Transfer Portal - General Discussion

[mthoopsfan]

I thought what Tom Izzo said recently was interesting.

1. "He said the waiver system that grants players immediate eligibility hurts them in the long run because they don't learn to become resilient."

"I'm not for it. I'm not for anything," Izzo said. "I just think we're hurting decisions that kids make."

"maybe it's because they're worried about beating somebody else out. We all had to beat people out ... and I think we're losing that. Where's the competitive edge?"

2. "I mean we've got 1,200. By Tuesday, we'll have 1,500, and then we're going to get a second wave of kids in the portal. And kids are going to go places that maybe it's a little bit for the money, maybe it's because they're worried about beating somebody else out. We all had to beat people out ... and I think we're losing that. Where's the competitive edge?"

3. He thinks the exceptions, like mental health reasons, for the exception to one-transfer, will be abused. I agree.

"Tom Izzo said he has "no faith" in the NCAA's plan to limit the immediate eligibility exceptions for two-time transfers because players will continue to use issues such as mental health to earn waivers."

""I don't have a lot of faith in the NCAA," Izzo said. "This waiver thing. If you've got a hangnail, you get a waiver. I just don't believe in that, because I think somebody, whether it's a lawyer, whether it's agents, whether it's people, they're going to just come up with a different reason. Mental health is a big reason."

"Earlier this year, the NCAA sent a memo to schools that stated players who transfer a second time won't be granted a waiver and will have to sit for a season if they transfer for reasons such as a coaching change or a reduction of playing time. But concerns about "physical and mental health" or "physical or sexual assault" will allow a player to qualify for immediate eligibility."

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/36018975/tom-izzo-says-mental-health-big-reason-transfer-waivers

 

[mthoopsfan]

The LSU women had 9 new players this season, some from portal and some frosh. I heard that coach thank the players from last year's team, who, as she said that the seniors stuck around for that season and started the success that came this season.

 

[grizpaws]

Interesting issues. On the one hand, I think it's good that players can transfer if they're not happy with their current school. On the other hand, programs need to be able to build rosters that can compete within their conferences. Maybe a one-time transfer with no restrictions on eligibility but then a one year sit and wait for any subsequent transfers without any waivers? It's clearly a different world in college sports now.

 

[SoldierGriz]

The LSU women had 9 new players this season, some from portal and some frosh. I heard that coach thank the players from last year's team, who, as she said that the seniors stuck around for that season and started the success that came this season.

More or less the same with K-State...almost an entire new roster plus a new coach, which is amazing.

 

[uofmman1122]

Interesting issues. On the one hand, I think it's good that players can transfer if they're not happy with their current school. On the other hand, programs need to be able to build rosters that can compete within their conferences. Maybe a one-time transfer with no restrictions on eligibility but then a one year sit and wait for any subsequent transfers without any waivers? It's clearly a different world in college sports now.

This is essentially how it works now. Students get a one-time exemption that allows them to transfer anywhere and be eligible immediately, and if they want to transfer again after that and be eligible to play right away, they need either to 1) drop down a level, just like before, 2) graduate and become a grad transfer, or 3) have extenuating circumstances like a coaching change or other one-off cases, otherwise they have to sit for a year.

IMO, they should be able to transfer as many times as they want, as long as they maintain academic eligibility, just like regular students.

And let's not act like every coach that's crying about the portal isn't also going to be searching HARD for instant impact players to come in and play for them. They all want to reap the benefits of the portal without losing any of their players.

 

[mthoopsfan]

Interesting issues. On the one hand, I think it's good that players can transfer if they're not happy with their current school. On the other hand, programs need to be able to build rosters that can compete within their conferences. Maybe a one-time transfer with no restrictions on eligibility but then a one year sit and wait for any subsequent transfers without any waivers? It's clearly a different world in college sports now.

This is essentially how it works now. Students get a one-time exemption that allows them to transfer anywhere and be eligible immediately, and if they want to transfer again after that and be eligible to play right away, they need either to 1) drop down a level, just like before, 2) graduate and become a grad transfer, or 3) have extenuating circumstances like a coaching change or other one-off cases, otherwise they have to sit for a year.

IMO, they should be able to transfer as many times as they want, as long as they maintain academic eligibility, just like regular students.

And let's not act like every coach that's crying about the portal isn't also going to be searching HARD for instant impact players to come in and play for them. They all want to reap the benefits of the portal without losing any of their players.

Are you sure an athlete can transfer a second time, with no-sit, if there's a coaching change?

"According to the new guidelines approved by the NCAA Division I Council, athletes must meet one of the following criteria in order to be eligible for a waiver:

1. “A demonstrated physical injury or illness or mental health condition that necessitated the student’s transfer (supporting documentation, care plans and proximity of the student’s support system will be considered).”

2. “Exigent circumstances that clearly necessitate a student-athlete’s immediate departure from the previous school (e.g., physical assault or abuse, sexual assault) unrelated to the student-athlete’s athletics participation.”

Waivers will no longer be granted for athletic reasons, including lack of playing time or “position preference.” Academic preferences (i.e., availability of major courses of study) will also no longer be considered.

These changes take effect beginning with the 2023-24 academic year."

https://www.al.com/sports/2023/01/ncaa-tightens-restrictions-on-second-time-transfers.html

 

[BigRock]

I've noticed a lot of complaining about how young men and women use their liberties. Not so much nuanced, solution-based discussion about whether or not they deserve the same freedoms as coaches, administrators, and any other adult member of society. But general complaining that teenagers don't make the same altruistic decisions as no-stakes hypothetical 4-star keyboard martyrs, and demands that those decisions be mandated and liberties forfeited for the stooges' preferred greater good.
I wonder if these same people apply their straight-line thought process to government, and who their dictator will be.

 

[uofmman1122]

This is essentially how it works now. Students get a one-time exemption that allows them to transfer anywhere and be eligible immediately, and if they want to transfer again after that and be eligible to play right away, they need either to 1) drop down a level, just like before, 2) graduate and become a grad transfer, or 3) have extenuating circumstances like a coaching change or other one-off cases, otherwise they have to sit for a year.

IMO, they should be able to transfer as many times as they want, as long as they maintain academic eligibility, just like regular students.

And let's not act like every coach that's crying about the portal isn't also going to be searching HARD for instant impact players to come in and play for them. They all want to reap the benefits of the portal without losing any of their players.

Are you sure an athlete can transfer a second time, with no-sit, if there's a coaching change?

"According to the new guidelines approved by the NCAA Division I Council, athletes must meet one of the following criteria in order to be eligible for a waiver:

1. “A demonstrated physical injury or illness or mental health condition that necessitated the student’s transfer (supporting documentation, care plans and proximity of the student’s support system will be considered).”

2. “Exigent circumstances that clearly necessitate a student-athlete’s immediate departure from the previous school (e.g., physical assault or abuse, sexual assault) unrelated to the student-athlete’s athletics participation.”

Waivers will no longer be granted for athletic reasons, including lack of playing time or “position preference.” Academic preferences (i.e., availability of major courses of study) will also no longer be considered.

These changes take effect beginning with the 2023-24 academic year."

https://www.al.com/sports/2023/01/ncaa-tightens-restrictions-on-second-time-transfers.html

Oh, I missed that there are changes happening this year. Thanks for letting me know.

Sounds like it'll be harder to get a waiver, but players can always drop down without one in order to play immediately, just like it was before the transfer rules changed.

 

[mthoopsfan]

I've noticed a lot of complaining about how young men and women use their liberties. Not so much nuanced, solution-based discussion about whether or not they deserve the same freedoms as coaches, administrators, and any other adult member of society. But general complaining that teenagers don't make the same altruistic decisions as no-stakes hypothetical 4-star keyboard martyrs, and demands that those decisions be mandated and liberties forfeited for the stooges' preferred greater good.
I wonder if these same people apply their straight-line thought process to government, and who their dictator will be.

Why should players have the same “freedoms” as coaches or administrators? They aren’t at all the same or similar.

Should players be subject to non compete agreements and buyout clauses like head coaches and many adults in
business? Can’t compete for a year or two? Buyout part of their scholarships? Or have their new school pay the buyout? Should players have to sign employment agreements?

 

[Copper Griz]

I've noticed a lot of complaining about how young men and women use their liberties. Not so much nuanced, solution-based discussion about whether or not they deserve the same freedoms as coaches, administrators, and any other adult member of society. But general complaining that teenagers don't make the same altruistic decisions as no-stakes hypothetical 4-star keyboard martyrs, and demands that those decisions be mandated and liberties forfeited for the stooges' preferred greater good.
I wonder if these same people apply their straight-line thought process to government, and who their dictator will be.

Underrated post right here. Well stated. I find it ironic that a coach paid millions is whining about kids transferring and not being tough enough to compete. Well cry me a damn river. How about you compete with every other school looking to get players from the portal. Something must be working right because I don’t remember seeing many of the schools in the final four making it in previous years. Good. Mix it up. Anyone can win. No more damn dynasties and payoffs by boosters. NIL and the portal are great and it just means every school has to compete differently than before. The game changed Izzo. Society changed. Adapt and stop complaining.

 

[mthoopsfan]

I've noticed a lot of complaining about how young men and women use their liberties. Not so much nuanced, solution-based discussion about whether or not they deserve the same freedoms as coaches, administrators, and any other adult member of society. But general complaining that teenagers don't make the same altruistic decisions as no-stakes hypothetical 4-star keyboard martyrs, and demands that those decisions be mandated and liberties forfeited for the stooges' preferred greater good.
I wonder if these same people apply their straight-line thought process to government, and who their dictator will be.

Underrated post right here. Well stated. I find it ironic that a coach paid millions is whining about kids transferring and not being tough enough to compete. Well cry me a damn river. How about you compete with every other school looking to get players from the portal. Something must be working right because I don’t remember seeing many of the schools in the final four making it in previous years. Good. Mix it up. Anyone can win. No more damn dynasties and payoffs by boosters. NIL and the portal are great and it just means every school has to compete differently than before. The game changed Izzo. Society changed. Adapt and stop complaining.

Izzo didn’t whine or say he wasn’t going to compete in the portal. He said it isn’t teaching kids to be tough and competitive. He said the new exceptions won’t be enforced by the ncaa. The unlimited NIL is further corrupting big time college sports. I think this will eventually lead to some schools dropping sports. Some lower level, poorer, and smaller schools are not going to be able to compete and will face more pressure not to divert money from academics to sports. I think college athletics is going to shrink.

 

[griznative24]

I've noticed a lot of complaining about how young men and women use their liberties. Not so much nuanced, solution-based discussion about whether or not they deserve the same freedoms as coaches, administrators, and any other adult member of society. But general complaining that teenagers don't make the same altruistic decisions as no-stakes hypothetical 4-star keyboard martyrs, and demands that those decisions be mandated and liberties forfeited for the stooges' preferred greater good.
I wonder if these same people apply their straight-line thought process to government, and who their dictator will be.

Why should players have the same “freedoms” as coaches or administrators? They aren’t at all the same or similar.

Should players be subject to non compete agreements and buyout clauses like head coaches and many adults in
business? Can’t compete for a year or two? Buyout part of their scholarships? Or have their new school pay the buyout? Should players have to sign employment agreements?

Yeah, they should. It's a business now.

 

[GrizMania]

Underrated post right here. Well stated. I find it ironic that a coach paid millions is whining about kids transferring and not being tough enough to compete. Well cry me a damn river. How about you compete with every other school looking to get players from the portal. Something must be working right because I don’t remember seeing many of the schools in the final four making it in previous years. Good. Mix it up. Anyone can win. No more damn dynasties and payoffs by boosters. NIL and the portal are great and it just means every school has to compete differently than before. The game changed Izzo. Society changed. Adapt and stop complaining.

Izzo didn’t whine or say he wasn’t going to compete in the portal. He said it isn’t teaching kids to be tough and competitive. He said the new exceptions won’t be enforced by the ncaa. The unlimited NIL is further corrupting big time college sports. I think this will eventually lead to some schools dropping sports. Some lower level, poorer, and smaller schools are not going to be able to compete and will face more pressure not to divert money from academics to sports. I think college athletics is going to shrink.

I just listened to Jay Bilis talk about this. He contends the schools should have the students be employees, pay them, have them sign non-compete, and then they're still getting paid, but not transferring a few times and thus having some continuity.

I don't know if he's right, but it's sn interesting thing to think about.

 

[mthoopsfan]

Aren't players on scholarship already getting paid? Does Bilas think they should be paid more?

A full ride at Stanford is more than assistant coaches at UM make annually.

 

[horribilisfan8184]

Which raises the question, can Stanford law students transfer now that Federal Judges are refusing to hire their law school graduates and regain law clerk eligibility?

 

[BigRock]

Aren't players on scholarship already getting paid? Does Bilas think they should be paid more?

A full ride at Stanford is more than assistant coaches at UM make annually.

Can players cash in their scholarship or invest that value how they please? Or are they bartering playing in a uniform -- real and time-sensitive advertising, entertainment, long-term physical health value -- for a very specific non-transferable internal product discount that the university can pull whenever and why it pleases?

Sure, they're getting paid. If you'd accept an expiring store credit coupon with wet ink in the back alley as paycheck.

The potential value is real from both sides. Both sides should be equally obligated by the barter. Mandating small print on the back of that coupon that's a legally-enforceable non-compete only on the athlete's side in the name of artificial one-sided "loyalty" is dubious morally. And I'd argue it's unAmerican. Open the market. Provide value, get value. Let the kids follow their hearts and minds in the pursuit of happiness like every other adult American.

 

[kemajic]

Aren't players on scholarship already getting paid? Does Bilas think they should be paid more?

A full ride at Stanford is more than assistant coaches at UM make annually.

Can players cash in their scholarship or invest that value how they please? Or are they bartering playing in a uniform -- real and time-sensitive advertising, entertainment, long-term physical health value -- for a very specific non-transferable internal product discount that the university can pull whenever and why it pleases?

Sure, they're getting paid. If you'd accept an expiring store credit coupon with wet ink in the back alley as paycheck.

The potential value is real from both sides. Both sides should be equally obligated by the barter. Mandating small print on the back of that coupon that's a legally-enforceable non-compete only on the athlete's side in the name of artificial one-sided "loyalty" is dubious morally. And I'd argue it's unAmerican. Open the market. Provide value, get value. Let the kids follow their hearts and minds in the pursuit of happiness like every other adult American.

An idealist point of view when in reality it could ruin college athletics.

 

[garizzalies]

No more damn dynasties.

UConn has the most national championships this century at four, and 5 since ‘99, again more than any other program.
UConn has won every time in the chipper. No other team with at least three appearances is undefeated in title games.