Tulane QB Tanner Lee to Transfer to Nebraska

[zoogs]

Are we talking about whether it's fair for the NCAA to have this policy, or the effect on Nebraska of Lee arriving? I've lost track. If it's the former, I can probably agree (without looking at it too much) that the transfer loss-of-year is a harmful rule to players.

 

The players have a terrible situation, really. I think that they should be able to move freely around to any school that wants them, at any time, with no penalty. The coaches can do it. Heck. Normal college students can do it. As "bad" as this would be for schools...

 

From Nebraska's standpoint, though, the fact that Lee has to sit out a year isn't that much of a drawback. He'll still get at least one year here. If he gets two, all the better. I'm responding to arguments I've seen that this hurts our scholarship situation because he'll tie up a scholarship for more years than he gets to see the field, but that is true of anybody who redshirts.

[BigRedBuster]

Are we talking about whether it's fair for the NCAA to have this policy, or the effect on Nebraska of Lee arriving? I've lost track. If it's the former, I can probably agree (without looking at it too much) that the transfer loss-of-year is a harmful rule to players.

 

The players have a terrible situation, really. I think that they should be able to move freely around to any school that wants them, at any time, with no penalty. The coaches can do it. Heck. Normal college students can do it. As "bad" as this would be for schools...

 

From Nebraska's standpoint, though, the fact that Lee has to sit out a year isn't that much of a drawback. He'll still get at least one year here. If he gets two, all the better. I'm responding to arguments I've seen that this hurts our scholarship situation because he'll tie up a scholarship for more years than he gets to see the field, but that is true of anybody who redshirts.

If you are not concerned about maintaining at least some level of competitiveness within the sport....go for it.

 

This move would be disastrous for many many programs.

[cm husker]

 

 

Are we talking about whether it's fair for the NCAA to have this policy, or the effect on Nebraska of Lee arriving? I've lost track. If it's the former, I can probably agree (without looking at it too much) that the transfer loss-of-year is a harmful rule to players.

 

The players have a terrible situation, really. I think that they should be able to move freely around to any school that wants them, at any time, with no penalty. The coaches can do it. Heck. Normal college students can do it. As "bad" as this would be for schools...

 

From Nebraska's standpoint, though, the fact that Lee has to sit out a year isn't that much of a drawback. He'll still get at least one year here. If he gets two, all the better. I'm responding to arguments I've seen that this hurts our scholarship situation because he'll tie up a scholarship for more years than he gets to see the field, but that is true of anybody who redshirts.

If you are not concerned about maintaining at least some level of competitiveness within the sport....go for it.

 

This move would be disastrous for many many programs.

How and why?

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

Are we talking about whether it's fair for the NCAA to have this policy, or the effect on Nebraska of Lee arriving? I've lost track. If it's the former, I can probably agree (without looking at it too much) that the transfer loss-of-year is a harmful rule to players.

 

The players have a terrible situation, really. I think that they should be able to move freely around to any school that wants them, at any time, with no penalty. The coaches can do it. Heck. Normal college students can do it. As "bad" as this would be for schools...

 

From Nebraska's standpoint, though, the fact that Lee has to sit out a year isn't that much of a drawback. He'll still get at least one year here. If he gets two, all the better. I'm responding to arguments I've seen that this hurts our scholarship situation because he'll tie up a scholarship for more years than he gets to see the field, but that is true of anybody who redshirts.

If you are not concerned about maintaining at least some level of competitiveness within the sport....go for it.

 

This move would be disastrous for many many programs.

How and why?

 

Smaller programs become basically JUCOs for bigger programs.

 

OSU all of a sudden becomes short on RBs. Some kid that was a 2 star out of HS becomes a stud at KU. OSU comes and cherry picks him and he's gone leaving KU out in the cold after putting the effort in developing him. They don't get to reap the rewards of doing the work.

 

Alabama all of a sudden finds they need a QB. Some kid has gone through three years at Iowa State and has shown he is one hell of a competitor. The ISU coaching staff is counting on him to be there for his senior year and have planned their game plan and recruiting around that. Alabama comes in and cherry picks him. ISU is left in a bad situation.

 

As much as I like the idea of doing nice things for the players, this would be really bad for the game and the programs these kids have used to get developed.

 

Both of those examples leave those schools being less competitive thus maybe less able to get a good coach or good recruits.

[zoogs]

That's an interesting point, BRB, but I guess I don't care too much about ISU being left in a bad situation. I don't see how the current system protects a school like that in any case. There's no true semblance of competitive balance in service of the game, but at least Iowa State can hold on to all its players' necks with the vice of their NLIs, and go 3-9.

 

The way I see it, players will move around more and that'll be different, but that's it. The Alabama QB who gets squeezed out by competition maybe ends up at ISU for a year and gets a chance to really shine.

[BigRedBuster]

That's an interesting point, BRB, but I guess I don't care too much about ISU being left in a bad situation. I don't see how the current system protects a school like that in any case. There's no true semblance of competitive balance in service of the game, but at least Iowa State can hold on to all its players' necks with the vice of their NLIs, and go 3-9.

 

The way I see it, players will move around more and that'll be different, but that's it. The Alabama QB who gets squeezed out by competition maybe ends up at ISU for a year and gets a chance to really shine.

Would you have the same feelings if Alabama OSU needed an RB or DE and Abdullah and Gregory left to go play for them?

 

Pardon me if I don't feel sorry for players. I have never gotten into the poor abused player act.

 

What if Texas needed Suh his senior year and he left?

[zoogs]

As a fan, I'd feel a little bad maybe. But I think we'd all get over it. Especially because we'd have new players coming in all the time, too. Possibly pretty talented guys who weren't in line for playing time at another top-tier school. It'd be the recruiting marketplace extended.

 

The NFL has restrictions and it makes sense, because they actually do level the playing field and increase the competitiveness of the game. But let's not kid ourselves, this is not true of CFB. There are the top programs, and everybody else.

[cm husker]

 

 

 

 

Are we talking about whether it's fair for the NCAA to have this policy, or the effect on Nebraska of Lee arriving? I've lost track. If it's the former, I can probably agree (without looking at it too much) that the transfer loss-of-year is a harmful rule to players.

 

The players have a terrible situation, really. I think that they should be able to move freely around to any school that wants them, at any time, with no penalty. The coaches can do it. Heck. Normal college students can do it. As "bad" as this would be for schools...

 

From Nebraska's standpoint, though, the fact that Lee has to sit out a year isn't that much of a drawback. He'll still get at least one year here. If he gets two, all the better. I'm responding to arguments I've seen that this hurts our scholarship situation because he'll tie up a scholarship for more years than he gets to see the field, but that is true of anybody who redshirts.

If you are not concerned about maintaining at least some level of competitiveness within the sport....go for it.

 

This move would be disastrous for many many programs.

How and why?

Smaller programs become basically JUCOs for bigger programs.

 

OSU all of a sudden becomes short on RBs. Some kid that was a 2 star out of HS becomes a stud at KU. OSU comes and cherry picks him and he's gone leaving KU out in the cold after putting the effort in developing him. They don't get to reap the rewards of doing the work.

 

Alabama all of a sudden finds they need a QB. Some kid has gone through three years at Iowa State and has shown he is one hell of a competitor. The ISU coaching staff is counting on him to be there for his senior year and have planned their game plan and recruiting around that. Alabama comes in and cherry picks him. ISU is left in a bad situation.

 

As much as I like the idea of doing nice things for the players, this would be really bad for the game and the programs these kids have used to get developed.

 

Both of those examples leave those schools being less competitive thus maybe less able to get a good coach or good recruits.

I agree with Zoog's reply and I think this is a corner case anyway.

 

but in any event, if a kid wants to move he should be allowed to move. Just like coaches can. And, like I proposed, if a coach refuses to release a kid from scholly, then the current rules may apply.

 

But a blanket prohibition with penalty? No. That's not appropriate or fair.

 

Or, if you're really concerned about mercenaries, make it a free transfer during the first 2 or 3 years at a program.

[cm husker]

 

 

That's an interesting point, BRB, but I guess I don't care too much about ISU being left in a bad situation. I don't see how the current system protects a school like that in any case. There's no true semblance of competitive balance in service of the game, but at least Iowa State can hold on to all its players' necks with the vice of their NLIs, and go 3-9.

 

The way I see it, players will move around more and that'll be different, but that's it. The Alabama QB who gets squeezed out by competition maybe ends up at ISU for a year and gets a chance to really shine.

Would you have the same feelings if Alabama OSU needed an RB or DE and Abdullah and Gregory left to go play for them?

 

Pardon me if I don't feel sorry for players. I have never gotten into the poor abused player act.

 

What if Texas needed Suh his senior year and he left?

Yes. Absolutely I'd feel the same way. If a coach can't recruit his own roster to stay, then why should he be protected by an artificial barrier?

 

On the flip side, "lesser" programs could benefit from a 2nd stringer having more flexibility to transfer.

 

By the way, transferring colleges is a big deal. I don't see kids jumping on a whim.

[BigRedBuster]

What if a player transfers from Nebraska to Alabama, he gets to go with no penalty, but he takes up two scholarships at Alabama while there and Nebraska gets an 26 next year and 86 total.

 

Something like that would make me feel better about it.

[cm husker]

What if a player transfers from Nebraska to Alabama, he gets to go with no penalty, but he takes up two scholarships at Alabama while there and Nebraska gets an 26 next year and 86 total.

 

Something like that would make me feel better about it.

I think that gets messy.

 

Why not just make it so that if a Nebraksa coach doesn't want to release a kid, then the kid can leave but has to sit out a year (like under the current blanket rule).

[RedDenver]

Could it be tied to academic performance like the grad transfer rule? If a player is on-track to graduate (similar to transferring into NCAA from JUCO), then he can transfer without penalty otherwise he has to sit out a year.

[ColoradoHusk]

Could it be tied to academic performance like the grad transfer rule? If a player is on-track to graduate (similar to transferring into NCAA from JUCO), then he can transfer without penalty otherwise he has to sit out a year.

That's actually something I have severe questions about. I was in undergrad 20 years ago and never looked to transfer schools, but I have heard about people transferring schools and having issues with credits transferring over to their new school. I think it would be really odd for a player to go through 3-4 years at a school and then transfer for his last 1-2 years. I would think that would severely impact his standing at his new school and his ability to graduate in a reasonable amount of time.

 

I know 99% of the kids are transferring for football reasons and have little care about how it impacts their academic standing, but if these are supposed to be student-athletes it just wouldn't feel right to me.

[RedDenver]

 

Could it be tied to academic performance like the grad transfer rule? If a player is on-track to graduate (similar to transferring into NCAA from JUCO), then he can transfer without penalty otherwise he has to sit out a year.

That's actually something I have severe questions about. I was in undergrad 20 years ago and never looked to transfer schools, but I have heard about people transferring schools and having issues with credits transferring over to their new school. I think it would be really odd for a player to go through 3-4 years at a school and then transfer for his last 1-2 years. I would think that would severely impact his standing at his new school and his ability to graduate in a reasonable amount of time.

 

I know 99% of the kids are transferring for football reasons and have little care about how it impacts their academic standing, but if these are supposed to be student-athletes it just wouldn't feel right to me.

 

I transferred schools, and it's not that difficult. Like everything else, you need to take time to learn the pros and cons. And if the players are in good academic standing, why would you assume that transferring would hurt them academically?

[ColoradoHusk]

 

 

 

 

Could it be tied to academic performance like the grad transfer rule? If a player is on-track to graduate (similar to transferring into NCAA from JUCO), then he can transfer without penalty otherwise he has to sit out a year.

That's actually something I have severe questions about. I was in undergrad 20 years ago and never looked to transfer schools, but I have heard about people transferring schools and having issues with credits transferring over to their new school. I think it would be really odd for a player to go through 3-4 years at a school and then transfer for his last 1-2 years. I would think that would severely impact his standing at his new school and his ability to graduate in a reasonable amount of time.

 

I know 99% of the kids are transferring for football reasons and have little care about how it impacts their academic standing, but if these are supposed to be student-athletes it just wouldn't feel right to me.

I transferred schools, and it's not that difficult. Like everything else, you need to take time to learn the pros and cons. And if the players are in good academic standing, why would you assume that transferring would hurt them academically?

Even if they are in good academic standing, there could be a number of classes/credits that don't transfer to the new school. It's probably the exception, rather than the rule, but it has to happen.