NCAA expected to change guidelines for transfer waivers

[UConnCat]

USA Today article talks about proposed changes to NCAA guidelines that would limit the number of transfer waivers granted. NCAA to tighten transfer guidelines, limit players gaining immediate eligibility

The NCAA Division I council is expected to approve a package of new guidelines that could make it more difficult for college football and basketball players who transfer to receive immediate eligibility via waivers, according to a document obtained by USA TODAY Sports.

The updated language of that same guideline is less broad, requiring “documented extenuating, extraordinary and mitigating circumstances outside of the student-athlete’s control that directly impacts the health, safety or well-being of the student-athlete.”

The addition of those two words — extenuating and extraordinary — as well as other language throughout the proposal, appears to send the message that the NCAA wants to tighten up on the requirements for waivers.

 

[hoopsfan22]

Just in time for Westbrook's application.

 

[UConnCat]

The addition of "extenuating circumstances" is curious as those are circumstances that make a bad act forgivable or deserving of less punishment.

 

[HuskylnSC]

Just in time for Westbrook's application.

you're not intimating this is an anti-UConn move by our beloved NCAA administrators, are you?

 

[DEpup]

This seems more like trying to get the milk back in the glass after it already spilled. Too late. Transfers are just now part of the fabric in my opinion so just go with it.

 

[Jmsdawg]

I just wish the NCAA would establish simple easy to understand rules in regards to transfers.

 

[the Q]

Yes, maybe they finally realized that star qb who doesn’t want to sit on the bench might not be more important than dying family member...

 

[CL82]

I just wish the NCAA would establish simple easy to understand rules in regards to transfers.

This. I don't really care what the rules are. Just give me a bright line clear guide line so that the results are predictable and applied equally to all.

 

[the Q]

This. I don't really care what the rules are. Just give me a bright line clear guide line so that the results are predictable and applied equally to all.

Yeah, it's tiring seeing schools like Notre Dame and Ohio St being given preferential treatment

 

[eebmg]

It's obvious that coaches and AD across the country are complaining (and concerned) about the wave of players wanting to transfer in the last 3-4 years. It's become the "new" normal. Players today now think no more of transferring than they do of taking a shower and putting on fresh underwear. Players today transfer for a myriad of reasons, and not necessarily about playing time.

I am just glad showering and fresh underwear are part of the norm.

 

[ocoandasoc]

Typical NCAA policy language: murky. They might as well just say "The rules are what we say they are when we make our decision, depending on our mood, the politics of the situation, the schools and coaches involved, and what our decision makers had for breakfast."

 

[RockyMTblue2]

Wait, I've got it - it's called the Westbrook Rule right?

 

[j66kicker]

Good luck with that. You're backing the NCAA into a corner (I'm with you there) and asking them to be transparent, and accountable for their decisions, which up to this point, they have not had to be. They don't gives reasons for the why or how of any decisions they make regarding transfers. I'm guessing they'd like to keep it that way.

If they would just say, "No exceptions for any reason" they could abdicate all accountability and would never have to explain anything or have anyone question their decisions. It's just so easy: Leave the rule like it is now (transfer = sit 1 year, grad transfer = play immediately), or change it to whatever, and have zero exceptions for any reason. Coach who recruited you leaves? Fine - you can leave too, and play after you sit a year. Hurricane in Houston? Fine - go home and help your family, and try to stay in shape because you can play again in a year.

 

[hoopsfan22]

you're not intimating this is an anti-UConn move by our beloved NCAA administrators, are you?

I would never think such a thing!

 

[j66kicker]

Wait, I've got it - it's called the Westbrook Rule right?

On one hand I think it would be better for Westbrook's waiver to get denied, give her knee a chance to get 'really' healed. But then I think there would be zero chance of having her at UConn for 2 years. But, if it does get approved and she's good to play, I still worry about her staying for a 2nd year since she'll turn 20 during calendar 2020.

 

[CocoHusky]

Wait, I've got it - it's called the Westbrook Rule right?

I don't see how Westbrook will be impacted by this, my guess is that these changes (if any) will be in place for the 2020 Academic year and not apply to existing waivers. The paper work for Evina is already in and changes to the procedure would require a rewrite of the appeal. Football players would also have a more immediate impact having completed spring practices and start of training camps about a month away.
I sense a trial balloon here by the NCAA as in leak out what we are planning on doing and see how people and institutions react. I also sense more confusion (perceived bias?) in these new guidelines which might kill the whole thing. Here is my free advice to the NCAA: Delegate all immediate eligibility request to the conferences.

 

[JavaMan]

...
The updated language of that same guideline is less broad, requiring “documented extenuating, extraordinary and mitigating circumstances outside of the student-athlete’s control that directly impacts the health, safety or well-being of the student-athlete.”

The addition of those two words — extenuating and extraordinary — as well as other language throughout the proposal, appears to send the message that the NCAA wants to tighten up on the requirements for waivers.

I like the language, but I don't think they're going far enough. I think that all waivers should be granted, however, you either redshirt for a year OR... you lose one year of eligibility on the back end. Of course this may have little impact on the male football and basketball players. However, it might have a major impact in women's sports. Decision making may change quite a bit if the young athlete realizes that he or she is committing to a program, not just to one coach or one friend on the team. Secondly, it would also have an impact on the willingness of coaches to accept a transfer, knowing up front that they get the kid for 2 years max, and some for only 1 year. Unless, of course you pull an EDD.

 

[CocoHusky]

I like the language, but I don't think they're going far enough. I think that all waivers should be granted, however you either redshirt for a year OR... you lose one year of eligibility on the back end. Of course this may have little impact on the male football and basketball players. However, it might have a major impact in women's sports. Decision making may change quite a bit if the young athlete realizes that they're committing to a program not just to one coach your one friend on the team. Secondly, it would also have an impact on the willingness of coaches to accept a transfer.

 

[Centerstream]

As I have stated many times, make all sports have the same transfer rules. Softball players can play immediately without any waivers so why are they treated differently than basketball and football players? Oops, I forgot it's the monopoly NCAA...

 

[soxfan23]

I don't see how Westbrook will be impacted by this, my guess is that these changes (if any) will be in place for the 2020 Academic year and not apply to existing waivers. The paper work for Evina is already in and changes to the procedure would require a rewrite of the appeal. Football players would also have a more immediate impact having completed spring practices and start of training camps about a month away.
I sense a trial balloon here by the NCAA as in leak out what we are planning on doing and see how people and institutions react. I also sense more confusion (perceived bias?) in these new guidelines which might kill the whole thing. Here is my free advice to the NCAA: Delegate all immediate eligibility request to the conferences.

I thought I just recently read a post by one of the beat writers that stated UConn was still working on the Westbrook waiver and it had not been submitted to the NCAA yet?

 

[tchalla1]

I thought I just recently read a post by one of the beat writers that stated UConn was still working on the Westbrook waiver and it had not been submitted to the NCAA yet?

It is my understanding that UConn's waiver request for Westbrook has been submitted and the school is waiting for the NCAA's response. Quite often during the process, the committee will ask a school for specifics and/or additional information on particular item and there is a need to extrapolate. So perhaps there was a request from the NCAA for an addendum to the original waiver request, and quite possibly that might be what UConn is "still working on"; however, several articles in the Courant and the CT have previously indicated that UConn has submitted a waiver request and are awaiting the NCAA's decision...

 

[CocoHusky]

I thought I just recently read a post by one of the beat writers that stated UConn was still working on the Westbrook waiver and it had not been submitted to the NCAA yet?

You are correct.

 

[tchalla1]

You are correct.

Thanks for providing this article, Coco. I guess that we have conflicting data because Geno in the article in the Courant was talking about the "wait" and the inconsistencies involved in the NCAA decision-making and Kelli Stacy mentioned that the duration of waiver decision process varies case by case. I am confused, if not perplexed, as to how UConn is "awaiting" the NCAA decision, if they are yet to file, as the 6/24 Connolly post states...

 

[CocoHusky]

Thanks for providing this article, Coco. I guess that we have conflicting data because Geno in the article in the Courant was talking about the "wait" and the inconsistencies involved in the NCAA decision-making and Kelli Stacy mentioned that the duration of waiver decision process varies case by case. I am confused, if not perplexed, as to how UConn is "awaiting" the NCAA decision, if they are yet to file, as the 6/24 Connolly post states...

I was also confused because there was article from the Courant written in the past tense, as in the waiver "was" submitted.

 

[Florida Fan]

Just in time for Westbrook's application.

And after Shepheard's early Christmas present.