Your thoughts on the transfer system?

[orientalnc]

I wasn't talking about UNC degrees in general. I was specifically saying that the education based on the bogus classes weren't worth anything. People who received a degree based on the bogus classes might have a piece of paper, but they didn't really learn anything. What good is a degree from any university if the recipient doesn't know anything. It might help you get a job, but it won't help you maintain your position once your employer finds out you can't accomplish the work.

I respect much of what you post on the swarm, but this is just wrong. The AFAM department is a boutique department when compared to the university as a whole. Most of the student body probably never even knew that department existed. Unless you are seeking an engineering job, a UNC degree is as valuable as a GT degree. That may not be comfortable to accept, but it is the truth. US News has it ranked 5 spots ahead of our favorite school.

 

[RonJohn]

I respect much of what you post on the swarm, but this is just wrong. The AFAM department is a boutique department when compared to the university as a whole. Most of the student body probably never even knew that department existed. Unless you are seeking an engineering job, a UNC degree is as valuable as a GT degree. That may not be comfortable to accept, but it is the truth. US News has it ranked 5 spots ahead of our favorite school.

I still don't understand what of your post conflicts with any of my post. If a player was pushed into the AFAM department and received a degree based on that department, is the education of value to that player? UNC degrees are valuable. GT degrees are valuable. However, if the degree helps you get a job, your job performance is what helps you keep the job. I was specifically responding to GT_05 in saying that the education received by football players is only a benefit to the players if they value an education and the education they receive is a valid one.

I have said before that I would wonder about UNC degrees because the university has proven that it doesn't have good control of its educational programs. It has been several years now, and I expect that the school has better reporting and controls to keep such a circumstance from happening again. However, that IS NOT what I am saying now. I am saying that student-athletes who were steered to and "benefited" from the bogus classes did not receive a "benefit" from that education. If such an athlete received a degree, but can't read past a sixth grade level, it won't help his career.

 

[orientalnc]

If such an athlete received a degree, but can't read past a sixth grade level, it won't help his career.

Name one athlete who has a UNC diploma and can't read past the 6th grade. If I am wrong about this I will apologize publicly, but I doubt you can name a single player with a UNC degree who is effectively illiterate. Understand, I think UNC should have been given the death penalty for the AFAM abuses. But it remains a wonderful public university.

 

[GT_05]

Did the coaches at UNC recruit players who would actually benefit from an education? Did the coaches or support staff at UNC push suspect players into the worthless programs to keep the eligible to play?

My statements are in response to your assertion that the players get "paid" something of benefit. If it is something that they don't want or that carries little value, then they received nothing of benefit. My assertions are based on my belief that the NCAA and the NCAA schools should actually act like the mission statement of the NCAA says. They don't. They act like they are running a business.

If someone gives you a $100 dollar bill, you can set it on fire or invest it and turn it into more money. Either way, it’s still receiving $100.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Augusta_Jacket]

Name one athlete who has a UNC diploma and can't read past the 6th grade. If I am wrong about this I will apologize publicly, but I doubt you can name a single player with a UNC degree who is effectively illiterate. Understand, I think UNC should have been given the death penalty for the AFAM abuses. But it remains a wonderful public university.

https://www.cnn.com/2014/01/07/us/ncaa-athletes-reading-scores/index.html

I agree that the UNC degree is still valuable, but they were bringing in functionally illiterate athletes.

 

[awbuzz]

Yep... and still, I promise I wasn't disagreeing with you. I agree with your intended point to a large extent.

There are obvious issues with the current system, and the root cause is spelled N-C-A-A.

Take Justin Fields for example. I don't know for a fact what card he played to be granted immediate eligibility (please note I said fact, let's not discuss what many believe happened), but I find it interesting that his sister is an incoming freshman to the uGA softball team next year. With what justification in the current rules does this make sense?

None!

All about the NCAA wanting OSU to be in the hunt next year.

 

[awbuzz]

It all goes back to the original reason:



An example - GT finds a Dedrick Mills-style bruiser of a running back. We invest the time, energy, and resources into helping him develop to his full potential. We found him when no one else would give him the time of day.

Then when he because known as one of the Top 5 RBs in the country, Bama and OU and Ohio State start sniffing around, and trying to get him to transfer (nevermind uGA). And I'm confident asserting that most of them have lots bigger budgets, and lots more 'bagmen' on hand than GT.

In essence, giving players the ability to transfer unrestricted means "the rich keep getting rich and the poor keep getting poorer."

I'm in favor of the old-style "hardship waivers", because bad things do happen. As much as I don't like that Demetris Robertson headed to uGA, I'm glad he was able to come home to be close to his ailing family members and not have to lose a year of eligibility. That's the way it should be.

But someone who says "I came, I lost out on the starting job, and now I want to leave without consequences?" Or someone who says "I came here because I was a 2-star, and now the big programs want me to come to them, so I'm leaving because [insert dynasty here] will be in the National Championship hunt?" That doesn't feel right to me. That just ensures the Clemson's, Bama's, and uGA's of the world will continue to be in the playoffs every year - at which point, why even have a playoff? Why even have teams like GT competing in the ACC?

(Of course, I'm a market of one. Just stating an opinion.)

We stated. Makes too much sense for some to comprehend.

 

[awbuzz]

Why should an 18-year old give up a year of eligibility because a) he made a mistake at 18; b) the coach who recruited him promising love everlasting now is a continent away seducing another 18-year-old (at no penalty to his ownself by the way) and c) a dozen other entirely defensible reasons. That loss of eligibility rule has one purpose and one only: to lock a kid into place. I'll buy taking a year away to prevent poaching by coaches wanting to take talent with them to play now, but not a rule intended to show some little twit who's boss. But if you'll apply the same rule to your next job change, then I'll buy your rationale. (Yeah, yeah, I know. Free market and all that. Except we stop the free market at the players' door.) As for graduate transfers, the player has his degree and only the arrogant NCAA would profess authority over him or her in any fashion. It is a bizarre interpretation to assume otherwise. (I know more than one person who went to more than one college, me included. What is my punishment?))

Ever hear of a non compete clause?

 

[RonJohn]

If someone gives you a $100 dollar bill, you can set it on fire or invest it and turn it into more money. Either way, it’s still receiving $100.

However, if someone gives you $100 worth of food, it will depend. If you are a vegan and someone gives you $100 worth of meat, then it means nothing to you. If you have a nut allergy, and someone gives you $100 worth of peanut butter, then it is an insult to you.

An education means something to you and me. There are some athletes who don't value an education, and do not want to be in school. They see school as something that have to put up with in order to have a chance at professional sports. If the supposed student-athlete does not value the education, then the value of that education to him is zero no matter how much you or I would value it.

 

[awbuzz]

We stated. Makes too much sense for some to comprehend.

* well stated... Not we stated...

 

[smokey_wasp]

Ever hear of a non compete clause?

Non-compete clauses are for high paying jobs. Sounds like you are in favor of paying the players.

 

[Jacket05]

Name one athlete who has a UNC diploma and can't read past the 6th grade. If I am wrong about this I will apologize publicly, but I doubt you can name a single player with a UNC degree who is effectively illiterate. Understand, I think UNC should have been given the death penalty for the AFAM abuses. But it remains a wonderful public university.

UNCheat, as an institution, put out a degree program to the entire student body that was completely bogus! By allowing this, the school SHOULD have lost it's accreditation along with the athletics getting the death penalty!!! In my opinion, I have zero respect for an academic institution as a whole that would allow that to go on. I am still astonished that neither the school or the athletic department got any real penalty for this!

 

[forensicbuzz]

This should not be complicated. We've had this discussion a number of times in past threads. All scholarship offers should be 4-5 year scholarship offers. I'll re-offer my opinion:

All players who transfer should have to sit out a year to gain eligibility to play, with the following exceptions:

1. If the school fails to renew a 1-year, the player is eligible to transfer to ANY school of their choice and have immediate eligibility. The school can restrict restrict transfer to another school and cause the transferring player to spend a year in residency by not filling that scholarship for the ensuing year. This would allow players cut to have immediate eligibility, without restriction, or if restricted, the school would suffer with 1 less scholarship athlete.

2. If the head coach is fired, resigns, retires, or otherwise leaves the program. The kids are supposed to commit to the school, not the coach, but let's face it, it's the coaching staff, the style of play, and the system that the player is involved with day-to-day. If the match between player and coach/system is no longer good, then the player should not be penalized because the staff/style changed.

3. The student-athlete is eligible to play immediately if they are not on scholarship. In other words, if the student-athlete is willing to pay their own way for the year in residency, then he would have immediate eligibility. A scholarship can be provided to the student-athlete for the year-in-residency, but if that happens, the transfer is required to not participate.

No hardship waivers, no sick family waivers, no other waivers. If someone wants to transfer back to be closer to a sick relative, fine. They can spend that first year of residency spending time with their sick relative, providing care for his family, etc. instead of playing football on Saturdays. I have no problem with the year in residency not counting as a year of eligibility.

 

[Skeptic]

Ever hear of a non compete clause?

I would like to sit in when you talk to an 18 year old about a non-compete clause, which as I understand them prevents them not from transferring and playing but from competing against the school they are leaving. Even a non-compete can't prevent one making a living. Even baseball finally had to give up its reserve clause, locking a player in for perpetuity. Is that what you have in mind? Geez, you guys act like you were never 18.

One last gasp in the fading light and I am done, and it is about the silly " choose the school and not the coach". Nonsense. Sound logic in a vacuum, but if that were the case Georgia Tech would send aeronautics profs to recruit players, not coaches. (Every time I read a player talking about "the education" regardless of school, I know I am hearing regurgitated recruiting drivel. Let's just admit it.)

 

[g0lftime]

Only if the education is worth something. The UNC education and degrees didn't mean much did they? Many coaches are pushing recruitment purely for athletic reasons. School is seen as a "have to" activity to appease the rules. If the coaches and programs don't take education seriously, then it is worth very little. If the student-athletes don't take education seriously, then it isn't worth anything.

In BB how many Duke hot shots will ever graduate. They used to take pride in how many of coach K players graduated. That has totally gone out the window and Duke is a very academic school . The APR thing in basketball is a joke at Kentucky. It's about coaches making millions more than the NCAA.

 

[awbuzz]

Non-compete clauses are for high paying jobs. Sounds like you are in favor of paying the players.

They are compensated. Don't like that t, then go to a pro league.

 

[RonJohn]

In BB how many Duke hot shots will ever graduate. They used to take pride in how many of coach K players graduated. That has totally gone out the window and Duke is a very academic school . The APR thing in basketball is a joke at Kentucky. It's about coaches making millions more than the NCAA.

Which actually goes towards proving the point I was making. I was responding to a post that said that the players are "paid" with a scholarship for education. My response is that the education is only valuable to those who value it. For many one-and-done basketball players, the money that the team pays for tuition and books is looked at with little if any value.

 

[RonJohn]

They are compensated. Don't like that t, then go to a pro league.

I have said for a long time that there should be a pro/semi-pro option for kids out of high school. At the moment, there are none. NCAA teams take advantage of the fact that for a chance to get into the NFL, the only available option is to go to college.

 

[RonJohn]

(Every time I read a player talking about "the education" regardless of school, I know I am hearing regurgitated recruiting drivel. Let's just admit it.)

I disagree with that. That probably is the case for some(maybe many), but there are athletes who do value the education. I remember a press conference before his last mutt game where Shamire Devine was asked what his greatest memory from playing D1 football was. His response was that in a few weeks after the press conference that he was going to be receiving his degree. It wasn't a memory yet, but getting a degree was the highlight of all of his college experience. He was the first in his extended family to get a college degree. There are student-athletes to whom the education is extremely important.

 

[slugboy]

Ever hear of a non compete clause?

Wait...a scholarship athlete with no other compensation should be subject to a non-compete agreement?

You want to subject a 17 year old to a four year non compete? Even a 1 year non compete?

I doubt many if any academic scholarships claw back money or restrict a student from transferring elsewhere other than ending payments.

Why should an athlete have more constraints, other than fans want their entertainment and coaches want control?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk