Immediate Transfer Eligibility On The Horizon?

  • @BShark The second proposal being discussed is actually more interesting–grad student transfers would get a guaranteed sch-ship for the number of years of the program. So, enrolling in a 2 year program would ensure someone 2 years of scholarship–even if the guy has only 1 year of eligibility left?

    Coaches will decide only to take guys who enroll in 1 year programs, which bb-minded schools will likely develop some more of if this passes.

    Except at UNC, which will just label a few classrooms “1 year graduate school” and leave a pile of masters degree sheepskins inside.

  • @BShark I dont like the idea personally, I think its to easy to transfer now.

  • @mayjay I read it as the student would just be able to finish his/her master’s on scholarship, but not be eligible for competition. Being able to play as long as a student is enrolled and making progress opens an entire new can of worms.

    But I actually really like this idea. Coaches move around. AD’s move around. Why can’t athletes? I could transfer at semester and be funded and work at a new school. Especially since there’s an academic requirement involved. I don’t know if Moore and the Lawsons had the GPA’s, but that would be nice.

  • @FarmerJayhawk I never suggested he would be playing as long as he was enrolled in the program–I meant it seems that a transfer in a 2 year grad program would cost the school 2 years of scholarship for 1 year of eligibility.

    Kind of a reverse redshirt, really–on scholarship but not playing after the career is over.

  • @FarmerJayhawk Agreed on your second paragraph, but don’t let HEM read it.

  • @mayjay ah I see what you’re saying. I’m good with it. Not like the AD’s can’t afford it. It won’t tie up a basketball scholarship, it’s just a method of letting the kid finish school. It happens when guys get hurt already.

  • @FarmerJayhawk When someone gets hurt and can’t play, the NCAA allows a school to apply for a medical waiver. That allows the kid to keep going to the school on scholarship, but it doesn’t count against the team scholarships because it is unforeseeable. This is what U Ariz did for Zach Peters when he was unable to keep playing and retired midway through his year there.

    To attract a kid to a school to play basketball on scholarship–it seems that should count as one of the allocated scholarships for every year he attends, not plays. It counts for redshirts. Otherwise, schools are giving more educational benefits to that player. Why not offer 3 years of law school to someone who has completted prelaw in 3 years? or 4 years of med school to a TJ Pugh finishing early? It would require a major prodigy, but I cannot imagine the NCAA will let schools attract graduate players, and pay their way for additional years, and not count those years.

  • To equate coaches being able to move when athletes have restrictions is beyond silly. A coach is working a job and not attending school and has a binding contract that he also has to follow. A student athlete is “supposed” to be in school with the goal of getting a degree which most do anyway. Allowing unlimited transfers would defeat the concept of the student athlete since most every school requires at least half the credits or 2 years in residence in order to get a degree. Unrestricted transfers would result in students with credits from several schools and a degree from none.

    If this is the case might as well declare the teams professional, pay the players and drop the pretense that top prospects actually go to college to learn anything other than the fastest road to the pros. The current setup does not appear to prevent student athletes from transferring anyway; according to the NCAA, 40% of students that enter Division 1 from HS transfer by the end of their sophomore year…coaches do not transfer nearly as much.

  • @JayHawkFanToo I agree with what you are saying about multiple transfers making it harder to get a degree, but I think colleges may be more lenient on residency credits than you said. I did a search on Google and none of the first six or so (UWash, Chic, Iowa, Wisc, UConn, Cal) were that strict. Most seem to focus on 30 residency credits, with some like UWisc) being 30 credits in residency after senior status (90 credits).

    If it could be done in 30 credits, that would make multiple transfers more viable in theory.

    But I think a better rule would be to allow one transfer, and grad transfers, without sitting out, but any later transfers require sitting out a year. And no thirds.

  • Interesting article. I think the proposal (immediate transfer with a certain GPA) is too lax if that’s the bar they are setting. A 2.7 or 2.8, that’s not setting the bar high at all for kids academically. I’d like to know how many kids are falling above or below this proposed requirement.

    I’m actually surprised the NCAA is thinking of opening this can of worms honestly. They look at record transfer numbers as a problem that needs to be fixed. I don’t think giving players the ability to transfer immediately fixes the issue. I don’t think the NCAA is prepared to deal with the potential issues this could create. Who’s going to oversea tampering? Can players transfer mid-season and play at other schools the same season?

  • This certainly isn’t going to “fix” the high amount of transfers.

  • Slippery slope, bending to pressure from those that want to destroy college basketball. It is comical to listen to the arguments of folks equating players and coaches, as if the workers in the store have anything to do with the CEO. But yes, it’s the point of view you come from … your political perspective. Mean old bosses. Folks that make high incomes are the enemy. Workers of the word, unite. That is what this is all about.

    Competition is the real engine of change. And to date, despite all the whining from the Bilas-wing of the CBB spectrum, where is the competition? Where are the better alternative leagues for these oppressed players, slaves some call them, to go make money? Heck, Billy Preston’s mom said he could have gone overseas and been an “instant millionaire.” Of course, with all the whining, CBB is the better choice. The CBB whiners have no argument, they have no proof, they have nothing other than what they think is right. And it all starts with their politics. Workers of the world, unite.

  • I’m sorry, but the analogy of coaches leaving for another school before their contract is up and players transferring is a load of crap. They are not analogous situations. Coaches can get fired before their contract is up for not performing to expectations. If a player underperforms to expectations, he loses playing time, but he is still on scholarship at the program.

    I’m fine with the graduate transfer amendment to allow a player to finish his scholarship and I would even go so far to say they should allow all programs to do that for players even if they aren’t a graduate transfer.

  • @mayjay

    Unless the rules have changed dramatically recently I don’t believe this is the case. From one of the links you provided:

    “ In addition to specific course and scholastic average requirements, each candidate for a bachelor’s degree from the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign must earn at least 60 semester hours of Illinois credit, of which as least 21 hours must be 300- or 400-level courses at this campus (Student Code Art 3-801). Consult your admissions/records officer in LAS Student Academic Affairs with questions. If you complete your last semester or year at another institution, including study abroad, but wish to receive a degree from this university, you may encounter delays in graduating if other schools do not send transcripts in time.”

    BTW, in residence was meant to indicate as “earning credits” from one institution. I can see where minor schools might take more transfer credits from a major school but the reverse is not true, otherwise you would see juniors from small schools transferring for the senior year to a more prestigious school and getting a degree from there; they might do that but the degree will be awarded by the school where most of the work (60 credits) was done. Say, if a junior from Emporia State transfers to KU and completes the last 30 credits at KU, the KU credits would be transferred to Emporia State who would grant the degree and not KU. To get a degree from KU an additional 30 credits would be required. It makes sense.

    The entire concept was based to allow JuCo students to transfer after 2 years and having them do 2 years at the larger institution which translates to at least 60 credits.

    You can see where unrestricted transfer could result on a student athlete having 130+ credits but not enough from any one school to get a degree. Basically, they become guns for hire or ringers rather than student athletes. I have no problem with the system the way it is. Student athletes should not have any less rights than the average college athlete but they shoul not have more either.

  • @HighEliteMajor my own personal politics have nothing to do with my opinion on this. I’m actually more libertarian than anything, mostly from all he time I’ve spent in government and how it’s made me acutely aware of its shortcomings. I just think if a coach can cut a player (scholarships don’t have to be renewed) then the player should be able to transfer without penalty. Like I said earlier, I’m on scholarship right now and paid a stipend. I can leave at semester and start working right away without restriction. What makes a student-athlete different than any graduate student re: finances?

  • @FarmerJayhawk

    A couples points, TTBOMK, most transfer happen not because a student athlete losing his scholarship but because of wanting more playing time or playing for a better program.

    Also, what makes you claim a student athlete cannot transfer at any time if he so desires? He can, just like any other student and start anew somewhere else, just like any other student. The only restriction is that he has to sit one year before he can play sports again, something he knew going in and something that he is not required to do to complete a college education…you know, the thing people go to college for…

  • @JayHawkFanToo I never claimed either of those things. I was just throwing out something ridiculous about the current system. How fair is it if a kid did everything right, but just gets recruited over and forced out, only to have to sit a year? And he’s penalized again if he graduates on time because while he can graduate transfer, he can’t get a scholarship for his last year.

    Since when is having to sit for a year not a penalty? If it wasn’t, the NCAA wouldn’t say it reduces transfers. A policy to discourage behavior is by definition a penalty.

  • @FarmerJayhawk But I don’t think that you are considering the deal from the start. The “deal” is exactly what is done. The coach can let a player go. The player agrees to that to start with.

    If you want to compare to a regular student, the athlete can do everything the regular student can do in changing schools. What is that you think the athlete can’t do, that a regular student can do? An athlete can transfer anytime that athlete wants, correct? And can go anywhere his academics will permit, correct? The only difference is the restriction on competing. And, of course, a regular student doesn’t have that. An athlete can leave anytime and go work, just like a non student-athlete. To answer your question, the student-athlete is not different at all in comparison to a regular student.

    The rules on transfers competing are based on the fact that competition is involved.

    Edit: I had started this and didn’t see @JayHawkFanToo’s reply.

  • @FarmerJayhawk In the business world, it’s called a no-compete clause in their contracts. Many companies have them, even professional sports leagues. The transfer rule is the NCAA’s version of the no-complete clause.

  • @FarmerJayhawk

    So, you are in effect saying that a scholarship is a right that should not be taken away and not a privilege? I bet every single student that attends school without a scholarship disagrees with you.

  • What about if there was a system in which players and coaches could mutually part ways? And that would result in immediate eligibility. A coach basically says this guy isn’t cutting it here for whatever reason, I release him and he is free to play wherever.

    Where, if a player wants out, but the coach doesn’t want to let him out freely, he can transfer and sit for a season.

    This seems like a reasonable compromise to me. Immediate eligibility would be too crazy of a thing if not regulated to a degree.

  • @Kcmatt7 Too much potential to turn very ugly for programs and players.