Jump to content

Transfers and grad transfers - 2020


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 855
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

2 minutes ago, Cowboy said:

-so if no waiting period could a kid play on Wednesday at School A, semester ends on Thursday and suit up for School B on Saturday as their semester also ended?

Good ?  Remind me why are they even proposing this change?

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, willie said:

So Duke,Kansas and Kentucky can compete with the Gonzaga’s of the world. 

Nah, it's to eliminate the current disparity where schools can decide not to offer an existing player a scholarship the pursuing year but that same player must sit a year when they transfer (whether by choice or by force). Anyone who cares about student-athletes should be supportive of this change.

BTW - I think it will have very little impact on schools like SLU. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cowboy said:

-so if no waiting period could a kid play on Wednesday at School A, semester ends on Thursday and suit up for School B on Saturday as their semester also ended?

That is a very interesting question, one I haven't seen before....how will semester transfers be handled.  Why would they have to sit out if end of season transfers don't?

A kid from the Akron Zips burns Ohio State for 30 on Wednesday, and on Saturday he is a Buckeye.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The biggest misconception about this rule is that it was concocted by some evil group of blue-blood type schools to increase the gap between them and the programs with lesser resources. In all likelihood, the impetus for this rule has much more to do with the NCAA's current legal battle over player compensation, and student-athletes benefiting off of individual likenesses. The NCAA (and effectively ALL of its member institutions, including SLU) has already been forced to pay several very significant legal settlements on this issue. The NCAA knows that its current transfer setup will likely not hold up in the long-run. It also knows it can offer this as an olive branch to capitol hill as a sign that it is making changes to support players' rights.

In general, almost all coaches (including those from power schools) have publicly come out against this rule. Coaches who have voiced their concern with this proposal include Scott Drew (Baylor), Nick Saban (Alabama CFB), Gus Malzahn (Auburn CFB), Mike Brey (Notre Dame), James Franklin (Penn State CFB), Mark Richt (former Georgia and Miami CFB coach), Frank Martin (South Carolina), Bob Huggins (West Virginia), Chris Mack (Louisville).

Let me be clear, I agree that this rule would hurt low-majors and mid-majors more than it would hurt power 5 schools. Any time you free up player movement, the schools with the most to offer (best facilities, coaching staffs, national exposure, etc.) are going to benefit the most. But that is not the reason why this rule is happening, and it also doesn't mean that schools like SLU (who spend as much $ on basketball as some Power 5 schools) could not be just fine if it were to happen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, BilliesBy40 said:

The same reasons Jordan Goodwin didn't transfer after being unfairly suspended his Freshman year (and the same reasons he picked us in the first place): Loyalty, friendships, academic interests, athletic facilities, etc.

Ok.  I hope you are right. 

We have averaged 2.2 departures per year over the last decade.  I don't see that going down.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/6/2020 at 10:17 AM, Pistol said:

Rapolas Ivanauskas (6-10, 230) is a guy we recruited out of HS (under Crews) and who is leaving Colgate as a grad transfer. He started his college career at Northwestern and wound up taking medical redshirts both his freshman and sophomore years.

He started all 69 games he appeared in over two seasons at Colgate, averaging 13.9 PPG, 7.4 RPG, and 1.8 APG on a slashline of .473/.341/.702. His shooting percentages and basically all stats dipped across the board this past season from the prior year, when he was Patriot League POY.

He'd be instantly eligible and I'm not sure if he'd have just one or two seasons remaining.

He picked Cincinnati.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, HoosierPal said:

Ok.  I hope you are right. 

We have averaged 2.2 departures per year over the last decade.  I don't see that going down.

It may tick up slightly with the proposed rule change, but we won’t see a mass exodus of our best players every year. That’s my main point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, BilliesBy40 said:

It may tick up slightly with the proposed rule change, but we won’t see a mass exodus of our best players every year. That’s my main point.

I have a bridge I would like to sell you. I think a French or Perkins could be tempted to go play for a Kansas with the promise of greater exposure for the next level. I also think its nieve to believe some programs don’t pay for players. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, willie said:

I have a bridge I would like to sell you. I think a French or Perkins could be tempted to go play for a Kansas with the promise of greater exposure for the next level. I also think its nieve to believe some programs don’t pay for players. 

If either of them want to come off the bench at Kansas, maybe so. That is purely hypothetical, of course, and isn’t intended to diminish their talents. But it is naive to believe our best players would always be able to transfer to a blue blood and start. And again, you’re totally ignoring that these guys are humans who might have strong reasons for staying put and seeing through their original commitment.

It is also naive to think only power conference schools would pay players (if you believe players are being paid, which they likely are).

Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, willie said:

I have a bridge I would like to sell you. I think a French or Perkins could be tempted to go play for a Kansas with the promise of greater exposure for the next level. I also think its nieve to believe some programs don’t pay for players. 

The blue bloods would rather have their incoming high school All-Americans than SLU's upperclassmen guards and undersized bigs.  The blue bloods might be interested in the true big men transfers.  The project big man that blossoms is the one type of player I could see the blue bloods hunting for on this new transfer market.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, BilliesBy40 said:

If either of them want to come off the bench at Kansas, maybe so. That is purely hypothetical, of course, and isn’t intended to diminish their talents. But it is naive to believe our best players would always be able to transfer to a blue blood and start. And again, you’re totally ignoring that these guys are humans who might have strong reasons for staying put and seeing through their original commitment.

It is also naive to think only power conference schools would pay players (if you believe players are being paid, which they likely are).

I do think French,Goodwin and Perkins are good enough to play for anyone. Hell they declared for the NBA. As far as paying lets see what happens to Self. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, brianstl said:

The blue bloods would rather have their incoming high school All-Americans than SLU's upperclassmen guards and undersized bigs.  The blue bloods might be interested in the true big men transfers.  The project big man that blossoms is the one type of player I could see the blue bloods hunting for on this new transfer market.  

We are talking about filling a need. If Kansas needed a rebounding 4 there isn’t anybody better than French. Again filling a need. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, willie said:

We are talking about filling a need. If Kansas needed a rebounding 4 there isn’t anybody better than French. Again filling a need. 

I agree with you there, but these schools staffs and fans think every kid they recruit is a future lottery pick. It is an arrogance that works against them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it'll be that bad for schools like SLU. Maybe in the first year or two but I think it's going to be fine. It adds extra stress on coaches. They basically have to actively recruit the kids who are already playing for them so that they don't lose them. But I don't think the large majority of star players will just leave to be a role player for a bigger school. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bauman said:

I know there are a couple posters who believe that players should have an unrestricted right to transfer without having to sit one year, but this article presents a rational alternative.  That is, no requirement to sit out if your coach is fired or moves on to another school  (I would add one restriction to this-if the coach moves based on a decision he makes, in other words isn't fired, you could transfer to any school except the school that coach goes to.  This would prevent the hiring of Coach A if he can bring Player A along with him)  We have seen up close and personal how this no-sit-out-rule could be abused by looking 120 miles west at Coach Poacher hiring an unqualified AC at a ridiculous salary to secure a recruit, or two!

If that no-sit transfer rule was in place for next year consider its potential impact on SLU!  French, Goodwin and Perkins gone for sure and possibly Jimerson and Collins joining them.  In effect, we would never see a roster that we planned on.  Might as well eliminate all speculation on how well the team will do next year until that next school year has begun because up until that point we won't know for sure who we will have.  Talk about the rich getting richer.  No longer would the Duke's, UK's or KU's need to look solely to one and done high schoolers.  They would be able to recruit players from schools like SLU, VCU, Xavier who have shown that they can excel in the college ranks.

If you love chaos you would love this!

In total agreement. The elites would prefer good mid major players over the one and doners. They aren’t dominating in championship banners with their future NBA’ers. But give them the pick of the litter of good mid major players with D1 experience, and they’ll be licking their chops. 

Our roster could be plucked clean by the top P5 schools. We have about 7 guys that could play for any of the elites and get serious minutes. Is anyone confident that if the elites came knocking on Yuri’s, Jimerson’s, or Hargrove’s doors they wouldn’t leave for the brighter lights. 
The only moat the mids have is the sit one rule. Fine, if the coach that recruited you leaves u can avoid the sit one year thing, but if the guy that recruited you and developed you is not leaving you got to sit it out for a year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, slu72 said:

In total agreement. The elites would prefer good mid major players over the one and doners. They aren’t dominating in championship banners with their future NBA’ers. But give them the pick of the litter of good mid major players with D1 experience, and they’ll be licking their chops. 

Our roster could be plucked clean by the top P5 schools. We have about 7 guys that could play for any of the elites and get serious minutes. Is anyone confident that if the elites came knocking on Yuri’s, Jimerson’s, or Hargrove’s doors they wouldn’t leave for the brighter lights. 
The only moat the mids have is the sit one rule. Fine, if the coach that recruited you leaves u can avoid the sit one year thing, but if the guy that recruited you and developed you is not leaving you got to sit it out for a year. 

Lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, slu72 said:

In total agreement. The elites would prefer good mid major players over the one and doners. They aren’t dominating in championship banners with their future NBA’ers. But give them the pick of the litter of good mid major players with D1 experience, and they’ll be licking their chops. 

Our roster could be plucked clean by the top P5 schools. We have about 7 guys that could play for any of the elites and get serious minutes. Is anyone confident that if the elites came knocking on Yuri’s, Jimerson’s, or Hargrove’s doors they wouldn’t leave for the brighter lights. 
The only moat the mids have is the sit one rule. Fine, if the coach that recruited you leaves u can avoid the sit one year thing, but if the guy that recruited you and developed you is not leaving you got to sit it out for a year. 

Yuri and Hargrove each have a chip on their shoulder.  They'd rather kick the elites a$$ than play for them.  You'll find that a lot of the radar kids in the StL are like that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

Yuri and Hargrove each have a chip on their shoulder.  They'd rather kick the elites a$$ than play for them.  You'll find that a lot of the radar kids in the StL are like that.

as are a lot of our fans. long live the underdog 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NH said:

 

In general, almost all coaches (including those from power schools) have publicly come out against this rule. Coaches who have voiced their concern with this proposal include Scott Drew (Baylor), Nick Saban (Alabama CFB), Gus Malzahn (Auburn CFB), Mike Brey (Notre Dame), James Franklin (Penn State CFB), Mark Richt (former Georgia and Miami CFB coach), Frank Martin (South Carolina), Bob Huggins (West Virginia), Chris Mack (Louisville).

 

-what does this section of your post mean?

-it doesn't mean these coaches signed a solemn oath pledging their life not to participate with kids under this proposed rule. They did not, they said these things to look good, back to the article where it said something like it will get coaches hating each other again, (remainder in blue font if not obvious) sounds like that is good for the game

Link to post
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...