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

#1
Tennesseefan2019

Tennesseefan2019

ALL LIVES MATTER!
Joined
Feb 14, 2019
Messages
17,257
Likes
29,799
#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
#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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tennesseefan2019
#8
#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
#9
XknoxvolsX said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sccshortstop
#10
#10
Dr H Lecter said:
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.
Click to expand...

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
#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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paper_Towel, DWright39, hog88 and 2 others
#12
#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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolNExile
#13
#13
n_huffhines said:
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.
Click to expand...
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
#15
LouderVol said:
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?
Click to expand...

?

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
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolNExile
#17
#17
n_huffhines said:
?

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
Click to expand...
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
#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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolNExile
#21
#21
Dr H Lecter said:
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.
Click to expand...
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?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolNExile
#22
#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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tbh and Tennesseefan2019
#23
#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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Tennesseefan2019
#25
#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.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top