A hard limit on transfers wouldn't hold up on court. Hell the current regulations are unlikely to hold up in court. If schools want to have a limit on player movement, then they need to hurry up and recognize them as employees, otherwise it will move towards a wide open marketplace.
They are getting sued for just having any limits. Putting any more would just increase their legal spending
Fine, then put me in the camp of spending more to preserve NCAA’s self regulating ability to set rules for participation. I wish they would, instead of rolling over to those who want to rig the rules in their favors. It’s ruining college sports.
I think the uber division Charlie Baker is proposing is kinda the best result. Let those schools and fan bases that want to provide pay for play do so, and everyone else can stick with the old status quo. What you are on the verge of having now is schools recruiting off the rosters of their opponents when they see a player that can help them and a smaller school could do nothing to try and keep the kid.
We are moving farther and farther from the O'Bannon lawsuit. I am interested to see a deep dive into the effects of all this change on the individual student athletes when enough data is available. Right now, all I can see is that kids have money that didn't have money, so that is good. Will the overall "health" of the whole College athletic system suffer to the point that it negatively impacts a segment of the student-athletes, or will it in fact be stronger, and provide equal or better opportunity for all of the student-athletes.
We won't know this for a number of years, but does it make more financial sense for a college athlete to focus on their academic career and build contacts or take money and move around colleges for athletics? Look at someone like Joly. Say he gets a large NIL payment for his last 2 years of his football career. Would it make more sense financially to have stuck at UConn, maybe make less in NIL but still make some, develop contacts in the NY/CT area, and set himself up for a career? Maybe his new college will help him, but it was clear he was getting a lot of attention at UConn. And, I am sure it is more important to get a college degree than to make some NIL cash with the exception of the very top players, but will the degree and future earnings potential motivate athletes?
He is moving because he is setting himself up for a career, the NFL. Balling out at a competitive P4 team will be much better for his future earnings than making contacts for a job in NYC. Not sure when people are going to understand, that even if he got less NIL money, moving to a competitive P4 team is the choice that he should make for his future. The exposure to scouts and a national audience on a more regular basis, along with proving yourself at the top level of competition, makes it far more likely to get drafted and drafted higher. I mean maybe if he had zero chance at going to the NFL, then yeah, maybe you weigh some of the things you mention, but if your goal is NFL, then you have to put yourself in the best place to do that and prove yourself consistently against the best competition to improve your odds.
Isn't it mandatory that schools allow these guys to return to finish their degrees now anyways? Thought i remembered that.
Whether it applies to Joly or not, who knows. But your point is reasonable, I think if you assume college athletics should be at least tangentially related to college education. In 4-5 years I have no doubt there will be reports about guys who progressively bigger payments for playing football or basketball at several different schools, never graduated and never saved and are now working at a car wash passing rumors about conference reorganization. Then there will be a big media circus about it, the NCAA or it’s successor will announce some new rule and it will all go away until next time.
So you think by recognizing the players as employees that is gonna change anything? I doubt it. More likely outside contractors subject to non-compete clauses. Or gig workers like they are now.
I apologize. I shouldn't have used Joly as an example as it obscured the point I was trying to make. The vast majority of college athletes, including football players, will not play their sport professionally. What is more important over the long run, a modest NIL payment or a college degree? Payments for college athletes is not new (weren't legal before) and there are many tales of athletes that didn't take advantage of their opportunities going to school.
Well the non compete clauses would solve the issue zoo was complaining about, so yeah it would change the situation.
Some of the best networking done in college is done within sports teams. The same connections a player could have made at their old school they'll make at their new school, if not better at top programs.
If a student like Joly is able to secure and save/invest NIL money while getting his degree at another school, it’s probably a good move regardless whether they have NFL-aspirations or not.
If you are getting hundreds of thousands of dollars of NIL, and not many are, sure, take the money. But, how many college athletes are going to even get $50k? And, that is before taxes so take home is significantly less. A solid career is like a 40 year growing annuity which is way more valuable.
Would appear there is a quick fix available to staff (w/ a vig) if this was about future playing time
LIke anything that is money driven, you can bet your house that it will help those at the top of the pyramid -- not just the top top athletes but the administrators of the top power schools -- and hurt those at the bottom. How? Once you're no longer playing for a national championship, why pour so much money into football? Why not see if partial scholarships can keep you competitive at your level instead of full scholarships.