Jump to content

Transfer Rules


WVBilliken

Recommended Posts

10 hours ago, glazedandconfused said:

I have no idea how much the athletic department makes but i’m not talking in favor of paying student athletes. I’m saying they should and will let students transfer without sitting out a year. I agree the money is a major issue in trying to pay athletes. I do think you made fair points and it’s reasonable to say that NCAA provides a lot for CBB athletes.  I do think it’s a joke that NCAA pretends the restrictions are there for “academic reasons”

I agree with the "academic reasons" being a joke. My point about money isn't about paying the athletes, It's more about schools being able to maximize the profits from their money making sports so that they can have the other sports. You were talking about why they have restrictions and my guess is they believe those restrictions help preserve all the schools not just the top few to make money. I'm not sure if I agree or not. Posters have made good points regarding some transferring up and some transferring down so the net result may be equal. My counter to that would be one of the ways schools like SLU can compete with the big boys is because they have continuity on their rosters. Would this change that? For example the reasons the Evans, Jett, McCall teams could compete is because they were Jr's and Sr's. Would they still have been able to compete if Jett and Evans leave after their Soph year and we get 2 other equally talented players? I say no. Why does the ability to compete matter? Because the ability to compete affects the money the school makes which funds all sports. Why should the mens basketball players have to give up some freedom's for the good of all? It's a trade off they give up some freedoms but they gain more than the large majority could/or would get if it wasn't for the bene's the school gives them. 

I'm not saying I'm 100% against free movement, but I'm not convinced it's a good thing either. Sometimes it can't be about the freedoms of an individual, it has to be about the good as a whole and like I said no one is forcing any player to join. It's simple we give you this … we require that. Interested then join, if not move on. College basketball is a great thing for 90% of basketball players so it's not like they are just being used and abused. 

I would like to see some restrictions on schools that drop players. I know you say it doesn't happen often but it does by coaches telling a player they won't play much. That coach is pretty much telling the kid, you should leave we want to recruit over you. Maybe let the kid move freely with the schools approval? I really don't know the answer but I believe letting kids transfer freely will only help the bigger schools. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 151
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

1 hour ago, slufanskip said:

I agree with the "academic reasons" being a joke. My point about money isn't about paying the athletes, It's more about schools being able to maximize the profits from their money making sports so that they can have the other sports. You were talking about why they have restrictions and my guess is they believe those restrictions help preserve all the schools not just the top few to make money. I'm not sure if I agree or not. Posters have made good points regarding some transferring up and some transferring down so the net result may be equal. My counter to that would be one of the ways schools like SLU can compete with the big boys is because they have continuity on their rosters. Would this change that? For example the reasons the Evans, Jett, McCall teams could compete is because they were Jr's and Sr's. Would they still have been able to compete if Jett and Evans leave after their Soph year and we get 2 other equally talented players? I say no. Why does the ability to compete matter? Because the ability to compete affects the money the school makes which funds all sports. Why should the mens basketball players have to give up some freedom's for the good of all? It's a trade off they give up some freedoms but they gain more than the large majority could/or would get if it wasn't for the bene's the school gives them. 

I'm not saying I'm 100% against free movement, but I'm not convinced it's a good thing either. Sometimes it can't be about the freedoms of an individual, it has to be about the good as a whole and like I said no one is forcing any player to join. It's simple we give you this … we require that. Interested then join, if not move on. College basketball is a great thing for 90% of basketball players so it's not like they are just being used and abused. 

I would like to see some restrictions on schools that drop players. I know you say it doesn't happen often but it does by coaches telling a player they won't play much. That coach is pretty much telling the kid, you should leave we want to recruit over you. Maybe let the kid move freely with the schools approval? I really don't know the answer but I believe letting kids transfer freely will only help the bigger schools. 

Some of what you mention in your last paragraph has already begun to happen, like when Mark Smith transferred from Illinois to Missouri after his freshman year and was granted a waiver to play right away without a year in residence.

slufanskip likes this
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...