Today in the annals of butthurt

Eastern Washington’s AD is awash in false graciousness over the school’s star quarterback moving to Oregon under the NCAA’s graduate transfer rule.

“We are not sure that this was the actual intent of the legislation…”?  What, pray tell, was it, then?

Then again, maybe what he meant was that it’s a mistake for any NCAA rule to benefit a student-athlete.

17 Comments

Filed under It's Not Easy Being A Mid-Major, The NCAA

17 responses to “Today in the annals of butthurt

  1. gastr1

    I think your point is accurate, but I shudder to think of the reaction in Bulldog Nation if a star player left us for any other school as a graduate transfer.

    Like

    • Merk

      Pretty sure eastern washington is D-II, not really a lateral move there.

      Like

      • Silver Creek Dawg

        Actually a FCS (1-AA) power program with more than one PAC-12 scalp in recent years, due primarily to this young man’s exploits.

        Like

      • gastr1

        Yeah, but my point is not that it’s likely but that, it’s possible, and I can’t imagine people would be all not-butthurt about it. Say we hired a new offensive coordinator that wanted to run the spread and pass 50 times a game and fifth-year senior Todd Gurley, after battling suspension and injury the last two years, decided to transfer to Alabama on the graduate-transfer rule. Would some people be miffed at Gurley? I think they would.

        Like

    • Sh3rl0ck

      Logan Gray was the nations premiere “fair-catch” specialist, and he used the graduate transfer rule to go to Colorado.

      Like

  2. Merk

    How dare the NCAA let a kid who gave the damn school 4 years, have a chance to go somewhere else for the 5th. Also screw that guy, this is a kid going from a nobody program to a top tier school for a chance to make a name for himself.

    I now hope he does succeed and never mentions/helps E. Washington with crap.

    Like

  3. Comin' Down The Track

    Heh heh… “annals.”

    Like

  4. Macallanlover

    I realize the sentiment on this blog is generally favorable for unrestrictive transfers but I also fail to understand the intent, or logic, of this rule. Moving from 1-A to 1-AA without penalty to get a better chance to play and showcase one’s talents makes sense to me, but players who are playing regularly should be restricted from transferring to play the same position, imo. I don’t know how you write the regulation based on amount of playing time but that is the only justification where I would allow transfers without penalty to D1 schools. Pandora’s Box, etc. etc., and all those other warnings apply to those who feel differently……respectfullly intended.

    Like

    • … but players who are playing regularly should be restricted from transferring to play the same position, imo.

      Because?

      Not being snarky here, Mac. I genuinely don’t understand why that should make a difference.

      Like

      • Macallanlover

        I am taking the “every player should get a right to play and showcase his skills” side whether it be for the NFL scouts or the individual’s own desire to be all he can be. If he is “trapped” behind an Aaron Murray, or Nick Chubb talent after two years, let him go 1-AA with no restrictions, or delay. If he is graduating, never has played much, or any, and is behind another superstar talent, let him transfer after graduation to any school outside the conference with no penalty. I don’t see the need for his young man, or Russell Wilson, to change schools when they have played the position, and demonstrated their talent at their current school. That sets up a “one and done”. Florida Marlins type one year surge to me for schools that are projected to be near the top next year. You just don’t need an influx of All-Stars from middling teams all bull rushing the Bama campus to have a “ring year” and play in the bright lights. Will Saban “roster manage” some average player out to accommodate 2 new WRs, a MLB,, 2 rush ends, and an All American OT? I can see this happening more than others may think and feel your “cure” is worse than the disease.

        Like

    • but players who are playing regularly should be restricted from transferring to play the same position, imo.

      Prior to this “legislation”, the only students that finished undergraduate studies from a university that could not accept scholarship for a new graduate field of study at another university were athletes. I don’t understand what is so difficult about this for some people. People tout all the time about how these guys are students, not employees, so why is it then a problem they act like any other damn student? How nonsensical is it that you could not choose what school you want to go to as a graduate student just because you play a sport?

      Honestly, I can’t believe anybody gives two shits about something where the only outcome is it makes coaches jobs slightly more difficult. They’re already pretty well compensated for it being the highest paid state employees in most states and whatnot.

      Like

  5. Senator – I’m sure you obviously had it in mind when you titled this post, but I can’t deny that my inner 12 year old had a good chuckle when I first read it.

    Like

    • The other side of this is that Eastern Washington offered him a scholarship when Oregon would not. Helped develop the guy into a star at this level and then to lose him to a bigger school that had no interest in him before now. I am not saying he shouldn’t be allowed to transfer or that it is a bad rule just that I can see E. Washington’s point of view.

      Like

      • Bulldawg165

        I see your point as well, but it’s a two way street. Eastern Washington helped this guy in ways other schools wouldn’t, and he benefited Eastern Washington in ways other players wouldn’t. It’s hard to say that one party got substantially more value from the deal than the other.

        Like