MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Hoopaloop on April 23, 2012, 03:59:23 PM
-
An epidemic is the description some coaches use for transfers in men's college basketball. Washington Post article from the weekend.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/colleges/college-basketball-transfers-linked-play-me-now-culture/2012/04/21/gIQAOw9OYT_story_1.html
-
A quote from the article.
"Coaches aren’t blameless. Even Turgeon concedes that players are more likely to transfer because 'coaches today are in ‘win soon’ type deals, so I think they help push guys out the door — even though they’re not supposed to — by telling them they’re not going to play.'"
Hummm.
-
Yes, how DARE these children look out for their own interests.
-
It seems more and more kids are using the graduate excuse to transfer. Wonder if the ADepartments will start having their advisors tell kids not to take as many classes? It would be a fine line between making sure they graduate but also making sure they don't graduate too soon.
-
It seems more and more kids are using the graduate excuse to transfer. Wonder if the ADepartments will start having their advisors tell kids not to take as many classes? It would be a fine line between making sure they graduate but also making sure they don't graduate too soon.
I think they will work to close this loophole, but for the time being, it has to be considered when deciding whether to redshirt a player. You run the risk of losing him for that 5th year either way, might as well not redshirt to begin with.
-
I think they will work to close this loophole, but for the time being, it has to be considered when deciding whether to redshirt a player. You run the risk of losing him for that 5th year either way, might as well not redshirt to begin with.
I actually have no problem with a kid leaving after graduating. I get player development and loyalty, but these aren't pro players. If they want one year to try something new and they had their stuff together in the classroom, why not let them have some fun there last year in college to see a new city or go to a powerhouse? It sucks as fans, but is our entertainment worth restricting them from having life experiences?
-
Since scholarships are one year deals only, why can't it cut both ways?
-
I actually have no problem with a kid leaving after graduating. I get player development and loyalty, but these aren't pro players. If they want one year to try something new and they had their stuff together in the classroom, why not let them have some fun there last year in college to see a new city or go to a powerhouse? It sucks as fans, but is our entertainment worth restricting them from having life experiences?
Exactly. It should be seen as a reward for getting work done in the classroom.
-
Exactly. It should be seen as a reward for getting work done in the classroom.
Totally agree. With some of the embarassing grad rates out there, players should be rewarded for graduating early and being accepted into a grad program.
-
Totally agree. With some of the embarassing grad rates out there, players should be rewarded for graduating early and being accepted into a grad program.
Does anyone know how a player transferring after graduating affect the school that he transferred to's graduation rate? I would think most kids who do that don't finish grad school in a year, and if they leave for the NBA, they aren't going to stay to finish their second degree.
-
Does anyone know how a player transferring after graduating affect the school that he transferred to's graduation rate? I would think most kids who do that don't finish grad school in a year, and if they leave for the NBA, they aren't going to stay to finish their second degree.
I think any graduate school transfer has zero negative effect on APR. I thought I remembered reading as such when Brandon Wood moved from Valpo to MSU....can't find the article though now.
-
It seems more and more kids are using the graduate excuse to transfer. Wonder if the ADepartments will start having their advisors tell kids not to take as many classes? It would be a fine line between making sure they graduate but also making sure they don't graduate too soon.
The graduate excuse? Yes, shame on them for doing their schoolwork, getting their degrees, giving themselves options and actually leveling the playing field a little in the coach/athlete power spectrum.
-
The graduate excuse? Yes, shame on them for doing their schoolwork, getting their degrees, giving themselves options and actually leveling the playing field a little in the coach/athlete power spectrum.
Don't be so sensitive on wording. My next post says I'm in favor of the rules for the reasons you posted above.
That said, I should have used loophole instead of excuse. I feel it is a loophole because it only works if you school doesn't offer the graduate program. Most players chose the school and then find the graduate program that fits the criteria. If it was truly about graduate programs, there wouldn't be as many transfers since you can usually find a similar program at your current school. The rule isn't in place to reward graduate, just as an out for a program if it doesn't fit your educational career path.
Is there anything else you want to nitpick, or are we on the same page? Don't you agree that most players fake interest in a graduate program just so they can transfer?
ETA: My earlier question is from a realist point of view, not my personal feelings. I could see programs protecting their investments against the best interest of the kids to ensure they spend all 4 years of eligibility at the original school.
-
Don't be so sensitive on wording. My next post says I'm in favor of the rules for the reasons you posted above.
That said, I should have used loophole instead of excuse. I feel it is a loophole because it only works if you school doesn't offer the graduate program. Most players chose the school and then find the graduate program that fits the criteria. If it was truly about graduate programs, there wouldn't be as many transfers since you can usually find a similar program at your current school. The rule isn't in place to reward graduate, just as an out for a program if it doesn't fit your educational career path.
Is there anything else you want to nitpick, or are we on the same page? Don't you agree that most players fake interest in a graduate program just so they can transfer?
To be honest, the *intent* of the rule was to help athletes from non-revenue sports and allows them to still compete and attend graduate school. However, it is being used exactly how you describe above for the revenue sport athletes.
-
Don't be so sensitive on wording. My next post says I'm in favor of the rules for the reasons you posted above.
That said, I should have used loophole instead of excuse. I feel it is a loophole because it only works if you school doesn't offer the graduate program. Most players chose the school and then find the graduate program that fits the criteria. If it was truly about graduate programs, there wouldn't be as many transfers since you can usually find a similar program at your current school. The rule isn't in place to reward graduate, just as an out for a program if it doesn't fit your educational career path.
Is there anything else you want to nitpick, or are we on the same page? Don't you agree that most players fake interest in a graduate program just so they can transfer?
ETA: My earlier question is from a realist point of view, not my personal feelings. I could see programs protecting their investments against the best interest of the kids to ensure they spend all 4 years of eligibility at the original school.
Fair enough. BTW, wasn't being "sensitive" on wording, just literal. Oh wait ... there I go again!!
-
Since scholarships are one year deals only, why can't it cut both ways?
This is no longer the case. The NCAA passed legislation a few months ago that schools can give multi-year scholarships Marquette voted it down (not surprisingly), but the legislation passed.