Meanwhile, on the transfer front

Well, there’s this as a starting point.

The Division I Transfer Working Group affirmed its strong support for a proposal that would eliminate the ability of schools to influence athletics scholarships provided to student-athletes after they transfer.

That’s nice, but as you read through the release, there are a ton of proposals, some of which conflict, that give me the impression they’re still a ways away from a final consensus.  One thing I do like a lot is that they’re looking to stiffen the penalty for coaches tampering with a college athlete at another school.  If you have a problem with players being recruited when they shouldn’t be, that should be on the coaches doing the recruiting.

On the other hand, if you want to see something that ought to make Nick Saban’s head explodes, check out the tail end of the release.

The working group is interested in membership feedback on a proposal that would require schools that accept graduate transfers to offer aid — and count it against team limits — for the duration of the graduate program in which the student enrolls. With this concept, even if a student leaves after the first year of a two-year graduate program, the school could not re-award that aid, and it would continue to count against team limits.

You lose a grad transfer, but still have to take the scholly hit for him?  Ouchy-ouch.  (As bad as that might be for Saban, merely on general principle, imagine the havoc it would wreck on basketball rosters.)  No wonder the report goes on to note “membership opinion was deeply divided”.  Hunh, imagine that.  Yet for some reason, they’ve put it out there again to see if those opinions have changed.  Somebody at the NCAA has a sense of humor, I guess.


Filed under Georgia Football

7 responses to “Meanwhile, on the transfer front

  1. Former Fan

    With all the complaining the basketball folks do at the schools about one and done, why don’t they just make a rule that if a player leaves after 1 year (for any reason), that scholarship cannot be replaced for another 3 years? That would discourage schools from recruiting players they think will be one and done players.

    Anyway, at some point, the players just should be granted the right to transfer and play immediately regardless. If they want to have buy out clauses like they do with coaches, then pay the players and start including buy out clauses in the contracts.


  2. Sam Johnson

    This is so ridiculous. The transfer rules are effectively noncompete agreements imposed on non-employees. If the players were truly employees, these non-competes would be unenforceable in most jurisdictions because they have no basis in logic or reality. It’s just incredible to me that NCAA gets away with this stuff.


    • Macallanlover

      How so? Nothing prohibits the athletes from transferring without penalty. There are dozens, even hundreds, of schools for them to transfer and play without delay. There is very deep logic why certain, minimal limitations are in place. What defies logic is allowing them to go to a school that will play against their former teammates and, possibly coaches who invested time in training them. That makes no sense at all.

      I would like to see blocking transfers to selected schools limited to just conference teams, and those which appear on that program’s schedule during the period of the athlete’s remaining eligibility. Occasionally, some of the schools blocked seem to be personal vendettas, and do not fit the preceding rationale. To that extent, I could support changes to the transfer rules.


      • What defies logic is allowing them to go to a school that will play against their former teammates and, possibly coaches who invested time in training them. That makes no sense at all.

        But letting coaches do exactly that does?


      • Former Fan

        The transfer rules prove that the schools should be calling them “athletes” rather than “student-athletes”. The student part doesn’t seem to matter to them as much as the athlete part. Otherwise, transfering would be allowed regardless of the competition.


  3. Ricky McDurden

    Saban et al be damned, I think if a school is willing to take on a grad transfer that they should be responsible for covering the tuition costs of that grad degree whether the student stays 2 years or not. If you’re not going to pay them, make sure they’re actually able to pursue the meaningful degree you claim acts as their compensation.


  4. DawgPhan

    These seem like two minor changes in the favor of the student athletes.