GatewayRedbirds.com

A Message Board Dedicated to Discussing St. Louis Cardinals Baseball!
It is currently March 24 19, 1:37 pm

All times are UTC - 6 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

Should college athletes have to sit out 1 yr of competition if transferring to another college?
Yes 18%  18%  [ 2 ]
No 82%  82%  [ 9 ]
Total votes : 11
Author Message
PostPosted: April 30 18, 3:03 pm 
Offline
tl;dr

Joined: May 21 09, 12:41 pm
Posts: 4163
Tim wrote:
tlombard wrote:
Tim wrote:
tlombard wrote:
I can see the basis for the rule hoping to prevent players jumping from one school to another who has a better shot at a championship and creating chaos but in the cases where the coach who recruited them is fired or there is a legitimate reason (be closer to home due to a family situation, etc.) then let the players go. The coaches and athletic departments and administrations don't have to show a single bit of loyalty to the players so why should the players have to show any?

As always, the answer is $$$$ of course.

Maybe a rule that you can transfer with no penalty if your head coach changes? Reasonable.


I'm definitely on board with that along with other situations that come up from time to time. In theory they have a process to allow this to happen (University can release a player from their commitment and they can then transfer and appeal to be allowed to play right away) but rarely does the NCAA make the right decision to let the player just play. If I remember there was recently a situation where a coach was fired within a couple of weeks after a player made his decision but but the player started taking early classes and had been on campus for THREE DAYS (with no practices or anything) and it took months and multiple appeals to allow the player to go to another school and play.


http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/coll ... 53671.html

Braxton Beverly


How could I have ever forgotten that name? [insert joke about how he should be playing lacrosse with a name that white]


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 30 18, 3:22 pm 
Offline
darjeeling sipping elite
User avatar

Joined: October 17 06, 11:19 am
Posts: 35916
Location: Huis Clos
tlombard wrote:
Tim wrote:
tlombard wrote:
Tim wrote:
tlombard wrote:
I can see the basis for the rule hoping to prevent players jumping from one school to another who has a better shot at a championship and creating chaos but in the cases where the coach who recruited them is fired or there is a legitimate reason (be closer to home due to a family situation, etc.) then let the players go. The coaches and athletic departments and administrations don't have to show a single bit of loyalty to the players so why should the players have to show any?

As always, the answer is $$$$ of course.

Maybe a rule that you can transfer with no penalty if your head coach changes? Reasonable.


I'm definitely on board with that along with other situations that come up from time to time. In theory they have a process to allow this to happen (University can release a player from their commitment and they can then transfer and appeal to be allowed to play right away) but rarely does the NCAA make the right decision to let the player just play. If I remember there was recently a situation where a coach was fired within a couple of weeks after a player made his decision but but the player started taking early classes and had been on campus for THREE DAYS (with no practices or anything) and it took months and multiple appeals to allow the player to go to another school and play.


http://www.newsobserver.com/sports/coll ... 53671.html

Braxton Beverly


How could I have ever forgotten that name? [insert joke about how he should be playing lacrosse with a name that white]


Hmm. Frankie Beverly. Patrick Beverly. Braxton Miller.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 30 18, 5:51 pm 
Offline
The Last Word

Joined: June 21 06, 8:45 am
Posts: 19343
Tim wrote:
Socnorb11 wrote:
I'm open to both arguments, but how do you keep elite players from transferring to elite teams (college's version of Durant to the Warriors)?

You don't.
They sign with them out of college already.



What?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: April 30 18, 5:54 pm 
Offline
The Last Word

Joined: June 21 06, 8:45 am
Posts: 19343
MrCrowesGarden wrote:
Tim wrote:
tlombard wrote:
I can see the basis for the rule hoping to prevent players jumping from one school to another who has a better shot at a championship and creating chaos but in the cases where the coach who recruited them is fired or there is a legitimate reason (be closer to home due to a family situation, etc.) then let the players go. The coaches and athletic departments and administrations don't have to show a single bit of loyalty to the players so why should the players have to show any?

As always, the answer is $$$$ of course.

Maybe a rule that you can transfer with no penalty if your head coach changes? Reasonable.



This is kind of what I was thinking. There might be some extenuating circumstances too. Of course some players commit to a location because of an assistant coach, so I don't know how you handle that.



Maybe kids should give more thought to the school that they want to attend, rather than the coaches that they want to play for?

I'm open to allowing transfers when head coaches change schools....... but I don't think it should the case for when anyone in the football program changes schools.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: May 1 18, 7:51 am 
Offline
"I could totally eat a person if it were a life/death situation"
User avatar

Joined: August 5 08, 11:24 am
Posts: 22869
Location: Thinking of the Children
The NCAA's position is pretty clear that these are STUDENT-athletes and ipso facto free tuition is all they are entitled to or deserve which is an entirely discussion. But, nevertheless, it's important to remember that.

Students are free to transfer from school to school whenever they want without any repercussions, so it only makes sense that student athletes are treated the same way.

I understand this could put schools in a bind if, say, half the team decides to transfer or a select top few players decide to transfer (even if this is likely indicative of a problem at the top be it head coach, assistants, or AD all of whom the school pay and hand select) . Still, I don't see how the NCAA can have it both ways. On the one hand, they're saying that the players are students first, not employees, and tuition is more than enough compensation for their efforts. On the other hand, they're forcing transfers to sit out a year due to a perceived (real or not) threat to collegiate sports overall.

Well...which is it? Are they students or are they employees because the mandatory loss of a year heavily implies the later. And, this is completely ignoring the cash windfall that sports have become.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: May 1 18, 8:45 am 
Offline
Consider him admonished
User avatar

Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
Posts: 7760
Location: Charleston, SC via Arkansas
Socnorb11 wrote:
Tim wrote:
Socnorb11 wrote:
I'm open to both arguments, but how do you keep elite players from transferring to elite teams (college's version of Durant to the Warriors)?

You don't.
They sign with them out of college already.



What?

Bama is already an elite team.
Have you seen Duke's incoming basketball class?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: May 1 18, 1:18 pm 
Offline
The Last Word

Joined: June 21 06, 8:45 am
Posts: 19343
Tim wrote:
Socnorb11 wrote:
Tim wrote:
Socnorb11 wrote:
I'm open to both arguments, but how do you keep elite players from transferring to elite teams (college's version of Durant to the Warriors)?

You don't.
They sign with them out of college already.



What?

Bama is already an elite team.
Have you seen Duke's incoming basketball class?



OK. So you meant that they sign with them out of high school, not out of college.......


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: May 1 18, 1:24 pm 
Offline
Consider him admonished
User avatar

Joined: March 25 15, 9:59 am
Posts: 7760
Location: Charleston, SC via Arkansas
Socnorb11 wrote:


What?

Bama is already an elite team.
Have you seen Duke's incoming basketball class?[/quote]


OK. So you meant that they sign with them out of high school, not out of college.......[/quote]
Yep


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: May 1 18, 1:32 pm 
Offline
The Last Word

Joined: June 21 06, 8:45 am
Posts: 19343
Allowing kids to transfer wherever, whenever, would essentially mean that most mid-major and low-major D1 athletic programs would become irrelevant. They'll essentially become farm systems for the Duke's, Kansas', NC"s and Kentucky's of the world.

We're mostly talking about college basketball anyway (which is already a bit of a joke with the one-and-done's), so I don't really care either way.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: May 1 18, 2:01 pm 
Offline
is shooing asian children away from his fridge.
User avatar

Joined: May 17 06, 10:23 pm
Posts: 27872
Location: at the gettin' place
AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote:
Students are free to transfer from school to school whenever they want without any repercussions, so it only makes sense that student athletes are treated the same way.


Not exactly. There's a lot of examples of schools either not releasing guys from scholarships or trying to dictate where they are allowed to transfer. I don't think it's great that guys have to sit out a year, but I don't think free agency in college athletics is good either. Some sort of compromise can be found. Maybe they are eligible right away but don't have postseason eligibility? Or if you pay your own way you are eligible immediately? Making them sit out X% of games is probably not ideal.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 25 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 6 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 12 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group