Welcome home, fellow Gator.

The Gator Nation's oldest and most active insider community
Join today!

Oh, My, Possible NCAA Transfer Rule Change

Discussion in 'Awesome Recruiting' started by doctorg8r, Feb 19, 2020.

  1. doctorg8r

    doctorg8r Junior

    180
    108
    208
    Dec 11, 2018
    • Fistbump/Thanks! Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. thale410

    thale410 GC Hall of Fame

    5,263
    794
    463
    Apr 3, 2007
    Might as well at this point as it's much better than the capricious waiver process/outcomes. A one time free move seems appropriate.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  3. atlantagator86

    atlantagator86 GC Hall of Fame

    12,586
    497
    618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Alpharetta, GA
    I don't like this.

    I'm okay with the basic concept of a one-time transfer with immediate eligibility and I'm okay with NCAA considering wavers, but I think this could open pandora's box in terms of players essentially put themselves up for bid. I would rather have them set up certain criteria that would trigger a free one-time transfer, including a head coaching change. If the head coach changes, all 85 players (who haven't already transferred) can transfer and be eligible at another school of their choice immediately.

    I can also see a situation where schools (through indirect contact) start trying to recruit kids at other schools to transfer. While I don't really see this just helping Bama, I could also see a situation where transferring kids decide to form pacts to transfer to the same school.

    I could also see a situation where maybe some of the top upperclassmen in the country decide they all want to play a season together as a super team. Imagine a scenario where say a down and out school (like FSU) decided not to sign incoming freshman anymore and give the all 25 scholarships to transfers of superstar upperclassmen for every position every year. I know it's unlikely, but it could happen.
     
    Last edited: Feb 19, 2020
    • Like x 3
    • Agree x 2
    • Disagree x 1
    • Fistbump/Thanks! x 1
    • Creative x 1
  4. doctorg8r

    doctorg8r Junior

    180
    108
    208
    Dec 11, 2018
    Obviously, this would be huge for Shorter and Lingard! Also, it would eliminate a ton of meetings and decisions for the NCAA! For those who hate reading, this proposal, if adopted, would be effective for the 2020 season.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  5. doctorg8r

    doctorg8r Junior

    180
    108
    208
    Dec 11, 2018
    I totally agree, I think this needs tweaking, as it could open pandora's box and create a nightmare scenario, as you suggest. It may be that this story came out deliberately to gauge response and suggestions.
     
  6. SeabudGator

    SeabudGator GC Hall of Fame

    1,188
    756
    478
    Apr 23, 2014
    Just posted similarly on SG, but my take is the NCAA will adopt this. They are furiously trying to fend off the players attempts to negotiate at the table of this business, and this is one way to relieve the stress of players being treated differently from every other student/player (other sports can transfer)/coach/AD/professional who can go to a new school and participate/benefit from that schools full complement of benefits.

    Only group opposing seems to be the American Football Coaches Association: "Todd Berry, executive director of the American Football Coaches Association, said he was “shocked” by the NCAA’s announcement and fears the change will spark a free-agent frenzy that led to restrictions being placed on transfers decades ago."

    What a joke! Coaches paid millions that leave all the time are "shocked" that the guys risking CTE who made a decision when they were 17 or 18 years old might want a one time pass?? Maybe stop lying to the kids about starting from day 1 (and paying them under the table) to get them on campus or prohibit coaches from transferring? Maybe the NCAA should investigate the sacred cows and their bag men? Not gonna happen.

    If folks want to say "what happened to amateurism" (and I do), it flew the coop when coaches, conferences, and schools sold their souls to access TV/advertiser millions. The players are simply the last ones seeking a seat at the business table that is college football.
     
  7. GATOR_4Life

    GATOR_4Life GC Legend

    633
    134
    153
    Aug 16, 2010
    Marietta, Ga
    I don't think this will be good for the game, but that's not the point. It's about fairness, and for that it's successful.

    I would like to see "free" transfer season linked to High School recruiting calendar. So a player must be added to the transfer portal by Feb 1 (a few days before NSD) to give schools time to respond and fill out a roster.

    I'd also consider giving schools an offsetting IC to prevent a mass hollowing out of a roster, though I worry that would be used by schools like bama as a way to process out players that don't work out and effectively get more chances at finding superstars.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. doctorg8r

    doctorg8r Junior

    180
    108
    208
    Dec 11, 2018
    I'm not sure this is good for college football either, but college football has become more about money just like the NFL! If the NCAA isn't careful they will ruin whatever integrity is left in the game. Probably, the transfer portal is about to become as equally important as signing day!
     
  9. SeabudGator

    SeabudGator GC Hall of Fame

    1,188
    756
    478
    Apr 23, 2014
    When the NCAA allowed UNC to blatantly cheat to keep athletes eligible, allows schools to almost openly pay players (Wade at LSU, persons at Auburn, autos/jobs to football players/families) with no repercussions, the illusion was laid bare. The NCAA has no interest in education, player welfare, amateurism, or other factors the sport was supposedly built on UNLESS failing to address them threatens the gravy train... and the NCAA will actively subvert anything that threatens their seat on the gravy train. The perversion of college athletics into a money driven business happened long ago and we are just watching the sad end game.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Best Post Ever Best Post Ever x 1
  10. mkfgator

    mkfgator Junior

    190
    98
    218
    Aug 28, 2019
    I hope it happens, although I too have some concerns. Once it gets abused, and it will, there will be other committee meetings on this. Freedom usually begets irresponsibility at some level and point, and this should be no exception. In the meantime, it hopefully helps us soon. Having said that, I heard a guy ( forgot his name ) on Frank Frangie's show yesterday here in Jax. He has apparently attended some of the committee meetings, according to Frank. He indicated it likely won't happen until next year, 2021. Still, given at least the atmosphere of support for this type of thing, I hope our guys can find a peg for the powers that be to hang their hat on and let Shorter and Lingard in immediately.
     
  11. Wanne15

    Wanne15 GC Hall of Fame

    2,833
    596
    238
    Jan 18, 2015
    I like the onetime transfer but you make a good point. Possibly limiting the amount of transfers a school can take in a year would help the super team issue which I’d see as more than Han just a possibility.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. wildcat76

    wildcat76 Freshman

    28
    2
    108
    Feb 13, 2020
    This would mainly affect college basketball, I would imagine, as almost every high performing midmajor player would simply jump ship to a higher landing spot. I have to say I don't like this idea one bit. Lost is the amateur status or loyalty, D1 athletes become recruitable free agents. It's very unfortunate that this is what college athletics have become.
     
  13. 96Gatorcise

    96Gatorcise GC Hall of Fame

    9,404
    1,576
    723
    Aug 6, 2008
    Tampa
    I love the idea and Mullen has done well with the current TP. No reason he won't continue to do well with the pending new rules TP.

    This helps the Gators!!!

    It also means that coaches have to earn their pay more and be better at evaluating talent and cultivating relationships with their players.
    They will have to become better player managers.
     
  14. atlantagator86

    atlantagator86 GC Hall of Fame

    12,586
    497
    618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Alpharetta, GA
    Not really. The NCAA doesn't really have a "seat". You have to understand what the NCAA is to understand it's motives.

    The NCAA is nothing more than a non-profit (not-for-profit) association of the member schools who's primary function is to make as much money for the member schools as possible. The board is made up of mostly presidents and ADs of the schools. It is basically the schools overseeing themselves and any decisions it makes are for the benefit of the schools. The NCAA doesn't make money. Everything goes back to the schools.

    The NCAA IS the schools. It does NOT represent the athletes.

    That's not arguing your point, but just trying to give some understanding to why the NCAA is doing what it's doing.
     
  15. atlantagator86

    atlantagator86 GC Hall of Fame

    12,586
    497
    618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Alpharetta, GA
    I'm not sure about this. Let's just for example say Lingard becomes immediately eligible. And let's say we sign Evans in March. That's 2 5-star RBs suddenly competing for immediate PT who weren't expected a few days before signing day.

    If a player like say Clement or Davis, who may suddenly feel like they're likely to be squeezed out not be allowed to transfer? Not sure that's really fair to them.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
  16. doctorg8r

    doctorg8r Junior

    180
    108
    208
    Dec 11, 2018
    You make a great point! I grew up watching the NFL, long before the superbowl, when you thought of players being loyal to teams. Anything beyond five transfers in a year could very well be a huge mistake. The problem is how far does the door crack open before it becomes an insanely wide open free agency?
     
  17. atlantagator86

    atlantagator86 GC Hall of Fame

    12,586
    497
    618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Alpharetta, GA
    Yep. Imagine how much a school like LSU would be willing to pay right now for a guy like Trevor Lawrence to be able to transfer in and play immediately.

    Schools would pay an exponentially higher amounts for a fully developed superstar than a recruit who MIGHT develop into a superstar in 2 or 3 years. Look how much more the top guys in MLB, NFL and NBA make than rookies.

    And think about how much more effort and risk schools might be willing to put out there in illegally recruiting kids to transfer, just for the chance to grab a superstar player at a position of need, even if it's just for a season.
     
  18. thale410

    thale410 GC Hall of Fame

    5,263
    794
    463
    Apr 3, 2007

    Scholly limits will keep much of this in check. There just won't be room for mass transfers to a school without risking long-term recruiting balance and a damaged rep. Though I'm sure some unscrupulous program will spontaneously purge 5/6 guys to make room for a transfer "dream team" scenario, it will be a tough one to explain to parents on the recruiting trail.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. doctorg8r

    doctorg8r Junior

    180
    108
    208
    Dec 11, 2018
    Yes, and if a university wishes to take the risk of going after a recruit like you are proposing, I favor the death penalty
     
  20. atlantagator86

    atlantagator86 GC Hall of Fame

    12,586
    497
    618
    Apr 3, 2007
    Alpharetta, GA
    They don't have to purge anybody. A school, like FSU in my example from above, could effectively take 22 veteran transfers (the entire starting offense and defense) every single year and they could still keep 63 underclassmen on scholarship as back ups and players to develop.

    I don't think schools are too worried about reputation if they can win NCs.