W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
Jan 4, 2013 11:22am
The new model would allow a student-athlete with a 2.6+ GPA to transfer schools and play immediately. This could become quite interesting.
http://www.athleticscholarships.net/2013/01/03/new-transfer-model-would-reduce-eligibility-consequences.htm
http://www.athleticscholarships.net/2013/01/03/new-transfer-model-would-reduce-eligibility-consequences.htm
sleeper
Posts: 27,879
Jan 4, 2013 11:36am
So basically you can't transfer from the SEC.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Jan 4, 2013 11:39am
They should at least make the GPA 3.0.
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jan 4, 2013 11:40am
oh god
Fly4Fun
Posts: 7,730
Jan 4, 2013 11:57am
Agreed, 2.6 isn't exactly a high bar.se-alum;1357427 wrote:They should at least make the GPA 3.0.
wildcats20
Posts: 27,794
Jan 4, 2013 12:21pm
Fly4Fun;1357442 wrote:Agreed, 2.6 isn't exactly a high bar.
Especially considering a large percentage of these guys have people do their school work for them. And get extra tutoring that normal students do not get.
derek bomar
Posts: 3,722
Jan 4, 2013 12:26pm
I could be in a coma and get a 2.6. Jesus.
Midstate01
Posts: 14,766
Jan 4, 2013 12:32pm
I don't like the idea because its going to mean guys playing at one school, being basically recruited by other schools. Could be a lot of dirty things going on if they allow that. Id also agree to make it at least a 3.0
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
Jan 4, 2013 1:32pm
Not.Good.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
Jan 4, 2013 1:33pm
This was my first thought. It will almost be like free agency for college.Midstate01;1357460 wrote:I don't like the idea because its going to mean guys playing at one school, being basically recruited by other schools. Could be a lot of dirty things going on if they allow that. Id also agree to make it at least a 3.0
S
sportchampps
Posts: 7,361
Jan 4, 2013 3:12pm
I would like this rule if it only applied to teams that have coaching changes or face NCAA penalties that the student athletes didn't know about when they choose to play there.
W
WebFire
Posts: 14,779
Jan 4, 2013 3:28pm
They already have that for coaching changes, don't they?sportchampps;1357636 wrote:I would like this rule if it only applied to teams that have coaching changes or face NCAA penalties that the student athletes didn't know about when they choose to play there.
gorocks99
Posts: 10,760
Jan 4, 2013 3:33pm
Not as far as I know. If you transfer, even after a coaching change, you still have to sit out a year. Only exception when transferring FBS to FBS that I know of is if you're going to go to grad school and your current school doesn't offer a graduate program in your field of study (Russell Wilson took advantage of it).WebFire;1357655 wrote:They already have that for coaching changes, don't they?
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Jan 4, 2013 6:38pm
It's done on a petition basis, but a recent precedent has been basically set. Everyone who had a coach leave got their waiver for immediate eligibility granted.
FatHobbit
Posts: 8,651
Jan 4, 2013 6:46pm
I don't like it, but coaches can transfer without penalty. Why not players?
Pick6
Posts: 14,946
Jan 4, 2013 7:26pm
Do coaches not have a buyout built into their contracts? If players want to pay back their scholarships, then I have no problem letting them leave without penalty.FatHobbit;1357779 wrote:I don't like it, but coaches can transfer without penalty. Why not players?
Cat Food Flambe'
Posts: 1,230
Jan 4, 2013 10:54pm
I wonder about "fairness" impacts - would athletes in certain protected classes (ethnic, economic, etc.) be unfairly impacted? If so, it might not stand up in court.
ts1227
Posts: 12,319
Jan 4, 2013 11:03pm
ccrunner609;1357856 wrote:Just make it a one time deal. Make it a 3.0 and make it a rule that they have to transfer out of the same conference.
I agree, except about the conference thing. 3.0 and a stipulation that you can only do it once (I doubt it would ever be an issue, but put it in there to cover all bases).
Q
queencitybuckeye
Posts: 7,117
Jan 6, 2013 10:51am
Might be a boon for the mid-majors (i.e. MAC). With situational exceptions, the kids transferring will for the most part be the AYOs, not the kids getting playing time.
Fly4Fun
Posts: 7,730
Jan 6, 2013 10:59am
Likewise it might be a bust for the mid-majors. Their more talented athletes who didn't get as much of a look in high school but have proven to be a force in college might skip out to a bigger program.queencitybuckeye;1358908 wrote:Might be a boon for the mid-majors (i.e. MAC). With situational exceptions, the kids transferring will for the most part be the AYOs, not the kids getting playing time.
se-alum
Posts: 13,948
Jan 6, 2013 1:20pm
I can't imagine the corruption taking place if they allow this. If a booster was willing to pay $250,000 for an unproven Cam Newton, just imagine what they would be willing to pay for a Braxton Miller or Johnny Football.
V
vball10set
Posts: 24,795
Jan 6, 2013 2:39pm
*Manziel
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Jan 6, 2013 4:06pm
Here's an interesting article, obviously UK-related. But the principle applies to many institutions.
http://sports.yahoo.com/kentucky/blog/wildcats/post/new-potential-transfer-could-help-calipari-uk?urn=college,wp2753
I DO NOT like this rule at all. It may lead to better competition, better teams and give a lot more options to athletes...but it will be quite possibly the single-biggest change in college sports history.
http://sports.yahoo.com/kentucky/blog/wildcats/post/new-potential-transfer-could-help-calipari-uk?urn=college,wp2753
I DO NOT like this rule at all. It may lead to better competition, better teams and give a lot more options to athletes...but it will be quite possibly the single-biggest change in college sports history.
B
BunkMoreland
Posts: 9
Jan 6, 2013 4:13pm
Until coaches have to sit out a year after switching schools, athletes shouldn't have to either.
Azubuike24
Posts: 15,933
Jan 6, 2013 4:16pm
In theory, yes, but the "contact" a coach signed is NOT the same as the contract "LOI/scholarship papers" a student-athlete signs.BunkMoreland;1359233 wrote:Until coaches have to sit out a year after switching schools, athletes shouldn't have to either.
It's like taking every employee in a huge company and expecting that all are held to the exact same terms and conditions of employment. They aren't.
With that said, I believe there are many, many options for student-athletes or future athletes to explore without getting "roped into" the whole eligibility limitations loop. That's the direction this stuff has to go, not just making it an open forum.