Portal - 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: Portal (/thread-24419.html)
+- 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: Portal (/thread-24419.html)
Portal - lex24 - 09-14-2023
Stanford has a choice - open up the portal, or wither.
NIL is not the issue. Players deserve to get paid.
But, imo, the portal is destroying college football. It’s absurd. The rich get richer. The poor poorer.
Stanford has its generally one way portal. Cannot compete in this environment unless they play the games and open up to accept more transfers.
It stinks.
RE: Portal - msqueri - 09-14-2023
Well they have. What had been an occasional unicorn transfer gave way to our current roster now having Bernadel, Mayberry, Lamson, Butler, Lytle, Bank, Holt, and Warford (non-scholarship as far as I know but seems like he could be moderately significant). Sea change. Maybe we need more, but if we get 6-8 transfers a year and if improvement in the program allows us to shop in a higher end part of the transfer portal than what we did this off-season, I think that could be ok. It's not going to ever replace the imperative of high school recruiting for us (or the imperative of retention in dissuading key players from straying for greener pastures). But we had three transfers starting against USC. That's not nothing.
Moreover, there is a major story about the portal that I admit I have been slow to internalize and I wouldn't be surprised if you and others have been too. The NCAA changed the rules on transferring multiple times. My understanding is now undergrad transfers will be able to transfer once. If they want to transfer a second time they have to sit out a year unless they are granted a waiver for physical or mental well-being, exigent circumstance (e.g., physical or sexual assault or discrimination based on a protected class), or diagnosed education impacting disabilities. I don't know how this is going to play out but I suspect it will be a significant brake compared to the last two years, and potentially very significantly impact the QB transfer landscape. Will this help Stanford because transfers become a somewhat less salient part of the landscape and the market becomes a bit less efficient for transfer-reliant programs? Will it hurt Stanford because our players are so much more likely to have the transfer bullet in the chamber than players elsewhere that our players will become hot commodities for poachers elsewhere? I don't know, haven't really thought about it much and even if I had this feels like something with a lot of moving parts and difficult to predict second and third order consequences.
RE: Portal - Langdude - 09-14-2023
Is Holt considered a "transfer" because he signed a LOI with Northwestern? Dude graduated from high school in June, and, as far as I can tell, never went to Northwestern for summer football.
-m.
RE: Portal - msqueri - 09-14-2023
I imagine he enrolled or somehow started in some way at Northwestern but yeah that timeline makes him more akin to a true freshman (which of course he is) than a transfer. Stanford lists him as a transfer and lists Northwestern as his last school. You are probably right the LOI plays a role. I just checked and Cal’s roster lists Justin-Williams-Thomas’ last school as Tennessee, not Stanford.
RE: Portal - chrisk - 09-14-2023
The NCAA has begun denying waivers for transfers to get immediate eligibility.
One transfer who claimed mental health reasons because of family issues was told by the NCAA to get his mental health in order this year without the distraction of football.
UNC’s appeal was denied. Sounds like the NCAA is not going to be rolled by Power 5 football coaches.
lex24 Wrote:Stanford has a choice - open up the portal, or wither.
NIL is not the issue. Players deserve to get paid.
But, imo, the portal is destroying college football. It’s absurd. The rich get richer. The poor poorer.
Stanford has its generally one way portal. Cannot compete in this environment unless they play the games and open up to accept more transfers.
It stinks.
With 85 total scholarships, how many transfers could Stanford realistically take in a normal year not impaired by COVID or a coaching change?
RE: Portal - Giants - 09-14-2023
chrisk dateline='[url=tel:1694749119' Wrote: 1694749119[/url]']
The NCAA has begun denying waivers for transfers to get immediate eligibility.
One transfer who claimed mental health reasons because of family issues was told by the NCAA to get his mental health in order this year without the distraction of football.
UNC’s appeal was denied. Sounds like the NCAA is not going to be rolled by Power 5 football coaches.
lex24 Wrote:Stanford has a choice - open up the portal, or wither.
NIL is not the issue. Players deserve to get paid.
But, imo, the portal is destroying college football. It’s absurd. The rich get richer. The poor poorer.
Stanford has its generally one way portal. Cannot compete in this environment unless they play the games and open up to accept more transfers.
It stinks.
With 85 total scholarships, how many transfers could Stanford realistically take in a normal year not impaired by COVID or a coaching change?
For every transfer that leaves, you can bring one in (in a normal year as defined by you) as long as you do not exceed a total of 85.
RE: Portal - chrisk - 09-15-2023
(09-14-2023, 09:39 PM)Giants Wrote:chrisk dateline='[url=tel:1694749119' Wrote: 1694749119[/url]']
The NCAA has begun denying waivers for transfers to get immediate eligibility.
One transfer who claimed mental health reasons because of family issues was told by the NCAA to get his mental health in order this year without the distraction of football.
UNC’s appeal was denied. Sounds like the NCAA is not going to be rolled by Power 5 football coaches.
lex24 Wrote:Stanford has a choice - open up the portal, or wither.
NIL is not the issue. Players deserve to get paid.
But, imo, the portal is destroying college football. It’s absurd. The rich get richer. The poor poorer.
Stanford has its generally one way portal. Cannot compete in this environment unless they play the games and open up to accept more transfers.
It stinks.
With 85 total scholarships, how many transfers could Stanford realistically take in a normal year not impaired by COVID or a coaching change?
For every transfer that leaves, you can bring one in (in a normal year as defined by you) as long as you do not exceed a total of 85.
The reason that there were so many transfers out was because of the coaching turnover, COVID eligibility extensions, and the ability to play immediately. In the future, the numbers in the transfer portal will drop significantly.
It's not just a matter of how many Stanford players want to transfer, there just aren't going to be as many desirable landing spots for them in the future. I would guess that the transfers out will generally be in single digits, and the number of transfers in will tend to be less than the transfers out. The transfer portal needs to be aggressively but prudently mined, but it will not be a source of large quantity of players.
RE: Portal - BobK - 09-15-2023
Most all of the transfers from Stanford football were grad transfers. If one has a year left they will continue unless they can get into the Stanford grad school of their choice. Graduate in Dec start grad school on scholarship in January is darn attractive
RE: Portal - lex24 - 09-15-2023
(09-14-2023, 08:06 AM)msqueri Wrote: Well they have. What had been an occasional unicorn transfer gave way to our current roster now having Bernadel, Mayberry, Lamson, Butler, Lytle, Bank, Holt, and Warford (non-scholarship as far as I know but seems like he could be moderately significant). Sea change. Maybe we need more, but if we get 6-8 transfers a year and if improvement in the program allows us to shop in a higher end part of the transfer portal than what we did this off-season, I think that could be ok. It's not going to ever replace the imperative of high school recruiting for us (or the imperative of retention in dissuading key players from straying for greener pastures). But we had three transfers starting against USC. That's not nothing.
Moreover, there is a major story about the portal that I admit I have been slow to internalize and I wouldn't be surprised if you and others have been too. The NCAA changed the rules on transferring multiple times. My understanding is now undergrad transfers will be able to transfer once. If they want to transfer a second time they have to sit out a year unless they are granted a waiver for physical or mental well-being, exigent circumstance (e.g., physical or sexual assault or discrimination based on a protected class), or diagnosed education impacting disabilities. I don't know how this is going to play out but I suspect it will be a significant brake compared to the last two years, and potentially very significantly impact the QB transfer landscape. Will this help Stanford because transfers become a somewhat less salient part of the landscape and the market becomes a bit less efficient for transfer-reliant programs? Will it hurt Stanford because our players are so much more likely to have the transfer bullet in the chamber than players elsewhere that our players will become hot commodities for poachers elsewhere? I don't know, haven't really thought about it much and even if I had this feels like something with a lot of moving parts and difficult to predict second and third order consequences.
Thanks. I had heard of the one time rule, but not the specifics. I don’t like what transfers are doing to some and for some programs. Bu5 not sure how it can be further limited.
RE: Portal - Mick - 01-22-2024
(09-15-2023, 12:34 AM)chrisk Wrote:(09-14-2023, 09:39 PM)Giants Wrote:chrisk dateline='[url=tel:1694749119' Wrote: 1694749119[/url]']
The NCAA has begun denying waivers for transfers to get immediate eligibility.
One transfer who claimed mental health reasons because of family issues was told by the NCAA to get his mental health in order this year without the distraction of football.
UNC’s appeal was denied. Sounds like the NCAA is not going to be rolled by Power 5 football coaches.
lex24 Wrote:Stanford has a choice - open up the portal, or wither.
NIL is not the issue. Players deserve to get paid.
But, imo, the portal is destroying college football. It’s absurd. The rich get richer. The poor poorer.
Stanford has its generally one way portal. Cannot compete in this environment unless they play the games and open up to accept more transfers.
It stinks.
With 85 total scholarships, how many transfers could Stanford realistically take in a normal year not impaired by COVID or a coaching change?
For every transfer that leaves, you can bring one in (in a normal year as defined by you) as long as you do not exceed a total of 85.
The reason that there were so many transfers out was because of the coaching turnover, COVID eligibility extensions, and the ability to play immediately. In the future, the numbers in the transfer portal will drop significantly.
It's not just a matter of how many Stanford players want to transfer, there just aren't going to be as many desirable landing spots for them in the future. I would guess that the transfers out will generally be in single digits, and the number of transfers in will tend to be less than the transfers out. The transfer portal needs to be aggressively but prudently mined, but it will not be a source of large quantity of players.
COVID eligibility extensions have reached the level of the absurd. Have you heard of Cam McCormick, grizzled veteran? Per Sports Illustrated, he is returning for a ninth season playing college football when 2024 kicks off. He made history completing his eighth season in 2023, tied with NIU's Kyle Pugh for the longest tenure by any college football player in FBS history.
https://www.si.com/college/oregon/history/cam-mccormick-returning-to-miami-for-ninth-college-season
Here's the timeline:
2016 Committed to Oregon. Spent seven years there, slowed by injuries. Redshirted in 2016.
2017 Pac 12 All Academic Honorable Mention, played all 13 games as a redshirt frosh.
2018 Injured for season vs. Bowling Green on September 1
2019 Didn't play at all, injuries.
2020 Covid provides extra year
2021 Played in Oregon's first two games before sustaining season ending injury.
2022 Plays 7 games at Oregon. Won Capital One Orange Bowl FWAA "Courage" Award for overcoming injury. Appeared in all 13 games.
2023 U of Miami, 8 receptions, plays 5 games at Miami
https://goducks.com/sports/football/roster/cam-mccormick/11277
https://miamihurricanes.com/roster/cam-mccormick/
Graduated from Oregon in 2019, Journalism/Comm's/Advertising, earning his degree in three years.
Graduated from Oregon with Master's in Advertising and Brand Responsibility.
Transferred to UMiami in January 2023, petitioned for ninth year of eligibility and was awarded it.
https://www.si.com/college/oregon/football/former-oregon-te-cam-mccormick-petitioning-acc-for-ninth-year-of-college-eligibility
RE: Portal - newguy - 01-22-2024
when i heard about Cam McCormick, i was thinking that a line has just been crossed, but then i realized that for all intents and purposes, there really is no line anymore.
RE: Portal - SkiBum80 - 01-22-2024
I recall Coach TT at end of season making it very clear he intends for Stanford to rely on recruiting graduating HS players as the primary way to build the roster. He really downplayed any expectation that Stanford would be very active in getting transfers. That being said, he is getting transfers anyway. Small numbers, but still important or potentially important guys. And the trend certainly is upwards from only a couple / few years ago.
In regards to the NCAA rule about transferring once, but for a second time needs a hard-to-get waiver, that restriction seems to have fallen under pretty successful legal attack.
From a recent article on CBC news site:
"The NCAA is now staring down a new legal opponent as the U.S. Department of Justice joined a lawsuit from several states on Thursday challenging NCAA transfer restrictions. At stake is whether the NCAA will be allowed to continue mandating that second-time undergraduate transfers sit out a season before participating in competition.
A U.S. District Court judge issued a temporary injunction in the case on Dec. 13, leading to immediate eligibility for dozens of second-time transfer basketball players around the country. However, the fate of the rule beyond this academic year remains up in the air, pending the outcome of the case.
The NCAA faces a tough battle with the DOJ on board and 11 states now participating in the lawsuit, which asserts the NCAA's transfer rules are "an illegal restraint on college athletes' ability to sell their image and likeness and control their education." A trial date has note been set."
RE: Portal - BostonCard - 01-22-2024
(01-22-2024, 04:33 PM)SkiBum80 Wrote: The NCAA faces a tough battle with the DOJ on board and 11 states now participating in the lawsuit, which asserts the NCAA's transfer rules are "an illegal restraint on college athletes' ability to sell their image and likeness and control their education." A trial date has note been set."
I legit do not get this argument. There is no restriction on their ability to sell their name image and likeness or control their education. As far as I know, the only restriction is on playing NCAA sports. But, if a school is not working out academically, they are free to transfer at any time, and can continue their education anywhere where they can get it, whether they play intercollegiate athletics or not... just like any other student. Likewise, if a sponsor wants to use them in an ad campaign, transfer rules do not prevent a student-athlete from getting paid for their NIL.
In fact, it is the impact of frequent transferring on education that is the whole reason why transfer restrictions exist in the first place. It takes time to acclimatize to a new school, different general education requirements, potentially having units not count towards graduation. A year without competition, to allow a student to focus on academics makes sense in a world where student athletes are actual students. The problem is that these restrictions only make sense if athletes are also students. If they are thinly veiled professionals, then of course any restriction is an unfair labor practice. However, every ruling that ignores the student in student athlete makes subsequent restrictions harder to justify. The next steps will be to say that academic requirements are unfair labor practices and that eligibility limits are age discrimination, and that athletes are entitled to play professional collegiate athletics without regard to age, prior participation in a different league (eg NFL, NBA) or academics.
I am always somewhat cautious about slippery slope arguments, but we have already slipped well down this slope.
BC
RE: Portal - jacket3ree - 01-22-2024
The ACC boards are deriding Peter Pan Cam McCormick, but again, it is the offseason, so what else is there to do? Nine years out of high school with two degrees, it might be time to grow up and get a job. Except maybe he can make more NIL money than someone starting out in advertising. If he was NFL material, one would think he'd already be in the NFL. Or go to the USFL. Or Canada.
I thought we were rapidly moving toward a split world of college sports with NASCAR/European basketball or soccer style sponsorships in one division and everyone else going back to a trying not to get caught paying amateurs to win division, like the good old days. But the more court rulings come out about paying players as straight up employees, I think we're headed to a pay for play division and the rest stick to club sports and intramurals. I'm not sure what DII and DIII schools are going to do if forced to pay players in addition to scholarships.
NIL was completely bastardized as expected. No one is stopping someone from working a deal with EA sports or keeping an athlete from monetizing a social media presence. But now, we have collectives so the players can just show up for money without doing their own leg work.
Hard to go back up that slippery slope.
RE: Portal - 82lsju - 01-22-2024
(01-22-2024, 07:33 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: The ACC boards are deriding Peter Pan Cam McCormick, but again, it is the offseason, so what else is there to do? Nine years out of high school with two degrees, it might be time to grow up and get a job. Except maybe he can make more NIL money than someone starting out in advertising. If he was NFL material, one would think he'd already be in the NFL. Or go to the USFL. Or Canada.
I would not expect
- 2023 U of Miami, 8 receptions, plays 5 games at Miami
to garner much NIL money, I'm actually somewhat surprised that Miami would want to use a scholarship for him...
RE: Portal - Goose - 01-23-2024
(01-22-2024, 07:06 PM)BostonCard Wrote:I was going to argue we had totally slid down the slope and were now in the sewer at the bottom, but this descent seems so neverending there may be worse below.(01-22-2024, 04:33 PM)SkiBum80 Wrote: The NCAA faces a tough battle with the DOJ on board and 11 states now participating in the lawsuit, which asserts the NCAA's transfer rules are "an illegal restraint on college athletes' ability to sell their image and likeness and control their education." A trial date has note been set."
I legit do not get this argument. There is no restriction on their ability to sell their name image and likeness or control their education. As far as I know, the only restriction is on playing NCAA sports. But, if a school is not working out academically, they are free to transfer at any time, and can continue their education anywhere where they can get it, whether they play intercollegiate athletics or not... just like any other student. Likewise, if a sponsor wants to use them in an ad campaign, transfer rules do not prevent a student-athlete from getting paid for their NIL.
In fact, it is the impact of frequent transferring on education that is the whole reason why transfer restrictions exist in the first place. It takes time to acclimatize to a new school, different general education requirements, potentially having units not count towards graduation. A year without competition, to allow a student to focus on academics makes sense in a world where student athletes are actual students. The problem is that these restrictions only make sense if athletes are also students. If they are thinly veiled professionals, then of course any restriction is an unfair labor practice. However, every ruling that ignores the student in student athlete makes subsequent restrictions harder to justify. The next steps will be to say that academic requirements are unfair labor practices and that eligibility limits are age discrimination, and that athletes are entitled to play professional collegiate athletics without regard to age, prior participation in a different league (eg NFL, NBA) or academics.
I am always somewhat cautious about slippery slope arguments, but we have already slipped well down this slope.
BC
RE: Portal - Mick - 09-26-2024
(01-22-2024, 07:33 PM)jacket3ree Wrote: The ACC boards are deriding Peter Pan Cam McCormick, but again, it is the offseason, so what else is there to do? Nine years out of high school with two degrees, it might be time to grow up and get a job. Except maybe he can make more NIL money than someone starting out in advertising. If he was NFL material, one would think he'd already be in the NFL. Or go to the USFL. Or Canada.
I thought we were rapidly moving toward a split world of college sports with NASCAR/European basketball or soccer style sponsorships in one division and everyone else going back to a trying not to get caught paying amateurs to win division, like the good old days. But the more court rulings come out about paying players as straight up employees, I think we're headed to a pay for play division and the rest stick to club sports and intramurals. I'm not sure what DII and DIII schools are going to do if forced to pay players in addition to scholarships.
NIL was completely bastardized as expected. No one is stopping someone from working a deal with EA sports or keeping an athlete from monetizing a social media presence. But now, we have collectives so the players can just show up for money without doing their own leg work.
Hard to go back up that slippery slope.
Tight end McCormick's career:
2016 Redshirted as freshman (same recruiting class as Justin Herbert, now in his fifth year in the NFL)
2017 Played / 1 year eligibility gone
2018 Played a few games but broke left fibula and tore ankle ligaments / red shirt
2019 Medical redshirt
2020 COVID
2021 Tore his right Achilles vs. tOSU
2022 Played / 2nd year eligibility gone, started 11 games, played in all 13, 8 catches, 62 yards
2023 Played / transferred to Miami, 3rd year eligibility gone
McCormick has had two receptions for 18 yards and scored one touchdown in four games.
McCormick has a B.A. in Journalism and a Master's in advertising/brand responsibility.
RE: Portal - fullmetal - 09-26-2024
Yeah, I feel sorry for the guy if his best option in life is to get some sort of scholarship for a ninth year. With a master's degree, he might as well just become a graduate assistant and stop putting wear and tear on his body. Definitely agreed that if he was NFL material, he would have gone to the league much earlier. Is he getting health insurance and continuing treatment for game-related injuries? Does being a graduate assistant not come with health benefits or lodging? (Dorms are cheap on scholarship!) Or is he just stricken with Peter Pan syndrome and living up life as a big man on campus with the benefits that entails...?