NCAA Transfer Rules changing?

[methodology]

Another hypothetical...

What if after 1st semester a kid transfers from a crap team to a top 10 team who just lost a kid to injury for the year

@Guapo and @polycom are firmly in the belief they should be treated like transferring students and not have to sit. Does this hypothetical change that stance and if so why?

 

[polycom]

Another hypothetical...

What if after 1st semester a kid transfers from a crap team to a top 10 team who just lost a kid to injury for the year

@Guapo and @polycom are firmly in the belief they should be treated like transferring students and not have to sit. Does this hypothetical change that stance and if so why?

I don't believe they should be treated as everyone else because I think they should be paid, so in this situation I would have all the players contracted... But if we are treating them like students then yeah this is fine for me. If the school has enough scholarships and the player who was injured didn't lose their scholarship to bring on another player from another school in the same season. However, I don't think this wouldn't work because scholarships are yearly contracts I believe not by semester but someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[Guapo]

Another hypothetical...

What if after 1st semester a kid transfers from a crap team to a top 10 team who just lost a kid to injury for the year

@Guapo and @polycom are firmly in the belief they should be treated like transferring students and not have to sit. Does this hypothetical change that stance and if so why?

Without thinking too deeply about how scholarships work, if the school with the injured player had a scholarship to give and existing or potential in season tampering rules, I guess this would be ok.

It would obvious suck from a fan perspective but something as inane and rare and silly as this hypothetical is not a reason to not support this rule change.

 

[methodology]

I don't believe they should be treated as everyone else because I think they should be paid, so in this situation I would have all the players contracted... But if we are treating them like students then yeah this is fine for me. If the school has enough scholarships and the player who was injured didn't lose their scholarship to bring on another player from another school in the same season. However, I don't think this wouldn't work because scholarships are yearly contracts I believe not by semester but someone can correct me if I'm wrong.

So how much do you think they will/ should be paid? Are they responsible for paying tuition/ room/ board/ books/ meal plan/ the free gear and sneakers?

You understand every athlete in every sport would have to be paid equally. Or do football players and the 100 man roster get more because there more $$ and revenue in football. What about the non revenue sports and female athletes.

Are you seperating from the ncaa to avoid a class action lawsuit from every student athlete who doesn't play football/ basketball?

How big is the pie after operating expenses/travel/medical? How much do you think you can actually pay these student athletes and is that more than the benefits they currently receive?

I've Already stated they should get a cut of merchandising sales or video games. They should be able to profit on their image if they want like that kicker who had the YouTube channel etc.

There are about 460k d1 athletes

17250 approximately playing football and basketball.

 

[methodology]

Without thinking too deeply about how scholarships work, if the school with the injured player had a scholarship to give and existing or potential in season tampering rules, I guess this would be ok.

It would obvious suck from a fan perspective but something as inane and rare and silly as this hypothetical is not a reason to not support this rule change.

Doesn't have to be injury. Any school with open scholarship can poach a senior for half a year for a title run. It's absolutely insane

 

[Guapo]

Doesn't have to be injury. Any school with open scholarship can poach a senior for half a year for a title run. It's absolutely insane

Ok, even if it's not an injury, the other issues re: scholarships, tampering rules etc remain the same.

 

[polycom]

So how much do you think they will/ should be paid? Are they responsible for paying tuition/ room/ board/ books/ meal plan/ the free gear and sneakers?

You understand every athlete in every sport would have to be paid equally. Or do football players and the 100 man roster get more because there more $$ and revenue in football. What about the non revenue sports and female athletes.

Are you seperating from the ncaa to avoid a class action lawsuit from every student athlete who doesn't play football/ basketball?

How big is the pie after operating expenses/travel/medical? How much do you think you can actually pay these student athletes and is that more than the benefits they currently receive?

I've Already stated they should get a cut of merchandising sales or video games. They should be able to profit on their image if they want like that kicker who had the YouTube channel etc.

There are about 460k d1 athletes

17250 approximately playing football and basketball.

Player should be to make the market rate for their likeness. As for the schools paying them additionally on top of that. It's difficult to work through a fair system because college athletics isn't fair. Few athletic departments turn a profit and the ones that do, do so because of their football programs. Nick Saban is worth more money to the state of Alabama than what he is currently paid but so is his QB, so are all the players on the team.

The question becomes should mid-majors have programs they can't afford...

 

[Ewekon]

The top 8 to 12 players aren't transferring anywhere. They are declaring.

 

[Travelman6]

I don't believe they should be treated as everyone else because I think they should be paid

They already are paid with free UNI that, in some cases cost 25,000 or more per year (an exorbitant sum of money), room and board (in some cases special chefs for the athletes), free transit to away games as well as lodging, free exposure on national TV, access to trainers and state of the art training facilities/weight rooms, etc. All while the average American struggles a great deal to pay for UNI, often times going into a lot of debt while their athletic counterparts, in some cases grossly underachieve (coughUconnmencough) without having to pay a dime while @ UNI. Or post grads who don't even earn what these kids get in athletic scholarships per year. How about all of the student non-athletes that also contribute to the schools reputation and academic standings? It is amazing how out of whack and askew priorities are at most UNIs in the states and why other countries continue to surpass the US in academic standings.

 

[polycom]

They already are paid with free UNI that, in some cases cost 25,000 or more per year (an exorbitant sum of money), room and board (in some cases special chefs for the athletes), free transit to away games as well as lodging, free exposure on national TV, access to trainers and state of the art training facilities/weight rooms, etc. All while the average American struggles a great deal to pay for UNI, often times going into a lot of debt while their athletic counterparts, in some cases grossly underachieve (coughUconnmencough) without having to pay a dime. How about all of the student non-athletes that also contribute to the schools reputation and academic standings?

Not sure what argument you are trying to make here? You believe athletes are compensated for their services enough? Then why do they have to go to class? Why do they have to get an education, since as you say "they already are paid." Why not treat them as employees and we can go from there...

 

[Travelman6]

My point is that they ARE paid. What more should they get? Money? For real (again, while a majority of non athletic students continue to struggle to pay and/or go into massive debt to pay for UNI)? Is there any precedent to American UNI athletes getting paid?

 

[freescooter]

This is good. They are amateurs and students first, they should go wherever they can get the best education.

LOLOLO! Funny!

 

[intlzncster]

Not sure what argument you are trying to make here? You believe athletes are compensated for their services enough? Then why do they have to go to class? Why do they have to get an education, since as you say "they already are paid." Why not treat them as employees and we can go from there...

Why bother associating them with the school at all? Just create minor leagues and be done with it. Pretty much solves most of the problems and the vast majority of schools would save money.

 

[The Funster]

And I mean, really, can we ever trust the NCAA to do anything right?

 

[intlzncster]

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

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

If there's one thing I know about human beings, it's that, given an opportunity to exploit a situation, they will take it every time. Human's are opportunists at heart.

Whatever edge the new system allows, kids/coaches/programs are going to leverage it to the highest degree possible. Too much money involved to do otherwise.

 

[intlzncster]

Can I tell you about the Arby's pork belly I had last night?

Incredible.

I'm not sure there's anyone alive who enjoys the phrase 'Meat Craft' more than August.

 

[Rico444]

Arby's: We have the MEAT SWEATS!

 

[Guapo]

If there's one thing I know about human beings, it's that, given an opportunity to exploit a situation, they will take it every time. Human's are opportunists at heart.

Whatever edge the new system allows, kids/coaches/programs are going to leverage it to the highest degree possible. Too much money involved to do otherwise.

I'd also argue that there's too much money at stake for the powers that be to allow the entire sport to collapse, as some are suggesting it will.

 

[auror]

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

If the top gets smaller, then there are fewer scholarships impacted by those transferring to the top and the transfer "epidemic" doesn't exist.

Comparing the college transfer epidemic to your real life work situation shows just how out of touch you are with the college game. While all your points ring true to real life and most normal employees, the disconnect to the college athlete, especially a ranked one with pro aspirations, is enormous.

One big thing you're missing: College athletes can't transfer to a higher paying position, which is the #1 reason in the real life people change jobs. There will always be less transfers in the college sports world than job changes because of this.

A majority of college transfers do not transfer up for a shot at the pros. They leave their situations because they are untenable for them, and that's often down or out of division 1.

The most apt comparison because of the lack of waiting period are graduate transfers. These are mature, ready to contribute players who don't clog up scholarships. They're among the most likely candidates to transfer up because they fill in roster gaps and are transitioning their life anyways (finished degree). There were like 80 grad transfers last year.

The slots to transfer up just aren't there like you think there are. There are maybe 60 relevant "power" programs that someone might transfer up to. That's like 750 scholarships total. 50 will leave for the draft early, 180ish will graduate. Plus however many transfer down for normal reasons (6% previous transfer rate of the 560 non-graduating scholarships is 34). That leaves 264 open scholarships. The top 150 or so freshmen will still end up at those programs, so you're looking at around 115 transfers up. If you think there will be substantially more, that means you think coaches will be pushing out players happy at the program (otherwise they'd be in the current transfer number). I just don't see that happening.

 

[Guapo]

If the top gets smaller, then there are fewer scholarships impacted by those transferring to the top and the transfer "epidemic" doesn't exist.



One big thing you're missing: College athletes can't transfer to a higher paying position, which is the #1 reason in the real life people change jobs. There will always be less transfers in the college sports world than job changes because of this.

A majority of college transfers do not transfer up for a shot at the pros. They leave their situations because they are untenable for them, and that's often down or out of division 1.

The most apt comparison because of the lack of waiting period are graduate transfers. These are mature, ready to contribute players who don't clog up scholarships. They're among the most likely candidates to transfer up because they fill in roster gaps and are transitioning their life anyways (finished degree). There were like 80 grad transfers last year.

The slots to transfer up just aren't there like you think there are. There are maybe 60 relevant "power" programs that someone might transfer up to. That's like 750 scholarships total. 50 will leave for the draft early, 180ish will graduate. Plus however many transfer down for normal reasons (6% previous transfer rate of the 560 non-graduating scholarships is 34). That leaves 264 open scholarships. The top 150 or so freshmen will still end up at those programs, so you're looking at around 115 transfers up. If you think there will be substantially more, that means you think coaches will be pushing out players happy at the program (otherwise they'd be in the current transfer number). I just don't see that happening.

I only liked this 'cuz there ain't a love option

 

[intlzncster]

I want everyone to take a deep breath and really think about this.

I am, like a lot people, an "at will" employee. I can leave whenever I want for a new job. However, I haven't. Why? Because I like my job. Generally speaking I like my coworkers and I know the quality of work I can expect from them and they the same from me. I know where I stand with the power structure of my firm and I'm happy with my work-life balance.

Stability. People, whether they know it or not, crave stability.

Players are not just going to transfer for the hell of it.

These players in their times at their respective schools have developed a routine. They've made friends, girlfriends etc. They have a developed a social network.

Furthermore, they know their teammates and they know the coaching staff. They know the expectations of the staff, the rules, the plays, what to expect at practice, what is expected of them in the classroom etc etc.

Will a rule change such as this cause increase in transfers? Yes, definitely. Will it become the Wild West where entire rosters switch over every single year (more so than what one and dones do already)? No. Because players are human.

Will this rule change, if it happened to today, negatively affect UConn? Probably. Especially in the short term. I can't really say I blame players for not wanting to play for this coaching staff in this league (not to turn into yet another thread on either of those subjects).

This rule will have an impact, maybe a significant one, but not on a scale that will bring ruin to the sport. If this rule goes into affect, it could seem staggering at first but we will recalibrate how we follow transfers, recruiting etc.

You're not wrong about this to some degree, but I think you are underestimating the different dynamic.

#1 - For most people, work is a destination. For players, college basketball is just a short term means to get somewhere else (the destination), whether that be professional ball, or the working world.
#2 - Following on that, and more importantly, most good players' goal is first and foremost is to get to the NBA. They will look at: what gives me the best chance to do this? Maybe they couldn't get to an NBA factory coming out of high school, and now they can. Friends, relationships, loyalty, even winning, takes a back seat to getting to the League. What can increase my draft stock and marketability.

I do think you'll find more situations where rosters will be imbalanced. Unexpected transfers for which you did not recruit enough replacement players.

The regulation of this rule will be the most important thing. Having no more than 2-3 transfers on a team at any one time might be workable.

EOD it's going to be interesting to watch.

 

[intlzncster]

I'd also argue that there's too much money at stake for the powers that be to allow the entire sport to collapse, as some are suggesting it will.

Which comes back to the regulation thing, which some of us are touting. I don't trust the NCAA to get it right. But schools presidents and ADs will hopefully guide the rules.

 

[Guapo]

You're not wrong about this to some degree, but I think you are underestimating the different dynamic.

#1 - For most people, work is a destination. For players, college basketball is just a short term means to get somewhere else (the destination), whether that be professional ball, or the working world.
#2 - Following on that, and more importantly, most good players' goal is first and foremost is to get to the NBA. They will look at: what gives me the best chance to do this? Maybe they couldn't get to an NBA factory coming out of high school, and now they can. Friends, relationships, loyalty, even winning, takes a back seat to getting to the League. What can increase my draft stock and marketability.

I do think you'll find more situations where rosters will be imbalanced. Unexpected transfers for which you did not recruit enough replacement players.

The regulation of this rule will be the most important thing. Having no more than 2-3 transfers on a team at any one time might be workable.

EOD it's going to be interesting to watch.

If I was to re-write that post, I'd spend less time talking about my employment, since it's easy to think I was comparing my situation to college athletes and that wasn't the point.

The point was to show that I have the ability to leave my current location whenever I want and yet I don't because there are a lot of forces keeping me in a place, similar to there being a lot of forces keeping a college athlete at a school.

I think you are the one underestimating those forces and I think you're overestimating how the desire to get to the NBA plays in all this.

You can make an argument that you can make a better case for the NBA playing at a school below the Kentucky or Kansas tier because of playing time, the spot light only being on you etc.

Someone earlier brought up Steph Curry. Why would he have needed to transfer? He went deeper into the tournament than Kansas did, became a college star and is now the biggest basketball star in the world.

 

[djct1999]

If the top gets smaller, then there are fewer scholarships impacted by those transferring to the top and the transfer "epidemic" doesn't exist.



One big thing you're missing: College athletes can't transfer to a higher paying position, which is the #1 reason in the real life people change jobs. There will always be less transfers in the college sports world than job changes because of this.

A majority of college transfers do not transfer up for a shot at the pros. They leave their situations because they are untenable for them, and that's often down or out of division 1.

The most apt comparison because of the lack of waiting period are graduate transfers. These are mature, ready to contribute players who don't clog up scholarships. They're among the most likely candidates to transfer up because they fill in roster gaps and are transitioning their life anyways (finished degree). There were like 80 grad transfers last year.

The slots to transfer up just aren't there like you think there are. There are maybe 60 relevant "power" programs that someone might transfer up to. That's like 750 scholarships total. 50 will leave for the draft early, 180ish will graduate. Plus however many transfer down for normal reasons (6% previous transfer rate of the 560 non-graduating scholarships is 34). That leaves 264 open scholarships. The top 150 or so freshmen will still end up at those programs, so you're looking at around 115 transfers up. If you think there will be substantially more, that means you think coaches will be pushing out players happy at the program (otherwise they'd be in the current transfer number). I just don't see that happening.

You simply can't compare college athletes to real paying jobs. A D1 basketball players currency is tv exposure, nba scout exposure, and the opportunity to play on the big stage. With the new rule change, I certainly think its realistic for the Duke, Kentucky's, UNCs, and Kansas's of the world to poach the best players from the A-10, American, Big East, etc to fill spots vacated by early entries. And yes, I think many college players will jump at this opportunity. Objectively speaking, would Jalen Adams help himself more by playing on this years UConn team or starting for Kentucky? Fast forward, lets say JA in this situation does transfer out, there is no way UConn would fill his scholarship with a player of similar ability. Hence, the cycle starts. The best programs strengthen, the middle tier programs weaken, and the bottom tier no one cares about anyway.

 

[auror]

#2 - Following on that, and more importantly, most good players' goal is first and foremost is to get to the NBA. They will look at: what gives me the best chance to do this? Maybe they couldn't get to an NBA factory coming out of high school, and now they can. Friends, relationships, loyalty, even winning, takes a back seat to getting to the League. What can increase my draft stock and marketability.

How many players is this? There are 60 players drafted each year. How many players in college think they have an opportunity to make it. 1000? How many are actually right (and would be wanted by top schools?) 400? How many are already not on a power conference team? 100? How many of them want to leave their current situation and how many scholarships are available at the top schools?

Those are my guesses and you might disagree with the numbers, but I don't think that less than 200 "transfers up" out of 4500 players is going to do anything to harm the sport.