MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: MU82 on April 17, 2019, 02:31:39 PM
-
We're all so Hauser-centric now that a huge story is playing out that could affect the ability of Wojo (and every other coach) to fill roster spots with grad transfers.
https://www.apnews.com/e4fbc74f9e7a454bb4f83954b243271e
Here's the start of the article:
The NCAA Division I Council is expected to vote by Friday on an amendment that would require a grad transfer to count against a team’s scholarship total for two years, no matter how much eligibility the player has left when they arrive. An exception would be made for athletes who complete graduate degree requirements before the start of the second year.
The proposal targets what critics say is virtual free agency in big-time college athletics. Current rules allow athletes who have earned an undergraduate degree to transfer to another school without sitting out a season, as is usually required by the NCAA of undergraduates.
Grad transfers can be a quick fix for coaches trying to plug holes on a roster and the freedom has been a boon to athletes looking for more playing time. But some administrators say the rule has drifted away from its original intent and graduate transfers are rarely completing those advanced degrees.
“The so-called graduate degree is really not the aspiration,” Big 12 Commissioner Bob Bowlsby said. “The aspiration is to be featured, and usually featured at a higher level.”
Changing the rule could slow the flow of grad transfers by making coaches more reluctant to take on players with only with one year of eligibility remaining.
“Roster management is such a critical component of every collegiate coach and then to say that you’re going to burn a scholarship for another year afterward, where an individual is not even playing, that’s obviously a pretty high price,” said Todd Berry, the executive director of the American Football Coaches Association.
A relatively small number of student-athletes have found a way to gain some freedom, and they've done it by -- zounds! -- being students who actually get their degrees. But we can't have athletes having a scintilla of control, so better make a new rule to screw even the good students among them. Beautiful.
-
“The aspiration is to be featured, and usually featured at a higher level.”
What a freaking joke! How dare a player try to do something in their own interest that doesn't fall in line with the NCAA monopolistic, free labor model. To call this idiot (and the NCAA in general) tone deaf, is an insult to tone deaf people everywhere.
-
I wonder...will some schools try to streamline graduate programs. Maybe create grad degrees that are 27-36 credits, enough so that three relatively simple semesters starting in summer gets them in and out with a grad degree.
-
Wow. I'm one of those old guys who like the idea of forcing the kids to sit out a year when they transfer, because I think it is better for the college game and not a real hardship on the players who don't lose any eligibility and get an extra year of schooling. That said, I liked the grad transfer rule because it rewarded kids who graduated. I would hate to see them amend the rule like this. It would be better if they forced the schools to grant two years of grad school (if the student wanted it) but didn't charge the second non-playing year against the allotment of 13 scholarships. That would mitigate the issue somewhat and be a positive for a real student. But probably the best thing is to leave it as it is.
-
Wow. I'm one of those old guys who like the idea of forcing the kids to sit out a year when they transfer, because I think it is better for the college game and not a real hardship on the players who don't lose any eligibility and get an extra year of schooling. That said, I liked the grad transfer rule because it rewarded kids who graduated. I would hate to see them amend the rule like this.
This is pretty much exactly what I was going to type.
-
Yep, it's a travesty and a power grab, as well as a solution looking for a problem.
-
Wow. I'm one of those old guys who like the idea of forcing the kids to sit out a year when they transfer, because I think it is better for the college game and not a real hardship on the players who don't lose any eligibility and get an extra year of schooling. That said, I liked the grad transfer rule because it rewarded kids who graduated. I would hate to see them amend the rule like this. It would be better if they forced the schools to grant two years of grad school (if the student wanted it) but didn't charge the second non-playing year against the allotment of 13 scholarships. That would mitigate the issue somewhat and be a positive for a real student. But probably the best thing is to leave it as it is.
Except for a few high major guys who have more unusual circumstances, the list of grad transfers is mostly populated by guys from lower level schools who end up taking the brunt of the hits. Largely a mid/low-major vs. high-major issue. Though, I have to say it is good for the guys that have graduated.
-
Yep, it's a travesty and a power grab, as well as a solution looking for a problem.
I know, let's take the people who most live up to the "student" part of the "student-athlete" ideal and figure out a way to screw them. Gotta love the NCAA.
-
How dumb is the ncaa
-
I wonder...will some schools try to streamline graduate programs. Maybe create grad degrees that are 27-36 credits, enough so that three relatively simple semesters starting in summer gets them in and out with a grad degree.
Already exists. I don't know if these players are allowed to enter post-grad/non-degree programs such as those that prepare students for medical school, but most larger schools do have them. I know you can also get a post-grad year to become a nurse, off the top or my head.
Also, I mean, what constitutes a master's degree is pretty murky, at best. Not that MU is the bastion of academic standards but you also have the Grand Canyons of the world that don't even have a reputation to uphold at all.
-
This is a solution looking for a problem. The kid has graduated - it's completely reasonable to reward him with an opportunity he wouldn't otherwise get.
Leave it to the NCAA to eliminate a reward to kids who take the "student" part of "student-athlete" seriously.
-
Horrible rule.
-
Would be a wonderful and welcomed change. Do it.
-
1. I believe the sit out a year rule for traditional transfers works to the players benefit and is fair to the original school attended. So I have always been for it.
2. I thought the grad transfer rule was also fair, in that the player fulfilled his obligation and gets a fresh start. It also helps the school he goes to in that it provides a quick fix while allowing the regular recruiting and roster management to continue.
The proposed new rule benefits neither party.
-
1. I believe the sit out a year rule for traditional transfers works to the players benefit and is fair to the original school attended. So I have always been for it.
2. I thought the grad transfer rule was also fair, in that the player fulfilled his obligation and gets a fresh start. It also helps the school he goes to in that it provides a quick fix while allowing the regular recruiting and roster management to continue.
The proposed new rule benefits neither party.
They benefit the student-first athlete who wants to earn a graduate degree.
-
Just a flip side. Under current rules a kid doesn't have to attend class or even have a grade to be eligible the 2nd semester since he has already graduated.
For the coaches/schools. They spent 3/4 years developing kids. Those overlooked by the big boys. Build your program and plan for a great year and your two best players leave. This also affects the coaches livelihood. A conference title and NCAA bid to another 3rd place in the conference and unemployed while your star is playing for a coach who didn't even know his name 10 months earlier.
There's a happy middle and I think we all agree the NCAA is not going to be the one to find it.
-
Just a flip side. Under current rules a kid doesn't have to attend class or even have a grade to be eligible the 2nd semester since he has already graduated.
#FakeNews #Lies
1) Couldn't abandon taking classes in the spring semester and still play, unless the school colluded.
2) Would bang the APR
-
A better rule would be to limiting a school to 3 grad transfers over a 4 year span.
-
I thought originally it was to allow players who wanted to get a graduate degree in something their current school did not have. Of course the whole thing got expanded past its original intent. The NCAA appears to be upset with players taking advantage of this option without really looking to get the degree they were suppose to be transferring for.
-
#FakeNews #Lies
1) Couldn't abandon taking classes in the spring semester and still play, unless the school colluded.
2) Would bang the APR
exactly. Have to certify at the end of the first semester. Now, a kid can never attend during the second semester and still play, but your second point applies (though grad students don't hurt APR as much as undergrads).
the proposal is going to lose. it was pushed by the Presidents and FAR's, not athletics.
I'd also like to point out that legislation is usually proposed by the membership and conferences. A lot of proposals involving increased recruiting or transfer restrictions, including previous grad transfer restrictions, have been put forward by conferences like the Southern and the Ivy because they are schools hurt by grad transfers moving up. This particular proposal was resubmitted by the Transfer Working Group, made up of AD's, FAR's and administrators from across the membership. The Chair was from South Dakota, representing a conference negatively affected by grad transfers.
-
They benefit the student-first athlete who wants to earn a graduate degree.
The kid who wants to earn the degree will earn the degree; unless what your saying is that the scholarship is good for two years so that the student athlete can actually earn the degree in certain majors. Then I would tend to agree with you. However, I think it should work the same way things do for undergrads in that those who are finishing their degree but have used up the eligibility are not in included in the scholarship count.
-
The kid who wants to earn the degree will earn the degree; unless what your saying is that the scholarship is good for two years so that the student athlete can actually earn the degree in certain majors. Then I would tend to agree with you. However, I think it should work the same way things do for undergrads in that those who are finishing their degree but have used up the eligibility are not in included in the scholarship count.
You're vs. your
Yes - what I'm saying is that if an SA wants to get a grad degree, too bad now - he'll be off scholarship after one year.
Under this proposal, he'd have two years to get the grad degree, on scholarship.
I'm unfamiliar with your last comments. If a kid has used up his eligibility, he ain't on no athletic scholarship.
-
I've never liked that many (most?) grad transfers leave without getting a graduate degree.
I don't think this is a way to fix that problem.
-
You're vs. your
Yes - what I'm saying is that if an SA wants to get a grad degree, too bad now - he'll be off scholarship after one year.
Under this proposal, he'd have two years to get the grad degree, on scholarship.
I'm unfamiliar with your last comments. If a kid has used up his eligibility, he ain't on no athletic scholarship.
It may be something that varies from conference to conference and school to school but their are many places that will keep funding the kid till they graduate. Have had personal experience with that .
-
I've never liked that many (most?) grad transfers leave without getting a graduate degree.
I don't think this is a way to fix that problem.
How about something like this:
Grad transfer counts as a two-year scholarship towards the roster but actual scholarship must be for the duration of the program; however, if a grad transfer completes X credit hours (or % progress) towards a bona fide post-graduate degree (MA, MS, PhD) in their first year as a grad transfer, they earn a bonus, i.e. fifth, year of eligibility (provided three years of eligibility were exhausted as an undergrad), further provided that if said grad transfer does not complete the post-graduate program, it is counted against APR whether or not they would have been academically eligible to continue their graduate curriculum.
-
Thankfully, the full NCAA council rejected this ridiculous proposal, so it's status quo for the grad transfer rule -- until some other self-serving administrator proposes the next attempt to limit one of the very few advantages any student-athlete has.
Surprisingly, the NCAA actually passed a good rule, too, allowing athletes who go to summer school to transfer and be immediately eligible if there is a head-coaching change. It's about time they stopped punishing athletes who actually try to be students.
-
Surprisingly, the NCAA actually passed a good rule, too, allowing athletes who go to summer school to transfer and be immediately eligible if there is a head-coaching change. It's about time they stopped punishing athletes who actually try to be students.
How many head coaches leave during summer school or after summer school prior to the first day of classes. Players could easily get a waiver anyway. Look at Brett Roseboro, who was able to get a release, waiver and enroll at St. Bonaventure within a few days even without a head coaching change.
-
How many head coaches leave during summer school or after summer school prior to the first day of classes. Players could easily get a waiver anyway. Look at Brett Roseboro, who was able to get a release, waiver and enroll at St. Bonaventure within a few days even without a head coaching change.
Why should they have to get a waiver? It was a good rule change that saves some angst, paperwork and time -- a rarity for the NCAA.
-
Why should they have to get a waiver? It was a good rule change that saves some angst, paperwork and time -- a rarity for the NCAA.
They will probably still have some extra paperwork. ;)
-
Just a flip side. Under current rules a kid doesn't have to attend class or even have a grade to be eligible the 2nd semester since he has already graduated.
For the coaches/schools. They spent 3/4 years developing kids. Those overlooked by the big boys. Build your program and plan for a great year and your two best players leave. This also affects the coaches livelihood. A conference title and NCAA bid to another 3rd place in the conference and unemployed while your star is playing for a coach who didn't even know his name 10 months earlier.
There's a happy middle and I think we all agree the NCAA is not going to be the one to find it.
No. The unpaid players should be able to go wherever whenever.
-
Interesting Thread! Porky never quite understood the grad transfer rule, but it's not surprising that very few of the players that take advantage of it actually complete their degrees.
It's never been explained to Porky what the reasoning is behind requiring undergrad players to sit out a year after transferring either. Not sure what it accomplishes other than allowing a player to acclimate to the new program. Is the NCAA simply trying to discourage transfers en masse?
Seems to porky that if transferring players were eligible immediately there would be far less of a need for grad transfers in the first place. Allow them to contribute immediately but limit their ability to transfer to 1 time in their 4 years of eligibility. Under the current regulations, you have some kids that have played for 3 schools over an undergrad career. Seems ridiculous.
-
It may be something that varies from conference to conference and school to school but their are many places that will keep funding the kid till they graduate. Have had personal experience with that .
No. Literally not OK in D-I bball.
-
How many head coaches leave during summer school or after summer school prior to the first day of classes. Players could easily get a waiver anyway. Look at Brett Roseboro, who was able to get a release, waiver and enroll at St. Bonaventure within a few days even without a head coaching change.
Yeah, but Roseboro was due to Buzz’s egregious behavior running him off. A kid like Braxton Beverly, who spurred this proposal, is just a whiny little brat. But, he got Bilas and Goodman involved so the waiver had to be granted for PR purposes.