Quality Is Job 1 Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 http://247sports.com/Article/Sources-Major-Potential-Shift-In-NCAA-Transfer-Rules-107001121/Amp Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Coach314 Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 I believe 800+ kids transferred this past year. That number would easily double if they passed this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 Nightmare. College free agency. Recruiting current players. Cutting players that don't quite fit the bill. Other than the Bills going division II this is about the only scenario where I stop giving two squirts about college athletics........ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 4 minutes ago, Billiken Rich said: Nightmare. College free agency. Recruiting current players. Cutting players that don't quite fit the bill. Other than the Bills going division II this is about the only scenario where I stop giving two squirts about college athletics........ Totally agree. This would be about as bad a news as possible for small schools. I can't believe any coaches other than top 10 programs like duke and Kentucky would support this. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billikenfan05 Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 i agree. Maybe a better idea would to come up with some way to restrict coach movement Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RiseAndGrind Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 This would be the death of college basketball except for a select few teams Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taj79 Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 This is horrible. Whoever said college free agency was correct. I think there can be a compromise in here ..... if the coach you signed with leaves, you can leave immediately. Declaration of your intentions has to occur within some time period either just after the coach leaves or shortly after the new coach is hired. If you are that tied to the coach like a Porter, or Robinson at WKY, or Julian Winfield, or Brad Underwood. This can be crafted ---- but carte blanche is lunacy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 Lunacy has never deterred officials or administrators Taj. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnkielBreakers Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 This would be great. Honestly, it is reprehensible the way they force these kids to stay at one school. If it was an academic scholarship, the student wouldn't have to sit out a year. Anyone in a good situation would stay, anyone in a bad situation would leave. Whether it is good for the schools, it is in the best interests of the players (Cutting players commonly happens anyway). Certainly good schools would benefit, but it would probably work both ways. Talented guys who are second options at, for example Wisconsin, would transfer down. In theory, the best schools would only recruit the top players out of high school, and try to fill their roster with transfers, probably from the power five. It would trickle down. But, that would leave more talent for development at mid-majors. If those players are in good situations, they wouldn't transfer. In either case, we are fine. When I look at our roster, this would not affect the decisions any of the current players or commits, except that we would have had 4 starting transfers last year. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 I believe there has been some discussion regarding the problem of having many new players in a team for any new season. In short the concerns are how well the new players will be able to fit with the team and get to know one another to play as a team during the season. These are reasonable concerns. If every season brings many times the number of transfers we are seeing currently, both coming in and going out, how will this play out in reality, particularly for mid to low end schools? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 I think it would be mayhem for a season and then the numbers would drop down close to today's levels. There are only so many roster spots on top teams. Most of the truly elite teams would rather add a group of top recruits than recycled players that will clog the roster for multiple seasons. One year of a bunch of kids getting burned and having to settle for options that were not as good as what they left would really put the brakes on many of the kids thinking this is the best option. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 In other words you think it is possible the new measure would not result in massive increases in the number of transfers after an initial year or two of great increases in the numbers of transfers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 1 hour ago, RiseAndGrind said: This would be the death of college basketball except for a select few teams I'm convinced part of the reason college basketball has become a second tier sport in terms of national popularity is the rise of the one and done player and the lack of player name recognition from year to year. It's hard to get super excited about a player if you know he's going to be gone in a year, even if you are a fan of Duke or Kentucky. Long gone are the days of Bobby Hurley, Grant Hill and Laetner. Now you get Tatum, Giles and some other top 15 kid to be replaced by 3 new ones the next year. It simply isn't as exciting. This rule would do the same to schools like SLU. Every year, we'd expect 6-7 players to turn over and it will be relatively rare player that stays for 4 years and truly succeeds. It would kill casual fan interest. Super fans like us won't be deterred but the average fan really likes coming back year over year and seeing some of the same players. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 Imagine the A10 and lower level conferences as the farm teams for the power five. Bad year, get sent down to the Valley. Tearing it up at Murray St, get promoted to the major league at Memphis. No no no and hell no. No way this is good for us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACE Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 11 minutes ago, kshoe said: I'm convinced part of the reason college basketball has become a second tier sport in terms of national popularity is the rise of the one and done player and the lack of player name recognition from year to year. It's hard to get super excited about a player if you know he's going to be gone in a year, even if you are a fan of Duke or Kentucky. Long gone are the days of Bobby Hurley, Grant Hill and Laetner. Now you get Tatum, Giles and some other top 15 kid to be replaced by 3 new ones the next year. It simply isn't as exciting. This rule would do the same to schools like SLU. Every year, we'd expect 6-7 players to turn over and it will be relatively rare player that stays for 4 years and truly succeeds. It would kill casual fan interest. Super fans like us won't be deterred but the average fan really likes coming back year over year and seeing some of the same players. +1 It would lead to chaos. Rosters would be in constant flux, even more than they are now. Lower level schools that do a good job of finding hidden gems would be screwed... their reward for doing well would be likely losing their top players. A lot of college players wouldn't be auditioning for the NBA, they would be auditioning for other schools. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slu72 fan Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 Just like Calipari recruits the one and dones, others will become like Pitino and grab the best players off of other teams. Have a hole, go find the best kid in a smaller conference and fill it. This would be horrible for a school like SLU. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 The worst thing is if the NCAA does this in the name of academic integrity. Never mind that classes don't transfer, continuity of degrees, etc. there is no way you can convince me kids will be more likely to graduate if they do 4 schools in 4 years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 Hopefully this has as much legs as the 96 team NCAA tournament did. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnkielBreakers Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 18 minutes ago, kshoe said: The worst thing is if the NCAA does this in the name of academic integrity. Never mind that classes don't transfer, continuity of degrees, etc. there is no way you can convince me kids will be more likely to graduate if they do 4 schools in 4 years. I hate to pick on any opinion, but I think this meets academic benefits for the athletes, if not integrity. A player that wants to transfer to a better school, who academically qualifies, for Duke or Stanford, etc, should be given every opportunity to go to that school. The better school should not be penalized for accepting the transfer. Maybe that should be the requirement on transfers. Use the US News list of top schools, and if the kid transfer up, there is no time limitation, transfers down, time limit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kshoe Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 24 minutes ago, AnkielBreakers said: I hate to pick on any opinion, but I think this meets academic benefits for the athletes, if not integrity. A player that wants to transfer to a better school, who academically qualifies, for Duke or Stanford, etc, should be given every opportunity to go to that school. The better school should not be penalized for accepting the transfer. Maybe that should be the requirement on transfers. Use the US News list of top schools, and if the kid transfer up, there is no time limitation, transfers down, time limit. Ha! Can you imagine the feeding frenzie athletic departments would put on the rest of the university to increase their US News rankings. Talk about an arbitrary ranking. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnkielBreakers Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 1 hour ago, kshoe said: Ha! Can you imagine the feeding frenzie athletic departments would put on the rest of the university to increase their US News rankings. Talk about an arbitrary ranking. Well, then take out rankings as part of the consideration. It really is about what benefits the students most. The ability to transfer without restrictions could lead to more opportunities for student athletes and there education. Maybe Mike Crawford has an MBA from Northwestern and not SLU. That, arguably, is in his best interests. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 With a law degree on board it is not very likely that Mike Crawford will have much need for his MBA. Do you think the guy who has the most diplomas from the "best" University comes ahead of the guys that went to "lower" schools? I am afraid this is not so. A lot of the diploma collectors don't do that well in the corporate environment. If you do not believe this, try to hang your Harvard or MIT diploma in your office when you have a senior boss who graduated from Mizzou or from Vancouver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quality Is Job 1 Posted September 6, 2017 Author Share Posted September 6, 2017 4 hours ago, kshoe said: The worst thing is if the NCAA does this in the name of academic integrity. Never mind that classes don't transfer, continuity of degrees, etc. there is no way you can convince me kids will be more likely to graduate if they do 4 schools in 4 years. Only after an individual's first transfer could he/she be immediately eligible. Any subsequent transfer would result in sitting out a year. I don't know if they've settled on reduction of eligibility for subsequent transfers, but I suspect the five years to complete four years of eligibility will remain in effect. Thus, more than two transfers would force a student-athlete to lose eligibility. Four schools in four years will never be possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billiken Rich Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 One or two is more than enough.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted September 6, 2017 Share Posted September 6, 2017 Like I said earlier, I think it would be one year of chaos and then things would return to situation normal. You can currently transfer one time without sitting out for sports like soccer, track, FCS football, wrestling, etc. Those sports don't have complete chaos with people transferring. It appears that they want to now have the same rule apply to all D1 sports programs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.