Jump to content

Transfers - 2023


ACE

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 2k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

2 hours ago, brianstl said:

Students on an academic scholarship and take part in the chess team or something like debate aren’t prevented from transferring and competing at their next school immediately.

Try being on an academic scholarship and transferring schools 3 times.

cgeldmacher and SShoe like this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, thetorch said:

Try being on an academic scholarship and transferring schools 3 times.

A student could if 3 different schools were willing to extend a scholarship to them.  Not sure why this is pertinent to the discussion at hand. 

@slu72 in the previous post is valuing stability of the sport over individual freedom of student athletes. 

What I'm asking is what is the reason to stop a transfer from being immediately eligible?

Reasons so far:

Stability of the sport

Integrity of the game

Also seems to be some straight hater-ade (see above post)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheA_Bomb said:

A student could if 3 different schools were willing to extend a scholarship to them.  Not sure why this is pertinent to the discussion at hand. 

@slu72 in the previous post is valuing stability of the sport over individual freedom of student athletes. 

What I'm asking is what is the reason to stop a transfer from being immediately eligible?

Reasons so far:

Stability of the sport

Integrity of the game

Also seems to be some straight hater-ade (see above post)

 

Far from hating.  Athletes should get whatever they can.  They are being exploited by universities and the NCAA.

An argument is always made that players shouldn't be held to a higher standard than regular students.  This works both ways.  No regular student who transfers colleges 3 times in a short period of time is going to get scholarships from the 3rd school.  Multiple red flags go up.  So I can see a case for allowing athletes to do that but also with the caveat that the chances of getting a 3rd opportunity are slim and none.

Now if we let the market set prices on education instead of our current quasi-communist set up, athletes could easily afford to pay for college themselves in most cases then they could go wherever they wanted, whenever they wanted to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My concern is that college sports is driven by fan interest.  There's growing evidence that fan interest is already on the decline (see the picture this weekend of the Liberty vs Buffalo football game where the stadium was almost empty).  While fans are fans of the school, fans are always more interested when they feel a connection to the players.  Fans get more attached to a player the longer a player is in the program.  If the players turn over every year, particularly the better players, frankly I think many fans - particularly the casual fan - will lose interest.  Frankly I don't have much interest in buying season tickets if each year the team might be a whole new bunch of kids.  I will buy tickets to support players who are committed to the school/program, but I don't have much interest in supporting players who are in it only for themselves.  There's not much difference between that player and a professional player, and I already don't follow professional sports.  Not much of a leap to lose interest in college sports if that's the future of college sports.  Maybe I'm the exception (too old school), but if enough fans stop buying tickets and stop watching games, some schools aren't going to keep investing millions of dollars in an athletic program that loses money.  Don't get me wrong.  Our society is too addicted to college sports for it to go away overnight, but I think there may enough changes if NIL is not regulated and if transferability is not regulated that you'll see a good number of schools drop out of Division 1 sports.  Heck, look at Div 1 football.  There's a clear movement towards a handful of elite conferences that will have the resources to cover the costs inherent in running a top level program under these new conditions, but many Div. 1 football programs admit they can't really compete under the current conditions.  How long until they start cutting back - if not completely eliminating - their program?  So yes, student athletes who make those elite teams may be better off, but if a good number of schools drop out of Div 1 sports and no longer offer athletic scholarships, a lot of kids will be worse off.  I don't think it is simply a question of athletes being exploited by universities and the NCAA.  Many student-athletes (especially students in the non-revenue sports) have benefitted from the current set-up, athletes who may not have the same opportunities going forward.  I don't think the picture is as simple as you paint it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In order to transfer schools mid-term, wouldn't the gaining school have to release a person from the 13 scholarship limit?  Then you're bringing in a stranger to a team already established since summer workouts began in August.  I guess you could do that but the guy coming in better be named Mike Jordan or Hakeem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Taj79 said:

In order to transfer schools mid-term, wouldn't the gaining school have to release a person from the 13 scholarship limit?  Then you're bringing in a stranger to a team already established since summer workouts began in August.  I guess you could do that but the guy coming in better be named Mike Jordan or Hakeem.

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but scholarships count for the whole academic year, I believe. So in order to add a player mid season, you’d have to have a scholarship available from the start. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, brianstl said:

Students on an academic scholarship and take part in the chess team or something like debate aren’t prevented from transferring and competing at their next school immediately.

Chess isn't governed by the NCAA. It's a bit archaic but if you want to play NCAA Division 1 sports, you gotta play by their rules. I've always been of the mindset that the NCAA, while stinky, isn't the problem. It's the lack of alternative.

ACE and AGB91 like this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gobillsgo said:

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but scholarships count for the whole academic year, I believe. So in order to add a player mid season, you’d have to have a scholarship available from the start. 

...or, have said player walk on and dump NIL money on him to cover costs plus some extra. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gobillsgo said:

Someone correct me if I’m wrong, but scholarships count for the whole academic year, I believe. So in order to add a player mid season, you’d have to have a scholarship available from the start. 

That rule was actually changed a year or maybe two ago. You can lose a guy mid year and replace him with a mid year transfer in. It never made much sense to begin with, but now it is dead. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@thetorch I don't know if an academic scholarship student has transferred 1 or 4 times.  We don't televise academics. If a school wanted to offer a scholarship and a student wanted to accept it there is no stopping it. 

Athletes are scrutinized more than non athletes due to being in the public eye. Therefore,  violations of a school's code of conduct by an athlete have repercussions, normally. Unless that school is Baylor (corrupt and terrible).

@Wendelprof I agree with your sentiment. I just don't agree with artificial enforcement. If fan interest wanes then money will not flow as much,  incentives to move may dry up and the sport returns to something you recognize and is more enjoyable for you.  Let it be Laissez-faire as the alternative is limiting freedom and very hard to enforce.  However,  as a counterpoint to your statement that interest drops when fans don't know the players, I offer you Colorado Football, nearly all transfers and new players sold out stadium, prices through the roof and top 25 team. Also LSU Baseball, FSU football etc. Winning cures a lot. 

@billikenfan05 the NCAA is horrible. Their lack of forward thinking caused most of these issues.  They have pointless long investigations with senseless punishments. Reggie Bush didn't win the Heisman, uh I saw it.  Michigan didn't win a BB National Championship, uh yeah they did. "If you want to play you have to play by their rules".  No you don't.  We have NIL they were firmly against it.  Their inability to apply common sense to decisions and make timely decisions undermines the very sport they regulate. They need to embrace the empowerment of athletes and only enforce minimal rules.  I think those rules are:

1. Full time,  academically eligible students can play

2. Mid-season transfers must sit out the remainder of the season

3. No performance enhancing or illegal drugs (this is for health issues)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting that you cite Colorado's football success as a counterpoint to my argument.  I'd say the exact opposite.  If that is what college sports is heading towards, I'll get off that bus right now.  I've got no interest in supporting a minor league football team or minor league basketball team where the coach buys and fires players.  And I don't think many University presidents will feel comfortable with that type of treatment of their students.  The way Colorado treated the "old" football players is reprehensible in my mind.  It should have no place in an academic setting.  In professional sports, sure, but not in an academic community.  And that's my concern.  The new rules are creating an incentive for a race to the bottom from an academic perspective.  I think some schools are already beginning to wonder how long the new relationship between academics and college sports can last.  Some of the top college football coaches have implicitly acknowledged that when they predicted the future of college sports will be universities licensing their names to private organizations that will run the sports programs as a business - and the athletes won't have to be students at all.

CenHudDude and cgeldmacher like this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/15/2023 at 3:10 PM, TheA_Bomb said:

Thanks for the response. In my previous message I agree that a student athlete should be a full time student in good standing.  So I think you misunderstand my position.  In good standing means that you are eligible academically at the school you attend based on whatever educational certification board they utilize.

As to your other point regarding receiving something therefore something is expected.  Yes many athletes receive special benefits because of their talent.  So they are expected to perform the sporting event if able. It is a meritocracy for the public to view. If you don't practice and perform you lose your place on the team you can lose your scholarship. I agree with this position.  Much like your reference to a job there are expectations

I also understand that no one is forced to be an athlete. However why does choosing to be an athlete in college subject someone to undue external control? That I don't agree with.  We the sports consumers are the reason why this is so out of control relative to what it used to be or what you think it should be.

It is none of anyone's business why someone may decide to transfer schools and why should that decision preclude them from participating in sports that the school and fans of that school want to see?  It's arbitrary and unduly limiting that other students do not experience. Therefore,  it's wrong within our American standards of individual freedom.

If you're a student in good standing, enrolled in the school,  the school wants you to play.  You should be able to play. 

I suspect those opposed do not like the turmoil, the speed of change lately and think that it impacts their chosen school negatively. Furthermore,  I suspect that many value loyalty.  I understand that we want to believe that player is loyal to a school we love.  Some are and those that transfer aren't.  To force them to stay my arbitrary rules is selfish and controlling. I value a person being able to determine how they want to live their life aka Freedom over my selfish enjoyment of a sports team that may lose a good player. 

A-Bomb, I'm going to give you credit here.  I am appreciating this debate, because you are taking the right path with your argument.  If this were a true debate, and I was assigned your side of the argument instead of mine, I would be making arguments very similar to the ones that you are making.

That all being said, I think it just boils down to the simple fact that someone, anyone, who accepts the benefits that college athletes accept when they get a scholarship can be made to accept those benefits under a set of rules.  If you know that you are accepting benefits to be a college athlete who is playing under the rules laid out by the NCAA, then you are agreeing to abide by those rules, even if you disagree with them.  So, on the legal side, if the question is whether or not the NCAA can make and enforce those rules, the answer is that they can.

An entirely different question is whether or not free transfer should be the rule.  I think transfers should be restricted.  You think they should not.  That is opinion.  That is a different question than whether the NCAA can make the rule.

My argument for why transfers should be restricted ties into what Wendelprof is saying.  College football and college basketball benefits universities financially.  The NCAA and its member universities are not for profit entities funneling their money to shareholders/owners.  They are non-profit entities earning money to benefit education.  I know that there is this sentiment that the NCAA is the huge, evil, greedy organization.  However, the truth is that the money the NCAA earns pays its bills and the rest is distributed to member institutions (https://www.ncaa.org/sports/2021/5/4/finances.aspx).  The money made by the revenue sports not only benefits the students who play those sports, but it also helps fund the non-revenue sports, and helps the universities fund educational ventures.

Kids staying around at universities they agree to play for and accept benefits from helps keep interest in college sports up.  Allowing kids to transfer freely hurts people's interest in college sports.  At least that is my opinion, but I think that opinion is shared by many.  If free transfer is causing interest in college sports to drop, hurting viewership, hurting butts in seats, then I think it should not be allowed.  I'm not asking for a drastic change, just a return to the rule that has always been there so that we aren't taking money away from the institutions.  You know that if profits fall off, they fall off will be taken away from the education side and the non-profits sports, not from the football and basketball budgets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A ray of hope for Ezewiro?

 
 
 
roth_x96.jpg
 
Source: George Mason's Woody Newton has received a waiver from the NCAA and is eligible for the 2023-24 season. Newton is a two-time transfer who has previously played at both Oklahoma State and Syracuse.
AGB91 and wgstl like this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Cowboy II said:

-the flipped coin landed the right way?

No kidding! Looks like he is from the DC area, so maybe they made the argument that he is transferring to be closer to home? Would really like to know the reason he received a waiver not knowing anything about the kid.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, Cowboy II said:

-the flipped coin landed the right way? 

-I looked and couldn't find how many football two-time waivers were granted, if anyone has that I am curious

Sources: As of today, the NCAA has only approved 18% of waivers for two-time transfers in all sports who attempted to earn immediate eligibility during the 2023-24 academic year.
 


 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-thanks Hoosier, that's a piece of data, roughly 1 out of 5, higher than I expected

-I wonder though if it is influenced by 95% of rowers got a waiver while 2% of football did as the conspiracy theory part of me thinks the revenue sports are being treated in a different, less agreeable way

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, TheChosenOne said:

No kidding! Looks like he is from the DC area, so maybe they made the argument that he is transferring to be closer to home? Would really like to know the reason he received a waiver not knowing anything about the kid.

I copied this from the G Mason forum.  So 2 decided in the A10 and 3 still to be decided.

Others awaiting news:
Woody Newton (GM) may have a shot at a waiver because of the death of his father and moving back home.
Jalen Haynes(GM), probably would be one of the most impactful players, Mason fans think his chances are slim.
Brad Ezewiro (SLU) a coaching change may not cut it for him, without him their frontcourt would be thin.
David Green (URI) who knows, haven't heard anything.

https://www.masonhoops.com/threads/welcome-woody-newton.2528/page-3

TheChosenOne likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9/18/2023 at 8:24 AM, billikenfan05 said:

Chess isn't governed by the NCAA. It's a bit archaic but if you want to play NCAA Division 1 sports, you gotta play by their rules. I've always been of the mindset that the NCAA, while stinky, isn't the problem. It's the lack of alternative.

Speaking of stinky and chess…. 
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12559689/Hans-Niemann-Magnus-carlsen-anal-beads-chess-cheating.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, brianstl said:

Old news. The Courtside of Chess was on this months ago

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Old news. The Courtside of Chess was on this months ago

But did they ever get to the bottom of 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...