Count Tom Mars as someone who thinks the NCAA is going to get out of the transfer waiver business soon by adopting a “a one-time, no-questions-asked transfer” process.
“The absence of any logic in penalizing student-athletes becomes even more apparent when one considers the freedom that other college students have to transfer without penalty,” Mars said. “After all, there’s no rule that requires a college violinist with a scholarship to be barred from playing in any concerts for a year following their transfer to another school. What’s more, when a student-musician transfers, you never hear anyone say ‘by giving you a scholarship, we paid for you to stay here until you graduate.’”
Ah, logic. I forgot, this is the NCAA we’re dealing with.
Seriously, this makes too much sense not to adopt — even for the NCAA. At least I think it does.
Get The Picture 
When you have control freak, glorified PE teachers making the school’s policy in this issue, I would be very surprised if the NCAA’s membership would approve a sensible proposal like this. Of course, Mark Emmert isn’t going to stick his head out to the presidents to advise them to approve the change.
LikeLike
Not to be confused with a defender of the NCAA, or Emmert, in a general sense, their reluctance to open the door to wide-spread transfers seems wiser than the position of those who feel unlimited freedom should be allowed for athletic transfers. That said, I do feel the “transfers with limits” is where this will shake out. As noted below, the can is now kicked down the road for how we will deal with 2nd and 3rd transfer requests for reasons of substance (family emergencies and hardships).
I find your “glorified PE teachers” description both insulting for both college coaches and teachers at the HS (and below) grades. There are many admirable people at both ends of that, and yes, some scum bags as well; what is different about that from all other professions? The amount of money one makes doesn’t put them in a category for stereotyping their passion, integrity, or worthiness of respect, imo.
LikeLike
My glorified PE teacher comment isn’t meant negatively toward people who have decided that’s what they want to do. I have a lot of respect for high school coaches and physical education teachers who get paid to work with young people and make them better individuals.
My problem is these college coaches who want to control these guys but are willing to cut them loose at any moment. They make a bunch of money coaching “amateurs” just like a high school coach does.
By the way, Mac, you seem to defend every one of the NCAA’s positions regarding student-athlete welfare.
LikeLike
I usually stay away from discussions on this subject because I have stated my position. Sometimes comment when I read some new angle, or something is said that I feel needs addressing, supporting, or rebutting. Not sure it is actually the wanting to control them, their job to develop a team that succeeds and it is necessary to have a line of progression and succession. Not just true with a CFB team, true with any organization; constant and rampant turnover is a huge problem if you want to succeed. Continual in-and-out, unexpected, personnel changes will damage the product, be it a mom and mom operation, large conglomerate, or CFB team.
Supported the stipend long before it was adopted, although didn’t care for the COL aspect as too many games are played with that. Supported many other safety and long term care options for those injured. Also feel schollies should be guaranteed for 4 years, and many other thing I consider good for the welfare of the SA.
But I am against the positions that would disrupt/tear down the model we have. I think what you support so much would do harm to the overall community of student athlete’s welfare (smaller schools, minor sports, etc.) and future for those who will come later. Short term there might be dancing in the streets, a few years from now, a lot of doors may not be open for the next generation. Just a different side from you, certainly not fair to say I oppose what is good for the welfare of student athletes, or support the NCAA. They aren’t wrong about everything, and I wish the power football programs would pull away from their authority totally. But that is another discussion.
LikeLike
“Not sure it is actually the wanting to control them, their job to develop a team that succeeds and it is necessary to have a line of progression and succession.”
Given the fact that every part of the coach/player relationship is tilted toward the coach under the NCAA rules, I would suggest that is a level of control you would never accept in your career. The parallel in the real world would be I can fire you at any time, and after that, I can tell you where and when you can accept compensation for your next job. This is exactly what a student-athlete has to deal with today. A 1-time transfer with immediate eligibility wouldn’t lead to “constant and rampant turnover.”
I can agree with you on the stipend, health care, and scholarship guarantees … My position is that it should go to the next step where a student-athlete can earn for his/her name, likeness and image. I am not an advocate for pure pay-for-play but will go along with it if Kessler’s lawsuit burns the whole thing to the ground because the NCAA decides to act like, well, the NCAA.
None of these proposals would tear down the current model (I think the current model does need to be disrupted/modernized for today’s world). These are the two issues that make people compare college sports to the “plantation” (I hate that comparison and have said it multiple times) and give credence to those who say student-athletes are exploited (the NCAA is a price-fixing cartel).
We definitely agree that the “Power 5” along with some of the Group of 5 should break away from the NCAA, but that is another discussion.
LikeLike
How does giving a kid a list of three dozen programs he can’t transfer to contribute to “a line of progression and succession”?
As I pointed out to you the other day, coaches and administrators are free to leave at the drop of a hat.
LikeLike
You mention that you “didn’t care for the COL aspect as too many games are played with that.” How would you change that? I’m sincerely curious about it. The number that is used there is not a number that’s made up by the athletic association to give each student-athlete an extra amount of money in his/her pocket. That’s the number a university’s financial aid office estimates to determine financial aid and is disclosed to the federal government for financial aid for every student on campus.
LikeLike
On the last issue, because I think the “COL” for a college student, once you remove the housing, tuition, books, medical, etc. type of variables isn’t all that different. I am talking discretionary spending expenses for young adults around a college campus (movies, gas, pizza, beer, dry cleaning, clothing, music, etc.) Think about how a “normal” college student spends their money, how you and your kids did, does it really matter that much if you are in Athens, Austin, Chapel Hill, Happy Valley, Boulder, etc.? Minor variances is all I see unless someone wants to eat at 5 star restaurants, attend Broadway plays, or use Pebble Beach as their public golf course.
Regardless of who determines it, there is room for playing with the numbers. I feel there should be a flat rate, national number, say $200 per week, for all SAs receiving this cash. It can be adjusted periodically as needed for significant inflation, but should be the same, imo. I just feel these athletes should have the opportunity to fit into the university lifestyle regardless of their personal financial situation, nothing more, or less. To not do so can lead to bad activities to get money.
LikeLike
The COA does include discretionary expenses, transportation, etc. It is the estimate of what the all in cost to attend a particular school is.
https://osfa.uga.edu/costs/
LikeLike
I don’t know. The fact that something makes sense and appears perfectly logical to 99.99% of the world seems to increase the chances that the NCAA is opposed to it. Because, you know, students.
LikeLike
I like it. Less drama, basic fairness to the athlete. What would the rules be for the second or third transfer though?
LikeLike
I hope they give one free transfer after the athlete spends two seasons on the team. This would give the kids time to mature, no where they stand on the team, and then make a wise use of their transfer.
I wonder if this would impact grad transfers?
LikeLike
Why after 2 seasons? If a player knows it’s not a fit, why should he have to stay? Other college students don’t have to stay for 2 years before transferring.
I don’t think this will impact grad transfers if the rule changes.
LikeLike
I think it gives the kid time to adjust to college, the depth chart, and being homesick. Also, it gives the coaching staff 2 seasons to show the kid his future at the school.
LikeLike
I’m not convinced. Otherwise, why does every other student on the campus have the ability to leave if he decides he has made a mistake?
Using your logic, Chris Steele shouldn’t have been allowed to transfer because he didn’t give Dopey Dan a chance to show him his future and he didn’t adjust well to college at FU by having an alleged sexual predator as a roommate.
LikeLike