NCAA Looks to Adjust Transfer Rules

I don't like the idea of free reign as to where and when a player can transfer.  I could possibly be open to having the month of April to transfer without sitting out.....but, I would have to really think about it more. 

I do believe there needs to be some allowances for if the coach leaves or is fired.  This is magnified by the early signing period too.  I firmly believe that if a recruit signs with a school, but hasn't started classes at the school and the coach is fired or leaves, he should be allowed out of his LOI without penalty.

Once a player starts school and is on the team, transfer rules become more important to the integrity of the game.  For instance, it would be absolutely morally wrong if Frost would have brought a bunch of players with him from UCF and they could play immediately and UCF has no recourse.

You can have all the rules about recruiting other schools players you want, but if a coach thinks he can win a championship by going after an RB or QB at another school and that player could play immediately....he isn't going to give a crap about rules.  He'll have his championship long before any punishment comes down.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I have no problem with players being able to transfer with no penalty, as long as there are regulations (and enforcement) around schools not being the first to make contact.  Coaches can up and leave a penalty, so I see no difference in players being able to do the same thing.

And there is still going to be an 85 scholarship limit in football, so the Bama's of the world are not going to be able to run roughshod and bring in the top players from other schools around the country.

 
Red Five said:
And there is still going to be an 85 scholarship limit in football, so the Bama's of the world are not going to be able to run roughshod and bring in the top players from other schools around the country.
Click to expand...
Really???  If Alabama wants a Freshman RB from ISU and a Sophomore QB from Baylor, they will make room.

 
Red Five said:
I have no problem with players being able to transfer with no penalty, as long as there are regulations (and enforcement) around schools not being the first to make contact.  Coaches can up and leave a penalty, so I see no difference in players being able to do the same thing.

And there is still going to be an 85 scholarship limit in football, so the Bama's of the world are not going to be able to run roughshod and bring in the top players from other schools around the country.
Click to expand...


BigRedBuster said:
Really???  If Alabama wants a Freshman RB from ISU and a Sophomore QB from Baylor, they will make room.
Click to expand...


This is true that Alabama could get those players however an open transfer rule will benefit the second and third tier teams way more than the elite.  Most elite teams don't have depth issues and will replace starters from within.  If a player is a second stringer on an elite team and he wants to play he now doesn't have to sit out a year and will jump ship much quicker then before.

 
There is no way to control this, unless you have a cap on the number of transfers per year at any given school and you really need to have a specific time period for the recruiting to go on.  It will be a wide open 're-recruiting period.   Perhaps, the only way the school could recruit or accept a transfer would be IF that school had offered the player a scholarship before high school graduation.   In other words, a player may transfer ONLY to other schools that had previously offered them.  

I don't think I like the idea of recruiting other school's players.   Maybe there should be a 'buy out' of sorts where the receiving school must reimburse the sending school's full prior scholarship related costs for the player.   ?   There must be some kind of cost or it will become brutal.  There will be endless allegations and 'tampering' and so on.    

 
I'm not sure I like this.  Requiring players to sit out a year after transferring is, to me anyway, a good idea.  If they want to tinker with the transfer rule, then allow kids to play immediately at another school if the coach at their current school gets fired or leaves for another school/NFL.  Other than that, things should stay the way they are.

 
More transfer talk at the NCAA convention. South Dakota State AD Justin Sell, the chair of the transfer working group, faced some hard questions at the DI issues forum about the one-time transfer exception -- which is not yet part of any proposal. NC State AD Debbie Yow suggested that tampering would be rampant if transfers were granted immediate eligibility and estimated that the number of transfers across DI would more than double. She described the scenario as "a free for all, something that we've never seen before." Sell urged patience and promised that his group would use caution as it works to devise a proposal next month.
Click to expand...


ESPN

 
Like most people here I like the idea of letting a kid transfer if he loses his coach but other than that things need to be left alone. I find the idea of a free agency version of college football to be really damaging to the sport and just another nail in the coffin of the sport I used to love. 

 
I worry more about the kid on scholarship at the school accepting the transfer losing his scholarship.  Your the 3rd stringer at any given position and a stud wants to move in and the school is at 85 who goes?  I currently like the red shirt for a transfer rule.  Grad transfer are good IMO they have a degree from that school they've held up their end of the bargain so to speak.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top