collapse

* Stud of Colorado Game

Tyler Kolek

21 points, 5 rebounds,
11 assists, 1 steal,
40 minutes

2023-24 Season SoG Tally
Kolek11
Ighodaro6
Jones, K.6
Mitchell2
Jones, S.1
Joplin1

'22-23
'21-22 * '20-21 * '19-20
'18-19 * '17-18 * '16-17
'15-16 * '14-15 * '13-14
'12-13 * '11-12 * '10-11

* Big East Standings

* Recent Posts

Please Register - It's FREE!

The absolute only thing required for this FREE registration is a valid e-mail address.  We keep all your information confidential and will NEVER give or sell it to anyone else.
Login to get rid of this box (and ads) , or register NOW!

* Next up: NC State

Marquette
81
Marquette vs

NC State

Date/Time: Mar 29, 2024, 6:09 pm
TV: CBS
Schedule for 2023-24
Colorado
77

Author Topic: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?  (Read 5663 times)

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9875
Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« on: October 04, 2017, 07:47:00 PM »
Baby steps, I guess.

http://apne.ws/M7GF3OU

Dawson Rental

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10455
  • I prefer a team that's eligible, not paid for
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #1 on: October 10, 2017, 04:23:25 AM »
You actually have a degree from Marquette?

Quote from: muguru
No...and after reading many many psosts from people on this board that do...I have to say I'm MUCH better off, if this is the type of "intelligence" a degree from MU gets you. It sure is on full display I will say that.

CTWarrior

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4072
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #2 on: October 10, 2017, 08:05:43 AM »
I am for the one year sit out period for transfers, because as we all know we would never stop these sleazy coaches from poaching players from other schools, but with the one year sit out rule, once a player decides to transfer, I have no problem with him being able to go to whatever school he wants.  This would be a good rule change.
Calvin:  I'm a genius.  But I'm a misunderstood genius. 
Hobbes:  What's misunderstood about you?
Calvin:  Nobody thinks I'm a genius.

bilsu

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8799
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #3 on: October 10, 2017, 11:15:21 AM »
I am for the one year sit out period for transfers, because as we all know we would never stop these sleazy coaches from poaching players from other schools, but with the one year sit out rule, once a player decides to transfer, I have no problem with him being able to go to whatever school he wants.  This would be a good rule change.
+1

muwarrior69

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 5128
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #4 on: October 10, 2017, 11:21:15 AM »
What about conference rules that forbid a student to transfer to another school within the conference?

Boozemon Barro

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 663
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2017, 11:46:33 AM »
Coaches should have to sit out a year if they want to change jobs.

Jay Bee

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9021
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #6 on: October 10, 2017, 01:46:04 PM »
Coaches should have to sit out a year if they want to change jobs.

Makes zero sense.

Kids should because it'll help them as students.
Thanks for ruining summer, Canada.

B. McBannerson

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 274
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #7 on: October 10, 2017, 10:56:29 PM »
Coaches should have to sit out a year if they want to change jobs.

Why, what's the parallel? 

hdog1017

  • Team Captain
  • ****
  • Posts: 426
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #8 on: October 10, 2017, 11:17:37 PM »
If coaches can change jobs with no restrictions, so should the players.  What's good for gander is good for the goose. 

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9875
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #9 on: October 11, 2017, 09:37:36 AM »
Makes zero sense.

Kids should because it'll help them as students.

Yep.
Because if there's one thing we all know, colleges and the NCAA care deeply about the academic well being of their athletes.

JamilJaeJamailJrJuan

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7801
  • Js for days
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #10 on: October 11, 2017, 09:56:18 AM »
The risk with this is teams that play each other often have the ability to recruit away another team's best player.  Just for same of argument, take a guy like Marcus Derrickson or Jessie Govan on Gtown.  Both really solid BE frontcourt men that are now stuck in a pretty crappy situation.  Who's to stop Jay Wright or Chris Mack (or any BE coach) from saying hey man...come over where the grass is greener.  It will create a situation where lower tiered teams in a conference may have a tough time keeping their talent for their last 2 years of eligibility.

Intra-conference transfers should not be allowed.
I would take the Rick SLU program right now.

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9875
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #11 on: October 11, 2017, 10:53:15 AM »
The risk with this is teams that play each other often have the ability to recruit away another team's best player.  Just for same of argument, take a guy like Marcus Derrickson or Jessie Govan on Gtown.  Both really solid BE frontcourt men that are now stuck in a pretty crappy situation.  Who's to stop Jay Wright or Chris Mack (or any BE coach) from saying hey man...come over where the grass is greener.  It will create a situation where lower tiered teams in a conference may have a tough time keeping their talent for their last 2 years of eligibility.

Intra-conference transfers should not be allowed.

The NCAA already has rules against tampering. This wouldn't change that.
Why would the hypothetical you suggest be worse with Jay Wright at Villanova than Mark Turgeon at Maryland or Mike Rhoades at VCU?

Also, why does protecting lower tier teams from the consequences of their own suckage matter more than the players' abilility to determine their own fates?
« Last Edit: October 11, 2017, 10:55:13 AM by Pakuni »

JamilJaeJamailJrJuan

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7801
  • Js for days
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #12 on: October 11, 2017, 11:06:08 AM »
The NCAA already has rules against tampering. This wouldn't change that.
Why would the hypothetical you suggest be worse with Jay Wright at Villanova than Mark Turgeon at Maryland or Mike Rhoades at VCU?

Also, why does protecting lower tier teams from the consequences of their own suckage matter more than the players' abilility to determine their own fates?

Regarding the bolded, mainly just because they see eachother at minimum 2x per year. 

Regarding your 2nd questions, there are 365 division 1 programs.  Pick 1 that isn't in the league of the team you chose to go to.  Not that hard. 
I would take the Rick SLU program right now.

dgies9156

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4022
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #13 on: October 11, 2017, 11:08:20 AM »
The solution should be one of three things. First, if the coach leaves, the players have the right to leave immediately and be eligible immediately. Second, ditto if the school goes on probation from the NCAA for a rules violation.

Third, if the school recruits "over" the player, he can leave and play immediately.

These are reasonable, fair compromises, which means the NCAA will rejected them because they can't screw the student athlete to their liking.


JamilJaeJamailJrJuan

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7801
  • Js for days
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #14 on: October 11, 2017, 11:15:30 AM »
The solution should be one of three things. First, if the coach leaves, the players have the right to leave immediately and be eligible immediately. Second, ditto if the school goes on probation from the NCAA for a rules violation.

Third, if the school recruits "over" the player, he can leave and play immediately.

These are reasonable, fair compromises, which means the NCAA will rejected them because they can't screw the student athlete to their liking.

How in the world would you define the third?  Every player gets recruited over.
I would take the Rick SLU program right now.

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9875
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #15 on: October 11, 2017, 11:30:14 AM »
Regarding the bolded, mainly just because they see eachother at minimum 2x per year. 

And?
I mean, that seems so utterly arbitrary.
Also, not every conference has conference opponents playing each other twice. And in some football conferences, teams don't necessarily play each other every year.

Quote
Regarding your 2nd questions, there are 365 division 1 programs.  Pick 1 that isn't in the league of the team you chose to go to.  Not that hard.

That's not an answer.
Again, please explain to me why we need to protect the DePauls and Rutgers of the world from their own mismanagement. If they fail to create an environment that makes their best players want to stay, why should they be protected from the consequences?
« Last Edit: October 11, 2017, 11:32:29 AM by Pakuni »

Dawson Rental

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 10455
  • I prefer a team that's eligible, not paid for
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #16 on: October 11, 2017, 11:45:42 AM »
The solution should be one of three things. First, if the coach leaves, the players have the right to leave immediately and be eligible immediately. Second, ditto if the school goes on probation from the NCAA for a rules violation.

Third, if the school recruits "over" the player, he can leave and play immediately.

These are reasonable, fair compromises, which means the NCAA will rejected them because they can't screw the student athlete to their liking.

Regarding the first scenario, I think that a restriction that the players who are allowed to transfer to the same school that hired their old coach shouldn't be immediately eligible - just to prevent some ultra sleezy combo packages where the coach is using his connections to players to increase his income.
« Last Edit: October 11, 2017, 11:47:48 AM by 4everCrean »
You actually have a degree from Marquette?

Quote from: muguru
No...and after reading many many psosts from people on this board that do...I have to say I'm MUCH better off, if this is the type of "intelligence" a degree from MU gets you. It sure is on full display I will say that.

JamilJaeJamailJrJuan

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 7801
  • Js for days
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #17 on: October 11, 2017, 11:48:08 AM »
And?
I mean, that seems so utterly arbitrary.
Also, not every conference has conference opponents playing each other twice. And in some football conferences, teams don't necessarily play each other every year.

That's not an answer.
Again, please explain to me why we need to protect the DePauls and Rutgers of the world from their own mismanagement. If they fail to create an environment that makes their best players want to stay, why should they be protected from the consequences?

Its not that arbitrary.  Its much easier to recruit a player you're running into multiple times a season than it is to recruit someone you have no in-person interaction with.

These kids make a commitment to a school.  If they want to leave that school sometime in the future, they should find a school that isn't in direct competition with the school they are leaving.  Its really not that complicated, or unfair in the slightest in my opinion. 

That's really all I have to say about it. We can agree to disagree.
I would take the Rick SLU program right now.

Stronghold

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 516
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #18 on: October 11, 2017, 11:49:44 AM »
The solution should be one of three things. First, if the coach leaves, the players have the right to leave immediately and be eligible immediately. Second, ditto if the school goes on probation from the NCAA for a rules violation.

Third, if the school recruits "over" the player, he can leave and play immediately.

These are reasonable, fair compromises, which means the NCAA will rejected them because they can't screw the student athlete to their liking.

I agree with 1 and 2 absolutely, but have a hard time figuring out how one would qualify your 3rd reason.  Maybe there's a way and I just am not thinking of it. 

I'm split on the intra-conference transferring but I think I lean toward coaches/schools being able to block transfers to another school within the conference.  There are literally hundreds of other D1 programs to play ball at. And if it's a true academic reason why you want to attend a school within your conference maybe you decide to pursue that instead of basketball.  Playing D1 ball is a privilege.

bilsu

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 8799
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #19 on: October 11, 2017, 11:59:02 AM »
If coaches can change jobs with no restrictions, so should the players.  What's good for gander is good for the goose.
Many coaches have buyouts in their contracts, so there is a cost to change jobs. However, this is most likely paid by new employer.
Players do not have a buyout. They got there education and training from the old school and the school gets nothing in return when they leave.
To be equal the new school would need to reimburse the old school for some of the school's cost to have the player immediately eligible.

Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9875
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #20 on: October 11, 2017, 12:07:21 PM »
Many coaches have buyouts in their contracts, so there is a cost to change jobs. However, this is most likely paid by new employer.
Players do not have a buyout. They got there education and training from the old school and the school gets nothing in return when they leave.
To be equal the new school would need to reimburse the old school for some of the school's cost to have the player immediately eligible.

What about a player's time on the game and practice court? That's now nothing?

The Equalizer

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 1765
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #21 on: October 11, 2017, 12:09:01 PM »

This situation is similar to companies requiring and enforcing a non-compete agreement against a small set of direct competitors.

You have to start with the acceptance that player has significant intellectual property about his team--everything from individual player strengths & weaknesses to coaching playbooks, etc. And that information could tilt the competitive balance in favor of the team receiving the player transfer if he goes to a known opponent on the following year's schedule.

Its not unreasonable to think that a player leaving Villanova for, say, Xavier could significantly help Xavier up to 3 times in the following season--not just because of the player's individual skills, but also because Xavier will have deeper insights into the Villanova roster and playbook. And since 3 more wins (or losses) could easily make or break a team's NCAA chances, an additional edge has significant value.

You could extend this to situations where even one win could make or break a team, so its not unreasonable to include regular non-conference opponents (e.g. Marquette/Wisconsin), schools with multi-year home/home agreements, or already scheduled multi-team tournaments (e.g. other teams in the 2018 Maui tournament).

So there is a reasonable basis for schools to put some limits on where players transfer, limiting restrictions to conference opponents and any non-conference opponent under contract for the following year on the day the transfer is initiated.

And, of course, the coach of the player transferring would have the ability to waive the restrictions on a player by player basis.







Pakuni

  • Registered User
  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9875
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #22 on: October 11, 2017, 12:23:56 PM »
This situation is similar to companies requiring and enforcing a non-compete agreement against a small set of direct competitors.

Except the NCAA and its members insist players are students, not employees.
What we're really saying here is that sometimes - like when it comes to paying athletes and providing them with protections such as workers comp - they're students. And other times - like when enforcing "non-compete agreements" and other restrictions -  it's OK to treat them like employees.
Whichever is most beneficial to the institution.

Jay Bee

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 9021
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #23 on: October 11, 2017, 12:41:54 PM »
The solution should be one of three things. First, if the coach leaves, the players have the right to leave immediately and be eligible immediately. Second, ditto if the school goes on probation from the NCAA for a rules violation.

Third, if the school recruits "over" the player, he can leave and play immediately.

These are reasonable, fair compromises, which means the NCAA will rejected them because they can't screw the student athlete to their liking.

Two of those three already are allowed.
Thanks for ruining summer, Canada.

MuMark

  • All American
  • *****
  • Posts: 4298
Re: Schools to lose ability to block/restrict transfers?
« Reply #24 on: October 11, 2017, 07:49:37 PM »
recruit over is the wrong term.......you mean if a coach runs a guy off.

Any player could say he was recruited over and would if that was the criteria to not have to sit out.