Big Ten proposal would allow every athlete to transfer once without sitting out a year (Dodd @ CBS Sports)



Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
55,201
Likes
82,453

>>The Big Ten's proposal was largely unknown in NCAA circles. It went unpublished by the NCAA as it wound its way through the legislative cycle in October 2019. On Nov. 1, the NCAA Board of Directors put a moratorium on "transfer-related" proposals for the 2019-20 legislative calendar.

The board said it would gather additional data over the next year, including evaluation of a transfer model similar to the one suggested by the Big Ten. The conference proposed the transfers take place within a five-year eligibility window. The soonest the Big Ten's legislation could be adopted is now 2021.<<

>>Athletes in only five sports are required to sit for a season when transferring: men's basketball, women's basketball, baseball, hockey and football. In the NCAA's 20 other sports, athletes are allowed a one-time. The difference in the two transfer policies is getting harder to rationalize. The NCAA continually says athletics should enhance the overall education experience. The experience for the average student includes the ability to transfer schools at will.

"We have five sports that are not allowed to transfer in this day and age. That is something we need to fix," Manuel said. "We need to give all young people flexibility to transfer once. If they transfer a second time, there is no waiver."<<
 

Fairfield_1st

Sitting on this Barstool talking like a damn fool
Joined
Nov 16, 2012
Messages
1,475
Likes
1,885
I don't like it. In my cynical view, this is so the big dogs can pick the cherries off the lower teams and send their own cherry pits back. Rich get richer with no penalty and the smaller school likely loses out in the exchange.
 
Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
529
Likes
959
Long overdue.

sure, top talent at lesser schools might get picked. But guys in situations that are not a fit and are not getting reps at P5 program can now move to a school like UConn.
 
Joined
Sep 18, 2011
Messages
2,996
Likes
4,142
I don't like it. In my cynical view, this is so the big dogs can pick the cherries off the lower teams and send their own cherry pits back. Rich get richer with no penalty and the smaller school likely loses out in the exchange.
The transfer portal has given more transparency on transfers. The reality is the vast majority of transfers are down, P5 to G5 and G5 to FCS. Think about all the 4*s and high 3*s with NFL aspirations are backups on P5 teams. They want to play.
 
Joined
Nov 30, 2013
Messages
1,945
Likes
2,119
I don't hate it. Sure some of the top teams can cherry pick the best players from smaller programs, but I think this benefits the smaller programs far more than the bigger ones. Back ups will be more apt to transfer if they can play immediately. UCONN could benefit for this rule to help with depth
 
Joined
Feb 22, 2014
Messages
1,672
Likes
2,710
This had to be invented by Michigan to make sure that they could get a new starting QB out of the portal each year w/o penalty. Jimbo don't seem to like developing any of his own.
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
9,235
Likes
5,527
Let’s just make everyone a free agent at the end of the year. We can have a player draft but to make sure the Big names don’t have competition we can do it opposite of the NFL. National champ gets top pick on down through P5 then G5 from best to worst.

What a crock.
 

CL82

The best thing about puppies is they become dogs!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
34,694
Likes
58,439
It probably makes sense to add a cap to the number a team can lose and a cap on the number of players that can transfer in to a given university say over a five year period. That would prevent a team from being decimated and prevent a school from habitually harvesting players from weaker schools.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
55,201
Likes
82,453

>>"The reason I struggled with the proposal somewhat was because I know how hard our coaching staffs -- and all coaching staffs -- work to evaluate and recruit a player," Moos says.

Players transferring when the going gets tough — that's essentially the old-school rancher's concern.

"There's a big part of me that says, 'Hey, life's tough, suck it up,'" Moos says. "But at the same time, life is short. I've known a lot of athletes who maybe could've had a wonderful experience competing if they had another chance at another school." <<
 
Joined
Aug 29, 2011
Messages
9,235
Likes
5,527
I’m not sure the current rule is such a hardship. The NCAA seems to be granting waivers if you can think of any reason at all. Old uniform makes you look fat? Ok you can play. BC got a transfer quarterback from Notre Dame and his “hardship”. Was he missed his girlfriend who went to school in Boston. Not to BC, actually. BU I think. They weren’t married. They didn’t have a child. They didn’t have a long term commitment. What a crock. The NCAA ought to say ok but if you have a fight you need to sit the next game and if you break up you sit the year. LOL. They hand out waivers like a politician hading out vote for me papers on Election Day.
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
55,201
Likes
82,453

>>The working group concept would change waiver criteria to allow approvals for first-time four-year transfers in all sports to compete immediately if they:
  • Receive a transfer release from their previous school.
  • Leave their previous school academically eligible.
  • Maintain their academic progress at the new school.
  • Leave under no disciplinary suspension.
The waiver criteria are the same as the legislated exception already allowed for student-athletes who compete in any sport other than baseball, basketball, football or men’s ice hockey.<<
 

Exit 4

This space for rent
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
7,581
Likes
11,200
This doesn't necessarily belong here per se - but I'll post anyways since its more legislation talk.
 

Fairfield_1st

Sitting on this Barstool talking like a damn fool
Joined
Nov 16, 2012
Messages
1,475
Likes
1,885
So what keeps a certain star player from transferring from school A to school B just because he/she wants a better chance at winning a title? I feel like something is missing like a criteria related to actual playing time versus potential playing time, that way we know they're moving on for opportunity and not to exploit the new rule. If they don't meet the criteria then it follows the normal process.
 

Exit 4

This space for rent
Joined
Feb 3, 2012
Messages
7,581
Likes
11,200
I feel like this rule should prohibit you from moving within your conference or to a opponent on the current and/or following year schedule. Maybe this has been address- I haven’t actually read the proposal.
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
3,855
Likes
7,964
Have I finally smoked myself crazy or does this sort of bring some parity to the game?
 
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
5,814
Likes
8,158
Have I finally smoked myself crazy or does this sort of bring some parity to the game?
These things have a way of backfiring. I look at Tyler Coyle choosing to leave UConn and wonder, why? Will good players look to play at bigger, better programs or will players wanting playing time use it to go somewhere they will play? It is going to be really easy for a good player to upgrade.
 
Joined
Aug 2, 2012
Messages
3,855
Likes
7,964
These things have a way of backfiring. I look at Tyler Coyle choosing to leave UConn and wonder, why? Will good players look to play at bigger, better programs or will players wanting playing time use it to go somewhere they will play? It is going to be really easy for a good player to upgrade.
Totally agree, Hoop. But, I'm also wondering if that doesn't open up a window for some of the P5 kids to be forced our way? I'm not a scientist but somewhere like 95% of our portal exits went FBS or Nintendo Switched directions. Wouldn't that mean teams like us would end up getting some of the talented kids, who aren't as talented as they thought, from the P5's?
 
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
649
Likes
364
I don't like it. In my cynical view, this is so the big dogs can pick the cherries off the lower teams and send their own cherry pits back. Rich get richer with no penalty and the smaller school likely loses out in the exchange.
recruiting in high school will suddenly become less important. Wait until you see how they perform their freshman and sophomore years in college, then make the big push for them. Not surprised Ohio State and Michigan love this proposal.
 

Top