Under Consideration: ncaa announces one-time immediate eligibility transfer exception

#52
#52
RDU VOL#14 said:
I’m not sure I’m a huge fan of free agency college football. On top of that, it makes coaches lives that much more difficult . It’s already bad enough with the early signing period, now constantly recruiting your own team makes things that much more difficult.
Click to expand...

Yes those poor coaches. If only there were some way to compensate them for their many hardships.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I40flyer
#53
#53
VOL_Lyfe said:
Even professional athletes have to honor a signed contract before they get free agency.
Click to expand...

Technically a collegiate athlete transferring after 1 year would be honoring their contract. Athletics scholly’s are year-to-year.
 
#54
#54
Halph66 said:
This is good for the student athletes for sure.

The first time a school fires a coach and the entire team, or even half of the team says, fine, i'm transferring. I can see a schools entire program decimated just like that. A school can only add 25 players in a given year. This could be crippling.
Click to expand...

You think a coach gets fired and 85 (or even 43) dudes transfer? That’s some Grade A fear mongering if I’ve ever seen it
 
  • Like
Reactions: I40flyer
#55
#55
MarcoVol said:
Yes those poor coaches. If only there were some way to compensate them for their many hardships.
Click to expand...
Maybe read my other post. I want my coaches working smarter, not harder and I want the product of college football to be great and not watered down because a ton of great coaches feel like the NFL life would be better.
 
#56
#56
RDU VOL#14 said:
Maybe read my other post. I want my coaches working smarter, not harder and I want the product of college football to be great and not watered down because a ton of great coaches feel like the NFL life would be better.
Click to expand...

Read it. Still don’t agree, and that’s ok. To me, fighting change simply bc change is scary is preposterous. Nobody actually knows how any of this will affect anything.
 
#57
#57
Either implement this rule, or require coaches to show a hardship before they can leave a school in the middle of a contract. Maybe make them sit out a year w/o pay.

Then you will see rules change, and quickly.
 
#58
#58
MarcoVol said:
Read it. Still don’t agree, and that’s ok. To me, fighting change simply bc change is scary is preposterous. Nobody actually knows how any of this will affect anything.
Click to expand...

I don’t think it’s preposterous to discuss potential flaws or issues that may arise very quickly because of some the new rules. I don’t consider that to be scared of change, but weighing the pros and cons that are associated with it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Behr
#59
#59
Free Agency has arrived in college athletics. While I like this for Tennessee, it will only make things worse for programs with less money. This gap between the rich and the poor just got bigger. We’re slowly eliminating the middle class.
 
  • Like
Reactions: I40flyer
#60
#60
HuntlandVolinColo said:
This will be good for Cade Mays

Will it be good or terrible for the Top Teams?

They could lose their depth easier and they could bring in missing chess pieces just as easily.

If I was at bama and had the championship ring, I'd be ready leave turd town for greener pastures.

Could get interesting for scholly management too: maybe holding a few more for transfers.
Click to expand...
They might start allowing you to sign more than 25 to make up for the losses in the portal.
 
#61
#61
This will probably make it more common for players to follow their coaches if they go for another job.

It will definitely be hard on schools when they have to fire a coach for bad performance.
 
#62
#62
I feel as if this will make a coaches job even harder than it already is. Good luck building depth.
 
#63
#63
So....here's my thoughts:

1. Smaller schools or the Group of 5, just became the "Farm League" for the SEC, Big 10, Big 12, ACC, and PAC. If a player shines in one of those leagues, what is to prevent him from getting an instant "call-up" to the "big league programs" that maybe passed on him the first time around? But, in all honesty, this is what should happen. Better players should play on the bigger stages, and oftentimes, good players are shorted because of the "competition" they play against.

2. I am totally for this, because college players have limited years of eligibility to make their football careers count to begin with. People want to talk about Mel Tucker, who yes, was crap to do what he did, how he did, but he is given a contract, and at the end of his contract, is free to work another job if he wants. These kids have 5 years typically, tops, to make enough strides developmentally and on the field to be able to make it to the league. They can get educations everywhere, but if they feel they can maximize their limited time as collegiate football players elsewhere, they should do so. For many of these guys, once their senior year is done, so is their football career. Coaches can coach for decades, but a college football player can only "play" for 4 years.

3. The ONLY thing I'd like to see is a rule that says that a player can transfer at two times: After their sophomore year, AND when they're a graduate transfer. I think that if a coach spends years recruiting a player, it's only fair for the player to give 2 years (one of them can be redshirt year) to the coach to develop them as much as possible, and determine if it's a good fit, and it's only fair to the coach to have the players he expects to have. After their second year out of high school, they can transfer, and be immediately eligible somewhere else. This way, you KNOW the players who are at risk to transfer, because they'll be those finishing their second year, or those who are grad transfers. A player is convinced to spend the first two years at a school, get their "general education requirements" out of the way, learn the playbook, learn the system, learn the culture. And then, the coach recruits them to finish out the remaining two to three years of eligibility there, until they graduate. To me, that makes more sense than saying anyone can leave anytime they want. If your coach leaves in your first year, okay, well, you have to play one for the new guy, and then you can transfer if it's not going well. It prevents knee jerk reactions, and I think would provide much more solidarity for coaches predicting their rosters. It would also encourage guys to get their degrees quicker, since that would allow them to transfer quicker, if they're past their sophomore year.

4. I feel like the rule should also be that coaches can accept as many transfers as they'd like, as long as they are under the 85 limit when the season starts. Since there is no limit on how many can be lost, there's no limit on how many can be gained.

5. This eliminates a lot of the "yeah, but what if's" that we're getting in cases like Mays and everyone else, who are seeking waivers. Would be clear cut.

JMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tennesseekilt
#66
#66
Only_1_OK said:
I'm not fond of the "hardship" language built into that. I think a completely unrestricted, one time transfer can and should be included. Now, beyond that, I don't think student-athletes should be hopping from school to school every year until they run out of eligibility either. A one time, get out of jail free pass should be granted without a waiver or with a simple form.

My point is if a school decides to change coaches and the new athlete doesn't feel the new coach represents them, they should be allowed to depart without any restrictions at least once. Baker Mayfield is a prime example of how the system works against student-athletes in his transfer from Texas Tech to OU. He literally walked on at Texas Tech, transferred, walked on and OU and they still wouldn't grant him an immediate status even though he wasn't on scholarship.

Losing schools have too much power over the transfer process and losing coaches tend to throw temper tantrums when a player wants to move on to greener pastures.
Click to expand...
Im with u on players being able to leave if there is a coaching change becuase coaching is part of their initial decision. I also believe if you didnt have alot of options during your recruiting process u should be able to follow your dream if the situation presents itself. My only issue would be for these high profile guys who were recruited by everyone since they were in middle school. I would think those guys would have been through enough OV's, camps, & in-home visits over a long period of time to know what school they want to attend. Imagine if Trevor Lawrence just out of the blue goes to Bama becuase he thinks they have a more talented roster then Clemson.
 
#67
#67
Rasputin_Vol said:
WTF do coaches commit to when they sign multi-million dollar contracts?

Coaches don't have to sit a year between jobs, so why make that distinction for players?
Click to expand...

Great analogy; schools should have to buy out transferring athletes. And if players are under-performing, Boom! - fired and immediately get new ones.

Finally, players will be treated like coaches!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Voltopia
#68
#68
901 Orange said:
Im with u on players being able to leave if there is a coaching change becuase coaching is part of their initial decision. I also believe if you didnt have alot of options during your recruiting process u should be able to follow your dream if the situation presents itself. My only issue would be for these high profile guys who were recruited by everyone since they were in middle school. I would think those guys would have been through enough OV's, camps, & in-home visits over a long period of time to know what school they want to attend. Imagine if Trevor Lawrence just out of the blue goes to Bama becuase he thinks they have a more talented roster then Clemson.
Click to expand...
Again, limits on such things like a one time free pass deal. If you decide to do it again, there would be consequences of maybe losing a year of eligibility or sitting a year.
 
#69
#69
RDU VOL#14 said:
I don’t think it’s preposterous to discuss potential flaws or issues that may arise very quickly because of some the new rules. I don’t consider that to be scared of change, but weighing the pros and cons that are associated with it.
Click to expand...
The adults agree with you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RDU VOL#14
#70
#70
TVOL71 said:
A second transfer should always require the player to sit out a year except with a situation where the school is dropping the sport or moving to a lower division.
Click to expand...

HA. You mean the current rule? I thought this was all happening because the current rule wasn't "fair."

Yeah. That'll last until some folks get all worked up about it being unfair to limit transfers at all (again), and then they'll extend it to two transfers, and then one per academic year, and then who knows what.
 
#71
#71
Someone may have already posted this as I've only read through a few post. This may be a bigger issue for teams that are not very good(Vandy comes to mind) that have one or two bona fide studs. They prove they can play play at the P5 level and leave for a better team hoping to win a NC. Hopefully we'll be in contention soon and won't have to worry about it as much.
 
Last edited:
#72
#72
901 Orange said:
Im with u on players being able to leave if there is a coaching change becuase coaching is part of their initial decision. I also believe if you didnt have alot of options during your recruiting process u should be able to follow your dream if the situation presents itself. My only issue would be for these high profile guys who were recruited by everyone since they were in middle school. I would think those guys would have been through enough OV's, camps, & in-home visits over a long period of time to know what school they want to attend. Imagine if Trevor Lawrence just out of the blue goes to Bama becuase he thinks they have a more talented roster then Clemson.
Click to expand...

Do you think Clemson would release Lawrence to go to Alabama? I don't. I can't see a school releasing any of its top players. They will all have to go through the process the same as now.

A mass exodus from one team isn't going to happen because that school won't release the players.
 
#73
#73
Behr said:
The answer is in the question. They're still kids. Not sure how you can compare the two.

I guess since the adults do it even though its wrong, we should let the kids do it too.



They don't have to pay hundreds of thousands if not millions in some cases to leave?
Click to expand...
19-20-21-22 years old, kids? I wonder how old the MEN that won WWII were on average?
 
#74
#74
One good thing that could come from this is coaches and recruiters will have to tell the truth (the whole truth) when they recruit, otherwise, after being lied to, a player may decide he has no loyalty to those that lied to him. They are going to have to use different tactics, such as giving their girl friend a scholarship, type thing. But when the Unlimited outside cash, from those wanting to use their likeness is allowed (she's coming around the corner), we'll see a pack of players leaving-every year.
 
#75
#75
Can we just disband the NCAA and bring back college football on Xbox and PlayStation already?

The NCAA is hanging on by a thread to even consider these rules. It’s only a matter of time for them.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top