🏈 Georgia changes transfer policy under Smart

[College Football News :]

Georgia changes transfer policy under Smart

Under Mark Richt, Georgia would not restrict the future destinations of outgoing transfers, granting them full releases of their scholarships so they could continue playing at the program of their choice.



Now that Richt is gone, the Bulldogs have a new transfer policy under coach Kirby Smart that will restrict where players can transfer, as evidenced by UGA reportedly blocking running back A.J. Turman from transferring to Miami or Florida this week.

“Kirby brought me up to date on this when we were discussing our stance, and so that stance has been adjusted,” athletic director Greg McGarity told DawgNation on Friday.

The new policy is not very different from that used by many other programs, but it does contradict the principles Georgia used to espouse. As DawgNation noted, McGarity emphatically stated two years ago that "the student athlete's best interest is at the forefront of our program," after Georgia Tech blocked the transfer of basketball player Robert Carter to the Bulldogs.

Now, the tune has changed for McGarity and Georgia under Smart.

“We are not totally restricting transfer opportunities for our student-athletes," said McGarity. "We will take each request on its own merit to determine if any restrictions should be placed on the release due to any extenuating circumstances. Student-athletes are afforded the opportunity to appeal the decision through the institution.”

Continue reading...

 

[planomateo]

Smart preventing guys from going to Miami to play for the guy(s) who recruited them.

“One of the that reasons I put Miami on there is I wanted to set the precedent that in the future, kids would not be able to go to Miami right away,” Smart said. “It’s very important that we understand that and that’s pretty much standard operating procedure — when a coach leaves one place that a kid can’t go there with the coach. That’s important to me that people understand that.”

 

[MacLittle13]

Smart preventing guys from going to Miami to play for the guy(s) who recruited them.

I feel like that is a bad look for Kirby. Why shouldn't a kid be able to follow the coach that recruited him to another school? Especially if that coach was fired. If that kid wanted to play for that coach, it seems like you are robbing the kid of what he signed up for. I doubt that would happen very often, but it seems you should have that option.

Hell, I think freshmen (either redshirt or otherwise) should be allowed to transfer when their coach moves to greener pastures too. The rules allow the coaches the freedom to move freely to the highest bidder, given that the bidder can pay all the fees. Why shouldn't the players get a chance to go somewhere else too?

 

[The Dude]

The barns QB recruiting just got harder.

 

[bamachine]

The barns QB recruiting just got harder.

Nah, they only take those booted out, they don't need no stinkin' transfers.

 

[TerryP]

I feel like that is a bad look for Kirby. Why shouldn't a kid be able to follow the coach that recruited him to another school? Especially if that coach was fired. If that kid wanted to play for that coach, it seems like you are robbing the kid of what he signed up for. I doubt that would happen very often, but it seems you should have that option.

Hell, I think freshmen (either redshirt or otherwise) should be allowed to transfer when their coach moves to greener pastures too. The rules allow the coaches the freedom to mov e freely to the highest bidder, given that the bidder can pay all the fees. Why shouldn't the players get a chance to go somewhere else too?

Let's assume this is 'legal' for a minute. I want to know how this works.

Let's say a school comes out of NSD with a perfect number of 85. The coach leaves, like Richt, and ends up with 10 players that wants to follow him. How does the original school get back to a level playing field? Now, they're starting the fall with 75—in essence just like a school that had been placed on probation and had scholly's removed. That school has to go through several years of classes to get back to the 85 number.

What do you suggest keeping the field level? You can't allow that school to sign 35 to make up for the 10 because that, again, creates an unlevel playing field with that school up 10 on their closest competitors.

What happens when your next "big name" is hired? IF kids are going to flock to a proven coach, which they in all likelihood would, now you've got another situation where one school has an advantage over others.

While this seems like a good idea at first glance, it goes against the very nature of the NCAA—an athletic organization run on a socialistic model. I've seen several say this needs to change, but I've yet to see one person explain how. If it isn't 'fair' to all involved, it's not going to pass without a lot of flak an unintended consequences.

 

[FOX Sports Digital]

Georgia AD's call to block transfer a bad look for 'Dawgs

This decision could cause a storm, or an, er, hurricane.

Continue reading...

@MacLittle13

 

[94 Grad]

Let's assume this is 'legal' for a minute. I want to know how this works.

Let's say a school comes out of NSD with a perfect number of 85. The coach leaves, like Richt, and ends up with 10 players that wants to follow him. How does the original school get back to a level playing field? Now, they're starting the fall with 75—in essence just like a school that had been placed on probation and had scholly's removed. That school has to go through several years of classes to get back to the 85 number.

What do you suggest keeping the field level? You can't allow that school to sign 35 to make up for the 10 because that, again, creates an unlevel playing field with that school up 10 on their closest competitors.

What happens when your next "big name" is hired? IF kids are going to flock to a proven coach, which they in all likelihood would, now you've got another situation where one school has an advantage over others.

While this seems like a good idea at first glance, it goes against the very nature of the NCAA—an athletic organization run on a socialistic model. I've seen several say this needs to change, but I've yet to see one person explain how. If it isn't 'fair' to all involved, it's not going to pass without a lot of flak an unintended consequences.

I doubt you'd find 10 kids that want to transfer since most coaching changes happen prior to signing day.. more likely 2 or 3 kids as a guess. They'd be Freshman so you'd be able to back count the next years EE and sign more than 25 (If I remember correctly, the NLI is only binding one year).

I'm fine with the current NLI binding that makes it hard to transfer if you don't get a release... but I would like to see some sort of ability for any kid to transfer without the NCAA sit rule if a school fires a coach, but not if a coach leaves on his own accord.

Actually, I'm surprised more of these 5 star kids don't forgo the NLI and just insist on signing a Scholarship Agreement papers alone. The NLI is not required to be signed, but the schools sure want you to do that as it transfer the power to them. If you're good enough, I'd never recommend signing a NLI...

 

[BamaFan334]

I personally think it's BS for a program to block any kid from any school. I don't mind the wait a year deal, but if you aren't being signed to a four year scholarship, how the hell is it fair to restrict any movement? And no way do you have ten guys defect like that to ever put a team at that big of a disadvantage. Not like they use 75 people a game anyways. They want to make college football more businesslike and about the money, but I don't know any company that can force you to work for them and not take another job at another comoany, even after one day on the job. Internally, I understand a contract for a year or whatever, but I can leave when I want, so how is college football going to act businesslike, but then act unprofessional with issues like this?

 

[Tidestalker]

I don't blame Kirby... Makes a lot of sense for him to do this.

NCAA football and mens basketball is a money making sweat shop... So they will allow the million dollar coaches to come and go as they please but not the scholarshiped athletes.

Unfortunately for the kids, it's their best option. The big-business adults hold all the cards under the current system, so until something else comes along thats more fair for the student athletes (that generate all the business), they've just got to live with it.

 

[TerryP]

And no way do you have ten guys defect like that to ever put a team at that big of a disadvantage. Not like they use 75 people a game anyways.

That's an assumption. We don't know the answer to that because it's something you can't do right now.

While it's true you won't have 75 play in some games, you will have that many (and more in some cases) participate in a year. I've not really 'crunched' the numbers on 2015, but can tell you in '13-'14 Bama 'shirted 18 by my count. That's playing at least 75 in those two years.

I doubt you'd find 10 kids that want to transfer since most coaching changes happen prior to signing day.. more likely 2 or 3 kids as a guess. They'd be Freshman so you'd be able to back count the next years EE and sign more than 25 (If I remember correctly, the NLI is only binding one year).

We're dealing with a 25 limit/cap. There is no "over-signing" anymore ... as the term goes. Look at the last class for the Tide; seven EE's, 17 reporting in the summer or fall for a total of 24. The class of 2015 was at 24 as well.

The number 10 was a hypothetical. I don't think it's that much of a stretch.

_________

This conversation is beginning to open Pandora's box. IF the NCAA allows this in football, are you assuming it isn't allowed in other sports? How does that work? We're already seeing a handful of kids in basketball transfer each year from individual programs. In fact, a report just a few months ago cited 44% of D1 players transfer from their original school in basketball. Now, we're talking about a sport that only has 13 scholarshipped players. Start crunching those numbers for a second.

Which, leads me to think about this ...

Let's go with the best case scenario and look at two or three (as suggested here) with what ... maybe a dozen head coaching changes this season. IF we assume that's 36 players ... we're talking 36 out of close to 11,000.

Again, best case scenario ... and we're looking at .003% of players moving on. So, there needs to be sweeping rule changes for that small of a group?

We can't sit here and put firm numbers on this. We can sit here and see the issues it would create.

(As a last side note: "If a coach is fired..." throws another loop into this circular conversation. Richt, wasn't fired but he was ... Tuberville, wasn't fired, but he was. It seems to me we'd see very few cases of a coach being fired, but more forced resignations.)

 

[BamaFan334]

That's an assumption. We don't know the answer to that because it's something you can't do right now.

While it's true you won't have 75 play in some games, you will have that many (and more in some cases) participate in a year. I've not really 'crunched' the numbers on 2015, but can tell you in '13-'14 Bama 'shirted 18 by my count. That's playing at least 75 in those two years.



We're dealing with a 25 limit/cap. There is no "over-signing" anymore ... as the term goes. Look at the last class for the Tide; seven EE's, 17 reporting in the summer or fall for a total of 24. The class of 2015 was at 24 as well.

The number 10 was a hypothetical. I don't think it's that much of a stretch.

Well it's still an assumption on your end as well. Hypothetical or not, it's not a fact, so my assumption was based on an assumption. And to me, it's the schools deal to retain maybe five if those guys so you don't put yourself at a disadvantage. If they cant, that's their problem. I would have bolted Penn state in two seconds after the allegations against the school were true and would have gone to court if I was restricted by the school. Maybe apples and oranges, but a personal decision is a freedom you should have as a person. No one should be able to force you to do anything unless you knowingly sign up for such a stipulation. And I have yet to see a school keep a coach from jumping ship at any time and restricting his movement, no matter what time of the year he left or the bind he may put the school in.

I would be curious to know how many guys we play in a year. More so I would be interested in how many guys played a role, not just got put in against Chattanooga when it was 55-0 to empty the bench solely to call the dogs off late in the 4th.

 

[TerryP]

And I have yet to see a school keep a coach from jumping ship at any time and restricting his movement, no matter what time of the year he left or the bind he may put the school in.

We just saw it happen at Arkansas. Bielema has a no-compete clause with any other SEC school.

I would be curious to know how many guys we play in a year. More so I would be interested in how many guys played a role, not just got put in against Chattanooga when it was 55-0 to empty the bench solely to call the dogs off late in the 4th.

I looked at the last two years and counted redshirts; 18 total with eight in 2014 and 10 in 2015 (or vice-versa, can't recall which.)

As to the "play a role" thought ... how many 4 and 5 star players saw their first action against a team like Chattanooga? Considering out of the 85 a vast majority fall into that category?

You'll find a few each year only play in games like Chatt. But, those are walk-ons. You look at the participation charts and you'll see those frosh playing against the Chatt's of this world, but also in several other games.

 

[TheChief]

Let's assume this is 'legal' for a minute. I want to know how this works.

Let's say a school comes out of NSD with a perfect number of 85. The coach leaves, like Richt, and ends up with 10 players that wants to follow him. How does the original school get back to a level playing field? Now, they're starting the fall with 75—in essence just like a school that had been placed on probation and had scholly's removed. That school has to go through several years of classes to get back to the 85 number.

What do you suggest keeping the field level? You can't allow that school to sign 35 to make up for the 10 because that, again, creates an unlevel playing field with that school up 10 on their closest competitors.

What happens when your next "big name" is hired? IF kids are going to flock to a proven coach, which they in all likelihood would, now you've got another situation where one school has an advantage over others.

While this seems like a good idea at first glance, it goes against the very nature of the NCAA—an athletic organization run on a socialistic model. I've seen several say this needs to change, but I've yet to see one person explain how. If it isn't 'fair' to all involved, it's not going to pass without a lot of flak an unintended consequences.

Georgia fired Richt... right? Now the school wants to keep the kids Richt recruited? Right? If you don't want ten guys following and don't want to be put on "probation", don't fire the coach. Now, if a coach left of his own accord, that's a different thing.

Didn't Kirby take one of Bama's recruits recently? The kid "followed" the coach?

Aaaaaaaal-righty then!

 

[TerryP]

@TheChief Georgia and Richt "parted ways."

There were reports they've thought of firing him for a few years now.

 

[JoshB]

I personally think it's BS for a program to block any kid from any school. I don't mind the wait a year deal, but if you aren't being signed to a four year scholarship, how the hell is it fair to restrict any movement? And no way do you have ten guys defect like that to ever put a team at that big of a disadvantage. Not like they use 75 people a game anyways. They want to make college football more businesslike and about the money, but I don't know any company that can force you to work for them and not take another job at another comoany, even after one day on the job. Internally, I understand a contract for a year or whatever, but I can leave when I want, so how is college football going to act businesslike, but then act unprofessional with issues like this?

Plenty of "companies" and businesses have non competes where if you leave them you cant go to certain other companies that would be considered competition for a certain amount of time.

 

[UAgrad93]

Bielema had his assistant coaches sign those non compete clause contracts. It came to light when Kirby was filling out his staff at UGA.
@Birdman37 is right. One of my brother in laws was part of such a no compete clause and negotiation when the founders of a company he worked for parted ways. He was allowed to leave with one of the guys and return when he desired. The founders had a 2 year non compete agreement in place.

 

[planomateo]

Not all states have this, California is one of the few who don't.

 

[bamachine]

Most non-competes will not hold up in court.

 

[TerryP]

Not all states have this, California is one of the few who don't.

Ironically, Georgia just enacted legislation that not only permits it, but has a really broad definition. It's been a state that's been pretty adamantly against the NCC.