Jump to content

Transfer Portal?


Aliens05

Recommended Posts

It will be harder for teams to retain mid-level talent that needs time to develop. 
 

Maybe after several years of 1000+ players in the portal it will signal to kids to stay put for the most part. But I’m not a big fan of it personally. 

  • Plus1 3
Link to post

  • Replies 1.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

Kind of funny how things develop.  Two months ago people were sure that Chins was terrible and McCaffrey needed to be our starting QB.  Weird how things you think you know can turn out to be totally w

In a nutshell:    Butler & A Will are not surprised as they felt that Riley players were blamed to be a problem & pushed out. Also saying that when back to back years you lose your t

We found what the haters are going to latch onto guys!      Dude writes a heartfelt reasoning but a reporter uses a tag line to get readers and that’s what we latch onto!       Pathetic

Posted Images

2 minutes ago, I am I said:

It will be harder for teams to retain mid-level talent that needs time to develop. 
 

Maybe after several years of 1000+ players in the portal it will signal to kids to stay put for the most part. But I’m not a big fan of it personally. 

Agree.  Your 2 and 3 star kids that normally take 2-3 years to see the field are going to be tough to hold on to.  

  • Plus1 1
Link to post
1 hour ago, knapplc said:

Maybe there will be a period of adjustment, sure. And even after that, some kids will make rash decisions to commit, and shortly thereafter will make rash decisions to leave.

 

Such is the nature of kids at this age.

 

I don't think this will precipitate an era of total chaos in the college sports world. I think it will lead to more rational decision making, with a bit of chaos thrown in because these are still 18-22 year olds.

 

I think it will open a big can of worms over time, especially in regards to Title IX. How long before a star women's player files a lawsuit because of inequalities from endorsements? Or claims that the school's social media team promotes men's sports more frequently, gets basketball on TV more than swimming, soccer, etc.? Just hypothetical situations but certainly plausible. 

 

Normally capitalism rules the day in regards to the endorsements for the general public but Title IX overtakes capitalism in college athletics. Otherwise schools wouldn't have to provide equivalent scholarships for men's and women's sports. Therefore, I believe Title IX will factor into the situation before too long. 

 

My personal opinion is that if an athlete takes an endorsement deal over X amount ($500? - $10,000?), they should not be given an athletic scholarship but instead have to pay tuition and for the extras. The athlete can decide whether to stay on scholarship with all the benefits that entails or instead choose the endorsement route. 

  • Plus1 3
Link to post
8 hours ago, Wistrom Disciple said:

I think it will open a big can of worms over time, especially in regards to Title IX. How long before a star women's player files a lawsuit because of inequalities from endorsements? Or claims that the school's social media team promotes men's sports more frequently, gets basketball on TV more than swimming, soccer, etc.? Just hypothetical situations but certainly plausible. 

 

Normally capitalism rules the day in regards to the endorsements for the general public but Title IX overtakes capitalism in college athletics. Otherwise schools wouldn't have to provide equivalent scholarships for men's and women's sports. Therefore, I believe Title IX will factor into the situation before too long. 

 

My personal opinion is that if an athlete takes an endorsement deal over X amount ($500? - $10,000?), they should not be given an athletic scholarship but instead have to pay tuition and for the extras. The athlete can decide whether to stay on scholarship with all the benefits that entails or instead choose the endorsement route. 

The bill will take care of this.  The NCAA will total the monies made at all college/universities (still can't determine at FBS or all as it says 132 schools) and total this.  Pull out the monies for scholarships and then divide the remaining monies by 50%.  The school will get 1/2 and the athletes will get 1/2 dispersed equally to each individual.  Athletes covered would be scholarship athletes in football, baseball and mens'/women's basketball....IMHO, this will kill all but the major players in sports.  A lot of schools rely on the monies to pay for everything else........And a schollie player at NU, that never plays will be entitled to the same compensation as say JoJo/Wan'dale/AM etc as an every down player.....Latest estimate of payments.....

 

Using data supplied by universities to the Department of Education, Booker said that would mean payments of $173,000 a year to football players, $115,600 to men’s basketball players, $19,050 to women’s basketball players and $8,670 to baseball players who are on full scholarship.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/17/sports/ncaafootball/college-athlete-bill-of-rights.html

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/landmark-college-athletes-bill-of-rights-to-be-introduced-in-congress-142918071.html

 

https://www.booker.senate.gov/news/press/booker-senators-announce-college-athletes-bill-of-rights

Link to post
12 minutes ago, lo country said:

The bill will take care of this.  The NCAA will total the monies made at all college/universities (still can't determine at FBS or all as it says 132 schools) and total this.  Pull out the monies for scholarships and then divide the remaining monies by 50%.  The school will get 1/2 and the athletes will get 1/2 dispersed equally to each individual.  Athletes covered would be scholarship athletes in football, baseball and mens'/women's basketball....IMHO, this will kill all but the major players in sports.  A lot of schools rely on the monies to pay for everything else........And a schollie player at NU, that never plays will be entitled to the same compensation as say JoJo/Wan'dale/AM etc as an every down player.....Latest estimate of payments.....

 

Using data supplied by universities to the Department of Education, Booker said that would mean payments of $173,000 a year to football players, $115,600 to men’s basketball players, $19,050 to women’s basketball players and $8,670 to baseball players who are on full scholarship.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/17/sports/ncaafootball/college-athlete-bill-of-rights.html

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/landmark-college-athletes-bill-of-rights-to-be-introduced-in-congress-142918071.html

 

https://www.booker.senate.gov/news/press/booker-senators-announce-college-athletes-bill-of-rights

This will kill non revenue sports and greatly pull back the arms race with facilities and other benefits athletes get at major Universities.

  • Plus1 1
Link to post

19 minutes ago, BigRedBuster said:

This will kill non revenue sports and greatly pull back the arms race with facilities and other benefits athletes get at major Universities.

No revenue sports may see an impact- agreed.  I don't agree with the arms race though- facilities will still be paramount.  18 year old kids like nice things.  

Link to post
2 minutes ago, Hilltop said:

No revenue sports may see an impact- agreed.  I don't agree with the arms race though- facilities will still be paramount.  18 year old kids like nice things.  

But, most programs use the revenue stream from football and basketball to fund the majority of those facilities.  If a large chunk of that is going directly to the athletes, it takes away money to build those.

 

And, I didn't say it would eliminate the arms race, but it will greatly pull it back.

 

I know it was because of lack of revenue from fans in the stands this year, but just look at how our own construction project was down sized or delayed due to lack of this revenue.

  • Plus1 2
Link to post
40 minutes ago, lo country said:

The bill will take care of this.  The NCAA will total the monies made at all college/universities (still can't determine at FBS or all as it says 132 schools) and total this.  Pull out the monies for scholarships and then divide the remaining monies by 50%.  The school will get 1/2 and the athletes will get 1/2 dispersed equally to each individual.  Athletes covered would be scholarship athletes in football, baseball and mens'/women's basketball....IMHO, this will kill all but the major players in sports.  A lot of schools rely on the monies to pay for everything else........And a schollie player at NU, that never plays will be entitled to the same compensation as say JoJo/Wan'dale/AM etc as an every down player.....Latest estimate of payments.....

 

Using data supplied by universities to the Department of Education, Booker said that would mean payments of $173,000 a year to football players, $115,600 to men’s basketball players, $19,050 to women’s basketball players and $8,670 to baseball players who are on full scholarship.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/17/sports/ncaafootball/college-athlete-bill-of-rights.html

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/landmark-college-athletes-bill-of-rights-to-be-introduced-in-congress-142918071.html

 

https://www.booker.senate.gov/news/press/booker-senators-announce-college-athletes-bill-of-rights

 

Thanks for the info. It leads to a lot of questions.

 

How will this work with Title IX? How long before women athletes want to be paid the same as the male athletes - especially in the same sport? Also, and like others have said, how long before other programs are cut?

 

The poaching of players by top tier programs will also be interesting. 

 

Hopefully, we get our new facilities built and paid for before this goes into effect as I don't see major projects on this scale being done with the frequency we are seeing now.

  • Plus1 1
Link to post
40 minutes ago, lo country said:

The bill will take care of this.  The NCAA will total the monies made at all college/universities (still can't determine at FBS or all as it says 132 schools) and total this.  Pull out the monies for scholarships and then divide the remaining monies by 50%.  The school will get 1/2 and the athletes will get 1/2 dispersed equally to each individual.  Athletes covered would be scholarship athletes in football, baseball and mens'/women's basketball....IMHO, this will kill all but the major players in sports.  A lot of schools rely on the monies to pay for everything else........And a schollie player at NU, that never plays will be entitled to the same compensation as say JoJo/Wan'dale/AM etc as an every down player.....Latest estimate of payments.....

 

Using data supplied by universities to the Department of Education, Booker said that would mean payments of $173,000 a year to football players, $115,600 to men’s basketball players, $19,050 to women’s basketball players and $8,670 to baseball players who are on full scholarship.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/17/sports/ncaafootball/college-athlete-bill-of-rights.html

 

https://sports.yahoo.com/landmark-college-athletes-bill-of-rights-to-be-introduced-in-congress-142918071.html

 

https://www.booker.senate.gov/news/press/booker-senators-announce-college-athletes-bill-of-rights

 

First, there is no way this passes any sort of Title IX scrutiny.  Not only are they talking about paying men's basketball players six times what they are playing women's basketball players, the overall men/women disparity will never fly.  

 

Second, are they only going to pay scholarship players and not walk-ons?  I'm sure that won't lead to lawsuits.  If so, a team like Nebraska is going to be getting tons more than other schools.  I'm sure that won't lead to lawsuits.

 

Third, as others have said, football pays for almost everything else.  It would kill almost all the minor sports.  Then that leads to more Title IX issues since schools have to have the minor sports to offset the scholarships for football.  That will lead to lawsuits.

 

Fourth, there aren't that many baseball players on full scholarship.  Most get 1/4 to 1/2.  So a very few would be getting something and everyone else gets nothing.  I'm sure that won't lead to lawsuits.  Or coaches manipulating who is on what kind of scholarship to either help recruit a player or not have to play anyone.  That seems like a great idea.

 

In short, this is never going to happen.  It sounds really good to throw out there but isn't workable in any semblance of reality.

  • Plus1 4
  • Upvote 1
Link to post

Sounds like Anderson was away from the team for quite awhile during the season.  Not sure if he had other things going on or was just unhappy.  But probably not a surprise he left.

 

Sounds like Fritzche was in the same boat to a lesser extent.  Probably be another one who doesn't come back.  And wouldn't be surprising for Lynn to be gone as well.

 

Hate to lose depth, especially on the OL but those guys were already getting passed up by younger guys so not exactly surprising.

 

No word on Nance or Houston but I'd be pretty shocked if they weren't gone as well.

  • Plus1 1
Link to post

Since the transfer portal officially went online in October 2018, 30 Husker scholarship guys have entered the portal.  Only four went directly to a scholarship at another Power 5 school: Lightbourn (Oregon State), Vedral (Rutgers), Spielman (TCU) and Fleming (Maryland).  Guy Thomas (Colorado via a JUCO) and Miles Jones (walk-on at Tennessee but since left the team) were on other Power 5 teams under other circumstances.

  • Plus1 1
Link to post
10 minutes ago, Mavric said:

Since the transfer portal officially went online in October 2018, 30 Husker scholarship guys have entered the portal.  Only four went directly to a scholarship at another Power 5 school: Lightbourn (Oregon State), Vedral (Rutgers), Spielman (TCU) and Fleming (Maryland).  Guy Thomas (Colorado via a JUCO) and Miles Jones (walk-on at Tennessee but since left the team) were on other Power 5 teams under other circumstances.

 

What about Greene to FAU?

Link to post

One angle to look at with these transfers. On one hand I look at them and most are not contributors so it's easy to say good riddance no big loss. On the other hand when they are young players (freshman or sophomore). Most were high 3 stars or 4 star type players. Ok maybe we justify by saying well they got recruited over so they will leave. But who knows if they work hard in the program and someone goes early to the NFL and now they are a redshirt senior starting. These kids are young so who knows what they can be developed into. Perhaps the best they do is a solid 2nd string rotation guy. We gotta keep the Offensive Lineman in the system. If they leave we replace them with a high school kid who should have 2-3 years of strength and development before we WANT them on the field. 

 

Just due to boredom I have been watching a bunch of the 90's huskers bowl games. Man our offensive lines were like seniors, redshirt seniors and juniors. So we always had a developed, experienced, veteran oline. We gotta get back to that to control the line of scrimmage. 

  • Plus1 2
Link to post

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.






×
×
  • Create New...