2022-23 Transfer portal announcements | Page 13 | The Boneyard

2022-23 Transfer portal announcements

Status
Not open for further replies.
HuskyFan1125 said:
Ouch!!

Expand ...

Random observation here, but I cannot say that I can recall having ever seen anyone refer to UNC as "UNC Carolina."

If I ever heard someone, especially one of our own players, refer to us as "USC Carolina" I'd stare at them like they'd sprouted a 2nd nose on their face.

Just struck me as peculiar.
 
LwrcasefaN said:
NCAA makes massive decision on transfer rules


This amounts to overkill. It's so ridiculous that it comes across as a personal vendetta.
Expand ...
I think first of all the NCAA athletic scholarship is not a fundamental human right. It is a privileged awarded to outstanding athletes. A short while ago students had to sit out when they first transferred. Now they can jump ship and play immediately. But if they want to do it a second time, during their four years they will need to sit for a year. Not all that draconian a penalty and one that used to be the norm. Regular academic scholarships don't transfer at all. And there are a few very specifically defined exceptions.
 
UcMiami said:
I think first of all the NCAA athletic scholarship is not a fundamental human right. It is a privileged awarded to outstanding athletes. A short while ago students had to sit out when they first transferred. Now they can jump ship and play immediately. But if they want to do it a second time, during their four years they will need to sit for a year. Not all that draconian a penalty and one that used to be the norm. Regular academic scholarships don't transfer at all. And there are a few very specifically defined exceptions.
Expand ...
The issue is not whether it's a right. The issue is the NCAA saying you can't go seek it elsewhere "under certain conditions" without penalty. If a coach that recruited you leaves, you should be able to leave IMO...even if its the second transfer...without penalty. A school decides not to renew your scholarship. Same thing. You don't like the playing time? You can leave, but they should lose a year of eligibility. I'm not a fan of all the transfers, but the NCAA should address the BIGGER transfer issue..and to me that is THE FIRST TRANSFER.
 
DaBball said:
Expand ...

One of the Belmont coaches tweeted last week and insinuated that one of the current post season teams was more or less tampering with players on the Belmont team. This is the 2nd to hit the portal. I haven't seen any announcement from Wells herself so maybe she doesn't want to be contacted because...the transfer deal is done?
 
.-.
UcMiami said:
I think first of all the NCAA athletic scholarship is not a fundamental human right. It is a privileged awarded to outstanding athletes. A short while ago students had to sit out when they first transferred. Now they can jump ship and play immediately. But if they want to do it a second time, during their four years they will need to sit for a year. Not all that draconian a penalty and one that used to be the norm. Regular academic scholarships don't transfer at all. And there are a few very specifically defined exceptions.
Expand ...
Also, this isn't a case of transferring a scholarship. It involves acquiring a new one at a different institution. If any student, athlete or otherwise, wants to leave, then they should be allowed to do so as long as they agree to accept the known consequences. Equally important, is that the receiving institution agrees to the consequences. Sitting out a year doesn't seem to be an effective deterrent. It just means they will be in school 5 years versus 4. I think if they allowed them all to play immediately, but lost a year of eligibility, they would think twice about the initial transfer.

Let's say I just ended my SO season and I want to transfer to another school. I say let them, but they would only have one year of playing eligibility remaining not two. They could play immediately in their Jr year or sit and play the last year as a Sr. Upon graduation, they would also not be eligible as a grad transfer if that would have been available. And the receiving school would have to agree to maintain them on scholarship for both years.

My priority in a solution is #1 making certain players get their degree. Sometimes students make the wrong choice. Even non-athletes. There should be consequences and not punishment. As far as addressing the two or 3 transfer thing maybe they should consider restricting where they can transfer. For example, they can't transfer to a school that previously recruited them, or they can't transfer to the same conference or they could only transfer to a lower division or non-power 5 schools. But let them transfer because the problem is feeding upon itself. Kids recruited out of HS are leaving because they are tired of waiting to play.
 
Last edited:
I have the opposite view: there should be as few consequences as possible for the student. The system needs to have some regulation, but mainly to discourage coaches from trying to lure players away from other schools. The institution of college athletics exists for the students, for their benefit. They create the value in it (with the assistance of coaches and teachers, to be sure) and we need to respect that most of all. Ironically, that value is what has distorted the system and especially the NCAA itself.

The interests of the NCAA and its member institutions in preserving competition in one form or another is worth some consideration, but I think it must be secondary to the interests of the players in developing their talents and their minds. I feel similarly about NIL as about transfers. Either one may change the way the college game looks today, but I am unmoved. If we try to restrict the freedom of the students in the name of some vision of the game we cherish, we risk catering to the wrong interests.
 
Bone Dog said:
If we try to restrict the freedom of the students in the name of some vision of the game we cherish, we risk catering to the wrong interests.
Expand ...
I tend to agree with this point and believe almost nothing about college athletics has been about the students in many, many years.

I find it appalling that Coach A could say you "couldn't" transfer to play for Coach B for so long and never got pushback. I don't think that's right and am glad that element of the rule is gone. However, I don't think making students sit out a year is restricting their freedom to move, it just means their decision has a consequence.

If I were king for a day, which fortunately I am not, I'd allow free, single transfers without a sit out for students who experienced a coaching change, no waiver required. The HC is fired, takes a better job, voluntarily resigns, that's cool. The season ends in March and you are practicing with another program by fall. Pretty much any other instance beyond extreme, and I am saying extreme, would require a player sit in competitive games for a year.

Restricting student movement was always about the coaches and frankly so is the no sit out rule, under the guise of being student friendly.
 
Last edited:
BRS24 said:
Y'all - can we keep this thread as announcements for players transferring, and discuss the transfer rules here?
the-boneyard.com

NCAA Outlines Transfer Waiver Guidelines - Coach Change Among Denials

the-boneyard.com the-boneyard.com
Expand ...

source.gif
 
Bone Dog said:
I have the opposite view: there should be as few consequences as possible for the student. The system needs to have some regulation, but mainly to discourage coaches from trying to lure players away from other schools. The institution of college athletics exists for the students, for their benefit. They create the value in it (with the assistance of coaches and teachers, to be sure) and we need to respect that most of all. Ironically, that value is what has distorted the system and especially the NCAA itself.

The interests of the NCAA and its member institutions in preserving competition in one form or another is worth some consideration, but I think it must be secondary to the interests of the players in developing their talents and their minds. I feel similarly about NIL as about transfers. Either one may change the way the college game looks today, but I am unmoved. If we try to restrict the freedom of the students in the name of some vision of the game we cherish, we risk catering to the wrong interests.
Expand ...
For second transfer student athletes, having to sit out a year has no impact on their studies, they still have to go to class and pass. What impact of not being allowed to play will affect their studies?
 
.-.
DaBball said:
A fifth Arizona player:
Expand ...

So from an academic perspective, is it a thing where students can transfer grad school credits? Or would she be going for a double masters? I've never heard of someone transferring during graduate school.
 
Donarski is from Wisconsin so I can definitely see her in the B1G.
 
.-.
bovwa10 said:
Maybe she’ll go to Iowa, that would be a huge get for them
Expand ...
I can’t see it. She started at ISU and at Iowa she’d be a sub. But she is a Midwest girl and may not want to go too far away. If she were willing to move, Duke or UNC could really use a shooting guard who plays excellent D. In the B1G only IU really looks like a good fit for her, and Moren is a player friendly coach. One out of the box idea for her would be Stanford, who desperately needs someone like her. But I don’t know if Tara takes transfers.
 
.-.
Bone Dog said:
I can’t see it. She started at ISU and at Iowa she’d be a sub. But she is a Midwest girl and may not want to go too far away. If she were willing to move, Duke or UNC could really use a shooting guard who plays excellent D. In the B1G only IU really looks like a good fit for her, and Moren is a player friendly coach. One out of the box idea for her would be Stanford, who desperately needs someone like her. But I don’t know if Tara takes transfers.
Expand ...

Iowa is jam packed at that position for next season with Martin, Warnock Davis, and Marshall returning. Unless she's willing to use her COVID year, I don't see it either. Even if she did, I don't see it working. I disagree with Indiana being the only fit in the B1G. I could see Illinois benefiting from having a player like her on their roster.
 
If Indiana picks up Donarski and she basically slots in the Grace Berger role and they're a Final Four Contender again with almost everyone else back.

Huge portal name.
 
Last edited:
cancontent said:
Iowa is jam packed at that position for next season with Martin, Warnock Davis, and Marshall returning. Unless she's willing to use her COVID year, I don't see it either. Even if she did, I don't see it working. I disagree with Indiana being the only fit in the B1G. I could see Illinois benefiting from having a player like her on their roster.
Expand ...
Warnock’s not returning. Dental school instead.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,326
Messages
4,564,178
Members
10,462
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom