I do. They are all trying to monetize their NIL rights. Bigger programs or ... more playing time in urban programs. That's the new game. Notice how winning championships isn't part of the New Era.
It is what it is.
What are you even talking about? You think every single player that transfers is going to a bigger program? So you think Graham transfers from Tech and goes to Clemson? Some people just want a change, maybe they don’t like their fit at a school. Why do you think they should be locked in place if they’re not happy? Hundreds of kids transfer from the P5 level to G5 or even FCS every year. Are they doing that to monetize their NIL? Or are they doing it to get more opportunities to play football at a school they enjoy being at?
What are you talking about bigger payday? That’s honestly an incredibly ignorant take. In Georgia the HOPE grant exists for regular students. Do you think students who receive that grant shouldn’t be able to transfer? I mean, come on. Is there some dirty money or ill-gotten gains on the transfer market? Sure, but those instances are incredibly rare when looking at the whole picture. Graham is very likely to transfer to a G5 school, is he out looking for a payday? Or is he trying to accomplish his goals. You work at Auburn right? Auburn has a handful of kids every year transfer down a level. Are they looking for handouts or paydays?
I'm totally fine with your point of view. Let's take money out of it and students can go wherever they want whenever they want. My employer doesn't require me to stay ... but ... I have signed contracts that did.
Technically there is no commitment to play for four years, so no. An NLI is a contract an athlete signs before attending a four-year university. The athletes fulfills the terms of the contract once they’ve completed a full year at that school. So according to the terminology and literal definition of an NLI, an athlete should be free to transfer wherever they want after 1 year. IMO, not allowing an athlete free reign to transfer is breaching the terms and intent of an NLI, but I of course am no lawyer.
A what? I said NIL ... what the hell is an NLI?
NLI is a National Letter of Intent. It’s what you sign on signing day. It’s your contract. Not to be confused with NIL (Name Image and Likeness). But like I said, an NLI only requires an athlete to complete one year at the school they sign with to be considered fulfilled.
And I’m referring to this specific quote
And the answer is no. There isn’t a commitment to play for 4 years on the basis of an NLI which is a contract. A player does not sign to a school for 4 years. They sign for one year, with the stipulation that the school provides a scholarship for as long as they meet their terms of the contract for up to 5 years (exemptions can be made for up to 6 years).
Now I’m confused about what your point even is.
It’s all good. I’m just describing the hypocrisy of it all. No player is committed to a school as much as they are committed for one year. So it’s not really a commitment. So ... let the players do what they want. It’s fine.
Which hypocrisy? I would say it is more hypocritical for fans to expect players to stay committed for four to five years, while at the same time expecting to coaches to not have any commitment to players who don't live up to expectations. From a fans perspective if a player is good in college he should be required to stay with the team. If a player isn't as good as thought, his scholarship should be yanked for someone better.
And their ability to recruit their own. Peery is a good looking player.