Big XII Proposal Letting Athletes Transfer Instantly After A Coaching Change Picks Up Steam

[Drew]

Proposal to let athletes transfer instantly after a coaching change picks up steam

Athletes would be allowed to transfer schools without restriction if their coach were fired or left for another job as part of sweeping proposal that is making its way through Division I, CBS Sports has learned. However, athletes would not be permitted to follow the departing coach to their new program.

The proposal, which originated from the Big 12, would also allow athletes to transfer without sitting out a season (as currently mandated by NCAA rules) in the event a postseason ban is handed down by the NCAA as punishment to their program.

The traditional academic "year in residence" for transfers in all other situations would still be in place and extended to every sport. Presently, that is only a requirement in five NCAA sports.

The proposal authored by the faculty athletic representatives at Baylor and Iowa State has received early support. Skeptics note it is merely a proposal, not the proposal. Still, the document shared with CBS Sports seems to be the most detailed offering to date as a means of fixing the NCAA's long-criticized transfer policies.

"Basically, we're saying kids can go anywhere they want," Iowa State athletic director Jamie Pollard said. "For the first time ever in college athletics, the student-athlete is empowered."

Changing the NCAA's entrenched transfer rules has become one of the most significant undertakings in the association's history.

Coaches have long been able to "block" where a transfer goes. Athletes also have to seek release from their scholarships to immediately get aid at another school. Frequently, they have to get "permission" from the school/coach to move on to their desired school.

Those practices would end if the aforementioned proposal is adopted.

 

[UConnStats]

Let’s wait a year on this, AAC.

 

[freescooter]

And this is needed because?

 

[auror]

And this is needed because?

Because college athletes should not be forced to delay their eligibility in order to achieve a suitable situation following an external circumstance change.

 

[Travelman6]

So, how does this prevent against a team or teams poaching another team whose coach just got fired?

Of course when a coach leaves, the coach, or the school he is leaving for needs to pay off his contract, so if a player does the same, he should do the same and pay back the school (in regards to the scholarship). That will allow players to think twice if they REALLY need to transfer.

At this point the schools should not be required to offer 4 year athletic scholarships anymore (and just offer them based on academics only), otherwise, that could be 3 years (and a cr@p ton of money) wasted. I mean, if a player is taking a spot away from a student who could have used the money (with sky rocketing tuition costs and all) it is only fair that some commitment be expected of the athlete and this rule, IMO would only work in extreme cases like Baylor or PSU in football. Overall, it needs to be improved but could work with more information and details added.

 

[auror]

So, how does this prevent against a team or teams poaching another team whose coach just got fired?

It doesn't. Who cares? A lot of times those guys transfer anyways.

Of course when a coach leaves, the coach, or the school he is leaving for needs to pay off his contract, so if a player does the same, he should do the same and pay back the school (in regards to the scholarship). That will allow players to think twice if they REALLY need to transfer.

Athletic scholarships are only 1 year guarantees anyways (for most conferences), so there wouldn't actually be anything to pay unless they have the scholarship for the year already granted. I'm going to assume there's a clause in there preventing mid-season transfers, but other than that, nothing to pay off.

 

[CTBasketball]

I think it’d be better for the sport if coaches sat out a year when swapping schools.