CL82
James Breeding sucks
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 63,726
- Reaction Score
- 250,114
The unstated difference being, of course, that most students pay for their own tuition, albeit discounted. Scholarship athletes do not. Should schools who are investing significantly in their scholarship athletes have some degree of stability/certainty? Non-athletes to transfer bears the cost of it. If they lose credits, as can often be the case particularly for upper classmen transfers, they are going to pay for making them up. That economic constraint does not apply to scholarship athletes. So analogizing the scholarship in nonscholarship athlete isn’t really a perfect comparison.As a fan I hate to see a player transfer but I understand why they do. According to the US Department of Education 25% of students enrolled in a four year school will transfer sometime and yet some on here suggest that athletes should not have the same privilege. There are many reasons students transfer and I would think being a division 1 athlete exposes one to more reasons to transfer. The NCAA only allows one transfer without sitting out so I don’t see any athletes shopping their talents from year to year. Sure it could lead to some super teams but in reality I do not see that happening often if at all. If an athlete is unhappy with their situation I am all for them being allowed to pursue “greener pastures” just as any other student can.
Now, that being said, I’ve long thought that once a student graduates they have fulfilled their commitment to the University and should be able to go to any institution they’d like for graduate work. That, plus the one time transfer rule that is already in place, would allow student athletes the opportunity to move twice during their athletic career without having to sit out a year. That seems reasonable to me