Question of the day: Tinkering with NCAA transfer rules

Discussion in 'Nuttin' but Net' started by ufla5220, Sep 7, 2013.

  1. ufla5220
    Offline

    ufla5220 Editor & Reporter

    Joined:
    Mar 27, 2007
    Messages:
    15,812
    Likes Received:
    667
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Ratings Received:
    +1,785
    Until basketball season begins next month, I'm scaling back to one question per day. Once practice begins, we'll go back to three.

    TODAY'S QUESTION:

    The NCAA is mulling legislation that would allow Division I basketball players to be able to transfer to any school they choose without requiring approval of their current school. Is this a good idea or should their current school be able to prevent transferring to a major rival?
  2. InstiGATOR1
    Offline

    InstiGATOR1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    Messages:
    3,100
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +75
    Perhaps the NCAA could make the rule a little more restrictive. How about if a player can transfer to any program that in not in the same conference or traditionally on the schedule of the program they are leaving unless the first school waives this restriction.

    So unlike today, the restrictions are limited and the school can reduce them but can not increase them. That might cut down on any issue though most recent issues have been hardship and post graduate waivers.
  3. REM08
    Online

    REM08 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 1, 2010
    Messages:
    4,857
    Likes Received:
    194
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Arkansas
    Ratings Received:
    +702
    Like I've said before, let kids decide where they want to go and don't place restrictions on it. If Julius Randle decides Kentucky was a bad decision and he'd like to try Florida, then IMO the only thing that should stop him is if Cal suspects Donovan (or someone connected to the program) of recruiting him away from his current school. Cal would have to publically name the school he's restricting transfer to and name the reason why.

    There is something wrong with every possible way of handling transfers that I can think of, but this is the way I think is worth a try.
  4. gatorchamps0607
    Online

    gatorchamps0607 Always Rasta Premium Member

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2007
    Messages:
    41,452
    Likes Received:
    1,350
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Ft. Myers, Florida
    Ratings Received:
    +3,810
    A player should be allowed to transfer once with no restrictions whatsoever. After that, if you transfer again you have to sit out a year. Coaches should have no say in where you feel like transferring.
    • Like Like x 1
  5. corpgator
    Offline

    corpgator Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 9, 2010
    Messages:
    6,319
    Likes Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +792
    Drop the rule that kid must sit out for a year. Or make coaches sit out for a year.

    Or better yet: require all scholarships to be 4 years. If a kid wants to transfer while on that scholly, he has to sit out a year. If the school releases him, then he can go wherever he wants with no cooling off period, but the school cannot release him unless the student asks for it.
  6. gtr2x
    Offline

    gtr2x Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 21, 2007
    Messages:
    12,049
    Likes Received:
    394
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +834
    Good comments here, all would be fairer than the current system.
    • Like Like x 1
  7. regurgigator
    Offline

    regurgigator VIP Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    10,135
    Likes Received:
    1,084
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Location:
    Seattle area
    Ratings Received:
    +2,222
    I would be for the proposed change. I'm not sure I even understand the current rule. I didn't think a school could actually prevent anyone from transferring to a particular school. If a school does "prevent" the transfer and the players goes there anyway, doesn't it mean that the player can't be on scholarship for the year he sits out?

    I would, however, keep the requirement that players have to sit out a year when they transfer - although I would consider allowing transfers with immediate eligibility if the head coach leaves. It's very hard as it is for programs to have any stability with one-and-done rules and as many transfers as there are under the current rules.

    I also think allowing players to transfer with no restrictions (i.e., sitting out a year) would kill tough coaches like Donovan who hold players responsible from the beginning. I would guess that Donovan (and many coaches) would hate to see players given carte blanche to transfer whenever they felt like it.
    • Like Like x 1
  8. your_perfect_enemy
    Online

    your_perfect_enemy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 7, 2010
    Messages:
    5,772
    Likes Received:
    299
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings Received:
    +1,541
    If we want to keep going along with the studnet athelete thing, maybe they should tie grades to it and possibly legal troubles. A kid who has a 3.0 average and has had no off court problems should be given more leeway than a kid with a 2.0 and has been arrested twice
  9. InstiGATOR1
    Offline

    InstiGATOR1 Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2011
    Messages:
    3,100
    Likes Received:
    36
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings Received:
    +75
    Since arrests are not convictions, you probably would have legal problems with that part of your rule.
  10. Msgreentea
    Offline

    Msgreentea Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2007
    Messages:
    1,069
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Ratings Received:
    +17
    In D1, scholarship players are the only ones who should have to sit out a year. They would never be able to control the poaching if players didn't need to sit. The control of crooked AAU coaches would be greater. A player should be able to transfer anywhere they want if they are in good academic standing. I would eliminate the hardship waiver. Let guys go and practice with their new school. I would allow a waiver for any kid whose program is under significant NCAA sanctions or whose coach was fired for cause.
  11. GatorLurker
    Offline

    GatorLurker Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2007
    Messages:
    2,935
    Likes Received:
    136
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Ratings Received:
    +471
    If a player can transfer anywhere and not have to sit out a year what would prevent a coach from taking his good players with him to a new school?
  12. GatorPlanet
    Offline

    GatorPlanet Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 15, 2007
    Messages:
    6,426
    Likes Received:
    176
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Location:
    Maitland, FL
    Ratings Received:
    +695
    Thank you for pointing that out. I don't think it'd be a good situation for schools. If you were a Butler and had spent many years building a program, only to see the coach jump ship for big money, and take 6 or 7 guys with him, it would devastate the program.

    I do believe that players should be able to transfer without restriction immediately, if the head coach that brought them in was fired. And if and when a player decides to transfer, the program or coach (not counting the one who is fired) should have absolutely no say in where that kid can transfer to.

Share This Page