NCAA Transfer Rules changing? | Page 5 | The Boneyard

NCAA Transfer Rules changing?

polycom said:
In your previous post you said you believe they should get some money...what exactly should they get some money for? If it's for their sports services then you believe they are employees as employees are paid for their services.
Expand ...

Under my strict definition, that's fair.

However, the way I'd structure it, as I said, is as sort of 'academic bonus', based upon graduation. I've got no problem incentivizing education, as so many of these kids don't bother much with that side of things, when that should be the primary purpose.
 
polycom said:
Then you believe they are employees and the student discussion doesn't apply to you.
Expand ...

If I tear my acl or have any other medical issue as a student who pays for that? Me correct?

Who pays for the athlete... the school

Athletes are different then students and treated differently. They get things other students don't and that includes students on academic scholarship
 
the Q said:
They should also be able to sell their likeness or sell any gear they get from this if they do desire.

I hate Ohio st but trading gear for tattoos is kind of a silly crime.
Expand ...

That, I agree with. That's just using your own personal brand for your benefit. Even if you have to pay the school a % for their part in marketing you as an athlete.

I guess I've always been of the mind that, if you want to be perfectly fair, CFB and CBB should just be done away with. If schools want to create some sort of minor league that has nothing really to do with the students, fine. Don't offer them education, housing, school activities, or what have you. The only tie to the school would be the Jersey. Make kids sign contracts. Multi year deals, what have you. Everybody has agents, etc etc.
 
Guapo said:
We can have the exploitation debate in a different thread, this isn't the time or place for it
Expand ...

Good idea. Not that I want to have it as it's really a matter of opinion thing.

I will just say that I'd like to amend my position slightly for posterity. If all that money generated went right back into the schools, the facilities and the students, then I wouldn't consider that exploitation. But the NCAA as an institution is exploitative and should be abolished. And Administrations are well overcompensated.
 
.-.
methodology said:
If I tear my acl or have any other medical issue as a student who pays for that? Me correct?

Who pays for the athlete... the school

Athletes are different then students and treated differently. They get things other students don't and that includes students on academic scholarship
Expand ...


The school pays for the care because they are required to by the NCAA they also aren’t required to pay if someone tears their ACL doing not sports related events. If they are injured in a NCAA championship event the NCAA pays for it not even the school.

I don’t know what happens to people on academic scholarship but schools aren’t doing these students a favor they are forced to do so. So the walk ons.. not on scholarships I doubt they have insurance through the school
 
For all of you that wouldn't like this new transfer rule; would you at least support athletic scholarships being guaranteed all 4 years instead of needing to be renewed on a yearly basis?

How many of you even knew athletic scholarships aren't guaranteed?

If you want a kid to commit to a school, schouldn't you want the school to commit to the kid?
 
polycom said:
The school pays for the care because they are required to by the NCAA they also aren’t required to pay if someone tears their ACL doing not sports related events. If they are injured in a NCAA championship event the NCAA pays for it not even the school.

I don’t know what happens to people on academic scholarship but schools aren’t doing these students a favor they are forced to do so. So the walk ons.. not on scholarships I doubt they have insurance through the school
Expand ...

Please read the articles right above your comment
 
Guapo said:
For all of you that wouldn't like this new transfer rule; would you at least support athletic scholarships being guaranteed all 4 years instead of needing to be renewed on a yearly basis?

How many of you even knew athletic scholarships aren't guaranteed?

If you want a kid to commit to a school, schouldn't you want the school to commit to the kid?
Expand ...

Of course. I think the one year thing is stupid. Hurts football kids the most.

Though, in that scenario, I'd add that if a kid stops playing, and want to continue school, he shouldn't count against the scholarship limit.
 
Guapo said:
A Fight to Keep College Athletes From the Pain of Injury Costs

'I Trusted 'Em': When NCAA Schools Abandon Their Injured Athletes
Expand ...

Pointing out your hypocrisy. You want them treated as students when it fits your agenda i.e. not sitting out when transferring.

Any injury should be covered by the school. Shame on any school that pulls that bs. Not paying for or not renewing a scholarship is not standard operating procedure and doesn't happen all that often and should never happen in the first place
 
.-.
methodology said:
Pointing out your hypocrisy. You want them treated as students when it fits your agenda i.e. not sitting out when transferring.

Any injury should be covered by the school. Shame on any school that pulls that bs. Not paying for or not renewing a scholarship is not standard operating procedure and doesn't happen all that often and should never happen in the first place
Expand ...

Other people who disagree with this rule are at least making rational counter arguments, though I disagree.

You're just responding with anger.

Why does this *potential* rule change make you so angry?
 
Read the editorial that came out in many newspapers today by Victoria L. Jackson called A Jim Crow divide in college sports.
 
intlzncster said:
That, I agree with. That's just using your own personal brand for your benefit. Even if you have to pay the school a % for their part in marketing you as an athlete.

I guess I've always been of the mind that, if you want to be perfectly fair, CFB and CBB should just be done away with. If schools want to create some sort of minor league that has nothing really to do with the students, fine. Don't offer them education, housing, school activities, or what have you. The only tie to the school would be the Jersey. Make kids sign contracts. Multi year deals, what have you. Everybody has agents, etc etc.
Expand ...

Or the leagues could step up and stop freeloading off of taxpayer money (in a lot of cases).
 
intlzncster said:
That, I agree with. That's just using your own personal brand for your benefit. Even if you have to pay the school a % for their part in marketing you as an athlete.

I guess I've always been of the mind that, if you want to be perfectly fair, CFB and CBB should just be done away with. If schools want to create some sort of minor league that has nothing really to do with the students, fine. Don't offer them education, housing, school activities, or what have you. The only tie to the school would be the Jersey. Make kids sign contracts. Multi year deals, what have you. Everybody has agents, etc etc.
Expand ...

It also takes away a chance for them to get some real life experience.

Developing a personal brand is an important part of your life.

Let them learn and maybe even earn some money off their brand.
 
Is it conceivable that a coach changing schools would bring his 'recruited' star(s) along with him?
 
.-.
I’m a little baffled at how many people support college players essentially being free agents every year.

I like the suggestion of making transfers sit out the first semester instead of a full season. But the amount of turnover on an annual basis if this rule takes effect will make it impossible to keep track of who plays for what team.
 
Seth Davis thinks it would be the worst sports rule change in his lifetime.
 
UConn990411 said:
But the amount of turnover on an annual basis if this rule takes effect will make it impossible to keep track of who plays for what team.
Expand ...

Why don't you change your job every single year? You're a free agent, presumably (few people work on multi-year contracts).

The large majority of people don't change jobs every year. Someone quoted in this post that 85% of people don't change jobs on average each year.

In the case of college athletes, a majority of them CHOOSE which school to go to despite being courted by many different suitors. Why would enough of them decide they made wrong choices and transfer. There would be less turnover than you think.

Of course, this sport is ABOUT turnover, in a way. You can only play for 4 years, then it's on to the next one. You're already used to this particular change.
 
GemParty said:
Seth Davis thinks it would be the worst sports rule change in his lifetime.
Expand ...

It’s probably not even top 5.

Moving the ball forward after a timeout

The absurdly ridiculous semi circle for charges.

The new limits on draftees and international free agents in Baseball

Pick of version of the nfl catch rule

The franchise tag
 
I think this will be fun if we can become attractive again. A coach like Donovan or Hurley can rebuild pretty quickly using this rule. They could have us competitive on year one

NOTE: Not that Donovan is a realistic option. He’s just the first coach I thought of
 
.-.
CTMike said:
The answer isn’t to hold kids hostage. Address the root cause...
Expand ...
If the kids aren't held hostage they could walk out for any reason or no reason. In the end it would hurt college sports. There are consequences for decisions and to remove them could create chaos. Coaches could indirectly recruit players from opposing teams and the slimy coaches would have a field day.
I could see allowing players to transfer if the HC coach leaves or other special circumstances.
 
Everyone saying it's a win for the kids? How about the extra kids now each year that will be getting nudged off a roster? Goes both ways.

Revenue generating sports should get a cut of the apparel and receive a stipend during their time on campus as well. Far better it going to them then some empty suit at the NCAA.

As for UConn, this is obviously is going to hurt us. Why? Because why not at this point.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Everyone saying it's a win for the kids? How about the extra kids now each year that will be getting nudged off a roster? Goes both ways.

Revenue generating sports should get a cut of the apparel and receive a stipend during their time on campus as well. Far better it going to them then some empty suit at the NCAA.

As for UConn, this is obviously is going to hurt us. Why? Because why not at this point.
Expand ...

That's exactly what I was thinking. Kids are going to lose their scholarships more than ever from being pushed out by transfers.
 
ConnHuskBask said:
Everyone saying it's a win for the kids? How about the extra kids now each year that will be getting nudged off a roster? Goes both ways.

Revenue generating sports should get a cut of the apparel and receive a stipend during their time on campus as well. Far better it going to them then some empty suit at the NCAA.

As for UConn, this is obviously is going to hurt us. Why? Because why not at this point.
Expand ...

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
 
UConn990411 said:
I’m a little baffled at how many people support college players essentially being free agents every year.

I like the suggestion of making transfers sit out the first semester instead of a full season. But the amount of turnover on an annual basis if this rule takes effect will make it impossible to keep track of who plays for what team.
Expand ...
It’s just begging for tampering and lack of accountability by playing a good old fashioned shell game.
 
polycom said:
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
Expand ...

Sure, early classifiers, JUCOs and foreign players. Those can shift all summer.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,331
Messages
4,564,745
Members
10,464
Latest member
Rollskies27


Top Bottom