NCAA Considering Major Change To Transfer Rules

[Charliebball]

If you think there are a lot of transfers now, just wait and see the flood gates open if this rule change passes:

 

[Alydar]

Talk about opening a can of worms. Sure would provide us with a lot to talk about. And the effect on men's basketball and football would be unimaginable. I can just see the line of boosters with suitcases of cash lining up outside locker rooms.

 

[Geew1992]

I think they should be allowed to play immediately. I do like they have to have a specific GPA

 

[Phil]

I predict that if this passes, schools will develop informal farm teams.

Here is how it works how it works — recruiting candidate is interested in a P five program, but isn't a five-star recruit may be a solid three-star recruit. Or even better, a week three-star recruit with potential to be a five-star recruit but some question marks. Under the current system, show up at the P5 school and spent a lot of time on the bench as a freshman and then get into the rotation in subsequent years.

Under the new system, the coach persuades the recruit to enroll at a mid-major school. They get to start immediately, and if they turn out to be as good as some hope transfer as a sophomore. Or maybe it takes a little longer and the transfer as a junior.

What's in it for the P5 school? They may be open to place half a dozen or more players in mid-major schools and bring them up as needed. What's in it for the mid-major school? They get a year or two of a player who wouldn't otherwise consider them.

The very best of the P5 schools can stockpile talent, and can help ensure they stay at the top of the heap. The mid-majors benefit from better talent than they might otherwise get. The losers will be the bottom two or three schools from the P5 conferences who don't have the juice to set up a similar program. The other loses will be players who might have been stars amid major programs but are now role players at least for the first couple years.

 

[augustaTC]

I guess if you support the premise that a Division I athletic scholarship is simply a tool for the "student-athlete" to gain experience leading to a pro career of some kind, this makes sense. On the other hand, if you really believe that the "student" part of student-athlete is important, then I don't see how opening the flood gates to "team hopping" makes much sense. It may not quite be as bad as one-and-done, but at least initially a lot of prima donnas will be taking their games hither and yon looking for a place to "star". I'd think it would hit UConn WBB fairly hard in that it seems the first year is a giant shock to most freshmen and you have to wonder how many girls would bolt under the pressure if there were no penalty. Maybe if they limit a kid to a single transfer? Whatever the NCAA does though, you can rest assured it will end up making a horrible decision. Not sure that the system is so broken it needs radical fixing.

 

[bballnut90]

I'm all for it. Non athletes are able to transfer right away so I'm not sure why athletes are held to a different standard. Volleyball is that way right now and transfers do not seem to be much more preveleant than in women's basketball.

 

[oldude]

Talk about opening a can of worms. Sure would provide us with a lot to talk about. And the effect on men's basketball and football would be unimaginable. I can just see the line of boosters with suitcases of cash lining up outside locker rooms.

Yes, this would be a nightmare. There would be a cadre of sleezey guys poking around programs trying to promote transfer to disgruntled players. Coaches would start banning strangers from practice and other team functions. Paranoia would reign supreme.

 

[TWG236]

I do believe that some changes to this rule is warranted. Such as, if you are recruited by a coach to a particular school, he or she then leaves, the student athletics should be able to transfer without any type of penalty. But just to allow any student to transfer without having some type of consequence, seems like it will open a Pandora's box. If you don't believe that this will lead to some coaches recruiting (stealing) players from other college teams, then I have lot in Florida that you may be interested in buying. What we don't need the P5 Universities using the smaller ones for their minor leagues. But hey, the P5 conferences are trying to take over college athletics. But hey, in reality my opinion doesn't count.

 

[CocoHusky]

I predict that if this passes, schools will develop informal farm teams.

Here is how it works how it works — recruiting candidate is interested in a P five program, but isn't a five-star recruit may be a solid three-star recruit. Or even better, a week three-star recruit with potential to be a five-star recruit but some question marks. Under the current system, show up at the P5 school and spent a lot of time on the bench as a freshman and then get into the rotation in subsequent years.

Under the new system, the coach persuades the recruit to enroll at a mid-major school. They get to start immediately, and if they turn out to be as good as some hope transfer as a sophomore. Or maybe it takes a little longer and the transfer as a junior.

What's in it for the P5 school? They may be open to place half a dozen or more players in mid-major schools and bring them up as needed. What's in it for the mid-major school? They get a year or two of a player who wouldn't otherwise consider them.

The very best of the P5 schools can stockpile talent, and can help ensure they stay at the top of the heap. The mid-majors benefit from better talent than they might otherwise get. The losers will be the bottom two or three schools from the P5 conferences who don't have the juice to set up a similar program. The other loses will be players who might have been stars amid major programs but are now role players at least for the first couple years.

Phil I don't see this scenario happening because the talent levels are so drastically different between (P5 +UCONN) and other conferences. Even 2 years at a very good mid major would not prepare a player to make an impact at a P5 school.

 

[Fairfield Fan]

Next stop: paying athletes in college.

Seems that the NCAA is really feeling the heat.

 

[stamfordhusky]

Next stop: paying athletes in college.

Seems that the NCAA is really feeling the heat.

Which athletes? The only sports where teams make a profit are football and men's basketball. And not all of them.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

I guess if you support the premise that a Division I athletic scholarship is simply a tool for the "student-athlete" to gain experience leading to a pro career of some kind, this makes sense. On the other hand, if you really believe that the "student" part of student-athlete is important, then I don't see how opening the flood gates to "team hopping" makes much sense. It may not quite be as bad as one-and-done, but at least initially a lot of prima donnas will be taking their games hither and yon looking for a place to "star". I'd think it would hit UConn WBB fairly hard in that it seems the first year is a giant shock to most freshmen and you have to wonder how many girls would bolt under the pressure if there were no penalty. Maybe if they limit a kid to a single transfer? Whatever the NCAA does though, you can rest assured it will end up making a horrible decision. Not sure that the system is so broken it needs radical fixing.

I don't agree about it hitting UConn hard - I don't think anyone is staying with you guys "under duress". Your program offers so much to a player - those that are going to leave have left even with the current deterrent.

I like the idea of limiting kids to a single transfer and a minimum GPA - bot pert of the proposal.

As someone noted, transfers are a lot less restricted in most other sports. But so is the push for success. I think there would be a great increase in FB and MBB transfers, and some increase in WBB.

 

[Wbbfan1]

Miss out on recruit(s), don't worry you'll be able to poach needed player(s) from other schools.

I think Phil's scenario is partially true. Not sure if a coach would tell a player with potential to go to another school unless the school had no scholarships available and are unwilling to pull a scholarship from an existing player. Don't think it would happen often. However, I do think if a team is missing a player or two from being an elite team, they'll make an effort to poach talented players from other teams. The coaches may not do it themselves, but use their players to contact their friends on other teams to get the player(s) to transfer.

Last year a player being able to transfer without sitting out would have definitely benefited UConn. Last years team would have had no weakness with both Stevens and Camara able to play immediately. Do we really want elite teams to have the ability to poach players to fill recruiting shortfalls or to make up from unforseen injuries and/or recruiting mistakes. Not saying Geno poached Stevens and Camara.

 

[Ukonnfan]

I predict that if this passes, schools will develop informal farm teams.

Here is how it works how it works — recruiting candidate is interested in a P five program, but isn't a five-star recruit may be a solid three-star recruit. Or even better, a week three-star recruit with potential to be a five-star recruit but some question marks. Under the current system, show up at the P5 school and spent a lot of time on the bench as a freshman and then get into the rotation in subsequent years.

Under the new system, the coach persuades the recruit to enroll at a mid-major school. They get to start immediately, and if they turn out to be as good as some hope transfer as a sophomore. Or maybe it takes a little longer and the transfer as a junior.

What's in it for the P5 school? They may be open to place half a dozen or more players in mid-major schools and bring them up as needed. What's in it for the mid-major school? They get a year or two of a player who wouldn't otherwise consider them.

The very best of the P5 schools can stockpile talent, and can help ensure they stay at the top of the heap. The mid-majors benefit from better talent than they might otherwise get. The losers will be the bottom two or three schools from the P5 conferences who don't have the juice to set up a similar program. The other loses will be players who might have been stars amid major programs but are now role players at least for the first couple years.

Sounds just like the MLB to me. I think you nailed it.

 

[HoopsFan21]

Which athletes? The only sports where teams make a profit are football and men's basketball. And not all of them.

Football and MCBB soon won't have anything to do with the NCAA at the P5 schools. They will break away, have their own tournaments, make their own rules, and keep 100% of the money. The other schools and sports will be part of a much much slimmed down NCAA in a world where UConn and their mid-major cohorts will no longer need to try and keep up with the Jonses because the Jonses will have moved out of town to a fancy gated community.

 

[CL82]

I'm all for it. Non athletes are able to transfer right away so I'm not sure why athletes are held to a different standard.

This. The transfer rule is in place to hold kids at their current school. It is in no way designed to benefit the student athlete.

That said, is a "seismic shift" in recruiting and a major adjustment for all programs.

 

[Fairfield Fan]

Which athletes? The only sports where teams make a profit are football and men's basketball. And not all of them.

Good question. I think it's inevitable that there be a sorting out of sports programs: big-time football programs will contract to a few dozen, and they will pay their athletes. That will create a split on college campuses with real college athletes perhaps going back to being students first, while the semi-pro football and basketball players will separate themselves somehow from the universities. It might be that part-time students will be accepted for football, while the universities go back to education for everyone else as job one.

 

[rugbymate]

Lots of pros and cons to this rule. One benefit is that a player that has been recruited and seeing little playing time ( think Eckmark, Edwards) can go somewhere and experience the thrill of being an integral part of a team while graduating in 4 years. Makes all the sense in the world.
I would hope there would be some limitation on transfers from one program to another. Also, its a bit troubling that transferring could be incentivized if coaches of certain programs are announced as coach of a national/olympic team.
IMO, this will really help the top teams as top athletes will seek a change if it means a chance at a national championship and/or more media exposure.

 

[Husky pride]

Talk about opening a can of worms. Sure would provide us with a lot to talk about. And the effect on men's basketball and football would be unimaginable. I can just see the line of boosters with suitcases of cash lining up outside locker rooms.

Totally agree the change, under consideration, would be unfavorable in many ways.....being totally and shamefully partial, however, I can't help but hope that any near-term "softening" would work in favor of UConn and Sidney Wilson's transfer situation.

 

[CocoHusky]

Lots of pros and cons to this rule. One benefit is that a player that has been recruited and seeing little playing time ( think Eckmark, Edwards) can go somewhere and experience the thrill of being an integral part of a team while graduating in 4 years. Makes all the sense in the world.
I would hope there would be some limitation on transfers from one program to another. Also, its a bit troubling that transferring could be incentivized if coaches of certain programs are announced as coach of a national/olympic team.
IMO, this will really help the top teams as top athletes will seek a change if it means a chance at a national championship and/or more media exposure.

Good point about limiting the number of transfers to a team. I would strongly support this say set the limit at 1 or 2 transfer in per year/team. I would also support a sliding GPA scale for eligibility to both play and practice
3.0 GPA or higher immediately eligible to play and practice.
2.5-3.0 GPA eligible to practice immediately & play after 1 semester.
>2.5 Eligible to practice after 1 semester eligible to play after 2 full semesters.
This would completely end the NCAA farce of year of academic preparation where a student is doing everything a team does except playing in games.

 

[pacific 44]

If a certain gpa was required to transfer without sitting for a year then the coaches that are going to the professors and telling them to pass his players will be going to the professors and telling them to pass his players but keep the grade below the newly imposed gpa mendoza line.

 

[CocoHusky]

If a certain gpa was required to transfer without sitting for a year then the coaches that are going to the professors and telling them to pass his players will be going to the professors and telling them to pass his players but keep the grade below the newly imposed gpa mendoza line.

You are giving many great professors & coaches a bad rep because most (vast vast majority) would not even attempt this. UNC being the notable exception.

 

[pacific 44]

What about the half vast vast majority?

 

[Centerstream]

Seems to throw a wrench into the need to recruit a player if they can transfer without having to sit out. Just do away with recruiting and hold a draft for the top 60 players among the final top 20 teams. The remaining women can go wherever they want. If you don't like who drafts you, leave after your freshman year and transfer to the team you want to be on. Then give the saved recruiting money to all the coach's salary.

 

[CocoHusky]

What about the half vast vast majority?

What about then?
Think about what you are suggesting. A coach is going to trek all the way across campus to convince a professor to give one of his or her players a grade lower than what the student actually earned?