Kolek planning to go pro
A number of coaches were listed, they would be the experts on the ramifications....Jeff Goodman was just one of many I quoted. I left another 20 or so quotes off. As stated earlier, most of the Blue Bloods don't carry a full roster or they have 2 or 3 kids taking a scholarship that are there for GPA inflation / son of booster. As others quoted, it won't just be the blue bloods that do the poaching as it will go from one tier to the next to the next. This kind of movement would never be tolerated in the pros. Free agency was destroying the pro sports as it were which is why Salary Caps, franchise tags, home team exceptions were put in to undo the harm that free agency created. The ultimate irony when people say free agency didn't destroy professional sports....only it was and had to be corrected. No such remedies exist in the college game. Going to be really sad to see how this all turns out.
Coaches are not experts on the ramifications. Cmon...
why not? they're the ones trying to game the system. they all have a front row seat. they know how all this works. any honest person can see this would not end very well. this is all about a big power grab
With this rule in effect, would we have continuous recruiting? If someone liked Marcus after his soph year, could they recruit him then. Could they go on campus or to his home during the summer? During Xmas break?
If they could supplement them with a Myles Powell, Markus Howard, other top players on next level teams....they can and will do it in a heartbeat. That's the point.
They sign a contract, that’s why.
this is all about a big power grab
Fair question. I believe a number of coaches have correctly stated what will happen with transfers and poaching....they've admitted it happens now at a minor level and it will happen to unbelievable extremes in the future. I would characterize them as experts in the sense of recruiting, transfers, and roster management. Do you disagree?
It will be fine. Don’t let Chico Little scare you.
Old fogies don't like change, eh?
As do coaches, dg, and for a helluva lot more benefits. Let's hold them all to the contracts they sign.
I totally agree. If you recall your Warrior History, back in 1970 Al wanted to become the first head coach of the Milwaukee Bucks. He went to Father John Raynor, SJ, figuring the release from his contract would be a formality. Upon meeting, Father Raynor reminded Al that a contract was a contract that Father looked forward to Al being head coach at Marquette for a number of wonderful years to come.Al went nowhere.The crux of my point is this: the one year is arbitrary and a rule, not a contractual agreement. It goes back to the reserve clause in baseball and basketball. At the time, player contracts said a player would have to play out his contract and could be renewed automatically for another year (which MLB took to mean forever). A judge in 1967 ruled on NBA contracts that a year was a year.The reason I propose a two-year scholarship is to give player and school time to evaluate. The player would get two years contractually and then would be free to do as he/she wishes at the end of two years. The school could then either do a second two-year scholarship or the player could go to another school and play immediately.In the case of the Baby Hauser, he'd be playing for Michigan State this semester because his two years were up in December.I also believe the NCAA could structure this so that the contract counts against total scholarships, whether the student-athlete stays or not. So if you have a Henry Ellenson, you have a second year with one less scholarship because you blew it on Henry. Cuts down on the one-and-done cases.
No, I think they are thinking about what the potential pitfalls are going to be, something that many are not and don’t seem to care about. Many questions about negative possibilities are answered like you have answered and not really helpful to the dialogue. Many in fact want half measures instead of true free agency and capitalism and are therefore “chicken littles” themselves.I believe this all will happen whether we like it or not. It would be better if people on both sides of the argument could actually see both sides of it and could discuss the best way to solve it without being condescending. Because it’s apparent the majority of people have not fully thought this through to its conclusion.
No
So, you classify them as experts because they state what you already believe?What if there are other coaches, ADs, etc who state the opposite of these coaches? Are those opposing also considered experts?What about current or former players?I'm just trying to figure out what makes someone an expert
A student-athlete is allowed to transfer once without sitting out a year. That’s the proposal being discussed. You can’t transfer without penalty after that. Will the transfer rate increase? Yes. Will some players leaving hurt programs? Absolutely. Will some go to blue bloods? Absolutely. Will some transfer down? Absolutely. This will not kill college basketball. Coaches love to talk family and team and creating a culture. If they accomplish these things, their program will be successful and retain players. For too many, these things are just lip service.I’m all for guidelines establishing a timeframe for these one time transfers. Kids leaving in season or say after a certain date after the season have to sit a year. This is fair. There are options.
A school believes in a kid and gives them a 4 year scholarship and develops the kid....now the kid ups and leaves. Companies have policies / contracts if they develop someone (pay for their MBA) and the employee leaves early the employee must pay back the company. If the kid has to reimburse the school, I’m open to this.There are going to be so many roster changes that some schools instead of losing 3 or 4 kids could lose 7+ with no fault of their own....all because they had the audacity to take chances on kids that then blew up. If you don’t think that isn’t going to destroy programs and set fan bases in revolt you are kidding yourself.