[76lsjumb]

Bill Bradley:
No, my point is that empowering the players to shape the terrain of college basketball places an inordinate amount of power in the player’s hands. I would favor a system that is shaped by the stakeholders of the game. That would include those who want to see athletics serve the institution rather than the reverse.  However, in this post, I am simply asking others to join in to suggest legal ways that the current policy could be altered. You have asserted in the past that we should accept the current policy because that’s the way it is. I think that policies are worked out over time. We are in a very early stage of the modifications of collegiate athletics. 
I

OK thanks. I don't mean to derail your topic (others with law backgrounds please continue to keep the thread going). But FWIW, when Brittany Griner or Stewy or Caitlin or Juju brought their talents to the schools they chose as freshmen, why wasn't that in itself a display of an inordinate amount of power? It happens again and again, every recruiting cycle. The top players change the landscape when they enter as freshmen. Also, I know I sound like a broken record, but in all those cases I think the institutions were all glad to serve those athletes. They benefited greatly.

The institutions benefitted greatly...until that player [in the new paradigm] decides to leave the following year for more money elsewhere, leaving the institution with a big hole in the team... requiring that institution to go raid another team to fill the unplanned vacant position, etc., etc.  Otherwise put, the impact of upper class transfers is immediately twice that of a new high school senior coming in [since it hurts one school as well as helping one school], and those impacts are compounded further by the fact that transfers affect all four classes, not just one [incoming frosh].

[76lsjumb]

Bill Bradley:
No, my point is that empowering the players to shape the terrain of college basketball places an inordinate amount of power in the player’s hands. I would favor a system that is shaped by the stakeholders of the game. That would include those who want to see athletics serve the institution rather than the reverse.  However, in this post, I am simply asking others to join in to suggest legal ways that the current policy could be altered. You have asserted in the past that we should accept the current policy because that’s the way it is. I think that policies are worked out over time. We are in a very early stage of the modifications of collegiate athletics. 
I

OK thanks. I don't mean to derail your topic (others with law backgrounds please continue to keep the thread going). But FWIW, when Brittany Griner or Stewy or Caitlin or Juju brought their talents to the schools they chose as freshmen, why wasn't that in itself a display of an inordinate amount of power? It happens again and again, every recruiting cycle. The top players change the landscape when they enter as freshmen. Also, I know I sound like a broken record, but in all those cases I think the institutions were all glad to serve those athletes. They benefited greatly.

The institutions benefitted greatly...until that player [in the new paradigm] decides to leave the following year for more money elsewhere, leaving the institution with a big hole in the team... requiring that institution to go raid another team to fill the unplanned vacant position, etc., etc.  Otherwise put, the impact of upper class transfers is immediately twice that of a new high school senior coming in [since it hurts one school as well as helping one school], and those impacts are compounded further by the fact that transfers affect all four classes, not just one [incoming frosh].