn't pad the roster with a lot of walk-ons.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Four thoughts from an economics viewpoint.

1. Economic forces cannot be avoided. They can be embraced, suppressed or ignored.

An enormous amount of money is involved. Billions. The economic forces are real and big.

2. What is the best way to approach the economics of that enormous amount of money? Embrace, suppress or ignore?

If cornered… some will (if waterboarded) admit it is often easier to make money when you have money to begin with, easier yet if you are betting other people’s money, and even easier if you can write the rules of a marketplace. The juggernauts conferences have increased their hold over the dregs, who are mandated to maintain a certain number of scholarships and programs just to play the game, while cut out of the majority of media/CFP money.

Maybe the players need some of the money. What happens if that is suppressed? Under the table? Is that what people want, under the table?

Bribes/corruption, always going to be a problem. Does making those things “legal” in actuality if not letter make it worse.

3. The traditional student school experience. That is real too. These are colleges. This is an NCAA collegiate athletic sport like gymnastics and wrestling.

What does this mean for NCAA and students? What should be done or not done?

I’m hearing serious people, and I’m not making this up, argue that the Olympic sports will become endowed extracurriculars funded by wealthy alumni - when budget revenue is diverted revenue sports, administrative welfare.

4. Finally, legislation can intervene. Courts are taking these actions because legislation does not exist.

Be careful about getting politicians involved. Maybe courts are the best way to resolve that.

Or maybe Congress is.

Too late for that…

But, we’ve seen some of the populist legislation to “fix” things…I can’t even. I will continue to yell at clouds.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

Reusse on his podcast today said he heard from multiple sources that indeed scholarship limits will also be eliminated in the perhaps near future, as part of the terms in the settlement.

Interesting. States wealthy conferences planning to “add” up to 100 scholarships but does that mean as SON stated fully funding some or all non-rev athletes, or does it mean additional spots, or both. Like everything else in the mysterious settlement document (which hasn’t even been fully written yet…). everyone is literally guessing.

NCAA settlement likely to upend scholarship limits, roster sizes - The Indiana Lawyer

Scholarships are not going away in college athletics, but how many there are and which sports they will apply to in coming years are among the many questions stemming from a mammoth antitrust settlement and athlete revenue-sharing plan proposed by the Indianapolis-based NCAA and its five largest...

www.theindianalawyer.com

 

[hungan1]

It will be interesting to see how all these changes affect grades, transfer eligibility, and NCAA Academic achievement awards given to schools like MN, NW, etc.

Others have mentioned young kids making bad decisions by transferring and ending up with no degree and no NFL prospects.

I sure hope that the Gophers and the rest of the Big Ten stick to their guns with their student-athletes getting actual degrees when they leave school.

 

[Ski U Mah Gopher]

A few years ago, the Big Ten went to 4-year scholarships.

The pro equivalent is that these are basically 4 or five-year contracts with a player option after each year.

 

[Wally]

Collectively bargained contracts. Which I don't think technically you need a union for, but obviously at that point it just makes sense to make a union.

It would be better if the players formed a Union then rules could be negotiated and established, it would provide stability to the current wild west situation we now have

 

[Wally]

The NFL and the NFLPA somehow get away with blatant restraint of trade due to peculiarities of the law, waved into existence by the courts or rarely, legislators

They negotiate the rules and the players then vote on the contract. Has nothing to do with the law aside from rules governing contracts.

 

[Word]

It would be better if the players formed a Union then rules could be negotiated and established, it would provide stability to the current wild west situation we now have

Agree.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

They negotiate the rules and the players then vote on the contract. Has nothing to do with the law aside from rules governing contracts.

Isn’t that a pretty big part of the law? Judges disagree on legalities of CBAs and eg limiting employment applicants…Maurice Clarett originally won his case to enter the draft early before it was overturned on appeal by a panel including someone maybe familiar, Sonia Sotomayor. Their (NFLPA) legal carve out makes it impossible for players not three years removed from high school from entering the draft, signing a professional NFL contract. Seems like a silly rule, enabled/protected by a…legal interpretation of the concept of collective bargaining. The draft itself is a gross restaint of trade, and roster limits, and the list goes on.

Turf war.

 

[Ewert86PC]

I'd like to announce that I am going to use up my college eligibility by entering the transfer portal at every opportunity until I have the nest egg that my college education promised me.

 

[bleedsmaroonandgold]

I a

I'd like to announce that I am going to use up my college eligibility by entering the transfer portal at every opportunity until I have the nest egg that my college education promised me.

I always felt like a poorly-timed NHL strike during my first year of draft eligibility and my inability to navigate the eligibility considerations between NCAA Division 1 and the Major Junior Leagues is the only reason I'm not an aging NHL superstar right now.

 

[short ornery norwegian]

Interesting. States wealthy conferences planning to “add” up to 100 scholarships but does that mean as SON stated fully funding some or all non-rev athletes, or does it mean additional spots, or both. Like everything else in the mysterious settlement document (which hasn’t even been fully written yet…). everyone is literally guessing.

NCAA settlement likely to upend scholarship limits, roster sizes - The Indiana Lawyer

Scholarships are not going away in college athletics, but how many there are and which sports they will apply to in coming years are among the many questions stemming from a mammoth antitrust settlement and athlete revenue-sharing plan proposed by the Indianapolis-based NCAA and its five largest...

www.theindianalawyer.com

if you take all of the sports that have partial scholarships, and replace them with full scholarships for every athlete, it could be close to 100 new scholarships, between baseball, softball, track, etc. to use baseball as an example, a D1 baseball team is allowed up to 32 players, but only 12 full scholarships. if you make every player a full scholarship, that's 20 new scholarships for one sport. for a school that offers the maximum number of sports for men and women, it adds up pretty quickly.

given the direction of these anti-trust lawsuits, the idea that a baseball player is only "worth" a half-scholarship is not going to fly with the courts. now, whether that results in a school dropping baseball remains to be seen.

 

[Wally]

Isn’t that a pretty big part of the law? Judges disagree on legalities of CBAs and eg limiting employment applicants…Maurice Clarett originally won his case to enter the draft early before it was overturned on appeal by a panel including someone maybe familiar, Sonia Sotomayor. Their (NFLPA) legal carve out makes it impossible for players not three years removed from high school from entering the draft, signing a professional NFL contract. Seems like a silly rule, enabled/protected by a…legal interpretation of the concept of collective bargaining. The draft itself is a gross restaint of trade, and roster limits, and the list goes on.

Turf war.

I think the rules on entering the draft early would likely get thrown out in our current legal landscape.

It turns out those with the most money often make the rules and it often takes awhile for actual justice to prevail, if it ever does.

Some other provisions are sticky also, namely the draft. I think there is some deference to allowing it because the business enterprise and it's employees have agreed this is good for the business. I personally think college players should be free agents, the guys running the NFL have set up the system for the owners benefit and the players tend to accept it because they had to go thru it and that's how it is. Very few people think about or care enough to fight for the younger guys coming up.

As much as it would suck, I definitely think Darius Taylor should be playing in the NFL next year, the fact that he can't is criminal in my book

 

[Pompous Elitist]

if you make every player a full scholarship, that's 20 new scholarships for one sport. for a school that offers the maximum number of sports for men and women, it adds up pretty quickly.

given the direction of these anti-trust lawsuits, the idea that a baseball player is only "worth" a half-scholarship is not going to fly with the courts. now, whether that results in a school dropping baseball remains to be seen.

Over/under on number of years before a sports betting site logo is placed at mid-field. That’s gotta be worth a couple mil?

Yeah, allowing full scholarships is different than prohibiting it, or requiring it. Some schools will probably fully fund every sport, while other schools might shutter programs. Who knows how much money can be found in the seat cushions. YMMV. Donors, get your wallets out.

 

[Pompous Elitist]

I think the rules on entering the draft early would likely get thrown out in our current legal landscape.

It turns out those with the most money often make the rules and it often takes awhile for actual justice to prevail, if it ever does.

Some other provisions are sticky also, namely the draft. I think there is some deference to allowing it because the business enterprise and it's employees have agreed this is good for the business. I personally think college players should be free agents, the guys running the NFL have set up the system for the owners benefit and the players tend to accept it because they had to go thru it and that's how it is. Very few people think about or care enough to fight for the younger guys coming up.

As much as it would suck, I definitely think Darius Taylor should be playing in the NFL next year, the fact that he can't is criminal in my book

Sotomayor and Co. said (my take) any anticompetitive behavior, market collusion, discriminatory behavior (ageism) is OK as long as the current labor pool and management agreed to it in a CBA. Let’s wrap our heads around that.

The idea, I suppose, is the concept of unionization, collective bargaining is so important you take the good with the bad.

IMO it doesn’t mean clauses like the NFL age rule that don’t even meet the common sense test should exist. The draft and NFL roster pool is a zero sum game.

 

[kisarazu]

This makes me wonder when the NFL will get involved and offer their help in navigating a CBA. It will probably pave the way for an earlier draft age and all NFL teams having DI football colleges as minor league affiliates.

 

[Ope3]

This makes me wonder when the NFL will get involved and offer their help in navigating a CBA. It will probably pave the way for an earlier draft age and all NFL teams having DI football colleges as minor league affiliates.

As long as the NFL keeps getting it's primary player development league free and clear, I don't see them getting involved at all. If that somehow gets threatened, then perhaps they do step in.

 

[kisarazu]

As long as the NFL keeps getting it's primary player development league free and clear, I don't see them getting involved at all. If that somehow gets threatened, then perhaps they do step in.

College football players will be employees. There will eventually be no limit to how long a player can play for the team or who can play. NFL players whose careers struggle or are at their twilight can sign a contract with a college team. Without the NFL involvement, it will be a competing league.

 

[Ope3]

College football players will be employees. There will eventually be no limit to how long a player can play for the team or who can play. NFL players whose careers struggle or are at their twilight can sign a contract with a college team. Without the NFL involvement, it will be a competing league.

So there is a chance that Tanner Morgan can come back for a 7th Gopher season in the future?

 

[kisarazu]

So there is a chance that Tanner Morgan can come back for a 7th Gopher season in the future?

Ha. I suppose so. I'm really curious what college football will look like in 10 years.

 

[kisarazu]

As long as the NFL keeps getting it's primary player development league free and clear, I don't see them getting involved at all. If that somehow gets threatened, then perhaps they do step in.

And honestly, I don't think the NFL would make college football a minor league like baseball (I can't see the powerhouse FBS schools agreeing to that), but perhaps more like how soccer works between different leagues? What a weird situation we're in.