Great article on WCBB transfers (and Notre Dame)

[bags27]

Transfers remain tricky but growing part of women's college basketball

Although the waiver is helping the Irish this season, McGraw said she doesn't want to see women's basketball have a one-time transfer exception -- where anyone can transfer once without sitting out -- as exists in NCAA Division I sports except for football (bowl subdivision), men's and women's hoops, baseball and men's ice hockey.

"I hope not," McGraw said. "Because with 400 transfers this year, and then to say it's an open gate and you can play right away? I think there would be at least double that. It's really hard on the teams that lose people. It takes two years to recover from it, and it puts you in a tough situation trying to fill out a roster."

But the reality is, even when well-intentioned, coaches discussing transfers often end up essentially contradicting themselves: "We're against them ... until we need them."

 

[jennyo70]

Transfers remain tricky but growing part of women's college basketball

Although the waiver is helping the Irish this season, McGraw said she doesn't want to see women's basketball have a one-time transfer exception -- where anyone can transfer once without sitting out -- as exists in NCAA Division I sports except for football (bowl subdivision), men's and women's hoops, baseball and men's ice hockey.

"I hope not," McGraw said. "Because with 400 transfers this year, and then to say it's an open gate and you can play right away? I think there would be at least double that. It's really hard on the teams that lose people. It takes two years to recover from it, and it puts you in a tough situation trying to fill out a roster."

But the reality is, even when well-intentioned, coaches discussing transfers often end up essentially contradicting themselves: "We're against them ... until we need them."

I clearly noted the fact she worked the system in her favor yet controlled where those leaving her program went.
I would like to see one "free" transfer, after that, you have to sit a year. To me, it is the happy medium. It is a pretty high standard to hold a SA to, that they made the right decision with all the factors that were on the table, at such a young age. Not to mention Coaches can leave without penalty. Yet, limiting it to one "free" transfer would seem to stop the flood gates. I would also like to see the ACC get rid of the transfer within conference rule. I point you to the SEC for how they keep the SA first in this regard, not penalizing by making them choose a different school outside their conference, if that is where there heart is. I appreciate that about the SEC.

 

[iamcbs]

Ann McGraw has no moral authority on this subject. She doesn't want transfers to be immediately eligible but she and ND apply for a waiver for Jessica Sheppard when Turner goes down with an ACL. Coaches in all NCAA sports are notoriously malleable on the subject of transfers, depending upon which side of the transfer they happen to be at the time. If a coach can leave a program in the middle of contract to take another job and be immediately eligible to coach then a player should be able to leave a program and be immediately eligible to play.....

 

[UConnCat]

Ann McGraw has no moral authority on this subject. She doesn't want transfers to be immediately eligible but she and ND apply for a waiver for Jessica Sheppard when Turner goes down with an ACL. Coaches in all NCAA sports are notoriously malleable on the subject of transfers, depending upon which side of the transfer they happen to be at the time. If a coach can leave a program in the middle of contract to take another job and be immediately eligible to coach then a player should be able to leave a program and be immediately eligible to play.....

Sometimes you just have to rise above principle.

Reminds me of the time Muffet strongly objected to teams hosting regionals on their home court: "I think hosting a regional is in complete opposition to preserving the integrity of the game," McGraw said that day. "I think you can buy your way into the Final Four." She said this one week after Notre Dame submitted a bid to host a regional.

 

[BroadwayVa]

Transfers remain tricky but growing part of women's college basketball

Although the waiver is helping the Irish this season, McGraw said she doesn't want to see women's basketball have a one-time transfer exception -- where anyone can transfer once without sitting out -- as exists in NCAA Division I sports except for football (bowl subdivision), men's and women's hoops, baseball and men's ice hockey.

"I hope not," McGraw said. "Because with 400 transfers this year, and then to say it's an open gate and you can play right away? I think there would be at least double that. It's really hard on the teams that lose people. It takes two years to recover from it, and it puts you in a tough situation trying to fill out a roster."ou

But the reality is, even when well-intentioned, coaches discussing transfers often end up essentially contradicting themselves: "We're against them ... until we need them."

A couple of thoughts on this: 1. I detest EXCEPTIONS, do it for all or do it for none. 2. The 2 year recovery Muffet speak of is only if the incoming player does not have the Div 1 PT as the one she is losing; the open transfers could help or hurt all. . Azura: does anyone think it will take 2 years for her to fit into the Uconn scheme?? Muffet and we should be pleased the WNBA does not offer million dollar salaries.

 

[Orangutan]

Ann McGraw has no moral authority on this subject. She doesn't want transfers to be immediately eligible but she and ND apply for a waiver for Jessica Sheppard when Turner goes down with an ACL.

Her job is to coach ND. If she hadn't sought a waiver for Shepard she would not have been doing her job properly. She can have whatever opinions she wants personally, but her responsibility is to do what she can within the rules to ensure Notre Dame's success.

 

[bags27]

Her job is to coach ND. If she hadn't sought a waiver for Shepard she would not have been doing her job properly. She can have whatever opinions she wants personally, but her responsibility is to do what she can within the rules to ensure Notre Dame's success.

On one hand, I completely agree with you; on the other hand, as a teacher of your students (your team), it is about demonstrating a consistency about principles. I suppose in the world we live in today, the first hand has the upper hand....

 

[Plebe]

On one hand, I completely agree with you; on the other hand, as a teacher of your students (your team), it is about demonstrating a consistency about principles. I suppose in the world we live in today, the first hand has the upper hand....

I see your point, but I don't think that seeking a waiver for one individual athlete is necessarily inconsistent with opposing a blanket lifting of the one-year rule.

 

[Phil]

I fully understand how easy it is to react negatively when a prominent coach comes out publicly close to relaxing the transfer rules at the same time as she has requested and received a special exemption to the existing rules. When you add in her public opposition to posting on the home floor even while applying to play on one's home floor, it is easy to criticize.

Let me explain why the both actions might be justifiable.

In the case of the transfer, I suspect there are some things we do not know. We do know About the departure of the head coach at the school, and some rather unsavory allegations. While we don't know exactly what was said in the request for an exemption from the transfer rule, it isn't much of a stretch to guess that there might be some facts in that case which might cause many of us to support the transfer. Even though the UConn fan in us might want to make sure Notre Dame is in in a position to challenge us, I hope the basketball fan and us wants to support doing the right thing for the player.

It is not at all inconsistent to argue that the general rule for transfers should not be materially relaxed while simultaneously accepting and supporting that the general rule should have some exceptions for exceptional circumstances. We don't know exactly what happened but I do caution against throwing brickbats without knowing the whole situation.

Regarding hosting on one's own court — I'm happy to see that this forum is largely politics free so I'll try to stay away from being too specific, but I would argue that it is not inconsistent for an individual to support a change in the tax law to eliminate provisions that one takes advantage of oneself. Just because you think that tax provision should not subsidize a particular activity does not mean that consistency requires that you choose not to apply for such subsidies if you are legally entitled.

Geno has supported reducing the number of scholarships to 13, and we typically do not have more than 13 on the roster but it would be equally appropriate to support the reduction even if, in some particular year, we happened to have more than 13 on the roster.

 

[huskyd]

Aside from the fairness of it all, I think Shepherd wanted to showcase herself for the pros, thus the transfer to ND. She has some skills but is big and slow; we made her look silly last year. If she's in green this season, it probably won't turn around what's doomed to be a down season for the Irish. Yawn.

 

[bags27]

I see your point, but I don't think that seeking a waiver for one individual athlete is necessarily inconsistent with opposing a blanket lifting of the one-year rule.

No disagreement here. I was responding to Orangutan's sentiment that a coach has the (sole) responsibility of advancing her team. I was both agreeing that it's her responsibility and yet wondering about the message sent about principles.

 

[oldude]

I’m sorry, MM is doing a masterful job of equivocating, otherwise known as talking out of both sides of her mouth.

Either you’re for sitting out a year or you’re not. I’ll accept either rationale, but not both at the same time.

 

[huskeynut]

I could see an exemption for Sheppard if she had requested a transfer immediately after the Yori fiasco. That would have made sense. But a year later after playing a season under a new coach, now I have a problem. Did she not like or get along with the new coach? Did she not like the team make up and find it was not going to be competitive in most games? These are my first questions. Nebraska was a disaster last year (7 - 22).

MM is looking out for her team, I get it. However, either you support the transfer rule for all or you don't. Muffett can't have it both ways - but I guess she did have it both ways.

 

[uconnell]

Her job is to coach ND. If she hadn't sought a waiver for Shepard she would not have been doing her job properly. She can have whatever opinions she wants personally, but her responsibility is to do what she can within the rules to ensure Notre Dame's success.

McGraw speaks out of both sides of her mouth.

 

[Phil]

I’m sorry, MM is doing a masterful job of equivocating, otherwise known as talking out of both sides of her mouth.

Either you’re for sitting out a year or you’re not. I’ll accept either rationale, but not both at the same time.

Of course you are literally correct when you say "Either you’re for sitting out a year or you’re not.". Every transfer, for that matter every player is in one category or the other. My guess is that you are trying to say "when it comes to transfers, every player should have to sit out a year. No exceptions." Is that what you meant to say? And if so, you obviously have the right to propose that is a position but you have a good rationale why there should be no exceptions?

 

[UConnCat]

I now believe all transfers should play immediately. No sitting out. The exception process lacks transparency and the decisions seem inconsistent. I also think rosters should be reduced to 13 which may offset the increase in transfers the NCAA fears.

 

[oldude]

Of course you are literally correct when you say "Either you’re for sitting out a year or you’re not.". Every transfer, for that matter every player is in one category or the other. My guess is that you are trying to say "when it comes to transfers, every player should have to sit out a year. No exceptions." Is that what you meant to say? And if so, you obviously have the right to propose that is a position but you have a good rationale why there should be no exceptions?

I have no problem with grad student transfer being eligible year 1 and for a very special case, perhaps where there was some type of documented abusive behavior by a coach, I have no problem with a transfer being eligible in year 1, but as several people have pointed out, Shepard elected to stay at Nebraska after Yori was let go and a year later petitioned for a transfer exemption. I have no idea what rationale was used to justify her eligibility at ND in year 1.

 

[nwhoopfan]

I'm probably paranoid, but I think if all student athletes were allowed to transfer without sitting out a season, college athletics could be dealing with issues of tampering. I have no doubt that this already happens at least on a small scale. I think it could potentially be opening Pandora's box. Non-Power 5 conference schools, and even non traditional powerhouse schools from the big 5 conferences, could find themselves becoming de factro farm systems to develop talent for better programs who then grab those players when a roster spot opens up. Again, maybe paranoia, but I could definitely see it happening. Probably more in football and men's hoops, but I could see it effecting women's hoops as well.

 

[LasVegasYank]

McGraw speaks out of both sides of her mouth.

Wrong orifice.

 

[iamcbs]

Her job is to coach ND. If she hadn't sought a waiver for Shepard she would not have been doing her job properly. She can have whatever opinions she wants personally, but her responsibility is to do what she can within the rules to ensure Notre Dame's success.

She has a history of offering her opinion on subjects and then doing exactly what she criticizes, you'll recall the whole hosting of regional tournamentl games kerfuffle and how she railed against that practice as ND was submitting a bid to host a Regional? Sometimes in life what a person says has to be reinforced by the courage of their convictions.

 

[Orangutan]

She has a history of offering her opinion on subjects and then doing exactly what she criticizes, you'll recall the whole hosting of regional tournamentl games kerfuffle and how she railed against that practice as ND was submitting a bid to host a Regional? Sometimes in life what a person says has to be reinforced by the courage of their convictions.

It's kind of an interesting ethical question. She basically was saying that hosting gives a team an unfair advantage and she doesn't believe a team should have that advantage. However, she was not in a position to change that policy. Some teams inevitably were going to have that advantage.

My point is that her job is to make NDWBB successful and therefore she would not be doing her job had she not try to secure that advantage for ND as she did.

I can see why folks think she should have taken a "principled" stand and not applied to host, but it would have accomplished essentially nothing. Some other team would have hosted. Meanwhile, it would have hurt her team's chances of success.

To me, that's empty virtue signaling. Honestly, I think it would have been incredibly self-serving to not apply to host on the basis of her personal opinion. It would have accomplished nothing other than perhaps allowing her to hold some sort of moral high ground.

Personally, I don't think her opinions on what the NCAA policy should be obligate her to act against her own interest by ignoring benefits to which her team is entitled under the rules as they actually are.

 

[bags27]

To me, that's empty virtue signaling.
Personally, I don't think her opinions on what the NCAA policy should be obligate her to act against her own interest by ignoring benefits to which her team is entitled under the rules as they actually are.

Sorry, Orangutan, I absolutely can't agree with you here. You say her highest obligation
1. is to do the best she can for Notre Dame
2. that to do otherwise wouldn't be a victory of principle, because just some other team would get that advantage.

Well, universities have to stand for something. It's not easy. Often they backslide, such as taking money from donors they have contempt for, by rationalizing that the money will do good, etc. So, right, we all do stuff we're not comfortable with.

The difference is that it is for the rest of us to appreciate that it was wrong. Maybe not condemn that person/institution, but call it what it is: expediency. Cicero gave his life (I'm exaggerating only a little here) to argue that honestas (honor) was greater than utilitas (expediency). He admitted that it's a struggle and that it's not always a clear case. But as moral human beings, we are not excused from naming a wrong and appreciating it is a wrong and trying as hard as we can to do the honorable thing. If McGraw stated what she understood to be the honorable thing, then she consciously did the expedient thing; which is also the dishonorable thing. And that is not how you should act when you are a leader of young people.

 

[Orangutan]

Cicero gave his life (I'm exaggerating only a little here) to argue that honestas (honor) was greater than utilitas (expediency).

How many games did Cicero ever win?

 

[bags27]

How many games did Cicero ever win?

I know you're joking, and sorry that I'm not. Cicero wrote that in book 3 of his De officiis, which was the first book (after the Bible) that Gutenberg set to movable type and has subsequently formed the basis of civil society. It's probably not possible to think of (say) our Declaration of Independence without what he wrote. So, I guess he ended up winning the big one.

 

[Orangutan]

If McGraw stated what she understood to be the honorable thing, then she consciously did the expedient thing; which is also dishonorable thing. And that is not how you should act when you are a leader of young people.

She said, essentially, that the rules should not allow teams to host. There's no indication she thought it was dishonorable for teams to apply to host.

In this case, righting the wrong would have meant getting the NCAA policy changed, which she did not have the means to do.