NCAA Transfer Rules changing?

[intlzncster]

What is the math on this? We allow transferring so now there will suddenly be more players in the total pool? I don't follow the logic

EDIT: I misread your OP, so the following post is a bit of a non sequitur. I typed it, so for the hell of it:

Why not? Unless they put a two per school limit. A school could take 5 guys every year if they wanted. You've got coaches leaving for whatever reason, that's 13 potential transfers right there. Not all will go, but it wouldn't be at all surprising to see half of that. Take UCONN: If the rule were in place last year, I wouldn't be surprised to have seen half the team+ leave.

Where it becomes interesting is good players late in their careers who want an NCAA run. So a guy like Adams, who goes to UCONN for three years and then decides to go play for Nova or somebody as a senior....is he still a 'UCONN' guy?

RE roster construction. Do you keep any scholarships open to poach players? Or do you just rely on not renewing a kid's annual scholarship to take a better player?

A coach can move to another school and bring his top guys with him.

I don't know what will happen, but it could be very interesting to watch.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

What is the math on this? We allow transferring so now there will suddenly be more players in the total pool? I don't follow the logic

Not necessarily saying there will be more kids losing scholarships, but I'm saying more kids could be pushed out of situations they don't want to leave.

 

[djct1999]

Not sure what is right here. On the one hand, I am all for the kids having equal rights. The impact though could be devastating. It will destroy parity, kill the mid major, and change the playing field forever.

 

[Guapo]

Not sure what is right here. On the one hand, I am all for the kids having equal rights. The impact though could be devastating. It will destroy parity, kill the mid major, and change the playing field forever.

I simply do not arrive at the same conclusion you do.

But that's just me.

 

[polycom]

Not sure what is right here. On the one hand, I am all for the kids having equal rights. The impact though could be devastating. It will destroy parity, kill the mid major, and change the playing field forever.

Is there really parity now?

 

[djct1999]

I simply do not arrive at the same conclusion you do.

But that's just me.

Fair enough. But its hard to ignore the ramifications this will have on both the player and program. Again, don't know if this is right or wrong but hard to see how the game itself benefits.

 

[polycom]

Fair enough. But its hard to ignore the ramifications this will have on both the player and program. Again, don't know if this is right or wrong but hard to see how the game itself benefits.

Isn't the education of the students most important? The game is secondary to the education of these players according to the NCAA.

 

[RipCity]

Isn't the education of the students most important? The game is secondary to the education of these players according to the NCAA.

99% of players who use their ability to transfer aren’t doing it because of education at all. From a PR perspective, yes, you’re right. But looking at it realistically this is more about freedom to do what you want as an amateur. I support this, but they do need to find a good way to regulate it before putting it into action.

 

[polycom]

99% of players who use their ability to transfer aren’t doing it because of education at all. From a PR perspective, yes, you’re right. But looking at it realistically this is more about freedom to do what you want as an amateur. I support this, but they do need to find a good way to regulate it before putting it into action.

Do you believe players should be paid for their services? If you think they should get some kind of compensation then yeah of course they don't transfer for education. But the NCAA says that they are students first so lets treat them like students. If they aren't students then put them under contract and treat them like any other kind of employee.

 

[Guapo]

Fair enough. But its hard to ignore the ramifications this will have on both the player and program. Again, don't know if this is right or wrong but hard to see how the game itself benefits.

I think that the ramifications will be more equally distributed than some think.

Yes, some plays will transfer from smaller programs to bigger programs, but that'll result in players transferring from the bigger programs to smaller programs, thus giving smaller programs access to talent that they otherwise wouldn't have access too.

 

[RipCity]

Do you believe players should be paid for their services? If you think they should get some kind of compensation then yeah of course they don't transfer for education. But the NCAA says that they are students first so lets treat them like students. If they aren't students then put them under contract and treat them like any other kind of employee.

I’m all for letting them be students just like any other if they aren’t being paid.

But this argument has a small hole in it. It’s not like they aren’t being educated during their redshirt years. They’re still getting a free education even if they aren’t playing. So the rule as it stands now isn’t an egregious injustice IMO.

Again I’m pro this rule change, but i just think the NCAA needs to find a way to not let 100,000 knee jerk transfers occur every year.

 

[Guapo]

I’m all for letting them be students just like any other if they aren’t being paid.

But this argument has a small hole in it. It’s not like they aren’t being educated during their redshirt years. They’re still getting a free education even if they aren’t playing. So the rule as it stands now isn’t an egregious injustice IMO.

Again I’m pro this rule change, but i just think the NCAA needs to find a way to not let 100,000 knee jerk transfers occur every year.

I think there will have to be a coinciding rule limiting the number of transfers a school can take per year

 

[RipCity]

I think there will have to be a coinciding rule limiting the number of transfers a school can take per year

Yes, but you also don’t really want every losing team or mid major team in the country to lose their best players every year to transfers. It’s a delicate situation.

 

[Guapo]

Yes, but you also don’t really want every losing team or mid major team in the country to lose their best players every year to transfers. It’s a delicate situation.

I just don't think it'll happen on the scale that many here think it will.

And just to be clear, it WILL happen, just not enough to justify not making this rule change or the amount of hang wringing being done by some.

 

[RipCity]

I just don't think it'll happen on the scale that many here think it will.

And just to be clear, it WILL happen, just not enough to justify not making this rule change or the amount of hang wringing being done by some.

Even if you set the quantity of transfers aside, I think parity has to be kept in mind too. CBB doesn’t need a rule where the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. Duke, Kansas, UNC, and Kentucky don’t need a farm system to select the best from however they see fit.

I don’t know exactly what will happen, these are just things I’m weary of.

 

[Guapo]

Even if you set the quantity of transfers aside, I think parity has to be kept in mind too. CBB doesn’t need a rule where the poor get poorer and the rich get richer. Duke, Kansas, UNC, and Kentucky don’t need a farm system to select the best from however they see fit.

I don’t know exactly what will happen, these are just things I’m weary of.

Well I already responded to that.

Duke, Kansas etc. will accept transfers but that'll push some their current players to transfer and some of the recruits they are in on to look elsewhere, thus pushing that talent to programs that otherwise wouldn't have access to it.

 

[Palatine]

So a player comes to UConn has a great freshman year and then can transfer to Duke for his sophomore year.

In effect the entire NCAA becomes a farm league for Duke, UNC, Kentucky and Kansas. Sounds great.

 

[Guapo]

So a player comes to UConn has a great freshman year and then can transfer to Duke for his sophomore year.

In effect the entire NCAA becomes a farm league for Duke, UNC, Kentucky and Kansas. Sounds great.

Nope, that's not what's going to happen.

At least not on the scale that you're implying it will.

 

[UConnStats]

Well I already responded to that.

Duke, Kansas etc. will accept transfers but that'll push some their current players to transfer and some of the recruits they are in on to look elsewhere, thus pushing that talent to programs that otherwise wouldn't have access to it.

I understand that concept, but there’s a reason those players would be getting pushed out. Not many transfers are like Semi Ojeleye. And Duke, Kansas etc would be getting known commodities, virtually assuring their continued success.

I’m sure there will be a natural balance, but I do think this rule benefits those programs at the very top of the game the most.

 

[djct1999]

Isn't the education of the students most important? The game is secondary to the education of these players according to the NCAA.

LMAO. Education is pretty low on the list, both for a top 100 player and for the university. Schedules revolve around tv and revenue, not around a players syllabus. Stop pretending that education actually matters to the business of college athletics.

 

[Palatine]

Nope, that's not what's going to happen.

At least not on the scale that you're implying it will.

That is exactly what will happen.

And it allows Duke UNC, etc, to clear the deadwood off their team every year to make room for the proven players college players they are bringing on board.

It's a disaster except for about eight schools.

 

[polycom]

What is this parity people are talking about in college basketball the same 10-12 teams will win every year unless coaches change regardless of the rules.

Men's NCAA® Basketball Tournament Bracket History

 

[polycom]

LMAO. Education is pretty low on the list, both for a top 100 player and for the university. Schedules revolve around tv and revenue, not around a players syllabus. Stop pretending that education actually matters to the business of college athletics.

I don't think you get what I'm saying... Do you believe players should be paid?

 

[Palatine]

What is this parity people are talking about in college basketball the same 10-12 teams will win every year unless coaches change regardless of the rules.

Men's NCAA® Basketball Tournament Bracket History

There will be a new tier. The Super Teams.

There will be even less competition.

And like all monopolies, the top tier will get smaller and smaller.

And one of the teams that will be left behind for dead is UConn.

 

[WhereistheDove?]

Nope, that's not what's going to happen.

At least not on the scale that you're implying it will.

Agree it won't happen on that large a scale. And on the other side, there would be plenty of highly recruited guys that go to a high-level P5 school and get recruited over or otherwise decide they'd rather be a key player at a smaller program than a role player at a larger program. Certainly some smaller teams will lose talent more easily but they'll also have access to more talent.