Incoming Transfers?

[knoxjacket]

They should treat everyone the same. Either grant it or not. No exceptions.

Agreed. The ncaa has proven they are garbage at judgement calls.

 

[beerbuzz]

I did find this from the 2017-2018 bylaws. Not as tough as getting 100%, but still tough. The SEC and PAC-12 dropped the 1 year sit rule. Wonder where the ACC stands on this now.

2017-18 ACC MANUAL17CONSTITUTION | ACC
b.Waivers of Eligibility Rules. An approved waiver of the ACC initial eligibility rule, the intra-conference transfer rule, the intra-conference national letter of intent rule, or a medical hardship waiver requires an affirmative vote of two-thirds of the institutions present and voting on the request and not less than a majority of the member institutions. All members, including the institution requesting the waiver, are eligible to vote. (Revised: 10/2011, 5/2015)

 

[GTFLETCH]

At the ACC Kickoff (Media Days) Coach Collins had no updates on the eligibility status of the three incoming transfers – defensive end Antonneous Clayton (Florida), wide receiver Marquez Ezzard (Miami) and cornerback Myles Sims (Michigan). All three are seeking immediate-eligibility waivers that would enable them do play this fall. “I’m anxious to hear, as well,” Collins said.

Link
https://www.ajc.com/sports/college/...f-collins-acc-kickoff/jhmkRZRkbHRF8Tyfgokc4L/

 

[slugboy]

Somewhat related, Jim Harbaugh has gotten some debates going
@CoachJim4UM:

While I don’t want players transferring every year, I’ve seen enough students move to another school that’s more suited to them that I like Harbaugh’s suggestion


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[smokey_wasp]

100 percent behind Harbaugh on this. One free transfer, no questions asked. 2nd transfer, you sit, no questions asked. Takes out these arbitrary decisions about what constitutes a real hardship, no lawyers necessary, etc.

 

[AlabamaBuzz]

I also agree with Harbaugh. Give the kids one transfer chance "for free", but I would probably only allow it after their first full year for any reason, and then only after that if the head coach leaves, or there is a true hardship with a DIRECT family (mom, dad, bro, sis) member.

 

[Oldgoldandwhite]

No such thing as a free lunch.
People get married, join the military, and make career decisions at 18 all the time.
Choices have consequences.

 

[knoxjacket]

No such thing as a free lunch.
People get married, join the military, and make career decisions at 18 all the time.
Choices have consequences.

Over 1/3 of ALL college students transfer at least once. Why punish athletes for making the same decisions their peers make?

 

[Animal02]

I also agree with Harbaugh. Give the kids one transfer chance "for free", but I would probably only allow it after their first full year for any reason, and then only after that if the head coach leaves, or there is a true hardship with a DIRECT family (mom, dad, bro, sis) member.

That is the most sensible proposal I have read.

 

[slugboy]

No such thing as a free lunch.
People get married, join the military, and make career decisions at 18 all the time.
Choices have consequences.

I’m on my way this morning to hear a preacher who was an electrical engineering grad.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[gtrower]

Over 1/3 of ALL college students transfer at least once. Why punish athletes for making the same decisions their peers make?

Again, they’re free to transfer as their peers do. Just their football eligibility that gets called into question.

 

[iceeater1969]

I’m on my way this morning to hear a preacher who was an electrical engineering grad.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Read swarm and u hear from many tech guys no longer doing engr.

Preachers, teachers, etc.

Almost all wage earners and very few business Owners.

 

[Jim Prather]

Over 1/3 of ALL college students transfer at least once. Why punish athletes for making the same decisions their peers make?

This is where the boosters and the "100 dollar handshakes" hurt the athletes. The NCAA recognized years ago, that if players were allowed to transfer with no penalties, it would lead to the big schools "poaching" the best players off the smaller schools.
As a direct example, my brother-in-law was a top ranked tennis player for Clemson several years ago when they were a perennial powerhouse. He got an anonymous call from an Arkansas booster offering to buy him any kind of car he wanted if he would transfer to Arkansas. THAT WAS TENNIS..
Now translate that to football... Would any of us find it hard to imagine Nick Saban casually saying to a booster "You know we are really weak at cornerback this year. We've got some good young players but they are still a year away from being ready." That booster then finds out that there is an rising senior at Colorado who is an all-American cornerback. He reaches out anonymously and says I will pay you X dollars and give you a new car if you transfer to Alabama. And by the way, there is a good chance you will win a national championship...
This is why you have to sit a year when you transfer...

 

[LibertyTurns]

This is where the boosters and the "100 dollar handshakes" hurt the athletes. The NCAA recognized years ago, that if players were allowed to transfer with no penalties, it would lead to the big schools "poaching" the best players off the smaller schools.
As a direct example, my brother-in-law was a top ranked tennis player for Clemson several years ago when they were a perennial powerhouse. He got an anonymous call from an Arkansas booster offering to buy him any kind of car he wanted if he would transfer to Arkansas. THAT WAS TENNIS..
Now translate that to football... Would any of us find it hard to imagine Nick Saban casually saying to a booster "You know we are really weak at cornerback this year. We've got some good young players but they are still a year away from being ready." That booster then finds out that there is an rising senior at Colorado who is an all-American cornerback. He reaches out anonymously and says I will pay you X dollars and give you a new car if you transfer to Alabama. And by the way, there is a good chance you will win a national championship...
This is why you have to sit a year when you transfer...

I understand your point but aren’t we trying to fix one wrong but implementing a policy that has another wrong?

We have cheaters, so we cheat you out of an opportunity because other people cheat? Maybe we could crack down on the cheaters?

A poor kid suddenly driving around in a new SUV, sporting a bunch of new jewelry & tats didn’t get that because he found a $500/hr internship at Microsoft and worked all summer. Start at the top 10 & work your way down and put teeth in the sanctions.

 

[Jim Prather]

I understand your point but aren’t we trying to fix one wrong but implementing a policy that has another wrong?

We have cheaters, so we cheat you out of an opportunity because other people cheat? Maybe we could crack down on the cheaters?

A poor kid suddenly driving around in a new SUV, sporting a bunch of new jewelry & tats didn’t get that because he found a $500/hr internship at Microsoft and worked all summer. Start at the top 10 & work your way down and put teeth in the sanctions.

And I agree with you. My point is that, until you eliminate the cheaters, you can't open up free transfers. Thus my statement about boosters and 100 dollar handshakes ruining it for the athletes...

 

[LibertyTurns]

And I agree with you. My point is that, until you eliminate the cheaters, you can't open up free transfers. Thus my statement about boosters and 100 dollar handshakes ruining it for the athletes...

Agree. it’s all about the money. Bammer makes big money, NCAA schleps off what Bammer generates, kids at the bottom actually generating the money get screwed. NCAA whacks a few peripheral teams now & again to demonstrate they are relevant, but the skids get greased behind the scenes and the have nots are locked out of the real competition.

 

[ncjacket79]

And I agree with you. My point is that, until you eliminate the cheaters, you can't open up free transfers. Thus my statement about boosters and 100 dollar handshakes ruining it for the athletes...

To be honest I don’t care if they poach players. For every one who comes in one has to leave and in many cases there will be little difference in quality. No one is going to transfer to Alabama to be the #3 DT but that guy at #3 may think he needs more PT. In any regard I believe players should have more options for their short careers to find the best place for them.

 

[slugboy]

And I agree with you. My point is that, until you eliminate the cheaters, you can't open up free transfers. Thus my statement about boosters and 100 dollar handshakes ruining it for the athletes...

If we have 50 players potentially getting big bucks to transfer, and we have 500 players who want to transfer and can’t because of the 50 players, is it right to penalize the majority because the minority of cheaters?

If you’re a great assistant tennis coach, Arkansas poaches you from Clemson and it’s the nature of the business. If they poach an unpaid athlete for three years, we lock down the transfer system.

And that doesn’t even get into the question of just how much interest the NCAA has in cracking down on real cheating. It’s just my opinion, but if the UNC academic scandal had happened to Dayton or Richmond or maybe even Gonzaga, those programs would have been crushed.

I haven’t checked the stats, but I’d bet if a student transfers to Alabama, and Alabama wants the hardship waiver, they get it. And Alabama is also much more able to stash a player for a year with a red shirt. At Western Kentucky or other less affluent programs, less so.

There seem to be a couple of rules to the NCAA:
1. Don’t kill the cash cows
2. The athletes don’t get a vote, so the restrictions go on them


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[orientalnc]

This is where the boosters and the "100 dollar handshakes" hurt the athletes. The NCAA recognized years ago, that if players were allowed to transfer with no penalties, it would lead to the big schools "poaching" the best players off the smaller schools.
As a direct example, my brother-in-law was a top ranked tennis player for Clemson several years ago when they were a perennial powerhouse. He got an anonymous call from an Arkansas booster offering to buy him any kind of car he wanted if he would transfer to Arkansas. THAT WAS TENNIS..
Now translate that to football... Would any of us find it hard to imagine Nick Saban casually saying to a booster "You know we are really weak at cornerback this year. We've got some good young players but they are still a year away from being ready." That booster then finds out that there is an rising senior at Colorado who is an all-American cornerback. He reaches out anonymously and says I will pay you X dollars and give you a new car if you transfer to Alabama. And by the way, there is a good chance you will win a national championship...
This is why you have to sit a year when you transfer...

You don't really believe this doesn't exist now? Seriously.

 

[Jim Prather]

You don't really believe this doesn't exist now? Seriously.

I 100% believe this happens now. There was an article a few years back about a defensive end at the Naval Academy (i'm sorry, I tried to find his name but could not) where he said that he was actively being recruited by several SEC schools to come play for them.
I just believe that the only presently available deterrent for this type of activity, as imperfect as it is, happens to be making the player sit for a year.