The CardBoard
NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. (/thread-14216.html)

Pages: 1 2

NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - TreesAndBirds - 09-05-2017

http://247sports.com/Article/Sources-Major-Potential-Shift-In-NCAA-Transfer-Rules-107001121

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - 2006alum - 09-06-2017

Given that we admit essentially a handful of transfers at most these days, I can't imagine we will be a beneficiary of this revised rule. It's also probably not in the best interests of the students academically, because transferring from program to program for athletics has to be pretty disruptive to their education. Then again, since when was college sports about getting an education...

And on that note: Notre Dame has petitioned for a hardship waiver to allow their Nebraska transfer to play immediately now that Briana Turner will be out for a year.

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - JohnR34231 - 09-06-2017

(09-06-2017, 02:07 AM)2006alum link Wrote:Given that we admit essentially a handful of transfers at most these days, I can't imagine we will be a beneficiary of this revised rule. It's also probably not in the best interests of the students academically, because transferring from program to program for athletics has to be pretty disruptive to their education. Then again, since when was college sports about getting an education...

And on that note: Votre Dame has petitioned for a hardship waiver to allow their Nebraska transfer to play immediately now that Briana Turner will be out for a year.

I think college sports is about getting an education, as long as you understand where getting an education is on the priority list. (Hint: It's not #1.)

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - OutsiderFan - 09-06-2017

Immediate eligibility for transfers opens up a giant can of worms for coaches and the system.  But if the GPA minimum to be eligible for immediate transfer is high enough, say 2.8, it could actually kill two birds with one stone for the NCAA.  It could give players the flexibility to transfer like coaches, but also provide an incentive for them to work harder in the class room so they do have an immediate eligibility after transfer option. And importantly, if coaches know they can get immediately eligible transfers as easily as lose them, coaches may actually start prioritizing academics for their athletes on the same level as they do their sports.  Because, as this Kyle Shanahan anecdote demonstrates, academics are not prioritized like an athlete's chosen sport, by most coaches.

Excerpt from ESPN interview
Take when Shanahan sat out his redshirt season at Texas after transferring from Duke. In December 2000, the Longhorns held a scrimmage for the redshirt players in the midst of bowl practices. In one of Shanahan's classes, the final was scheduled for the day of the scrimmage.

A seemingly meaningless practice or an important final? The decision for the seven teammates Shanahan had in the class was easy: take the final.

"I was the only guy who showed up to the scrimmage," Shanahan said. "They were like, 'Don't you have a final?' I was like, 'Yeah, I'll just take an F. I'm here for football, and there's no way I'm missing a scrimmage to go to this class.' I had a B in the class, and I ended up getting a D-minus because I skipped a final. They thought I was crazy. I wasn't doing it to show off to the coaches. I was doing it because I came to Texas to play football. I'll be all right with my grades, but I came here because that was how my mindset was. That's how it is in coaching, and that's how I expect players to be."

Full article here: http://www.espn.com/blog/san-francisco-49ers/post/_/id/26952/of-will-ferrell-jerry-rice-and-drake-how-kyle-shanahan-is-rebuilding-49ers-culture

Pretty sure the "your sport is the priority" mentality is how it is at most universities. This is why I had no problem with Josh Rosen's comments.  The fact is Stanford is a very unique place in the college sports landscape.  Shaw would almost certainly never have a player like Shanahan, because Stanford probably would never admit someone like Shanahan.  Rosen may be more of the Shaw mentality, but the likelihood is he's surrounded by a Shanahan mentality.  Does anyone think Mora prioritizes academics like Shaw? That seems very hard to believe.



Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - BobK - 09-06-2017

Stanford has two transfers, XC/T&F and Women's Soccer.  Both of course eligible immediately.  That's the rule for most sports. 

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - TreesAndBirds - 09-06-2017

"And importantly, if coaches know they can get immediately eligible transfers as easily as lose them, coaches may actually start prioritizing academics for their athletes on the same level as they do their sports."


Seems to me a rule change allowing transfers if the athlete has a 2.8 GPA would incent coaches to deprioritize academics so the guys on their team cant transfer. The tutors will need to find a way to make sure athletes have grades high enough so that they remain eligible to play, but not so high that they are eligible to  transfer. The only players the coachs will want to have high grades are the guys on other teams. Although one beneficial result is that coaches might encourage their players to take harder majors to keep them below the transfer GPA.

I might be a little cynical in this area :)

This proposal could really result in some odd incentives, but I think the NCAA needs to be  more player friendly.

Might be interesting to require that the player must also maintain the higher GPA at the new school or he loses a year, but that will have unintended consequences and complexity also.

I think this hurts Stanford, because we wont benefit much, and it will allow our big name opponents to more easily raid the non powerhouse schools.

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - Mick - 09-06-2017

(09-06-2017, 07:09 AM)TreesAndBirds link Wrote:"And importantly, if coaches know they can get immediately eligible transfers as easily as lose them, coaches may actually start prioritizing academics for their athletes on the same level as they do their sports."


Seems to me a rule change allowing transfers if the athlete has a 2.8 GPA would incent coaches to deprioritize academics so the guys on their team cant transfer. The tutors will need to find a way to make sure athletes have grades high enough so that they remain eligible to play, but not so high that they are eligible to  transfer. The only players the coachs will want to have high grades are the guys on other teams. Although one beneficial result is that coaches might encourage their players to take harder majors to keep them below the transfer GPA.

I might be a little cynical in this area :)

This proposal could really result in some odd incentives, but I think the NCAA needs to be  more player friendly.

Might be interesting to require that the player must also maintain the higher GPA at the new school or he loses a year, but that will have unintended consequences and complexity also.

I think this hurts Stanford, because we wont benefit much, and it will allow our big name opponents to more easily raid the non powerhouse schools.

I think you're right in that it puts the onus for academic success on athletes.  I don't know how many great athletes will be available for the big schools, but I know that they'll try, with or without the transfer rules.  I know that Steve Nash faced a full court recruiting press from other schools, who indirectly tried to recruit him the last three years of his career at SCU.

Your most interesting point is about coaches and whether they would actually discourage academic success for their best players.  There's your counterproductive influence right there.

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - DC 86 - 09-06-2017

We always hear about athletic departments pressuring faculty members to raise an athlete's grade, the cynic in me envisions athletic departments at some schools now pressuring faculty members to lower an athlete's grade.

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - 2006alum - 09-06-2017

(09-06-2017, 11:31 AM)DC 86 link Wrote:We always hear about athletic departments pressuring faculty members to raise an athlete's grade, the cynic in me envisions athletic departments at some schools now pressuring faculty members to lower an athlete's grade.

The new sweet spot will be between B- and C, just enough to keep 'em ineligible to transfer but eligible to play... ;)

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - washingtonismoney - 09-06-2017

Don't think Stanford will be much of a beneficiary, but fully in support of the rule change.

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - DC 86 - 09-06-2017

(09-06-2017, 12:15 PM)washingtonismoney link Wrote:Don't think Stanford will be much of a beneficiary, but fully in support of the rule change.

100% agree. Stanford will almost certainly not benefit relative to other schools, but the unfairness of transfer limitations and the hypocrisy of coaches moving freely while student athletes require permission to transfer is something that I welcome being corrected.

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - ColoradoTree - 09-06-2017

(09-06-2017, 01:38 PM)DC 86 link Wrote:[quote author=washingtonismoney link=topic=17321.msg199344#msg199344 date=1504725328]
Don't think Stanford will be much of a beneficiary, but fully in support of the rule change.

100% agree. Stanford will almost certainly not benefit relative to other schools, but the unfairness of transfer limitations and the hypocrisy of coaches moving freely while student athletes require permission to transfer is something that I welcome being corrected.
[/quote]

I agree, too.  I'd like there to be some minimal guardrails in place to keep the NCAA's parade of horribles from coming true, but those would be minor and meant to avoid disruption to the academic year (I'm thinking things like you can't transfer mid-season but have to wait until the academic year is over, or if you transfer after the fall semester/quarter, you can't participate in that same sport for your new school in that same academic year).  You shouldn't be able to play the first half of the season for one team, and then transfer to a rival mid-season, but I'm not sure advocates for loosening transfer restrictions are even advocating for a system that extreme.  I think it would be justifiable from an academic standpoint, too, as it's massively disruptive to one's educational pursuits to spend one semester at School A, a second semester at School B, and the semester after that at School C. 

With all of that said, however, if you're in good academic standing at your current school, you should be able to transfer to any school that will have you, regardless of whether you've graduated or not.  Making a kid sit out for a year has always seemed unnecessarily punitive. 

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - DC 86 - 09-06-2017

(09-06-2017, 02:03 PM)ColoradoTree link Wrote:With all of that said, however, if you're in good academic standing at your current school, you should be able to transfer to any school that will have you, regardless of whether you've graduated or not.  Making a kid sit out for a year has always seemed unnecessarily punitive.

And if the player has already redshirted it's not only a year sitting out but a lost year of eligibility.

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - 81alum - 09-06-2017

I think this would be a disaster for Stanford.  Unscrupulous powerhouses who are "on top" could simply recruit the best players from bad teams, and many of these players could be willing to jump ship to be able to get a championship.  A team like Alabama could become an "all star" team that plucks the most promising sophomores and juniors from the rest of the competition.  The GPA requirement will be a joke, and the rich would just get richer. 

I'm reminded a little of South Carolina in WBB last year, who earned a national championship with Alisha Gray from North Carolina and Kaela Davis from Georgia Tech starting for them all year.  Without those transfers, South Carolina doesn't come close and we are in the championship round.  Multiply this if it becomes even easier to transfer.  Heck, Lili could have played against us last year if she didn't mind graduating from Notre Dame instead of Stanford.

Stanford won't benefit much and could be badly hurt.  Our transfer admissions standards and high retention rates will simply not let us take advantage of a free-for-all transfer system.  It also will dramatically weaken coaches in the eyes of their players.  This would be a good thing for abusive and unscrupulous coaches to lose power, but Stanford does not have coaches like that.  (It might undermine Mike Leach, who has had discontented players, and I would could that as a good thing.) 

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - Goose - 09-06-2017

Free for all transfers would be a disaster for just about everybody except the very top football schools. However, a modified version could work. One possible way to approach it is as follows: First, until a player has played in a game, he can transfer at will. So if you are a freshman who did red shirt, or any other year who hasn't played at all, you can transfer. Each program can designate N (for some N) players (who have actually played) as "protected". These players would be bound by the current rules. The rest of the players can transfer at will. A player who is "protected" becomes unprotected if he does not play at least X minutes in a season (and is not injured, is eligible, and not suspended). X and N can be tweaked to make sure that successful programs can't take the best players from another program without these players sitting out a year. A program can't "stash" a player that they aren't going to play, and protected players aren't sitting on the bench. If a player thinks he isn't getting a chance to play (value of X), he can leave. This isn't a perfect system, but something like it may give players who want to move an option without gutting a program because Alabama decides it wants all your DBs. Thoughts?

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - BostonCard - 09-06-2017

Ffs people, these kids are not property and are not getting paid to play football.  There is no union and no collective bargaining agreement.  Restricting what students can do is the wrong way to go about this.

As long as a player is making academic progress, they should be free to transfer any place that will take them and that will accommodate them.  Could it lead to good players on bad teams trying to transfer to a better one?  Maybe.  So what?  The current graduate transfer system has not been a disaster, and largely hasn't benefitted the best teams (I don't recall any highly talented graduate transfers into Alabama, for example).

If you want competitive balance, don't penalize the kids to get it.

BC

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - DC 86 - 09-06-2017

(09-06-2017, 08:06 PM)Boston Card link Wrote:Ffs people, these kids are not property and are not getting paid to play football.  There is no union and no collective bargaining agreement.  Restricting what students can do is the wrong way to go about this.

As long as a player is making academic progress, they should be free to transfer any place that will take them and that will accommodate them.  Could it lead to good players on bad teams trying to transfer to a better one?  Maybe.  So what?  The current graduate transfer system has not been a disaster, and largely hasn't benefitted the best teams (I don't recall any highly talented graduate transfers into Alabama, for example).

If you want competitive balance, don't penalize the kids to get it.

BC

I could not agree with you more, but one correction: Jake Coker, who was Alabama's starting QB in 2015 and won a national championship, was a graduate transfer from FSU.

Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - OutsiderFan - 09-07-2017

Transferring is no big deal for the rest of the population of a university.  Why should it be for athletes?  And ss Bobk says, other sports allow them without a sit-out requirement as it is.

The question I always have about transfers and Stanford is how does a player who didn't submit a Stanford undergrad application as a Senior in High School get vetted for admission after establishing a college course record at another school? If someone proves they can do college level coursework at a major university, do they have to "go back" and complete the same standard undergrad application?  Or, is there another process for a transfer, that looks only at college courses, or otherwise doesn't consider high school record as much? 


Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - 81alum - 09-07-2017

Liberalizing transfer rules makes it less necessary for the most successful programs to develop their own talent since they will instead be able to shop for it.  They can wait until other schools recruit, train, and test high school talent and then swoop in and take the best.  Rather than high schools being the feeders for college teams, college teams will become the feeders for college teams--there is far less risk in recruiting a known college talent and correspondingly far less responsibility to improve their football skills.  Who is to say that Nick Saban would not have come to Christian McCaffrey and offered him a shot at a national championship if he jumped ship?  Maybe CMac would have said no, but that is the sort of scenario that would play out in many places.  The college game appeals to many of us over the pro game precisely because this kind of behavior is not common at the moment.  Turn the college sport into a marketplace of fungible talent that flits from school to school and the college game will no longer hold any advantage over the pros.

Now, as for the players.  Is it in their academic best-interest to transfer for football?  I have advised hundreds of transfer students (mostly not athletes) over the years and it is NEVER a smooth process, even under ideal conditions.  Transfer students graduate at lower rates and earn lower grades than "native" students--mostly because of the wasted courses and bureaucratic hurdles they have to overcome.  Different universities often have radically different academic requirements, necessitating the taking of more units.  My experience is that practically no students who transfer from one four year institution to another four year institution graduate in four years--meaning the new class of mercenary transfer athletes will likely need to stay in school after their athletic scholarships run out.  I do not believe this to be in the best interest of the students--except perhaps for a few future pros who will find bigger stages to showcase their talent before leaving without a degree.


Re: NCAA seriously considering letting transfers play immediately. - Goose - 09-07-2017

(09-07-2017, 05:03 AM)OutsiderFan link Wrote:Transferring is no big deal for the rest of the population of a university.  Why should it be for athletes?  And ss Bobk says, other sports allow them without a sit-out requirement as it is.
True, but those other sports don't involve "big money". It at least seems to me that sports such as volleyball operate closer to the student-athlete model, and actually have a minimal level of "morality" in what happens. Unfortunately, I think this is changing, but it hasn't totally yet. I realize that there are more behind the scenes issues than the average fan sees, but we haven't had a Reggie Bush situation, at least not yet. Football for sure involves big alumni dollars, TV contracts, and lots of other things. As C.al is about to show us, some of those sports that have no transfer restrictions don't continue without football dollars. Football is a different case, I'm afraid.

Quote:
The question I always have about transfers and Stanford is how does a player who didn't submit a Stanford undergrad application as a Senior in High School get vetted for admission after establishing a college course record at another school? If someone proves they can do college level coursework at a major university, do they have to "go back" and complete the same standard undergrad application?  Or, is there another process for a transfer, that looks only at college courses, or otherwise doesn't consider high school record as much?
I don't know what the procedure is either. When I was at Stanford, a fair number of transfer students were accepted each year. As I understand it, this is no longer the case and there are very few transfers accepted. I am sure the process is as arcane and opaque as admissions themselves are.