Interesting tweet. Could be the Wild Wild West.

Quote:@ESPN_Schick

I spoke w/ an NCAA official this week who was “95% certain” transfers will soon be allowed to play immediately in basketball & football. Could be a one-time freebie, plus grad transfer option. So in theory, a student-athlete could play for three different schools w/o sitting out.

So...Free Agency?

Hopefully it will help us get a couple guys to attempt to fill Kyle and Gary’s shoes next year. We’re not going to come close to their production with the guys in the roster currently.

If that happens, coaching changes could be last one out the door turn off the lights.

If that happens, I imagine the G5 would become little more than a D-league in which every year, the most experienced players are plucked away to fill holes on the blue bloods' rosters. This could be disastrous.

(01-17-2018 08:19 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  If that happens, I imagine the G5 would become little more than a D-league in which every year, the most experienced players are plucked away to fill holes on the blue bloods' rosters. This could be disastrous.

It is heading that ay anyways.

(01-17-2018 08:19 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  If that happens, I imagine the G5 would become little more than a D-league in which every year, the most experienced players are plucked away to fill holes on the blue bloods' rosters. This could be disastrous.

I think it depends on the culture of the school. If Fickell can develop Cincinnati back into a yearly conference championship contender, guys aren't going to be as quick to uproot their lives and head for greener pastures. If we continue to be a middling or worse team over the years, our best players will flee like bugs. Don't forget though, we could benefit as well from getting some FCS/MAC/Sun Belt guys.

In basketball, I don't think we have much to worry about. We have a stable coaching staff and no real history of highly productive players transferring out. And no offense in that last statement to Lawrence, Guyn, Morman, Jeremiah Davis, Quadri, etc... we have yet to experience any truly devastating transfers in the Cronin era. If anything, we may benefit from the potential new rule.

(01-17-2018 08:19 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  If that happens, I imagine the G5 would become little more than a D-league in which every year, the most experienced players are plucked away to fill holes on the blue bloods' rosters. This could be disastrous.

I think basketball is going to be affected by this more than football. Basketball sees the one and dones. I could easily see one of the big schools picking up a solid senior PG or a Center to complete a strong roster to make a run for the tournament.

This will ruin college sports as we know it. The only reason people like the college is there is some sort of semblance of loyalty to the school (even if it isn't all true).

Cincinnati is not G5 in basketball. And players/recruits do not perceive it as such.

But for the true mid-majors, this can't be good.

Man, when a coach interviews for a P5 job, the unsavory question they may be asked if this passes is who can you bring with you. Yuck.
There is so much about this that is ripe for abuse.

I don't understand who in power thinks this is a good idea. There are things about the college game that can be fixed, but I never perceived the transfer rule as one. The big boys will never have to rebuild a roster organically again. They won't have to worry about taking chances on projects or diamond in the roughs either, just let theme go on down to the local directional school and develop first.

Everything I love about college sports is being torn down lately. It is heading towards a bore fest of about 25-30 teams, and will look exactly like one of the pro leagues but with lest talented teams. Congrats NCAA on destroying yourself from within.

The chair of the committee looking at this is from South Dakota State.

Quote:Mitch Sherman
ESPN Staff Writer


Some movement today at the NCAA convention on the discussion about reforming transfer rules. The Division I Council has asked the board of directors to grant a more flexible timeline for legislation, which could potentially allow a proposal to pass this year outside of the normally exhaustive cycle. Implementation remains unlikely in 2018. The proposal would likely increase penalties for tampering and eliminate the tying of scholarships to transfer eligibility. As for the much-debated, one-time undergraduate exception -- removing the requirement for players to sit one year -- it's far from a done deal. The transfer working group will meet again in February to devise a plan. "Our job now," said South Dakota State AD Justin Sell, chair of the group, "is to get people to lessen the anxiety and take a deep breath." Here's Miami AD Blake James, chair of the DI Council, on the possibility of major change:

My thinking is, if a coach leaves, for whatever reason, the student cannot go with the coach but also shouldn't have to sit out if he/she transfers. I'm also fine with the grad transfer rules. If a student just decides to leave, he/she should still have to sit out a year. I agree, eliminating this all together could create additional shadyness.

The big boys strike again.

This will just water down the product. Don't know if it would work out or not for UC, but regardless if you're filling your roster with guys that are tired of sitting at blue blood schools or with G5 impact players that are looking to move up, the attrition to and from is going to make for a lot of adjustment time and some ugly contests. For some schools, it will be just like when LeBron James calls up four of his friends in the offseason and decides on a particular franchise to migrate to. And coaching changes may as well be a program reboot.

I'm a little tired of hearing the narrative about "coach x did this, so why can't the player?" Place more controls on the coach and school, don't allow them to rescind scholarships, and don't legislate a free-for-all. You're killing your product.

Also, student athletes under scholarship receive free education, sizable stipends, room and board, meal plans, and career connections at no cost, and graduate with no debt. If you don't feel that is fair compensation, go elsewhere. An alternate league needs to be created for people who don't find value in the education system. It shouldn't be a reason to water down what people like about college athletics.

(01-18-2018 06:31 AM)crex043 Wrote:  This will just water down the product. Don't know if it would work out or not for UC, but regardless if you're filling your roster with guys that are tired of sitting at blue blood schools or with G5 impact players that are looking to move up, the attrition to and from is going to make for a lot of adjustment time and some ugly contests. For some schools, it will be just like when LeBron James calls up four of his friends in the offseason and decides on a particular franchise to migrate to. And coaching changes may as well be a program reboot.

I'm a little tired of hearing the narrative about "coach x did this, so why can't the player?" Place more controls on the coach and school, don't allow them to rescind scholarships, and don't legislate a free-for-all. You're killing your product.

Also, student athletes under scholarship receive free education, sizable stipends, room and board, meal plans, and career connections at no cost, and graduate with no debt. If you don't feel that is fair compensation, go elsewhere. An alternate league needs to be created for people who don't find value in the education system. It shouldn't be a reason to water down what people like about college athletics.

Agree. The bottomline is the student athlet is not equal to a coach, who is under a paid contract. The player has the right to go where ever he pleases, whether that be play professionaly or transfer to another school. The NCAA as an organization still needs some limits on this stuff or they are going to destroy their own product. This is their product, they should be able to do with it whatever the hell they want, to their own benefit. I don't see this transfer rule as being a benefit.

I would also be in favor of setting some limits on coaches. I'm just not sure how to implement that. I would like to see college football figure a solution to the coaches leaving early before the bowls.

Absolutely horrendous idea. Yep. College Sports is officially dead.

Nothing has changed...yet. Hopefully common sense rules here. Then again, when has that happened with NCAA rules.