NCAA studies idea of 1 transfer with no penalty [merged thread] | The Boneyard

NCAA studies idea of 1 transfer with no penalty [merged thread]

dogged1

like a dog with a bone
Joined
Aug 18, 2016
Messages
817
Reaction Score
3,566
Hmmmm,
Fair to the Athlete? Check.
Uniformly, applicable, no undefined waiver process, Check
Serves the best interests of the "P5" institutions and coaches, No Check
No Go, never gonna happen.
Mea Culpa, I have a jaundiced opinion of our wonderful NCAA and its glorious leader M.E.
 

JordyG

Stake in my pocket, Vlad to see you
Joined
Jan 21, 2016
Messages
13,103
Reaction Score
54,870
Hmmmm,
Fair to the Athlete? Check.
Uniformly, applicable, no undefined waiver process, Check
Serves the best interests of the "P5" institutions and coaches, No Check
No Go, never gonna happen.
Mea Culpa, I have a jaundiced opinion of our wonderful NCAA and its glorious leader M.E.
Non P5 schools also are looking side eyed at this. I think they more than the P5 schools, knowing their one and only good recruit can up and scoot, are wary of this rule. I loved this idea from the scrum, though I think it just encourages the rich to get richer.
 

CocoHusky

1,000,001 BY points
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
17,205
Reaction Score
73,877
Non P5 schools also are looking side eyed at this. I think they more than the P5 schools, knowing their one and only good recruit can up and scoot, are wary of this rule. I loved this idea from the scrum, though I think it just encourages the rich to get richer.
Looks like two of the P5 is getting out in front of this. I think this will be a wrap by April.

 

JordyG

Stake in my pocket, Vlad to see you
Joined
Jan 21, 2016
Messages
13,103
Reaction Score
54,870
Looks like two of the P5 is getting out in front of this. I think this will be a wrap by April.

Like I said, this rule benefits the P5's and hurts the mid-majors. But rest assured, if the P5's fall in line, this goes through easy. Anyone see Charlie Collier in Husky blue next year?
 
Joined
Sep 19, 2018
Messages
7,526
Reaction Score
28,138
Hmmmm,
Fair to the Athlete? Check.
Uniformly, applicable, no undefined waiver process, Check
Serves the best interests of the "P5" institutions and coaches, No Check
No Go, never gonna happen.
Mea Culpa, I have a jaundiced opinion of our wonderful NCAA and its glorious leader M.E.
The ACC and B1G are on board. If the B1G and/or $EC want it to happen it will happen.
 
Joined
Jan 5, 2013
Messages
2,163
Reaction Score
11,925
Like I said, this rule benefits the P5's and hurts the mid-majors. But rest assured, if the P5's fall in line, this goes through easy. Anyone see Charlie Collier in Husky blue next year?

Why? Collier is having a pretty good season at Texas, arguably better than Liv's season at Uconn.
 

bballnut90

LV Adherent. Topic Crafter
Joined
Dec 19, 2011
Messages
7,335
Reaction Score
32,603
Regarding the thought process that it'll benefit the P5 programs and be a detriment to mid majors, I don't think this is necessarily the case. In college volleyball they have very limited transfer restrictions and it seems to work for most parties. You commonly see top recruits who are buried on talented rosters transfer to lesser programs where they can get playing time and make an impact. On the flip side some top mid major players transfer up to P5 programs if they want to compete against better competition. Someone with more hard data could provide a greater breakdown, but all in all I think the process works well and you do see transfers but athletes aren't penalized for seeking their best interest.

In WCBB we've already seen numerous top recruits transfer out to non-P5 programs (Decosta, Boothe, Mulkey, McCoy, Hayes, etc) so I think the talent will continue to spread out across the board in both directions.
 
Joined
Aug 27, 2011
Messages
6,899
Reaction Score
27,062
While I support giving players some freedom, one unintended consequence is that we will see a hoard of surrogates roaming the country and luring late developing athletes to major institutions that are their clients. Difficult if not impossible to control. Raiding other programs was made illegal many decades ago and this new rule could revive it.
 

oldude

bamboo lover
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
17,103
Reaction Score
152,293
Non P5 schools also are looking side eyed at this. I think they more than the P5 schools, knowing their one and only good recruit can up and scoot, are wary of this rule. I loved this idea from the scrum, though I think it just encourages the rich to get richer.
While nothing is perfect, your concern is certainly warranted. Forget about WBB. If and when this proposal goes into effect, I can forsee the rise of a bunch of shady middlemen in MBB, soliciting players for P5 programs. Need to replace a pg? So and So from mid-major U is really interested in becoming a Jayhawk, Cardinal, Tar Heel, fill-in-the-blank.

However, I think it’s better then what we have right now, because it’s in the best interests of the players.
 

CL82

NCAA Men’s Basketball National Champions - Again!
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
58,992
Reaction Score
219,543
Hmmmm,
Fair to the Athlete? Check.
Uniformly, applicable, no undefined waiver process, Check
Serves the best interests of the "P5" institutions and coaches, No Check
No Go, never gonna happen.
Mea Culpa, I have a jaundiced opinion of our wonderful NCAA and its glorious leader M.E.
It serves the interests of the P5 (a football designation, but I know what you mean) in that it will make most other programs (G5 etc.) a de facto farm club for the big boys. The net effect of "unrestricted" transfers is that the rich will get richer.

While nothing is perfect, your concern is certainly warranted. Forget about WBB. If and when this proposal goes into effect, I can forsee the rise of a bunch of shady middlemen in MBB, soliciting players for P5 programs. Need to replace a pg? So and So from mid-major U is really interested in becoming a Jayhawk, Cardinal, Tar Heel, fill-in-the-blank.

However, I think it’s better then what we have right now, because it’s in the best interests of the players.

Agree. I think a reasonable compromise can be worked out. Something along the lines of:

1. One time transfer for any student athlete based without penalty.
Makes the student thoughtful about whether to use the transfer in any given year. Otherwise we'd have de facto free agency, potentially with talented players moving annually.

2. Cap on the number of players any school can lose in a given year.
Prevents mid-major who has a good season from losing their team en masse. Would need rule to reconcile application of rule 1.

3. Cap on the number of players a school can accept either annually or over a given period.
Prevents schools from constantly scavenging players from smaller schools. Call it the Kentucky rule. I can see Calipari gaming an unlimited transfer rule without it.
 
Last edited:

donalddoowop

Who put the Bop in the Bop Shoo Bop?
Joined
Oct 5, 2015
Messages
5,422
Reaction Score
19,500
..and playing for a program going nowhere under a coach that may be on her last legs at Texas.
I see Baylor, not UConn. (Excuse me for speculating.) Women's college volleyball players don't have to sit a year after transferring, so why can't it be the same for basketball. It has not hurt volleyball.
 

oldude

bamboo lover
Joined
Nov 15, 2016
Messages
17,103
Reaction Score
152,293
I see Baylor, not UConn. (Excuse me for speculating.) Women's college volleyball players don't have to sit a year after transferring, so why can't it be the same for basketball. It has not hurt volleyball.
 

Centerstream

Looking forward to next season
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
8,458
Reaction Score
32,830
I'm all for let the players play where they want to without penalty, but I think a slow rollout with something like this would be quite interesting.
And thank you for expressing your opinion.
 

Centerstream

Looking forward to next season
Joined
Mar 6, 2017
Messages
8,458
Reaction Score
32,830
I see Baylor, not UConn. (Excuse me for speculating.) Women's college volleyball players don't have to sit a year after transferring, so why can't it be the same for basketball. It has not hurt volleyball.
And it is allowed in softball and I am amazed each spring how many "name" players are now on a different, usually highly ranked, team. And when a big name coach goes to a new school, it's amazing how many players transfer to the new school.
 

Online statistics

Members online
324
Guests online
1,858
Total visitors
2,182

Forum statistics

Threads
158,872
Messages
4,171,866
Members
10,042
Latest member
twdaylor104


.
Top Bottom