Jump to content

Transfers and grad transfers - 2020


Recommended Posts

A lot depends on the relationship between coach and player.  If a player feels the coach loves him (no matter how tough his is on him) , he is much less unlikely to transfer.  Coach Ford seems to have that type of relationship with most of his players.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 855
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

10 minutes ago, Cowboy said:

-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

It means that I don’t think this is a situation where High-major coaches are in favor of the rule, and low-major coaches are against it. I think probably 90% of coaches are against this rule. Coaches generally do not like change, especially when that change will make it harder for them to keep their teams in tact. I totally understand why someone would not be in favor of this proposed rule change. I also think it will make for a worse product on the court, across all of D1. I’m just saying I don’t think it’s merely a matter of the big schools being out to get the small ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours 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.

I hope so. Plus, I think a lot of our guys really like Travis and would be reluctant to leave. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

C’mon, folks, think about this for a minute. Take Obi Toppin of UD. He has a good FR season at UD.  He’s forecast to be a lottery pick. So, you don’t think Calipari or Saint Coach K are not going to try and lure him away from UD? He doesn’t have to waste a year sitting, just play his SO year at big time U and he’s got all kinds of exposure. 
I really don’t know what he’d do. He could say take a hike, I love UD. The point being do u even want to give the elites the chance of offering a guy like him with that option, ie you don’t have to sit out a year?! You’re gonna start from day 1? He wasn’t offered by either of these schools coming out of HS,  but UD did. He develops and grows 3 or 4 inches, suddenly, he’s a star who could help deliver big time U a national championship. This is what this rule will allow them to do. It sucks and is not fair to smaller schools.

But u argue it’s not fair to the student athlete. Fine, he can avoid the one year sit if the coach leaves the school that recruited and developed him, but he must sit out the year if that coach has not left. That’s fair. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Why shouldn’t kids be able to transfer freely? I mean obviously most coaches wouldn’t want that, but show me a coach who isn’t a hypocrite in that point of view. Isn’t the point to start making rules that are more advantageous to the athletes since they are the labor you are trying to acquiesce to?

*I removed unpaid since that sidetracked the discussion which was not intended

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, TheChosenOne said:

Why shouldn’t kids be able to transfer freely? I mean obviously most coaches wouldn’t want that, but show me a coach who isn’t a hypocrite in that point of view. Isn’t the point to start making rules that are more advantageous to the athletes since they are the unpaid labor you are trying to acquiesce to?

This all day long.

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

C’mon, folks, think about this for a minute. Take Obi Toppin of UD. He has a good FR season at UD.  He’s forecast to be a lottery pick. So, you don’t think Calipari or Saint Coach K are not going to try and lure him away from UD? He doesn’t have to waste a year sitting, just play his SO year at big time U and he’s got all kinds of exposure. 
I really don’t know what he’d do. He could say take a hike, I love UD. The point being do u even want to give the elites the chance of offering a guy like him with that option, ie you don’t have to sit out a year?! You’re gonna start from day 1? He wasn’t offered by either of these schools coming out of HS,  but UD did. He develops and grows 3 or 4 inches, suddenly, he’s a star who could help deliver big time U a national championship. This is what this rule will allow them to do. It sucks and is not fair to smaller schools.

But u argue it’s not fair to the student athlete. Fine, he can avoid the one year sit if the coach leaves the school that recruited and developed him, but he must sit out the year if that coach has not left. That’s fair. 

You’re first four sentences are the argument against your whole point. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours 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).

Jgood starts at Kansas immediately

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, TheChosenOne said:

Why shouldn’t kids be able to transfer freely? I mean obviously most coaches wouldn’t want that, but show me a coach who isn’t a hypocrite in that point of view. Isn’t the point to start making rules that are more advantageous to the athletes since they are the unpaid labor you are trying to acquiesce to?

You may think they aren't paid enough but they aren't unpaid. 90% of the scholarship players couldn't earn the value of what they get at SLU (tuition, room, board, tutors, coaching, etc …) playing basketball at the skill level they are in college anywhere in the world. The players aren't forced to play D1 basketball. They always have the right to choose any better option they have available just like everyone else in the world. 

I do believe they should be able to leave if the coach leaves and if their scholarship is not renewed they should not have to sit a year. Schools should have to announce within a couple of weeks after the season if a players scholarship is being renewed so the player has a chance to be recruited right after the season. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, TheChosenOne said:

Why shouldn’t kids be able to transfer freely? I mean obviously most coaches wouldn’t want that, but show me a coach who isn’t a hypocrite in that point of view. Isn’t the point to start making rules that are more advantageous to the athletes since they are the unpaid labor you are trying to acquiesce to?

But they are paid labor. They are paid with a scholarship room and board living expenses free shoes etc. When they sigh a loi they are entering a contract. Look I understand your point from the players perspective but there is no way that I see this as being good for SLU or the game in general. There is too much poaching going on now this would open up the Wild West. It would not be good for the game and I don’t think it would be good for the education of the player and his pursuit of a degree. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

You may think they aren't paid enough but they aren't unpaid. 90% of the scholarship players couldn't earn the value of what they get at SLU (tuition, room, board, tutors, coaching, etc …) playing basketball at the skill level they are in college anywhere in the world. The players aren't forced to play D1 basketball. They always have the right to choose any better option they have available just like everyone else in the world. 

I do believe they should be able to leave if the coach leaves and if their scholarship is not renewed they should not have to sit a year. Schools should have to announce within a couple of weeks after the season if a players scholarship is being renewed so the player has a chance to be recruited right after the season. 

I didn’t see your post when I repeated some of your comments. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

You may think they aren't paid enough but they aren't unpaid. 90% of the scholarship players couldn't earn the value of what they get at SLU (tuition, room, board, tutors, coaching, etc …) playing basketball at the skill level they are in college anywhere in the world. The players aren't forced to play D1 basketball. They always have the right to choose any better option they have available just like everyone else in the world. 

I do believe they should be able to leave if the coach leaves and if their scholarship is not renewed they should not have to sit a year. Schools should have to announce within a couple of weeks after the season if a players scholarship is being renewed so the player has a chance to be recruited right after the season. 

You don't think Good could get 50K a year overseas?

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

But they are paid labor. They are paid with a scholarship room and board living expenses free shoes etc. When they sigh a loi they are entering a contract. Look I understand your point from the players perspective but there is no way that I see this as being good for SLU or the game in general. There is too much poaching going on now this would open up the Wild West. It would not be good for the game and I don’t think it would be good for the education of the player and his pursuit of a degree. 

And many of the players that play in the NBA or overseas  wouldn't have the skill set to play there without the training and coaching they get in college. The NBA doesn't want to run a minor league system.  Out of the 1000 D1 scholarships given out every year 1% could possibly make the value of what they get at college playing basketball. The number that can play increases as they get older but again that is due to the coaching and training they get at college. You want to pay them? Pay them, but pull all scholarships and benefits. No one would pay 99% of these guys 40k to play basketball. 

You say the school is making money off these guys. How many schools make money off their athletic departments?  None if you expense their tuition, room, board, etc.. which is the actual cost.  What SLU makes on basketball allows them to have track and field, baseball, softball, diving, tennis, etc … 

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, almaman said:

You don't think Good could get 50K a year overseas?

Yes now. Could he have coming out of HS? Would he be mature enough to succeed at that age making 50k in Russia? He could now but much of that is due to what he received at SLU. Also, I didn't say no one could. I said 90% couldn't but the reality is 99% couldn't coming out of HS

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

Jgood starts at Kansas immediately

I love Jordan Goodwin, might go down as my favorite SLU player of all time. But he’s not starting over Devin Dotson or Marcus Garrett. They have a 5 star guard coming in next year, he’s probably not starting over him. If a coach like Cal or Self were bringing in veteran A-10 guards to start over elite freshmen they would get killed on the recruiting trail.

Would Jordan start at schools like Michigan State, Illinois, Ohio State, Purdue? I think so. But he could’ve gone to any of those schools out of high school and he picked SLU. I don’t see why that would change now.

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

You may think they aren't paid enough but they aren't unpaid. 90% of the scholarship players couldn't earn the value of what they get at SLU (tuition, room, board, tutors, coaching, etc …) playing basketball at the skill level they are in college anywhere in the world. The players aren't forced to play D1 basketball. They always have the right to choose any better option they have available just like everyone else in the world. 

I do believe they should be able to leave if the coach leaves and if their scholarship is not renewed they should not have to sit a year. Schools should have to announce within a couple of weeks after the season if a players scholarship is being renewed so the player has a chance to be recruited right after the season. 

This is the answer. Unfortunately, schools would never go for it since it could make them look bad for running off kids. Thus, we are going to get the immediate transfer rule.

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, NH said:

I love Jordan Goodwin, might go down as my favorite SLU player of all time. But he’s not starting over Devin Dotson or Marcus Garrett. They have a 5 star guard coming in next year, he’s probably not starting over him. If a coach like Cal or Self were bringing in veteran A-10 guards to start over elite freshmen they would get killed on the recruiting trail.

Would Jordan start at schools like Michigan State, Illinois, Ohio State, Purdue? I think so. But he could’ve gone to any of those schools out of high school and he picked SLU. I don’t see why that would change now.

Favorite player or not, I think you are underestimating JGood.  Frosh JGood maybe not Junior JGood starts. Not over Dotson but over Garrett 100%. JGood against the 4 top 20 ish teams this year Aub, Set Hall and Dayton twice with 3 of those being on the road averaged about 17/9. In addition JGood just bring an intensity and leadership aspect few can match. There won't be 4-5 freshman guards in the country next year better than a Sr JGood. 

A hit on the recruiting trail wouldn't hurt as they'd be bringing in better experienced players every year instead. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, slufanskip said:

Favorite player or not, I think you are underestimating JGood.  Frosh JGood maybe not Junior JGood starts. Not over Dotson but over Garrett 100%. JGood against the 4 top 20 ish teams this year Aub, Set Hall and Dayton twice with 3 of those being on the road averaged about 17/9. In addition JGood just bring an intensity and leadership aspect few can match. There won't be 4-5 freshman guards in the country next year better than a Sr JGood. 

A hit on the recruiting trail wouldn't hurt as they'd be bringing in better experienced players every year instead. 

Marcus Garrett just won the National defensive player of the year award. Two time all defense Big 12. Averaged 4.6 assists per game. Was a key player on the number one team in the country. Self is not going to bench that guy for any A-10 player coming in for one year. I think Jordan could start for most really good teams. But again, he could’ve gone to most really good teams out of high school. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TheChosenOne said:

Why shouldn’t kids be able to transfer freely? I mean obviously most coaches wouldn’t want that, but show me a coach who isn’t a hypocrite in that point of view. Isn’t the point to start making rules that are more advantageous to the athletes since they are the unpaid labor you are trying to acquiesce to?

-I would trade working at the grocery store to get my way through SLU to be an "unpaid" student athlete every single day and twice on Sunday

Link to post
Share on other sites

Eliminate unpaid from my post since that appears to be the bright shiny object for some. Why shouldn’t college basketball and football players be able to transfer freely without having to sit out a year? I’m just trying to understand the argument behind that and why folks would fight them being able to do so under any circumstance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For what it’s worth, here’s my 2 cents on this situation. I can see both sides. I am one that likes the rule that makes a kid sit a year. I think there’s something about being forced to stick to your commitments that builds character. That’s just how I was raised. If I joined a club or team, and didn’t like it, my parents made finish. I think that made me a better person. I also think, that rule benefits these kids to a certain extent. I think there are plenty of slimy, snake coaches that will promise the world to kids to get them to transfer, only for the kid to wind up as the 3rd guy off the bench. That being said, it DOES make me sick that coaches (and a lot of NCAA execs) are making millions of dollars off of these kids backs (I’m not going to get into the pros and cons and endless complications that will come from playing college players here). Yes, they get a scholarship that they can use for the rest of their lives, and I think that’s fantastic, but a lot of these coaches are making 10+ million dollars a year, before any endorsements. That seems crazy to me. And since that’s the case, I can understand the argument of giving these kids certain a level of freedom, especially if their coach gets fired/leaves, extreme personal circumstances, etc. I think giving kids a waiver in such circumstances would be perfect...if only the NCAA allowed ANY transparency into what that waiver process is. The seemingly random selection of who gets a waiver and who doesn’t is another in a long line of NCAA scams. As far as how I think it will effect SLU: I think we will be effected, but it will hit low-majors much harder. I don’t see why kids like French or Goodwin or Perkins would leave a good situation, where they all have a LEGITIMATE chance to win A10 player of the year to come off the bench at Kansas. I think a lot of kids are smart enough to know whether or not they’re happy where they are, whether a coach is making promises he can’t/won’t keep. And quite frankly, kids don’t NEED to play at a blue blood to get drafted. SLU has plenty of nationally televised games every year. If you’re good enough, they’ll find you. I think it will hit low-majors much harder. They find a diamond in the rough, and all of a sudden the kid gets offered play for a team that was a 4-seed instead of having to win his conference tourney to earn a 15-seed. That’s tough. Apologies for the long tedious post. Just thought I’d weigh in.

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the perspective of a transfering student athlete; Has the transfer year adding a fifth year for the student under scholarship, improved the percentage of students who actuall graduate?  Many non-scholarship students take 5 years to graduate. Yes I realize a student athelete could take a redshirt year and accomplish the same thing, but if they don't do that the first year, it doesn't happen. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, Aquinas said:

From the perspective of a transfering student athlete; Has the transfer year adding a fifth year for the student under scholarship, improved the percentage of students who actuall graduate?  Many non-scholarship students take 5 years to graduate. Yes I realize a student athelete could take a redshirt year and accomplish the same thing, but if they don't do that the first year, it doesn't happen. 

Except for Dustin Maguire!

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TheChosenOne said:

Why shouldn’t kids be able to transfer freely? I mean obviously most coaches wouldn’t want that, but show me a coach who isn’t a hypocrite in that point of view. Isn’t the point to start making rules that are more advantageous to the athletes since they are the unpaid labor you are trying to acquiesce to?

Unpaid labor?  Tell a regular student leaving SLU with over 200k in student loan debt vs a player leaving with zero debt that they aren’t paid.   I’m not saying there couldn’t be more done for players or that they don’t need to compensated better.  But unpaid labor they are not.   Student loans are a big problem for a lot of people.  A problem most student athletes will never face.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, TheChosenOne said:

Why shouldn’t kids be able to transfer freely? I mean obviously most coaches wouldn’t want that, but show me a coach who isn’t a hypocrite in that point of view. Isn’t the point to start making rules that are more advantageous to the athletes since they are the unpaid labor you are trying to acquiesce to?

Respectfully Chosen the athletes are paid by an education at a great institution like SLU.

From where I come from I would love to have had a degree from SLU and I am envious of all of the SLU grads.

What make Billikens athletics special to the wife and I is that most of the athletes graduate and have a SLU degree.

There are some schools like Kentucky I have no respect for that is not interested in educating the kids who I would see as unpaid on an NBA farm team.

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...