Transfer rule changes

[Class71]

Love it!  Now they just have to get rid of the GPA requirement.

How about we also drop all course requirements and call it the NCAA semi-pro league? We can keep the college logos, however.

[GGGG]

How about we also drop all course requirements and call it the NCAA semi-pro league? We can keep the college logos, however.

So in other words, call it what it pretty much is? 

[Jay Bee]

So? If they were forced to sit out a year they would still get a scholarship at their new school. Why does "end education or do" matter? Transfers sitting out is not supposed to be about keeping people from transferring, its supposed to be about benefiting the athlete's academics. No group needs that benefit more than JUCO transfers.

I don't know that I find this compelling. Data supports that transfers struggle more than others.

A primary reason for a transfer *should be* academics. For some, it's a cry for help on their academics. "I believe this new school will be beneficial to me academically.... Help please." So let's help. Sit out a year. It's cool, you can still be on full scholarship. But, take your take and get acclimated.

Transfers should be changing schools because of an academic benefit.

JUCOs and freshmen change schools because it's a whole different animal... high school is done, time to go to college.. done with, or want to elevate from, a 2-year school to go to a 4-year. It's not a change driven by struggles or concerns at the previous school. Transfers are.

[Benny B]

I don't know that I find this compelling. Data supports that transfers struggle more than others.

A primary reason for a transfer *should be* academics. For some, it's a cry for help on their academics. "I believe this new school will be beneficial to me academically.... Help please." So let's help. Sit out a year. It's cool, you can still be on full scholarship. But, take your take and get acclimated.

Transfers should be changing schools because of an academic benefit.

JUCOs and freshmen change schools because it's a whole different animal... high school is done, time to go to college.. done with, or want to elevate from, a 2-year school to go to a 4-year. It's not a change driven by struggles or concerns at the previous school. Transfers are.

This is a good point... when things are going well, change is eschewed; when things aren't going so well, change is sought.  Now that might apply to apply to academics just as easily as it could apply to athletics or health or romance.  And of course, some people just want a change of scenery for no reason whatsoever.

I wouldn't have a problem with waiving a residency year provided the athlete clears some sort of academic threshold... not just minimum progress required by NCAA, but something that demonstrates enough acumen to put any question about academics to rest.  For example, if a transfer has a 3.0 GPA, has completed 15 credits for each semester he's been in school, and would still be on track to graduate in four years at the new institution (because sometimes graduation requirements may differ from school to school), residency is waived.

Frankly, I think the people being penalized the most by the current rules are transfers who may be on track to graduate in four years, but are forced to either a) delay graduation for a year or b) transfer to yet another school (grad transfer) just to get your fourth year of eligibility.  If there's no question that you're going to graduate in four years, you should be able to exhaust your eligibility in four years regardless of where you first enrolled or graduated.

[UNC Eagle]

A selection of impact transfers this season.
https://www.fanragsports.com/rothstein-20-impact-transfers-2017-18-season/

[MU82]

I don't know that I find this compelling. Data supports that transfers struggle more than others.

A primary reason for a transfer *should be* academics. For some, it's a cry for help on their academics. "I believe this new school will be beneficial to me academically.... Help please." So let's help. Sit out a year. It's cool, you can still be on full scholarship. But, take your take and get acclimated.

Transfers should be changing schools because of an academic benefit.

JUCOs and freshmen change schools because it's a whole different animal... high school is done, time to go to college.. done with, or want to elevate from, a 2-year school to go to a 4-year. It's not a change driven by struggles or concerns at the previous school. Transfers are.

Again ... what about the kid who is "forced" to transfer due to being Buzz-cut, Pole-axed, Creaned, etc.?

What if he's a good student and a model citizen who doesn't need "help" acclimating? He simply had to go because the coach recruited over him and "strongly suggested" he "consider his options."

That kid has to sit out a freakin' year? Really? Great rule!

[DCHoopster]

What about if Brandon Bailey does not show up?

[Jay Bee]

Again ... what about the kid who is "forced" to transfer due to being Buzz-cut, Pole-axed, Creaned, etc.?

What if he's a good student and a model citizen who doesn't need "help" acclimating? He simply had to go because the coach recruited over him and "strongly suggested" he "consider his options."

That kid has to sit out a freakin' year? Really? Great rule!

Non renewals due to performance or ability aren't OK per existing Bylaws. If the academics are important, you can stay. 

[wadesworld]

What about if Brandon Bailey does not show up?

Then he's not a transfer and can play wherever he ends up.

[MU82]

Non renewals due to performance or ability aren't OK per existing Bylaws. If the academics are important, you can stay.

Huh? Not sure what you mean by this.

[CTWarrior]

I think this part is completely overblown.

Does anyone have an example of a situation where a team got a new arena and the program as a whole measurably improved?

UConn and Gampel Pavillion in 1990?  Calhoun had more to do with it, but program is night and day since Gampel opened. 

[B. McBannerson]

So in other words, call it what it pretty much is?

??

Except it isn't.  Virtually no one on the women's side of the ledger, and same for most on the men's side for collegiate sports.  Even basketball and football, 1.5% are going to get paid after college playing ball.

[brewcity77]

Even basketball and football, 1.5% are going to get paid after college playing ball.

1.5% in basketball? Maybe that percentage makes the NBA, but then factor in the 90 new two-way roster spots, all the NBADL teams, and the hundreds of teams overseas and that figure is way, way higher.

Unless you mean to say guys like Joe Chapman, Dwight Burke, and Jake Thomas, all of whom got paid playing after college, are part of that elite 1.5%.

[Benny B]

Huh? Not sure what you mean by this.

I think it means that you can't cite performance/ability as the reason for a non-renewal, which, in theory, means that if a coach was going to non-renew a player who doesn't want to leave, you may have to offer a scholarship to allow for the student to matriculate, i.e. you can't non-renew a redshirt senior who only has a semester left until graduation before the start of his fifth year. 

Now in reality, the student-athlete wants to play, so he's likely going to move on if he has more than a year left, but this is why I am always skeptical about graduate transfers in basketball; I'm not saying that basketball players are dumb, but to keep a D-I basketball schedule and graduate in 3-1/2 years is quite the feat... hell it's quite the feat for any student to do that.  I get that these guys have tutors and probably take courses during the summer months, and I would think that having a couple accomplish this in any given year would be reasonable, but it seems like a couple dozen do it every year.  Occam's razor would suggest they're being "fast-tracked" through academics.

So what's worse... being "cut" from a team (i.e. having your scholarship revoked because you're not good enough) or being shuffled out the door with a degree even though you were shorted on your education?

[wadesworld]

I think it means that you can't cite performance/ability as the reason for a non-renewal, which, in theory, means that if a coach was going to non-renew a player who doesn't want to leave, you may have to offer a scholarship to allow for the student to matriculate, i.e. you can't non-renew a redshirt senior who only has a semester left until graduation before the start of his fifth year. 

Now in reality, the student-athlete wants to play, so he's likely going to move on if he has more than a year left, but this is why I am always skeptical about graduate transfers in basketball; I'm not saying that basketball players are dumb, but to keep a D-I basketball schedule and graduate in 3-1/2 years is quite the feat... hell it's quite the feat for any student to do that.  I get that these guys have tutors and probably take courses during the summer months, and I would think that having a couple accomplish this in any given year would be reasonable, but it seems like a couple dozen do it every year.  Occam's razor would suggest they're being "fast-tracked" through academics.

So what's worse... being "cut" from a team (i.e. having your scholarship revoked because you're not good enough) or being shuffled out the door with a degree even though you were shorted on your education?

I think a lot of graduate transfers are guys who redshirted for one reason or another (injury, transfer, development) and are going into their 5th year of college.  Like Duane, Carlino, Katin, etc.

[Benny B]

I think a lot of graduate transfers are guys who redshirted for one reason or another (injury, transfer, development) and are going into their 5th year of college.  Like Duane, Carlino, Katin, etc.

That could very well be the case.  I guess I'm not taking note of all of the g-transfer situations... most of them probably are redshirts/transfers.

[B. McBannerson]

1.5% in basketball? Maybe that percentage makes the NBA, but then factor in the 90 new two-way roster spots, all the NBADL teams, and the hundreds of teams overseas and that figure is way, way higher.

Unless you mean to say guys like Joe Chapman, Dwight Burke, and Jake Thomas, all of whom got paid playing after college, are part of that elite 1.5%.

Great points Brewcity77.

For football, it is indeed 1.5% per the NCAA.  There are over 70,000 college football players at the various divisions, and only about 16K are draft eligible each year.  250 on average were drafted per the NCAA.  They came up with a 1.5% number

For college basketball, over 18,000 student athletes at the various divisions.  For the NBA, the % that are drafted is 1.1% of the draft eligible ~4000 student athletes.  Again, this is all per the NCAA.   However, when you add overseas, as you suggest, the number is going to be higher.  I should have been more clear with my language.

Thank you for the additional points.