Executive order aims to limit NCAA athletes to 5 years, 1 transfer

[Travelman6]

Executive order aims to limit NCAA athletes to 5 years, 1 transfer

An executive order signed by President Donald Trump on Friday limits NCAA athletes to a five-year playing window and how often they can transfer between schools.

www.espn.com

Something has to be done, I'm not sure what, nor am I paid to figure out what, but something. Not sure if this is it. But , something needs to make college ball make sense again and less crazy.

 

[HooperScooper]

This won't stick. Will be challenged in the courts.

 

[Travelman6]

Ya, it's not an easy fix.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

Executive order aims to limit NCAA athletes to 5 years, 1 transfer

An executive order signed by President Donald Trump on Friday limits NCAA athletes to a five-year playing window and how often they can transfer between schools.

www.espn.com

Something has to be done, I'm not sure what, nor am I paid to figure out what, but something. Not sure if this is it. But , something needs to make college ball make sense again and less crazy.

That will get challenged in court but at least it kicks of a needed debate and solution

 

[StllH8L8ner]

Pretty sure this is a case similar to when I did an internship for the CT States Attorney in college and I wrote my own recommendation letter to future employers. The State’s Attorney glanced at it and signed it. He had no idea what it said…

(My one take away from that internship was to fight every traffic ticket.)

 

[brihman]

Executive order aims to limit NCAA athletes to 5 years, 1 transfer

An executive order signed by President Donald Trump on Friday limits NCAA athletes to a five-year playing window and how often they can transfer between schools.

www.espn.com

Something has to be done, I'm not sure what, nor am I paid to figure out what, but something. Not sure if this is it. But , something needs to make college ball make sense again and less crazy.

I mean comparatively this executive order is pretty reasonable as a proposal

 

[SubbaBub]

The NCAA is a private organization. Please stop being so gullible.

 

[EnochRoot]

This won't stick. Will be challenged in the courts. Executive orders aren't always legal as we've seen.

A federal court will grant a stay on the order until litigation gets resolved. Probably within a week, actually..

 

[typhaon]

I don't understand why this (or something similar) won't stick. This is basketball, not college. Kids can go to whatever college they get admission to and get an education... no sitting out a year. They can transfer 10 times, if they want.

But, why can't the NCAA make up rules for their extracurricular sports leagues?

 

[temery]

This is the only post where this executive order will be discussed and if you try to drag politics into it in any way, you will be gone.

 

[Palatine]

There will have to be exceptions if a coach moves and a couple of others. But this is a very reasonable proposal from which to proceed.

 

[Palatine]

I wonder if colleges couldn't make this a requirement for acceptance to the university. Make every student agree to it. Like the stuff you have to accept when you attend a concert.

 

[Ha Who]

The NCAA is a private organization. Please stop being so gullible.

Many of the schools are getting taxpayer money

 

[dtrumpet]

Many of the schools are getting taxpayer money

The fact that not all of them are is why this executive order is meaningless.

 

[temery]

I wonder if colleges couldn't make this a requirement for acceptance to the university. Make every student agree to it. Like the stuff you have to accept when you attend a concert.

Or sign a player to a multi year NIL deal.

 

[UCFan1513]

Effectiveness and enforceability aside

I agree with the general premise and would be happy if this got effectuated

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The fact that not all of them are is why this executive order is meaningless.

I imagine that ebery one of them is under some tax preference status from the IRS.

This won't hold, but logically it should lead to some far more clearly defined terms than what we currently have.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

I wonder if colleges couldn't make this a requirement for acceptance to the university. Make every student agree to it. Like the stuff you have to accept when you attend a concert.

I don’t think there would be a legal issue but the university would be competing against other universities that won’t require that. Universities couldn’t all collude to require it.

 

[uconngb]

If it gets a discussion started, then it was effective. On its own, I don’t see how it has any teeth.

 

[Jaydumo20]

I prefer this idea. Selfishly, I prioritize the millions of fans and hundreds of university's over unfettered player mobility. College sports is way more nuanced a thing than just legal capitalist justifications.
Some of us are still too mired in quantifiable processes only

 

[metsfan2323]

What happens if someone transfers into your school and things go really bad and the school/coach wants them gone. Would they be able to transfer again? The transfer limit will cause more problems than it fixes.

I do like the 5 years for a player, we really benefitted from having Newton and Spencer in their 5th Covid year. The players benefitted too.

 

[QDOG5]

I think the 5 years of eligibility is a good start. It will probably be pushed to 6 if the athlete sits a year with an injury. Two transfers seems more reasonable. NCAA needs to get their act together quickly.

 

[CL82]

There will have to be exceptions if a coach moves and a couple of others. But this is a very reasonable proposal from which to proceed.

It's not a bad idea, I just don't see how the President of the United States come up, regardless of party, can by executive order regulate the actions of private citizens.

I haven't read the executive order, maybe there's more to it.

 

[cohenzone]

A fix is needed but this doesn’t fly and I’m reasonably sure no court will bless it. It goes way outside the bounds of what Executive Orders are meant to do, namely tell federal agencies how existing laws are to be administered or other orders within the Constitutional power of a president.

Given that the supposed reason for a fix to the one year sit rule was that if coaches could leave for greener pastures and get immediate payoff, why should the players have to sit. So the “problem” gets over-fixed by allowing unlimited transfers. Why not a rule that gets at the original issue by allowing free transfers without sitting in any situation where the coach who recruited you is gone for any reason. Any other situation might be allowed in a family or other emergency where the player will transfer to a school within say 100-150 miles from home, some sort of reasonable exception. Otherwise, sit a year or some other form of compensation to the losing program.

 

[Flipside]

This should read "Executive order aims to limit young people from making life-changing (and/or generational) wealth" ... we need to get back to holding the people that generate millions and billions for others (not to mention 30 year TV ratings highs) hostage!

Some folks used to preach they should stay in school ... well, now they are, and the same folks don't like that either, lol ... that's all it's about imho, control, in so many obvious ways

What is the point of limiting transfers?

... otherwise why stop with athletes, let's limit general students to 5 years too; after that, they can't use the library, participate in intramurals, or use any facilities

 

[Palatine]

The fact that not all of them are is why this executive order is meaningless.

It's a conversation starter that came out of meeting with "Several dozen college sports leaders... and other sports executives at the White House round table discussion in early March."

The order will NOT stand scrutiny. But it gives the NCAA and Congress some sense of direction. The current system is no system at all. They should call the order Project Hail Mary.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

The NCAA is a private organization. Please stop being so gullible.

I thought the same thing until
the federal judiciary
decided it wasn’t

 

[UCFan1513]

It's a conversation starter that came out of meeting with "Several dozen college sports leaders... and other sports executives at the White House round table discussion in early March."

The order will NOT stand scrutiny. But it gives the NCAA and Congress some sense of direction. The current system is no system at all. They should call the order Project Hail Mary.

I’d also be highly skeptical how representative that body of “dozens” really was

 

[WhereistheDove?]

It's not a bad idea, I just don't see how the President of the United States come up, regardless of party, can by executive order regulate the actions of private citizens.

I haven't read the executive order, maybe there's more to it.

It attaches government funding for the school to following these guidelines. It’s “technically” forcing the school to do something, not the player. But literally every take I’ve read is this has next to no chance of sticking.

 

[CL82]

I thought the same thing until
the federal judiciary
decided it wasn’t

I don't know that the courts ever said that. What they said is that the NCAA is subject to the same rules as every other employer. Not unreasonable unless Congress carves out a specific exemption for them. Again, I would be extraordinarily wary of that. Too often, Congress lacks the real world experience to make rules that don't have unforeseen consequences. It's litigation that eventually forces them to address those unforeseen consequences.