Jacob Eason Transferring?

#126
#126
SaintLouisVol said:
I just don't see how you could manage that from a rules perspective. It certainly would not be fair to limit the rules to certain positions. And, who is actually going to determine what constitutes a "fair" amount of playing time and what constitutes a transferable amount?

How can a program recruit and build depth with such a rule in place? If you recruit top players, you run off your existing roster.

I understand the issue and do have sympathy for players who get recruited over or lose opportunity because of injury. But, I don't think there is a fair and manageable solution that doesn't cause more harm than good.
Click to expand...

Why is it fair for a team to hoard all the talent? The whole point of amateurism is to level the playing field but the playing field is not level at all. Out of 16 total playoff spots, we've only had 9 teams. You're making an argument for a rule change.
 
#128
#128
n_huffhines said:
Why is it fair for a team to hoard all the talent? The whole point of amateurism is to level the playing field but the playing field is not level at all. Out of 16 total playoff spots, we've only had 9 teams. You're making an argument for a rule change.
Click to expand...

Yes, let's bring wealth redistribution into college football! Next step Champions of Participation!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#129
#129
daj2576 said:
To play devils advicate: those who believe in personal freedom celebrate the fact that the young man chose to trade his football talents for certain benefits provided by UGA. The price and condition of that trade was put in writing with all parties signing intending to be bound by those conditions.

Imagine if he had walked into an Army recruiter’s office and signed up for a four year tour. A couple years later he no longer likes the food, he isn’t being promoted fast enough, and wants to leave. Should he be allowed to just walk into his commanders office and quit or go join the Navy?
Click to expand...

Jesus Christ, dude. It's college football. Not war and peace.

The NCAA is a cartel. He signed the contract because the cartel has made it so you either sign or don't play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#132
#132
Big Orange #1 said:
Will Georgia QB Jacob Eason transfer? That's the 'million dollar' question

Good article on Eason and if he will transfer. One would think yes given the success of Fromm and Fields enrolling this year. His talent is off the charts and has prob the biggest arm in college football. Perfect pro style QB.

Could CJP and CTH get in with Eason. This is the type of QB that is a program changer.

What you think volnation do we swing for the fences on him?
Click to expand...

You pretty much can’t. With it hypothetically being both an FBS-to-FBS transfer as well as an in-conference one, UGA would have to sign something to allow him said transfer (without the penalty of him sitting out a second year). They’re not going to waive that for a transfer to a program they have to play yearly.
 
Last edited:
#133
#133
daj2576 said:
That might generally be true, but it’s irrelevant from a freedom to contract standpoint. If the contract he entered into was clear about the terms and conditions and he signed it, he not only exercised his freedoms but knowingly gave some of them up in return.

He also had the opportunity to exercise other freedoms including trading his talent for schooling elsewhere that wouldn’t put such terms on the trade, or to find other avenues to pay for his schooling while walking on to the football team. That’s true freedom.

You really can’t have it both ways. You can’t say this is mostly about education without acknowledging there are many other ways with even a modicum of academic achievement to go to school without having to play football. You can’t say it’s mostly about football at this level, without acknowledging that, from the players stand point, college football is just a marketing ploy to try to get exposure and resume to get into the nfl. Either way, he decided to trade a skill for either and in return granted some of his rights and freedoms to the school.

Again, I’m playing devils advocate but this idea that adults shouldn’t be allowed to contract is interesting, at the least. The market dictates the players value to the school. If Eason exercises his ability to not negotiate such terms, he will be replaced by any number of similarly talented people who will.

Ultimately I agree that the system is severely flawed. I don’t think it is flawed for the reason being suggested here, however. I think it is flawed by how people are mortgaging their future on something that has a very small chance to be successful. Only the top 1% of the top 1% of the top 1% of high school players will go pro in football. Why risk your body, your education, and thus your future, for such long odds? Why allow so many people to skirt through their schooling because they’re good at a game they could play while also getting an education? Those are the things that concern me.
Click to expand...

There is no negotiation here. There's no way for Eason to, upon signing his LOI, negotiate an unconditional release for himself in the future. The NCAA has essentially fixed standard contracts across the board, getting around typical antitrust laws by calling players "amateurs." It's not Eason's choice, it's imposed upon him.
 
#134
#134
NashVol11 said:
There is no negotiation here. There's no way for Eason to, upon signing his LOI, negotiate an unconditional release for himself in the future. The NCAA has essentially fixed standard contracts across the board, getting around typical antitrust laws by calling players "amateurs." It's not Eason's choice, it's imposed upon him.
Click to expand...

Unless the school is put on a two year bowl ban.
 
#136
#136
n_huffhines said:
Why is it fair for a team to hoard all the talent? The whole point of amateurism is to level the playing field but the playing field is not level at all. Out of 16 total playoff spots, we've only had 9 teams. You're making an argument for a rule change.
Click to expand...

Where is it written that the whole point of amateurism is to level the playing field? The primary point of amateurism is the notion that you’re playing as a representative of something rather than as a professional for personal gain. For example: the U.S. in the Olympics, or for a University, or your church softball team. You’re doing it AT WILL for your own fulfillment.

Too many look at college sports as something that exists in a vacuum. The players are not just “talent,” they are students. The rules should be set up to best serve first that idea and secondly the idea of their athletic “career.”

As long as the same rules have to serve a football player at Alabama AND a volleyball player at Appalachian State, they have to be student first focused. Bouncing around from school to school hardly does that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#138
#138
SaintLouisVol said:
Where is it written that the whole point of amateurism is to level the playing field? The primary point of amateurism is the notion that you’re playing as a representative of something rather than as a professional for personal gain. For example: the U.S. in the Olympics, or for a University, or your church softball team. You’re doing it AT WILL for your own fulfillment.

Too many look at college sports as something that exists in a vacuum. The players are not just “talent,” they are students. The rules should be set up to best serve first that idea and secondly the idea of their athletic “career.”

As long as the same rules have to serve a football player at Alabama AND a volleyball player at Appalachian State, they have to be student first focused. Bouncing around from school to school hardly does that.
Click to expand...

And students are free to transfer wherever they want, so there goes that argument.
 
#139
#139
n_huffhines said:
Jesus Christ, dude. It's college football. Not war and peace.

The NCAA is a cartel. He signed the contract because the cartel has made it so you either sign or don't play.
Click to expand...

You’ve made my point for me.

It’s a game.

If, for the opportunity to play the game, at a given level and a given school, a player decides to sign away his rights in exchange for a scholarship, other benefits, and restrictions, he did so freely for the chance to play a game there.

A game.

A game he could play at a lower level without those restrictions, or pay for his own education and walk on to play without those restrictions. Again, if he didn’t sign, someone else of similar talent would, and thus he has no real bargaining power. It doesn’t need a cartel to enforce uneven bargaining power when you have a glut of supply, and very little (comparative) demand.

Are you saying he shouldn’t be allowed to contract to gain access to those benefits and be encumbered by the restrictions?

Or, are you fundamentally arguing that playing football at a major college is a right that cannot be infringed?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#140
#140
daj2576 said:
You’ve made my point for me.

It’s a game.

If, for the opportunity to play the game, at a given level and a given school, a player decides to sign away his rights in exchange for a scholarship, other benefits, and restrictions, he did so freely for the chance to play a game there.

A game.

A game he could play at a lower level without those restrictions, or pay for his own education and walk on to play without those restrictions. Again, if he didn’t sign, someone else of similar talent would, and thus he has no real bargaining power. It doesn’t need a cartel to enforce uneven bargaining power when you have a glut of supply, and very little (comparative) demand.

Are you saying he shouldn’t be allowed to contract to gain access to those benefits and be encumbered by the restrictions?

Or, are you fundamentally arguing that playing football at a major college is a right that cannot be infringed?
Click to expand...

The freedom of choice that you are claiming to play "devil's advocate" for (but to be honest, it looks like you actually believe this) doesn't exist. There is a cartel that essentially controls access to the NFL and fixes "prices"/contracts across the board. There is no freedom to negotiate different terms, which is the premise your entire point rests on.
 
#141
#141
daj2576 said:
You’ve made my point for me.

It’s a game.

If, for the opportunity to play the game, at a given level and a given school, a player decides to sign away his rights in exchange for a scholarship, other benefits, and restrictions, he did so freely for the chance to play a game there.

A game.

A game he could play at a lower level without those restrictions, or pay for his own education and walk on to play without those restrictions. Again, if he didn’t sign, someone else of similar talent would, and thus he has no real bargaining power. It doesn’t need a cartel to enforce uneven bargaining power when you have a glut of supply, and very little (comparative) demand.

Are you saying he shouldn’t be allowed to contract to gain access to those benefits and be encumbered by the restrictions?

Or, are you fundamentally arguing that playing football at a major college is a right that cannot be infringed?
Click to expand...

Yes, there is incredibly uneven bargaining power. Yes, the NCAA could probably include in its scholarship agreements that football players have to live in a dungeon for four years, and most players would still sign it. Don't then turn around and act like everyone has free choice and like this is some triumph of capitalism. A monopoly like this is the exact opposite of that.
 
#148
#148
Vol0725 said:
If Fromm starts choking it up in bowl game, or natty champ game, would they put in Eason?
Click to expand...

They should have went with Eason to start second half vs Auburn in regular season. Fromm will have a tight leash in regards to playing OU as UGA isn't built to win if they fall 2 or 3 scores down.
 
#149
#149
JMSqb11 said:
They should have went with Eason to start second half vs Auburn in regular season. Fromm will have a tight leash in regards to playing OU as UGA isn't built to win if they fall 2 or 3 scores down.
Click to expand...

Based on what I remember about Eason, I think he's better than Fromm.

He never got a chance to come back from that injury.

I would not be surprised if he plays against OU.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top