AP story on NCAA Transfer rule changes

[Centerstream]

I hope that this hasn't been posted yet.

Reports: Transfers won't have to sit out season

The NCAA Division I Council voted Wednesday to change the long-standing rule that forces transfer athletes in football and basketball to sit out a season at their new school, a report said.

www.espn.com

 

[fireford]

I like it because it removes the politics. Someone like Westbrook had to sit out a year after a slew of others didn't have to with no better reasons than she had. The decisions came across as arbitrary.

 

[MD#12Fan]

When's the ESPN event, when LeBron, DWade and Bosh announce they're playing together in Miami. One of the great TV events ever. Had to rival Geraldo Rivera's Al Capone's Vault extravaganza.
Think the ladies will start uniting for "super teams"?

 

[Kaizen]

I am not sure this is good or bad. I can image there will be more transfers and the top teams will be even better and the not so good teams will lose more players. JMHO ..

 

[CocoHusky]

I am not sure this is good or bad. I can image there will be more transfers and the top teams will be even better and the not so good teams will lose more players. JMHO ..

There is also this interesting little twist to the new rules, player across all sports have until July 1st to decide if they want to transfer.

 

[letsgogirls]

There is also this interesting little twist to the new rules, player across all sports have until July 1st to decide if they want to transfer.

Is this for every year or just this year?

 

[mbr33ct]

The so-called one-time exception has been available to athletes in other NCAA sports for years, allowing them to transfer and play immediately. Athletes in football, men's and women's basketball, men's ice hockey and baseball have not had that available to them, with the exception of Notre Dame women's basketball, without asking the NCAA for a special waiver and claiming that a hardship caused the need for a transfer.

Just wanted to fix that paragraph.

 

[mbr33ct]

The article does not specify (unless I missed it) if an athlete wants to transfer for a second time, will the NCAA revert back to previous rule? special waiver and claiming that a hardship caused the need for a transfer. IMO, any transfers after the one-time exception the athlete should automatically sit a year with no exceptions.

 

[Figurehead]

I am not sure this is good or bad. I can image there will be more transfers and the top teams will be even better and the not so good teams will lose more players. JMHO ..

Yes, This is good for the UConns, Stanford’s, Baylor’s, and Oregon’s. The brand namers and the like. Bad for everyone else. I like it.

 

[Centerstream]

There is also this interesting little twist to the new rules, player across all sports have until July 1st to decide if they want to transfer.

July 1st is for this year only. Starting in 2022, transfers must notify their schools by May 1st for fall and winter sports.

 

[MD#12Fan]

Yes, This is good for the UConns, Stanford’s, Baylor’s, and Oregon’s. The brand namers and the like. Bad for everyone else. I like it.

Not so fast my friend. (remember Lee Corso)
Might level things out. We'll see. Kids can move wherever "the grass looks greener". Look at how Hunter showed up at Seton Hall. Effective enough to get BE honors. How about Arkansas, with all those 5th year seniors this year.
Did you see the UConn roster thread earlier today. 2022-2023, UConn has basically 18 eligible players. Enough said with that.

 

[uconnfan68]

When's the ESPN event, when LeBron, DWade and Bosh announce they're playing together in Miami. One of the great TV events ever. Had to rival Geraldo Rivera's Al Capone's Vault extravaganza.
Think the ladies will start uniting for "super teams"?

Been tried by UNC. Fell apart after 1year. The Diamond DeShields fiasco.

 

[triaddukefan]

Yes, This is good for the UConns, Stanford’s, Baylor’s, and Oregon’s. The brand namers and the like. Bad for everyone else. I like it.

Can't see how its good for Stanford.... how many actually players can actually transfer in with their demanding standards. Plus its not like they regularly have open roster spaces

 

[bballnut90]

Can't see how its good for Stanford.... how many actually players can actually transfer in with their demanding standards. Plus its not like they regularly have open roster spaces

Stanford is likely unaffected by this. No one transfers in/out of Stanford unless they're a grad transfer.

 

[fireford]

Sure the blue bloods benefit but it can be a two-way street. A player not getting enough minutes on a very good team can get more playing time in a more suitable system and flourish. Scenarios like this can benefit bad and marginal teams as well.

 

[TheGOAT23]

Can't see how its good for Stanford.... how many actually players can actually transfer in with their demanding standards. Plus its not like they regularly have open roster spaces

True! Has anyone ever transferred to the Stanford WBB team? ?

 

[CocoHusky]

Sure the blue bloods benefit but it can be a two-way street. A player not getting enough minutes on a very good team can get more playing time in a more suitable system and flourish. Scenarios like this can benefit bad and marginal.teams as well.

Also think this past season was an anomaly and you quickly see a return to top heavy WCBB where no more than 5 or 6 teams have a realistic chance of winning it every year. Two thing will guarantee a sea of mediocrity below that. One is the scholarship limit and the other is 200 minutes per game. If you have 10 kids that can give you 20 productive minutes per game you probably have a good, competitive & happy team. Most schools don’t have go 10 deep. Beyond that let’s say there are two or three kids on each team that are extremely happy to be on scholarship work as hard as they can knowing they will not get in games even in garbage times. That’s you squad right there 13 which is were most teams operate.

 

[huskyd]

I am not sure this is good or bad. I can image there will be more transfers and the top teams will be even better and the not so good teams will lose more players. JMHO ..

the not so good teams will lose more players.

This is interesting Kaizen. You're saying that removing the difficulties of transferring will encourage more players do it to the detriment of weaker teams--that the top teams will aggregate all of the best athletes. Not sure that would happen, and it's probably better to grant greater freedom to student athletes than less. The treatment of these aspiring youths is already pretty awful; they're not commodities, but people.

 

[hoopsfan22]

So can coaches recruit kids from other teams to get them to transfer?

 

[triaddukefan]

True! Has anyone ever transferred to the Stanford WBB team? ?

Duke had a player Brooke Smith that transferred to Stanford.... that was probably around 2003 or so.

 

[stamfordhusky]

The treatment of these aspiring youths is already pretty awful; they're not commodities, but people.

yes, it’s awful that they get a four-year scholarship worth $250,000+ and have to play a sport in return.

 

[Centerstream]

As far as the top teams getting the top transfers, don't you think that the transferring players would go to a team where they were pretty confident that they would be in the starting lineup on Day 1? If you are a top team, I would guess that the odds would not be in the player's favor. An exception might be if the player was trying to fill the void left by graduation or another player transferred out.

 

[bballnut90]

Sure the blue bloods benefit but it can be a two-way street. A player not getting enough minutes on a very good team can get more playing time in a more suitable system and flourish. Scenarios like this can benefit bad and marginal teams as well.

I actually think less talented teams benefit more than blue bloods will. We've already seen several former top recruits transfer to lower profile schools for one reason or another (ex. Hayes, Booth, Scott-Grayson, Austin, Bell, Mulkey, Decosta, etc.)

 

[LwrcasefaN]

I hope these kids have someone in their corner who will be the voice they need to hear versus the voice they want to hear. There are many reasons to transfer and all of them aren't necessarily good depending on the player. Some players want to be closer to home. Others want more playing time. Others seek money to pay for a certain degree that isn't available where they currently are enrolled. Each goal has pros and cons. Weigh them carefully. From a coach's point of view...don't go picking up players unless you have a plan for them or get caught up in this transfer landslide.

 

[Dublin]

As far as the top teams getting the top transfers, don't you think that the transferring players would go to a team where they were pretty confident that they would be in the starting lineup on Day 1? If you are a top team, I would guess that the odds would not be in the player's favor. An exception might be if the player was trying to fill the void left by graduation or another player transferred out.

or an early WNBA draftee, like Azurá and Megan.