The NCAA is considering rule that could curtail the growing number of graduate transfers

#1

Tennesseefan2019

Tennessee Fan ever since i can remember
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
3,824
Likes
5,099
#1
The NCAA is considering rule that could curtail the growing number of graduate transfers. The NCAA will vote in two weeks on strengthening the graduate transfer rule that allows players with an undergraduate degree to transfer for the final year of their eligibility. The rule would be a nod toward academics that would require schools to commit a scholarship to the length of the pursuit of the graduate degree which in most cases is two years.

NCAA considering rule that could curtail the growing number of graduate transfers
 
#7

Dr H Lecter

Mother Hen Survivor
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
940
Likes
495
#7
The Grad transfer rule is replacing the one and done method of building teams. With the one year rule being phased out, the transfer rules will be needed to stock the blue bloods. It will be more effective for them, too, replacing unreliable freshmen with more mature, developed players that can with the Championship.
 
#8

XknoxvolsX

The only people who dislike winners are losers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
177
Likes
141
#8
There has to be some equability in the system. Locking players just to have them on the bench to keep other teams from using them isn't exactly right.
 
#9

Dr H Lecter

Mother Hen Survivor
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
940
Likes
495
#9
There has to be some equability in the system. Locking players just to have them on the bench to keep other teams from using them isn't exactly right.
So you believe these basketball players transferring are bench riders? I’m just no seeing that. The ones I’m seeing are trying to find a better basketball team to play for.
 
#10

XknoxvolsX

The only people who dislike winners are losers!
Joined
Mar 11, 2019
Messages
177
Likes
141
#10
So you believe these basketball players transferring are bench riders? I’m just no seeing that. The ones I’m seeing are trying to find a better basketball team to play for.
I'm not just looking at basketball players for this. This is affecting and impacting more sports but in a way, yes, for the most part.
 
#11

Dr H Lecter

Mother Hen Survivor
Joined
Sep 4, 2012
Messages
940
Likes
495
#11
I’m way too old school to get in this type discussion. I was brought up in a different time with different attitudes. You make your choices, you live with them, and you follow through. I’m old but I’m still smart enough to know that this is not the prevailing attitude anymore. We’ll just have to live with the consequences. I’ve seen one sport dying on the vine because of money (car racing- it was sad to watch Bristol today), and big money is swallowing all sports.
 
#12

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
57,413
Likes
29,632
#12
Whether student athletes are empowered to transfer or not, we're going to end up with undesirable outcomes. As a general rule of thumb, giving people choice, especially when they are young amateurs, is the moral approach.
 
#13

LouderVol

Last of XVI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
24,358
Likes
10,995
#13
Whether student athletes are empowered to transfer or not, we're going to end up with undesirable outcomes. As a general rule of thumb, giving people choice, especially when they are young amateurs, is the moral approach.
I dont think this can be construed as a moral issue. No one made them play. No one made them sign. They knew the rules before hand. Unless you are fine with schools cutting players?
 
#15

n_huffhines

What's it gonna cost?
Joined
Mar 11, 2009
Messages
57,413
Likes
29,632
#15
I dont think this can be construed as a moral issue. No one made them play. No one made them sign. They knew the rules before hand. Unless you are fine with schools cutting players?
?

I'm talking about how things should be, I'm not talking about existing cases. If the kid and university both know he can do a grad transfer, then that is the agreement, right?

Morality is a component, whether or not it is the issue. I view it as the tie breaker on a difficult question
 
#17

LouderVol

Last of XVI!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Joined
May 19, 2014
Messages
24,358
Likes
10,995
#17
?

I'm talking about how things should be, I'm not talking about existing cases. If the kid and university both know he can do a grad transfer, then that is the agreement, right?

Morality is a component, whether or not it is the issue. I view it as the tie breaker on a difficult question
that still isn't being taken away. they can still transfer. They just have to find a third party willing to take on the burden. same as it was before. New conditions but they haven't been denied anything.
 
#20

Godfatha

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
8,151
Likes
3,961
#20
This is nothing more than an attempt to protect the Sabans of the world.

The NCAA is the most hypocritical organization I can think of, claiming to care about student athletes yet considering a rule to limit their choices.

A scholarship, to my understanding, is a one year contract. The coach can cut a player without any negative other than possible negative feelings by the cut player and his high school coach. A player cannot however transfer out without sitting out and losing a year of eligibility.

The loophole now is that a player can get his undergraduate and be free to transfer, without that loss of eligibility. So if the guy has been riding the pine at Alabama or Clemson, he will at least be able to go to a school that he might get to play. He might also want to transfer to a school that offers a program that his current school does not. Who can rightfully argue that a player should not be able to do that, especially considering the inequity that is in place with the one year scholarship/contract.

The NCAA makes me sick and there will be a day to come when players will sue the NCAA for this.
 
#21

Godfatha

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2006
Messages
8,151
Likes
3,961
#21
I’m way too old school to get in this type discussion. I was brought up in a different time with different attitudes. You make your choices, you live with them, and you follow through. I’m old but I’m still smart enough to know that this is not the prevailing attitude anymore. We’ll just have to live with the consequences. I’ve seen one sport dying on the vine because of money (car racing- it was sad to watch Bristol today), and big money is swallowing all sports.
I agree with your sentiment in some respects. However, what if you hired on at a job where you were mislead, either with promised pay or opportunity, or found the working environment to be poor. Would you be doomed to remain at that job because of some sort of moral obligation? Should you be forced to sit a year out of work because if your choice to leave?
 
#22

hog88

In dog beers I've only had 1
Joined
Sep 30, 2008
Messages
52,558
Likes
31,079
#22
Since schools can give 4 year scholarships now, a better rule would be:
If you are given and accept a 4 year scholly you are there until your eligibility runs out. Can't transfer.
If you are on a year to year and your scholarship is pulled you are free to go wherever. You graduate with eligibility you are free to go where ever for the remainder of your eligibility.
 
#23

volfannbama

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2010
Messages
14,391
Likes
16,520
#23
The ncaa should make a rule where the gaining school cant pay the buyout of the coach they hired, and cant give a bonus in the size of the buyout. Coached that are under contract should have to sit out a year if they are hired by another school.
 
#25

volfanbill

Praying for Squirrely
Joined
Sep 6, 2006
Messages
30,297
Likes
6,475
#25
The NCAA should just decide where every player is going and mandate they play for five years. That way everyone has to redshirt one season and no team has a real advantage. (unless they pay the NCAA).

Imagine the excitement when the next Zion Williamson gets selected to play for ETSU.
 

VN Store



Sponsors
 

Top