Jump to content

Transfer Rules


WVBilliken

Recommended Posts

48 minutes ago, wgstl said:

Why do people think this also cant help us?  

Ford is building this program to the point where we expect a competitive team every year. How would this not help us grab a low major player every once and a while?

Versus going to a highly rated team that has a legit shot at a Nat'l Championship? I don't think a JGood or French will check out, but a kid like Jimerson might give it some serious thought. 

One thing that might give an advantage to mids is getting better players out of HS. If a Calipari or Coach K start bringing in a bunch of transfers HS kids may think they could get recruited over pretty easily. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 151
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

This rule change would hurt SLU less than things like the SEC / Big Ten Networks being established, conferences going to 18-20 conference games, conference realignment, etc.. Look at the transfers we’ve been able to land under Ford: Bess, Henriquez, Foreman, Isabell, Weaver, Graves, Santos. As long as you have a coach that can recruit, and you have competitive enough exposure/facilities, you’ll find a way to bring in and keep good talent. I also don’t think power teams are going to start saving a bunch of scholarships for mid-majors, and I’m not sure the option of transferring will actually be that much more appealing. Would Goodwin really want to leave to go be a 6th man for Michigan State?

I could be way off, but I don’t think this change would materially harm a school like SLU.

Littlebill likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

You're talking like we have a say in this.  The elites in any group will try to come up with schemes to ensure their success.  But college basketball is a strange animal - gaming the system never seems to pan out the way they expect.  Somehow there's more parity now than there was 20 years ago. 

It's the lack of continuity that's causing these super-talented rosters to underperform.  It's not the lack of talent.  Poaching players from mid-majors has not and will not solve Duke and Kentuckys problem. And a scheme that doesn't solve the schemer's problem will ultimately fail.

 

 

Huh? 🙄 As a fan, I can't even express an opinion on the matter?

There are a lot of stakeholders here - coaches, players, athletic directors and fans... true, I am just one fan, but if these proposed changes hurt fan interest, then that is a major consideration that should be taken into account. College bball attendance is already on a slow steady decline. I can't see how creating more instability and more lack of continuity on rosters from year to year will help. 

My voice is not gong to carry the same weight as a coach, but if more coaches like Patrick Ewing come out against it that will help. If Athletic Directors hear a back lash from their fans, that will help.

I agree that the lack of continuity created by the one and done has not helped the blue bloods, but the one and done is likely going away. Also, agree that continuity at the "mid major" level has helped, but that will be a lot more difficult to maintain under this proposed new system. While some of the P5 programs having several one and dones has not helped team success, a lot of P5 programs have found success adding more experienced transfers - Michigan, Auburn, Texas Tech and Kansas making the final four in recent years as a few examples. We've already seen guys like Calipari adjust and take on some grad transfers and not rely as much on the one and dones. If the rules change and transferring becomes even easier, that's where a lot of the recruiting focus will shift. The poachers will win that battle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, ACE said:

Huh? 🙄 As a fan, I can't even express an opinion on the matter?

There are a lot of stakeholders here - coaches, players, athletic directors and fans... true, I am just one fan, but if these proposed changes hurt fan interest, then that is a major consideration that should be taken into account. College bball attendance is already on a slow steady decline. I can't see how creating more instability and more lack of continuity on rosters from year to year will help. 

My voice is not gong to carry the same weight as a coach, but if more coaches like Patrick Ewing come out against it that will help. If Athletic Directors hear a back lash from their fans, that will help.

I agree that the lack of continuity created by the one and done has not helped the blue bloods, but the one and done is likely going away. Also, agree that continuity at the "mid major" level has helped, but that will be a lot more difficult to maintain under this proposed new system. While some of the P5 programs having several one and dones has not helped team success, a lot of P5 programs have found success adding more experienced transfers - Michigan, Auburn, Texas Tech and Kansas making the final four in recent years as a few examples. We've already seen guys like Calipari adjust and take on some grad transfers and not rely as much on the one and dones. If the rules change and transferring becomes even easier, that's where a lot of the recruiting focus will shift. The poachers will win that battle.

Your fan interest should not be taken into account on player's rights issues. This isn't happening because of competition/attendance/fan interest issues. It's happening because it's not right to restrict a player's freedom to move around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

St. Louis is a top 25 tv market. Chaifetz and it’s facilities are one of the best in college basketball. You can’t tell me the boosters and other bagmen can’t devise a plan to keep good talent there. This is your typical billiken fan fretting fest. Thinking small will get you nowhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Your fan interest should not be taken into account on player's rights issues. This isn't happening because of competition/attendance/fan interest issues. It's happening because it's not right to restrict a player's freedom to move around. 

Playing D1 college basketball on scholarship is a privilege, not a right. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ACE said:

Playing D1 college basketball on scholarship is a privilege, not a right. 

Agreed, but that's not what was being discussed haha. No one is saying that everyone has a right to play D1 basketball. 

D1 players have a right to transfer to another school if they want to. A 1 year ban infringes upon that right. You may not like what it means for the future of the sport but this is, thankfully, an inevitability

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Your fan interest should not be taken into account on player's rights issues. This isn't happening because of competition/attendance/fan interest issues. It's happening because it's not right to restrict a player's freedom to move around. 

So would a non compete clause in business also be wrong?  What the NCAA actually has is the players work for compensation (tuition and living expenses) and they basically sign a limited non compete clause. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, slufanskip said:

So would a non compete clause in business also be wrong?  What the NCAA actually has is the players work for compensation (tuition and living expenses) and they basically sign a limited non compete clause. 

It’s very different in business, because it’s not a government-mandated no compete clause. If an employer wants to put a non-compete clause in a contract that’s fine, but it may hurt the competitiveness of the offer. The power dynamic is much different in college basketball, where there is effectively no competition, and a regulatory body (NCAA) is mandating the no-compete.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Agreed, but that's not what was being discussed haha. No one is saying that everyone has a right to play D1 basketball. 

D1 players have a right to transfer to another school if they want to. A 1 year ban infringes upon that right. You may not like what it means for the future of the sport but this is, thankfully, an inevitability

They have the right to transfer, but the idea is should the NCAA be able to restrict when they play basketball? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, glazedandconfused said:

Agreed, but that's not what was being discussed haha. No one is saying that everyone has a right to play D1 basketball. 

D1 players have a right to transfer to another school if they want to. A 1 year ban infringes upon that right. You may not like what it means for the future of the sport but this is, thankfully, an inevitability

You were the one who brought up players "rights" 🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

Is the NCAA's restrictions in their letter of intent government mandated? Is that what I'm understanding you're saying?

I mean it more in the sense that the NCAA serves the same function to the NCAA student-athlete “market” as federal or state government agencies would in the workplace. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, 3star_recruit said:

You're talking like we have a say in this.  The elites in any group will try to come up with schemes to ensure their success.  But college basketball is a strange animal - gaming the system never seems to pan out the way they expect.  Somehow there's more parity now than there was 20 years ago. 

It's the lack of continuity that's causing these super-talented rosters to underperform.  It's not the lack of talent.  Poaching players from mid-majors has not and will not solve Duke and Kentuckys problem. And a scheme that doesn't solve the schemer's problem will ultimately fail.

 

 

But the elites will poach lower P5 schools, lower P5 will poach high mid majors, and so forth ...,...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, WVBilliken said:

But the elites will poach lower P5 schools, lower P5 will poach high mid majors, and so forth ...,...

 

Transfers have and will continue to go both ways. Some recent SLU transfers (in and out). Surprisingly most have been from power 5 conferences. 


Isabell - Power 5 -> Mid-Major -> SLU

Bess - Power 5 -> SLU

Foreman - Power 5 -> SLU

Weaver - Mid Major -> SLU

Dion Wiley - Power 5 -> SLU

Rashed Anthony - Power 5 -> SLU

Jalen Johnson - SLU -> Mid-Major

Yacoubou - Power 5 -> SLU

Reynolds - SLU -> Mid-Major -> Power 5

Yarborough - SLU -> Mid-Major

 

 

wgstl likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ACE said:

Huh? 🙄 As a fan, I can't even express an opinion on the matter?

There are a lot of stakeholders here - coaches, players, athletic directors and fans... true, I am just one fan, but if these proposed changes hurt fan interest, then that is a major consideration that should be taken into account. College bball attendance is already on a slow steady decline. I can't see how creating more instability and more lack of continuity on rosters from year to year will help. 

My voice is not gong to carry the same weight as a coach, but if more coaches like Patrick Ewing come out against it that will help. If Athletic Directors hear a back lash from their fans, that will help.

I agree that the lack of continuity created by the one and done has not helped the blue bloods, but the one and done is likely going away. Also, agree that continuity at the "mid major" level has helped, but that will be a lot more difficult to maintain under this proposed new system. While some of the P5 programs having several one and dones has not helped team success, a lot of P5 programs have found success adding more experienced transfers - Michigan, Auburn, Texas Tech and Kansas making the final four in recent years as a few examples. We've already seen guys like Calipari adjust and take on some grad transfers and not rely as much on the one and dones. If the rules change and transferring becomes even easier, that's where a lot of the recruiting focus will shift. The poachers will win that battle.

The lack of fan interest is a real concern. My wife isn't like me following every movement of the team and she HATES that basically every year half the team is brand new. It takes away from her interest level and I'm certain that she isn't alone. She wants to know who the players are and follow them for 3-4 years.

ACE, SShoe and bauman like this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, kshoe said:

https://watchstadium.com/could-a-one-time-waiver-rule-be-the-death-of-college-basketball-02-20-2020/

Lot of quotes from coaches opposing this, including Mooney from the A-10.

It was touched on in the article, but if they go through with this, one thing the NCAA absolutely needs to do is set a deadline that kids need to announce their transfer by if they want to be immediately eligible. You can't allow North Carolina to realize in August that it needs a player, so they go pick off a shooter from a lower P6 team, who then goes and picks off a high mid-major, who then finds a low major. April 30 or some date like that should be the drop dead date so that coaches can actually know who is on their team.

Also, players should not be allowed to follow their coaches when they switch schools. Last thing we need is someone like Travis Ford (or someone else in a similar situation) interviewing around at P6 school and saying I can bring Goodwin, French and Perkins with me if you hire me...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You may consider me a lunatic, but I think there are plenty really talented players warming benches at Duke, Kentucky, etc... who do not play much if anything at all because there are others with more talent than they have in their teams. These kids will become targets for teams like SLU. Wait and see. This transfer game can be played both ways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, kshoe said:

https://watchstadium.com/could-a-one-time-waiver-rule-be-the-death-of-college-basketball-02-20-2020/

Lot of quotes from coaches opposing this, including Mooney from the A-10.

Excellent article, several points similar to what I made earlier and a few others I hadn't thought of. These were some of the best arguments and most striking comments...

There’s a reason why this is already being supported by the Big Ten and the ACC. Now guys like Mike Krzyzewski, Roy Williams, John Calipari, Bill Self and Tom Izzo can plug holes in their roster with ease. There’s also a reason none of those coaches have spoken out publicly.

“I think it will adversely affect everybody except for the top programs,” Richmond’s Chris Mooney said.

 

Houston’s Caleb Mills is a redshirt freshman who is leading Kelvin Sampson’s group in scoring, a team that is a lock to make the NCAA Tournament. None of the big boys came after him out of high school.

Now they will.

“Ultimately, it’s what some will do, if not most,” one blue blood assistant coach told me. “And even if I don’t, the others will.”

“Allowing transfers to be able to play right away at another institution is bad for college basketball, as a whole,” Jones said. “High-major schools may benefit because they would get a student-athlete who had a good year at a lower-level school and now can play right away. But the school that believed in that kid, when other schools didn’t, and invested time and effort into helping him develop will suffer. If we care about the student-athletes, and not the schools, then yes, the rule benefits the student-athletes athletically, but not necessarily academically. If we care about both the student-athletes and the schools, then there need to be parameters to transferring like we have now.”

Tampering has already been an issue. Now AAU and high school coaches will have even more power as middlemen because assistant coaches will call them to express their interest during the college basketball season.

“A change is needed,” Indiana’s Archie Miller said. “But now teams are going to have half their team in flux in July.”

“This will be the death of college basketball,” said one head coach of a top-25 team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Billiken Rich said:

The use of pro athletes in the Olympics was enough to kill any interest I had in them.  Free agency in college basketball will kill me interest in that too.  If that happens I'll have to move somewhere I can fish all year round...... 

College basketball players transferring a little more is enough to kill your interest, but sitting around waiting for a fish to get caught on a hook keeps your interest enough to do it year round? 

@OldTakesExposed...We'll see if you're still posting after this rule goes into place.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...