D1 Council Endorses Unlimited Transfers

[ToolzieFan]

Was this expected? I didn’t see it coming. I don’t have my finger on the pulse of the Division I Council, though.

 

[Hungryhusky99]

Was this expected? I didn’t see it coming. I don’t have my finger on the pulse of the Division I Council, though.

They have been approving all the waivers anyway

 

[ToolzieFan]

They have been approving all the waivers anyway

Good point.

 

[McLovin]

Good. Duke, Kansas, Kentucky, etc get all their transfer waivers approved anyways. At least no more BS Sid Wilson situations for us and the other non-favored D1 schools.

 

[nomar]

A part of me understands that kids should be allowed to change schools without penalty but another part of me thinks that it's ridiculous. Commitments should mean something. I've long held the view that kids should be allowed to transfer without penalty whenever a head coach leaves (I imagine everyone here shared that view); it was disgusting that a coach could leave his recruits high and dry. And I believe waivers should be liberally granted. But these rules (this and the change from last year) make the NCAA basically a sports league with 1-year contracts.

 

[storrsroars]

My takeaway is that if UConn is going to spend a ton on recruiting, might as well start going after one-and-done (to NBA) guys instead of one-and-done (to your competition).

Jay Wright was probably enjoying an adult beverage and chuckling after reading that.

 

[CL82]

A part of me understands that kids should be allowed to change schools without penalty but another part of me thinks that it's ridiculous. Commitments should mean something. I've long held the view that kids should be allowed to transfer without penalty whenever a head coach leaves (I imagine everyone here shared that view); it was disgusting that a coach could leave his recruits high and dry. And I believe waivers should be liberally granted. But these rules (this and the change from last year) make the NCAA basically a sports league with 1-year contracts.

Since an athletes scholarship can not be renewed annually, an athlete should be able to transfer, annually. That just seems fair and reasonable.

That said, this announcement is de facto free agency which is going to change the face of college athletics as we understand it. If you, like me, enjoyed watching kids develop over four years, you may want to think about getting a new hobby because I doubt we will be seeing that very much anymore. People like to talk about how fans “root for the laundry”. Well, when transfer without penalty comes into being that is going to be the norm because kids are going to be moving all over the place.

Don’t get me wrong, as I said at the start, if schools can cancel the kids scholarship annually, it’s only fair that the kids should be able to do the same and move on to another institution. I just don’t like the impact it’s going to have on the sport.

On the bright side, I think this benefits Connecticut football considerably. We have P5 facilities and a P5 coach, coupled with name recognition. Decent players who might not consider us out of high school, but who are buried in the depth chart may well be willing to give us a look.

 

[8893]

My takeaway is that if UConn is going to spend a ton on recruiting, might as well start going after one-and-done (to NBA) guys instead of one-and-done (to your competition).

Jay Wright was probably enjoying an adult beverage and chuckling after reading that.

 

[McLovin]

A part of me understands that kids should be allowed to change schools without penalty but another part of me thinks that it's ridiculous. Commitments should mean something. I've long held the view that kids should be allowed to transfer without penalty whenever a head coach leaves (I imagine everyone here shared that view); it was disgusting that a coach could leave his recruits high and dry. And I believe waivers should be liberally granted. But these rules (this and the change from last year) make the NCAA basically a sports league with 1-year contracts.

The problem with “liberally” granting waivers / keeping the rules grey like they are now, is that then you have a system where the favored schools (by the NCAA) get an advantage.

Sid Wilson was on the St John’s campus for like 2 minutes but the NCAA made him sit out a year. If he had gone to Duke or Kansas, no doubt he would have (like he should have btw) been granted a waiver immediately.

Giving the higher ups at the NCAA the power to “liberally” grant waivers as they see fit is worse than just letting it be an open transfer market every year imo.

The less power the NCAA has, the better it is.

 

[bobbyinaz]

Since an athletes scholarship can not be renewed annually, an athlete should be able to transfer, annually. That just seems fair and reasonable.

That said, this announcement is de facto free agency which is going to change the face of college athletics as we understand it. If you, like me, enjoyed watching kids develop over four years, you may want to think about getting a new hobby because I doubt we will be seeing that very much anymore. People like to talk about how fans “root for the laundry”. Well, when transfer without penalty comes into being that is going to be the norm because kids are going to be moving all over the place.

Don’t get me wrong, as I said at the start, if schools can cancel the kids scholarship annually, it’s only fair that the kids should be able to do the same and move on to another institution. I just don’t like the impact it’s going to have on the sport.

On the bright side, I think this benefits Connecticut football considerably. We have P5 facilities and a P5 coach, coupled with name recognition. Decent players who might not consider us out of high school, but who are buried in the depth chart may well be willing to give us a look.

This goes both ways. The trade-off is that after identifying an under recruited kid and coaching him up & developing him, he becomes a free agent for the next level.

This is just another rule that benefits the big guys. Next will be the expansion of rosters so they can keep more talent for themselves

 

[superjohn]

Since an athletes scholarship can not be renewed annually, an athlete should be able to transfer, annually. That just seems fair and reasonable.

That said, this announcement is de facto free agency which is going to change the face of college athletics as we understand it. If you, like me, enjoyed watching kids develop over four years, you may want to think about getting a new hobby because I doubt we will be seeing that very much anymore. People like to talk about how fans “root for the laundry”. Well, when transfer without penalty comes into being that is going to be the norm because kids are going to be moving all over the place.

Don’t get me wrong, as I said at the start, if schools can cancel the kids scholarship annually, it’s only fair that the kids should be able to do the same and move on to another institution. I just don’t like the impact it’s going to have on the sport.

On the bright side, I think this benefits Connecticut football considerably. We have P5 facilities and a P5 coach, coupled with name recognition. Decent players who might not consider us out of high school, but who are buried in the depth chart may well be willing to give us a look.

Transfer without penalty is already here. We just had 4 kids transfer out and brought in 4 transfers and we're all still here with this hobby.

I think we all realize it's now just pro sports with free agency and all the money and we continue on with the hobby. If the 2 mega conferences decide to ruin college basketball by destroying the tournament I'll find a new hobby, I think a lot of us will.

 

[McLovin]

This goes both ways. The trade-off is that after identifying an under recruited kid and coaching him up & developing him, he becomes a free agent for the next level.

This is just another rule that benefits the big guys. Next will be the expansion of rosters so they can keep more talent for themselves

How is that bad? What if that was your kid?

Would you want them stuck at URI because of some bogus transfer rules, or would you want him to have a shot to play big time CBB (and maybe have a shot at an NBA career)?

Or what if your kid was buried on the depth chart at UConn without a chance at playing time. Do you want them stuck there, or have the ability to go somewhere and use their eligibility actually playing?

Really benefits the student athletes, which is all that should really matter.

 

[storrsroars]

How is that bad? What if that was your kid?

Would you want them stuck at URI because of some bogus transfer rules, or would you want him to have a shot to play big time CBB (and maybe have a shot at an NBA career)?

Or what if your kid was buried on the depth chart at UConn without a chance at playing time. Do you want them stuck there, or have the ability to go somewhere and use their eligibility actually playing?

Really benefits the student athletes, which is all that should really matter.

There's a Grand Canyon sized gap between your scenarios and being able to xfer 3-4x during your 4-5 years of college ball.

 

[bobbyinaz]

How is that bad? What if that was your kid?

Would you want them stuck at URI because of some bogus transfer rules, or would you want him to have a shot to play big time CBB (and maybe have a shot at an NBA career)?

Or what if your kid was buried on the depth chart at UConn without a chance at playing time. Do you want them stuck there, or have the ability to go somewhere and use their eligibility actually playing?

Really benefits the student athletes, which is all that should really matter.

Never said it was bad for the kid.

I responded to his comment about this potentially being good for UConn football. While it potentially brings kids like Roberson here, it also opens the door for the under recruited kids that Mora & staff develop to jump ship

 

[CL82]

How is that bad? What if that was your kid?

Would you want them stuck at URI because of some bogus transfer rules, or would you want him to have a shot to play big time CBB (and maybe have a shot at an NBA career)?

Or what if your kid was buried on the depth chart at UConn without a chance at playing time. Do you want them stuck there, or have the ability to go somewhere and use their eligibility actually playing?

Really benefits the student athletes, which is all that should really matter.

How about if your kid agrees to a scholarship and likes playing for the school he’s at but gets pushed down on the depth chart due to transfers? Or how about if your kid has a four-year scholarship but gets seduced by the prospect of grader playing time and enters the portal and isn’t picked up, that’s losing his scholarship? There’s not a doubt in my mind that this will both benefit and hurt student athletes. One thing for sure though it is totally changing the landscape.

 

[BlueMAB]

I can't be the only one who thinks the vast majority of kids don't want to bounce around from school to school? While there will be kids who end up playing for 3+ schools; logic would tell me most kids prefer to pick the right school the first time, and then only transfer if/when it becomes necessary and/or beneficial to their long-term goals.

 

[ibleedhuskyblue]

How is that bad? What if that was your kid?

Would you want them stuck at URI because of some bogus transfer rules, or would you want him to have a shot to play big time CBB (and maybe have a shot at an NBA career)?

Or what if your kid was buried on the depth chart at UConn without a chance at playing time. Do you want them stuck there, or have the ability to go somewhere and use their eligibility actually playing?

Really benefits the student athletes, which is all that should really matter.

First, no one is stuck anywhere. There were always transfers, just with different rules.

Second, there will be a huge number of kids who end up losing their scholarship as a result of these changes. That is not better for the student-athletes.

 

[BlueMAB]

Second, there will be a huge number of kids who end up losing their scholarship as a result of these changes. That is not better for the student-athletes.

Where is your evidence of this?

 

[fatlucy]

This is certainly better for the players. They get to decide what’s best for them on a yearly basis, just like every other student. Some will make mistakes, others will make good decisions. It’s better for the schools as well as long as it’s managed correctly.

Watching project kids slowly develop was never my thing. I like winning and watching good players play together to win. I believe in recruiting over kids every year as long as the team improves. The game has changed. Time to adapt.

 

[ctchamps]

This just in (per ADub). BA eliminates all transfers! AmIright @August_West!!

 

[ibleedhuskyblue]

Where is your evidence of this?

The portal.

I'm not giving away some secret here. It's been happening for the last few years.

 

[BlueMAB]

The portal.

I'm not giving away some secret here. It's been happening for the last few years.

How do you know those kids "lost their scholarships"?

 

[ibleedhuskyblue]

How do you know those kids "lost their scholarships"?

What do you think happened to the guys that had scholarships, entered the portal, and went unclaimed ?
Many will drop a level to a level that doesn't offer full scholarships. Others will be replaced by freshmen who committed, or were being recruited before the portal entry was made. They will be without a chair when the music stops.

This won't be a problem for young men coming from the top levels, but everything was fine for them anyways. They would always get a 2nd or 3rd chance because of the cache of their previous school, or their recruiting ranking a couple years ago. But not everyone starts on that level. About 75% don't.

It's a numbers game.

 

[BlueMAB]

What do you think happened to the guys that had scholarships, entered the portal, and went unclaimed ?
Many will drop a level to a level that doesn't offer full scholarships. Others will be replaced by freshmen who committed, or were being recruited before the portal entry was made. They will be without a chair when the music stops.

This won't be a problem for young men coming from the top levels, but everything was fine for them anyways. They would always get a 2nd or 3rd chance because of the cache of their previous school, or their recruiting ranking a couple years ago. But not everyone starts on that level. About 75% don't.

It's a numbers game.

So what you're really saying is:

"some kids will give up their scholarships, others will lose it, but I have no idea who gave them up compared to who was forced out because that information isn't available to me."

Once the extra COVID year has been exhausted by all who have that option, the number of players unable to find a home should be reduced pretty significantly.

 

[McLovin]

How about if your kid agrees to a scholarship and likes playing for the school he’s at but gets pushed down on the depth chart due to transfers? Or how about if your kid has a four-year scholarship but gets seduced by the prospect of grader playing time and enters the portal and isn’t picked up, that’s losing his scholarship? There’s not a doubt in my mind that this will both benefit and hurt student athletes. One thing for sure though it is totally changing the landscape.

First, no one is stuck anywhere. There were always transfers, just with different rules.

Second, there will be a huge number of kids who end up losing their scholarship as a result of these changes. That is not better for the student-athletes.

Both of these are good points. No doubt some kids will be left out.

Unfortunately, if it becomes apparent after a year or 2 that a kid is not good enough to play D1 basketball, I don’t know that they should be grandfathered an athletic scholarship “just because”.

Would be great if the NCAA put in some sort of safety net for that. Like if a kid is in the portal and isn’t picked up by X date, as long as their GPA is over 3.XX, the school they were at is required to grant them an academic scholarship to complete their studies.

That way every student in good academic standing can at least make the choice of playing down (D2/3) with potentially less financial aid or continuing their education for free. Also would hold the schools accountable for recruiting over players / forcing out transfers.