Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Jaredcg

Immediate Transfers

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, thedude15 said:

It would still be a way bigger blow for the mid major. Mid major schools would lose their STARS to the major schools. Major schools would lose some depth (bench players transferring). 

Heck even the grad transfer rule hurts mid majors. If you take a "cupcake" major it is easy to get a degree in three years + summer and/or winter session(s). Mid major stars with a cupcake major can then transfer to a major school as a Sr or RS Jr. 

I really think, from a competitive stand point, there has to be a disincentive from transferring. Personally I think everyone should have to sit out a year unless

-  There is a compelling personal reason (ie I know Fresno had a basketball player transfer to UNLV and become immediately eligible because I believe his father was dying)

-The head coach of your school leaves (gets fired, resigns, takes another job, passes away). This should give every single player a one time chance at the end of the season to transfer and be immediately eligible. This reduces the compliant that coaches can leave without notice so players should also. Any major coaching change would give the players a chance to leave.

-The school goes on probation/punishment for your sport.  Ie scholarship loss, postseason ban. Again give the players a one time chance to leave at the end of the season without sitting out.

I agree with you, but of course I do because I am in the same faction as you, and the three factions are:

1) The NCAA and its member institutions, receiving billions of dollars annually off of college sports

2) The athletes, the unpaid labor who generate the revenue

3) The consumers (fans) who generally care about the integrity, competitiveness, and tradition of the sport

The athletes in the revenue generating sports are becoming more demanding, because they realize the system is not really set up to benefit them.  Among the issues that the NCAA is willing to appease them on is freedom of where to play.  This does not hurt the NCAA financially and they don't mind seeing a Brandon Clarke move to a program where he'll be in the tournament the rest of his career.  Also, as players are gaining more unity from issues like EA Sports using their likenesses, there is a move to make it seem less like the schools "own" the players, or at least limit their mobility with one-sided scholarship contracts.  When you say "disincentive from transferring" that sounds a lot like limiting freedom.

The "sitting out a year" is currently justified by the NCAA solely as a benefit to the athlete by giving the athlete a year to adjust academically to the new school.  Maybe the athletes say that is a "benefit" they don't need (?)

Neither the NCAA nor the athletes are too concerned with your "competitive stand point".  Hopefully the coaches are.

(Follow-on after seeing this article: https://247sports.com/Article/Sources-Major-Potential-Shift-In-NCAA-Transfer-Rules-107001121)

Two things that stood out to me:

  • student-athletes being permitted to change schools as freely as coaches
  • which metrics best indicate a potential transfer's ability to transition academically at a new school
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Different look at the transfer issue that only Air Force and the other two SA's have to face....players (cadets) can leave up to the first day of their junior year with no commitment to the military.  Once you begin your junior year you either graduate and serve as a commissioned officer for five years (up to 10 if going to pilot training) and, if you decide to leave the Academy before graduation in the last wo years you have a X-number of years commitment as an enlisted member (airman, private, seaman. 

 

A very good good read on two current players at AF coming into their own and losses the Falcons have faced over the years. Great article and forward thinking look at AF's Swann, Scottie and the sophomores. The future is bright but will they stay. This is kind of a Field of Dreams setting.    http://gazette.com/air-force-basketball-tandem-of-lavelle-scottie-and-ryan-swan-could-lead-programs-revival-assuming-they-stay/article/1619075

 

 

..GO FALCONS..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Headbutt said:

They already do that. 

You can get a free education with a strong football experience at BSU, or...

You can get a good free education with a decent football experience at CSU.

It's a free choice.

Indentured servants don't make $20,000 per year + tutoring, nutrition, high level coaching, free medical, and a weekly try out for a multi million dollar job after college.

You can't negotiate a million dollar salary which is what some of these kids are worth to their schools.

A free education at most places like CSU means you get an advanced underwater basket weaving degree.  No chance they will let you be a biology or chemistry major because that would interfere with practice so you free degree is about as good as any papermill degree.

Why are you scared of giving these kids the same freedom as you have to negotiate pay?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

51 minutes ago, ltcpilot said:

A Different look at the transfer issue that only Air Force and the other two SA's have to face....players (cadets) can leave up to the first day of their junior year with no commitment to the military.  Once you begin your junior year you either graduate and serve as a commissioned officer for five years (up to 10 if going to pilot training) and, if you decide to leave the Academy before graduation in the last wo years you have a X-number of years commitment as an enlisted member (airman, private, seaman. 

 

A very good good read on two current players at AF coming into their own and losses the Falcons have faced over the years. Great article and forward thinking look at AF's Swann, Scottie and the sophomores. The future is bright but will they stay. This is kind of a Field of Dreams setting.    http://gazette.com/air-force-basketball-tandem-of-lavelle-scottie-and-ryan-swan-could-lead-programs-revival-assuming-they-stay/article/1619075

 

What % of cadets start/complete pilot training?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, renoskier said:

What % of cadets start/complete pilot training?

In the class of 2016 795 graduated (plus 17 more international cadets) and 345  went to pilot training from the Academy = 43.4%.  As I remember a typical flight ( usually 6 flights per Squadron with classes staggered so different student classes/flights would be in different phases of flight from basic flying to instrument flying to navigation flying and finally formation flying) in the Squadron during pilot training had approximately 23 to 25 student Pilots. Of that generally everyone made it but three or four at the most. Sometimes there were less sometimes more but it's a very competitive and a very good program. Initially upon the start of pilot training you'll have at least one individual that may have problems getting sick during the acrobatic basic phase. Generally they have ways working with medical to get them acclimated to flying under those conditions and generally we do not lose students anymore because of that but sometimes you do.

 

..GO FALCONS..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, ltcpilot said:

In the class of 2016 795 graduated (plus 17 more international cadets) and 345 U.S. grays went to pilot training from the Academy = 43.4%.  As I remember a typical flight ( usually 6 flights per Squadron with classes staggered so different student classes/flights would be in different phases of flight from basic flying to instrument flying to navigation flying and finally formation flying) in the Squadron during pilot training had approximately 23 to 25 student Pilots. Of that generally everyone made it but three or four at the most. Sometimes there were less sometimes more but it's a very competitive and a very good program. Initially upon the start of pilot training you'll have at least one individual that may have problems getting sick during the acrobatic basic phase. Generally they have ways working with medical to get them acclimated to flying under those conditions and generally we do not lose students anymore because of that but sometimes you do.

As a kid flying with my dad, I'd sometimes have a problem. Once I started flying, never had a problem in the left seat.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yay! we're not gonna suck next year!

Memphis lands four-star Arizona State (Norvell's old team) GRAD transfer (so he can immediately play) Brady White.

https://247sports.com/Player/Brady-White-30136

if you graduate, you should be able to transfer and play...but outside that, they should sit out a season IMHO.

 

mem skyline sig.jpeg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this overhaul proposed by the big 12 makes sense, two key changes

https://sports.yahoo.com/ncaa-must-back-revolutionary-athlete-transfer-proposal-220528626.html

The first calls for a complete abolition of transfer limitations. Quite simply, schools would no longer be allowed to tell a transferring athlete where he or she couldn’t go, including arch rivals and conference opponents. That’s long been an indefensible position, but it has persisted.

(The Big 12 proposal would allow immediately eligibility for any player whose sport is hit with a postseason ban, regardless of year in school. That would eliminate the need for what has been happening with Ole Miss transfers — attorney Thomas Mars has been leading an offensive on their behalf, urging NCAA rulings granting them eligible for the 2018 season.)

The second calls for transferring athletes to be immediately eligible to play in the event of their coach leaving the school, whether resigning to take another job or being fired. This would deconstruct the stubbornly held NCAA position that athletes make their college choices not because of the coach, but because of the school itself. The one caveat here is that athletes would not be able to follow coaches leaving for another school and have immediate eligibility, a sensible qualifier that would curtail wholesale raiding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I saw this morning I was fully onboard with this proposal. Still makes players stick to their commitment or pay a small penalty in the grand scheme of things (1 year sit out), however now if the coach they signed up for is gone they have a lot more options.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm all for the players having more freedom, so I don't mind this going through.

But this will suck big time for fans of schools like ours. Not only does your coach get poached if you string together a couple decent seasons, but now the P5's will come in and take half your roster. I didn't read the proposal, but will there be something in place that allows the new coach to recruit more than 25 players to make up for all the losses? If not, losing your coach to a P5 could set your program back a decade. Enjoy!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Fort Fun said:

I'm all for the players having more freedom, so I don't mind this going through.

But this will suck big time for fans of schools like ours. Not only does your coach get poached if you string together a couple decent seasons, but now the P5's will come in and take half your roster. I didn't read the proposal, but will there be something in place that allows the new coach to recruit more than 25 players to make up for all the losses? If not, losing your coach to a P5 could set your program back a decade. Enjoy!

Yep.  I did read the proposal, and I like what they are proposing.  I do however agree with you.  It may have to be taken in stages depending on the cause of transfer.  If players otherwise ineligible for immediate playing time transfer due to a coaching change, I'd give the new coach two years to refill those scholly's above and beyond the 25 limit.  If that's 10 players the new coach can sign 35 in his first class, or 30 in his first two classes for example.  It's only fair. 

In the case of those same players transferring due to NCAA violations, I think I'd be less generous to the new coach.  No sense in rushing to put a violating program back on even footing ASAP.  That needs to be part of the consequences.  The new guy coming in needs to know he's walking into a rough situation and why.  There are no secrets.  If you get sanctioned and lose players, go ahead and hire that new coach but be aware that he's going to be short on players.  Maybe let him recruit 1/2 of what he lost, or none of what he lost.  I'm not a fan of just giving an offending institution a fresh start.  A little bit of additional proactive action to make institutions think twice about cheating.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...