the loophole is the graduate transfer rule.

In ALL other lateral/upward transfers- you have got to sit out a year. Why is the graduate transfer different? Let them transfer- but make them- like ALL other transfers- sit out a year.

It's going to get closed up quickly.

(08-14-2015 10:46 AM)stever20 Wrote:  the loophole is the graduate transfer rule.

In ALL other lateral/upward transfers- you have got to sit out a year. Why is the graduate transfer different? Let them transfer- but make them- like ALL other transfers- sit out a year.

It's going to get closed up quickly.

Because the student graduated.

In my opinion, the student-athlete gets the short end of the stick so much in comparison to the school that I think this is one case that if they do what they have to do in the classroom and are fortunate enough to graduate while having eligibility remaining then they should be allowed to look at other options. Doesn't mean they have to transfer, but they have the ability if it gives them the opportunity to play more or earn a degree they want.

Schools happily over recruit, pull scholarships, ask recruits to gray shirt, ask recruits to be a 'preferred' walk-on and other questionable things - why shouldn't the student have a little control in their situation? Especially in a situation that means the students is doing what they are supposed to do in their studies?

(08-14-2015 10:53 AM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:46 AM)stever20 Wrote:  the loophole is the graduate transfer rule.

In ALL other lateral/upward transfers- you have got to sit out a year. Why is the graduate transfer different? Let them transfer- but make them- like ALL other transfers- sit out a year.

It's going to get closed up quickly.

Because the student graduated.

In my opinion, the student-athlete gets the short end of the stick so much in comparison to the school that I think this is one case that if they do what they have to do in the classroom and are fortunate enough to graduate while having eligibility remaining then they should be allowed to look at other options. Doesn't mean they have to transfer, but they have the ability if it gives them the opportunity to play more or earn a degree they want.

Schools happily over recruit, pull scholarships, ask recruits to gray shirt, ask recruits to be a 'preferred' walk-on and other questionable things - why shouldn't the student have a little control in their situation? Especially in a situation that means the students is doing what they are supposed to do in their studies?

That's fine let them transfer. But make them sit out a year like EVERY other transfer. It's a loophole and it needs to get closed up.

The problem also is that there are like 5-6 graduate transfers who are going to be QB in the top 25 this year. Let's see if Ohio St/Big Ten misses the final 4, but FSU(with Golston leading them) and Oregon(with Adams leading them) in the final 4. Lets see how fast that loophole gets closed.

(08-14-2015 10:43 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:35 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-13-2015 06:33 PM)stever20 Wrote:  the problem is that it's becoming much more than a rare case..

It's a loophole that the NCAA will close up.

If it's becoming so commonplace, then name me an example where a FCS player used the rule (not a loophole) to transfer to a P5 team and help them have a very successful year.

Going from Oregon to Mississippi or from NC State to Wisconsin, is not what we're talking about here.

Stever can surely speak for himself, but I think he is referring to the rule in general allowing FBS players to transfer without restriction (name P5 to P5 or G5 to P5) being the issue that is not so "rare" anymore.

The context of the thread is a star player at an FCS school transferring to an elite P5 school.

I'm not dismissing the concern of G5 to P5 or P5 to P5, but that's not the discussion.

(08-14-2015 10:58 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:53 AM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:46 AM)stever20 Wrote:  the loophole is the graduate transfer rule.

In ALL other lateral/upward transfers- you have got to sit out a year. Why is the graduate transfer different? Let them transfer- but make them- like ALL other transfers- sit out a year.

It's going to get closed up quickly.

Because the student graduated.

In my opinion, the student-athlete gets the short end of the stick so much in comparison to the school that I think this is one case that if they do what they have to do in the classroom and are fortunate enough to graduate while having eligibility remaining then they should be allowed to look at other options. Doesn't mean they have to transfer, but they have the ability if it gives them the opportunity to play more or earn a degree they want.

Schools happily over recruit, pull scholarships, ask recruits to gray shirt, ask recruits to be a 'preferred' walk-on and other questionable things - why shouldn't the student have a little control in their situation? Especially in a situation that means the students is doing what they are supposed to do in their studies?

That's fine let them transfer. But make them sit out a year like EVERY other transfer. It's a loophole and it needs to get closed up.

The problem also is that there are like 5-6 graduate transfers who are going to be QB in the top 25 this year. Let's see if Ohio St/Big Ten misses the final 4, but FSU(with Golston leading them) and Oregon(with Adams leading them) in the final 4. Lets see how fast that loophole gets closed.

Not a loophole. It's a rule, which rewards the student-athlete for graduating.

You want to punish players who graduate. Shame on you.

(08-14-2015 11:07 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:43 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:35 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-13-2015 06:33 PM)stever20 Wrote:  the problem is that it's becoming much more than a rare case..

It's a loophole that the NCAA will close up.

If it's becoming so commonplace, then name me an example where a FCS player used the rule (not a loophole) to transfer to a P5 team and help them have a very successful year.

Going from Oregon to Mississippi or from NC State to Wisconsin, is not what we're talking about here.

Stever can surely speak for himself, but I think he is referring to the rule in general allowing FBS players to transfer without restriction (name P5 to P5 or G5 to P5) being the issue that is not so "rare" anymore.

The context of the thread is a star player at an FCS school transferring to an elite P5 school.

I'm not dismissing the concern of G5 to P5 or P5 to P5, but that's not the discussion.

It's using the Graduate Transfer loophole, so it is absolutely that. If Adams transferred, sat out this year, and played next year at Oregon, absolutely NO problem with that at all. But the fact that he is able to play immediately is a crock. I feel the same about Golston at FSU, and the other ones that are around this year.

(08-14-2015 11:08 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:58 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:53 AM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:46 AM)stever20 Wrote:  the loophole is the graduate transfer rule.

In ALL other lateral/upward transfers- you have got to sit out a year. Why is the graduate transfer different? Let them transfer- but make them- like ALL other transfers- sit out a year.

It's going to get closed up quickly.

Because the student graduated.

In my opinion, the student-athlete gets the short end of the stick so much in comparison to the school that I think this is one case that if they do what they have to do in the classroom and are fortunate enough to graduate while having eligibility remaining then they should be allowed to look at other options. Doesn't mean they have to transfer, but they have the ability if it gives them the opportunity to play more or earn a degree they want.

Schools happily over recruit, pull scholarships, ask recruits to gray shirt, ask recruits to be a 'preferred' walk-on and other questionable things - why shouldn't the student have a little control in their situation? Especially in a situation that means the students is doing what they are supposed to do in their studies?

That's fine let them transfer. But make them sit out a year like EVERY other transfer. It's a loophole and it needs to get closed up.

The problem also is that there are like 5-6 graduate transfers who are going to be QB in the top 25 this year. Let's see if Ohio St/Big Ten misses the final 4, but FSU(with Golston leading them) and Oregon(with Adams leading them) in the final 4. Lets see how fast that loophole gets closed.

Not a loophole. It's a rule, which rewards the student-athlete for graduating.

You want to punish players who graduate. Shame on you.

It is a loophole. I want to make it where if you transfer you sit out a year. PERIOD. They closed up the loophole this past year to make it where you couldn't get hardship waivers. They need to close up this loophole as well.....

The tables are turned stever.

Now it's your personal crusade. No one but you sees a problem with the rule, as it's written. It's not a loophole.


Good for athletes who graduate. If they have a year left and want to transfer -- no penalty!

(08-14-2015 11:15 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  The tables are turned stever.

Now it's your personal crusade. No one but you sees a problem with the rule, as it's written. It's not a loophole.


Good for athletes who graduate. If they have a year left and want to transfer -- no penalty!

Personally I like the rule. I agree it is a reward for those who graduate to look for a new environment if they are not getting what they want at their current locale. However Stever is by far not the only one complaining about it. Many a coach has called for its removal. that is probably why he is saying he thinks it will be removed. Personally I don't think or hope it will, but it has been suggested by some coaches. Some big name coaches at that.

(08-14-2015 11:30 AM)adcorbett Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 11:15 AM)MplsBison Wrote:  The tables are turned stever.

Now it's your personal crusade. No one but you sees a problem with the rule, as it's written. It's not a loophole.


Good for athletes who graduate. If they have a year left and want to transfer -- no penalty!

Personally I like the rule. I agree it is a reward for those who graduate to look for a new environment if they are not getting what they want at their current locale. However Stever is by far not the only one complaining about it. Many a coach has called for its removal. that is probably why he is saying he thinks it will be removed. Personally I don't think or hope it will, but it has been suggested by some coaches. Some big name coaches at that.

Which coaches are saying they want the rule removed?

You can google it. Not my argument. But you are claiming he is the only one stating it and that is not remotely true.

The fact is the NCAA has established a committee looking at all transfer policies, with the graduate transfer issue smack atop the priority list....

(08-14-2015 10:58 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:53 AM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:46 AM)stever20 Wrote:  the loophole is the graduate transfer rule.

In ALL other lateral/upward transfers- you have got to sit out a year. Why is the graduate transfer different? Let them transfer- but make them- like ALL other transfers- sit out a year.

It's going to get closed up quickly.

Because the student graduated.

In my opinion, the student-athlete gets the short end of the stick so much in comparison to the school that I think this is one case that if they do what they have to do in the classroom and are fortunate enough to graduate while having eligibility remaining then they should be allowed to look at other options. Doesn't mean they have to transfer, but they have the ability if it gives them the opportunity to play more or earn a degree they want.

Schools happily over recruit, pull scholarships, ask recruits to gray shirt, ask recruits to be a 'preferred' walk-on and other questionable things - why shouldn't the student have a little control in their situation? Especially in a situation that means the students is doing what they are supposed to do in their studies?

That's fine let them transfer. But make them sit out a year like EVERY other transfer.

You mean, just like Steve Sarkisian had to sit out a year when moving from Washington to USC, and Roy Williams had to sit out a year when moving from Kansas to North Carolina?

Just like that, right?

Bison,
I don't often agree with Stever, if for no other reason he meticulously researches everything before posting, compared to many others going off memory, so he gets a lot of "I Told You So's." His opinions are not always on point, but the flipside of that is 99% of what he posts in terms of historical fact, or things that have previously happened, are dead on balls accurate.

article from July:
http://articles.philly.com/2015-07-20/sp...e-nicastro

The NCAA has promised to examine the exception at its January convention, and many believe it will force future graduate transfers to sit out a season.

(08-14-2015 12:00 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:58 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:53 AM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:46 AM)stever20 Wrote:  the loophole is the graduate transfer rule.

In ALL other lateral/upward transfers- you have got to sit out a year. Why is the graduate transfer different? Let them transfer- but make them- like ALL other transfers- sit out a year.

It's going to get closed up quickly.

Because the student graduated.

In my opinion, the student-athlete gets the short end of the stick so much in comparison to the school that I think this is one case that if they do what they have to do in the classroom and are fortunate enough to graduate while having eligibility remaining then they should be allowed to look at other options. Doesn't mean they have to transfer, but they have the ability if it gives them the opportunity to play more or earn a degree they want.

Schools happily over recruit, pull scholarships, ask recruits to gray shirt, ask recruits to be a 'preferred' walk-on and other questionable things - why shouldn't the student have a little control in their situation? Especially in a situation that means the students is doing what they are supposed to do in their studies?

That's fine let them transfer. But make them sit out a year like EVERY other transfer.

You mean, just like Steve Sarkisian had to sit out a year when moving from Washington to USC, and Roy Williams had to sit out a year when moving from Kansas to North Carolina?

Just like that, right?

ALL other college transfers sit out a year....

It's getting looked at in January. It's going to be a shocker if it remains.

(08-14-2015 12:07 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 12:00 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:58 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:53 AM)rokamortis Wrote:  

(08-14-2015 10:46 AM)stever20 Wrote:  the loophole is the graduate transfer rule.

In ALL other lateral/upward transfers- you have got to sit out a year. Why is the graduate transfer different? Let them transfer- but make them- like ALL other transfers- sit out a year.

It's going to get closed up quickly.

Because the student graduated.

In my opinion, the student-athlete gets the short end of the stick so much in comparison to the school that I think this is one case that if they do what they have to do in the classroom and are fortunate enough to graduate while having eligibility remaining then they should be allowed to look at other options. Doesn't mean they have to transfer, but they have the ability if it gives them the opportunity to play more or earn a degree they want.

Schools happily over recruit, pull scholarships, ask recruits to gray shirt, ask recruits to be a 'preferred' walk-on and other questionable things - why shouldn't the student have a little control in their situation? Especially in a situation that means the students is doing what they are supposed to do in their studies?

That's fine let them transfer. But make them sit out a year like EVERY other transfer.

You mean, just like Steve Sarkisian had to sit out a year when moving from Washington to USC, and Roy Williams had to sit out a year when moving from Kansas to North Carolina?

Just like that, right?

ALL other college transfers sit out a year....

It's getting looked at in January. It's going to be a shocker if it remains.

For sure, it would be unsurprising if the hypocrites who run college athletics closed down the graduate-transfer avenue. But let's not forget that they are hypocrites.

they wouldn't be closing down the graduate transfer avenue. A guy like Golston(or Adams) would be allowed to transfer this year- not play- but then play next year. If anything, it's better for them because they would get 2 years of graduate work paid for not one year.

(08-14-2015 12:17 PM)stever20 Wrote:  they wouldn't be closing down the graduate transfer avenue. A guy like Golston(or Adams) would be allowed to transfer this year- not play- but then play next year. If anything, it's better for them because they would get 2 years of graduate work paid for not one year.

It's not better for them at all, because teams would be less reluctant to take a graduate transfer who can only play one year, but takes up a scholarship for two. It is one thing when you take a transfer from a freshman or sophomore, where they spend a year off, then get to play for 2 or 3 years. But one for one will completely dry up the market for teams seeking grad transfers.

Also such a change in rules would require allowing a sixth year of eligibility in a lot of cases. so you'd have to change another rule to make a rule that by and large, is not problematic to the division as a whole. Just a few coaches who lost players who usually left for reasons of PT, meaning they weren't being hurt to much by them leaving, but they just want to see them have some sort of "punishment" for doing so. You see it basketball more much more than football where the player transferring was actually a starter. In football, most of the grad transfers are players who are leaving to get more PT. And in basketball, where the players leaving are much more often starters, most of them have the blessing of their coaches, as most are players (starter level) trying to go up a level in hopes of making it pro at some level, or were not starting to begin with.

here's my personal thought on transfers...
1- current school only allowed to limit transfers to out of conference schools. Can't do what some coaches do and try to not allow transfers to a number of extra schools. I can see the part of not allowing in conference transfers- and a number of conferences already ban that practice.
2- all transfers must sit out a year- no matter what
3- graduate transfers allowed- but 2 still applies.
4- current school not allowed to block transfers like you see now.