📡 NCAA official this week who was “95% certain” transfers will soon be allowed to play immediately in basketball & football.

[TerryP]

 

[TheChief]

Coaches can leave and coach immediately, why not players?

If I'm not mistaken, players also sign one year scholarships. That should bind them for one year only. They should be free to go anywhere they wish and play immediately.

I'm all for this.

 

[TUSKtimes]

I'm more for tweaking the process rather than blow it up. The players should sit out a year but with no restrictions. They can go to any team they like and be on full scholarship the year they sit out. Free agency ain't the answer folks.

 

[TheChief]

Why is it okay for coaches to transfer and not sit out then? Coaches can go to any team they want and get paid the next season. If the NCAA can make that a rule for coaches, then I'm all for it for the players.

The answer is a four year scholarship. Then, make a transfer sit out a year. As it is the coach can cut your scholly, resulting in your transfer, and you still have to sit? Tell me how that's fair? That should be against the law.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Why is it okay for coaches to transfer and not sit out then? Coaches can go to any team they want and get paid the next season. If the NCAA can make that a rule for coaches, then I'm all for it for the players.

The answer is a four year scholarship. Then, make a transfer sit out a year. As it is the coach can cut your scholly, resulting in your transfer, and you still have to sit? Tell me how that's fair? That should be against the law.

Why is getting a higher education equated with going into business for yourself? The fact that a university makes money from the student doesn't make the student an entrepreneur. It is however what they hope to become AFTER they graduate.

 

[planomateo]

Willie Taggart head coached at 3 schools in less than 1 year...let that sink in. Hired at Oregon on 12/7/2016 and FSU on 12/5/2017.

I don't know how you fix this, ,but don't think it's right to punish the athletes. But there will be a huge cost if they allow them to jump whenever w/o consequences. How do you prevent coaches from recruiting other players...

 

[50+yeartidefan]

Bad. Bad..bad
Why fix things that aren't broken.....
A kid committs.....if he doesnt like it or doesnt fit.....fine...sit out a year...stick with it...dont see a problem..... for all actions there are consequences....
...now...before the kid steps on campus...HC moves on...he should be freed from contract....( thats being recruited under deceiption.....)....
The proposal is nothing but free agency.....chaos.....

 

[TerryP]

Damn, I couldn't finish this without thinking about "We have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it." (See bolded area)

------

DI Board of Directors provides legislative flexibility
Change will allow more time to develop transfer proposals

Division I will operate with a more flexible legislative schedule in 2018, allowing more time for the membership to provide input on potential transfer rule changes.

The Division I Board of Directors on Thursday voted to allow the Division I Council to introduce legislative proposals in April changing transfer rules, with final voting to take place as early as the summer. The regular legislative cycle requires proposals to be introduced by Sept. 1. The Council generally casts final votes at its April meeting.

The adjusted timeline will give the Transfer Working Group additional time to collect feedback and develop additional transfer rule changes that could be adopted at the same time as the transfer proposals already in the cycle.

Last year, the Council introduced legislation that would establish tampering as a level 2 violation in the Committee on Infractions penalty structure. It also created a measure that would eliminate the ability of schools and coaches to restrict transfer students from receiving aid at their next school. The Council could delay the vote on those measures so all transfer items could be adopted as a package, potentially as early as June.

The board’s decision provides conferences the opportunity to review final proposals during spring meetings, with a Council vote set for the June meeting.

Strategic agenda
To fulfill the group’s mission to set the Division I strategic agenda, board members are interested in receiving additional membership input on proposed strategic areas of emphasis for 2018 to 2023. The Division I board is identifying its priorities and areas of emphasis in conjunction with the Board of Governors’ strategic planning process.

The Division I board already shared a draft of its plan with the Presidential Forum and the Strategic Vision and Planning Committee for initial feedback. Now the group is seeking comments from a broader swath of the membership.

The board identified three foundational goals that could serve as the division’s highest priorities:

• Develop policies and legislation to improve the academic success of student-athletes, and help provide a well-rounded and safe educational and athletics experience that supports their overall well-being and prepares them for a successful transition before, during and after college.
• Oversee policies and legislation to enhance the sustainability of the collegiate model.
• Identify and examine threats and opportunities impacting the collegiate model, and develop strategies to manage outcomes and enhance the student-athlete experience.

Several areas of focus within each of those foundational goals will be forwarded to the membership through a survey in the next few months. The board hopes to finalize its strategic areas of emphasis in April.

Board members also discussed its current membership composition, basketball issues and the Presidential Forum’s Charting the Course initiative.

DI Board of Directors provides legislative flexibility

------

What that really means? We don't know what we're doing, we don't have enough research and feedback to have a good grasp on what other feel about this, but we're pushing it through?

Am I the only one seeing ... well, the NCAA as SNAFU?

 

[TheChief]

Why is getting a higher education equated with going into business for yourself? The fact that a university makes money from the student doesn't make the student an entrepreneur. It is however what they hope to become AFTER they graduate.

Getting a higher education is not being equated to going into business for yourself. Being a college athlete is, in effect, going into business for yourself. Being an athlete and a student are two different things completely. And yes, being a student athlete should be about entrepreneurship.

The fact that a university makes money and restricts students makes the student a slave. That student is paid only by allowing them to attend classes and giving them some food and board. At best the entire situation is indentured servitude with the covenant signed on signing day. The disparity in value is tremendous. Coaches being allowed free movement and great riches while the laborers are restricted provides rich irony to the servitude of college athletics.

I've come full circle about the idea of paying college athletes, and I suppose you can figure I'm firmly in the camp of paying the players. Millions upon millions of dollars are being made on the backs of big sport athletes. Coaches and administrators, clothing manufacturers, and advertisers make money hand over fist. The players get peanuts. They deserve a portion of the pie.

Yet, we worry about players going to play wherever and whenever they want to play? Please. Why not just whip them with leather and tell them they can't go anywhere?

The players would be wise to form a union of sorts. If they all refused to play one Saturday, you'd see changes. That is a guarantee.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Getting a higher education is not being equated to going into business for yourself. Being a college athlete is, in effect, going into business for yourself. Being an athlete and a student are two different things completely. And yes, being a student athlete should be about entrepreneurship.

The fact that a university makes money and restricts students makes the student a slave. That student is paid only by allowing them to attend classes and giving them some food and board. At best the entire situation is indentured servitude with the covenant signed on signing day. The disparity in value is tremendous. Coaches being allowed free movement and great riches while the laborers are restricted provides rich irony to the servitude of college athletics.

I've come full circle about the idea of paying college athletes, and I suppose you can figure I'm firmly in the camp of paying the players. Millions upon millions of dollars are being made on the backs of big sport athletes. Coaches and administrators, clothing manufacturers, and advertisers make money hand over fist. The players get peanuts. They deserve a portion of the pie.

Yet, we worry about players going to play wherever and whenever they want to play? Please. Why not just whip them with leather and tell them they can't go anywhere?

The players would be wise to form a union of sorts. If they all refused to play one Saturday, you'd see changes. That is a guarantee.

I wish you and your "plantation theory" a lot of success.

 

[rick4bama]

Great Read!

 

[17BAMA]

That student is paid only by allowing them to attend classes and giving them some food and board

The fact that a university makes money and restricts students makes the student a slave. That student is paid only by allowing them to attend classes and giving them some food and board. At best the entire situation is indentured servitude with the covenant signed on signing day. The disparity in value is tremendous. Coaches being allowed free movement and great riches while the laborers are restricted provides rich irony to the servitude of college athletics.

I'm no historian so perhaps you can help me here.

When have seen see a case where a slave or indentured servant has received over $50,000 in benefits per year including spending money? It's estimated the average college degree is worth over $300,000. Where's an indentured servant receiving that for a four year commitment.

Coaches are not allowed free movement. They have to pay as well. Daboll is looking at $250,000 with his move to the NFL. And how much of the time and investment(s) are transferring athletes having to repay?

You're coming across like TennStud's offspring.

 

[musso]

Definitely sympathetic to paying players. But given the fact that so many athletic departments either lose money or barely break even, I expect a splintering within the FBS division. We could end up seeing a new and exclusive FB$ division comprised of the biggest revenue generating schools which divide all the loot among themselves. Off the top of my head, I could see perhaps there being enough potential revenue to support paying players at the top 50 programs. Five conferences comprised of 10 teams each. All conference members play each other every season. All conference champs enter the play off with home field advantage, plus 3 at-large teams. Give all players at the 50 programs a base minimum salary with academic conditions attached. Then give play off teams an additional monetary prize. This would be awesome IMO.