Well that was a waste

[Cheeks]

This is the same conference that recently had its media rights valued at $5 billion.
They. Have. No. Shame.

Valuations don't mean revenue.  Furthermore, the revenues that do come in, most are used to offset expenditures that overwhelmingly benefit the student athletes....the other side of the equation that you all refuse to acknowledge.

[Cheeks]

Statement from Pac12..

Statement from Pac 12..



Statement from the Pac-12 on the signing of California SB 206






By Pac-12 Conference

Sep 30, 2019
.










The Pac-12 is disappointed in the passage of SB 206 and believes it will have very significant negative consequences for our student-athletes and broader universities in California. This legislation will lead to the professionalization of college sports and many unintended consequences related to this professionalism, imposes a state law that conflicts with national rules, will blur the lines for how California universities recruit student-athletes and compete nationally, and will likely reduce resources and opportunities for student-athletes in Olympic sports and have a negative disparate impact on female student-athletes.

Our universities have led important student-athlete reform over the past years, but firmly believe all reforms must treat our student-athletes as students pursuing an education, and not as professional athletes. We will work with our universities to determine next steps and ensure continuing support for our student-athletes.

PAC 12 not alone, San Diego State AD issued a comment a few minutes ago as well.  Other schools will follow.

Maybe this will end up like the IRL and CART and no one wins for years....that would thrill some here, no doubt.

[lawdog77]

Seriously?  If they have to sit out a year, less will transfer.  That's why.  Thus not leaving as many high and dry.  It also curtails poaching and tampering.  That is why. Maybe you are fine with that behavior, I am not. 

It is a disincentive, like a tax.  That's exactly right.  It is there for a reason.  Why are we penalizing schools for investing in kids, developing them and they just leave on a whim? 

You love to keep making employee comparisons...you realize how many companies if you invest in education or training require a payback or non compete (sit out for a few years)? 

We reap what we sow, all the grad transfer situation has done is penalize mid majors, made high majors into vultures who tamper and poach...what a great outcome.

I am curious, but too lazy to look. How many grad transfers transfer up, versus laterally or down?

[brewcity77]

The NCAA is giving up the fight. Statement from the NCAA:

As a membership organization, the NCAA agrees changes are needed to continue to support student-athletes, but improvement needs to happen on a national level through the NCAA's rules-making process. Unfortunately, this new law already is creating confusion for current and future student-athletes, coaches, administrators and campuses, and not just in California.

We will consider next steps in California while our members move forward with ongoing efforts to make adjustments to NCAA name, image and likeness rules that are both realistic in modern society and tied to higher education.

As more states consider their own specific legislation related to this topic, it is clear that a patchwork of different laws from different states will make unattainable the goal of providing a fair and level playing field for 1,100 campuses and nearly half a million student-athletes nationwide

Agrees change is needed. Acknowledges they have to address this before collegiate athletics becomes a patchwork of mismatched laws. This is over. Name & image likeness will absolutely be a national reality by 2023. This is the NCAA concession speech.

https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/ncaa-statement-gov-newsom-signing-sb-206

[The Sultan]

Because IT IS THE LAW.  I'm sorry if defending the law is a problem for you.

Yet again, I never said I have a problem with the law.  If a mid-major coach abides by the terms of his contract and "decimates" a mid-major program in the process, that's fine by me.

I just think student athletes should have the ability to transfer without sitting a year - regardless of the consequences.

[Cheeks]

I am curious, but too lazy to look. How many grad transfers transfer up, versus laterally or down?

I don't know....per SI the grad transfer up rate increased 5X and will continue to basically raid mid major programs to their detriment. 

Just wait until we combine this with really big schools offering whatever they want by alumni to players for their "likeness"....cannot wait to see how this benefits schools, especially those without football or smaller alumni bases.  Going to be wonderful.

[Uncle Rico]

I think of this mess when people talk about things like student athletes and mid-majors

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/7327683/big-east-conference-introduces-boise-state-broncos-san-diego-state-aztecs-houston-cougars-smu-mustangs-ucf-knights


No mention of student athletes and how it would help them academically or how Conference realignment was going to hurt mid-majors, decimate many, really after it was all said and done.

Why? Because none of that matters

[The Sultan]

The NCAA is giving up the fight. Statement from the NCAA:

As a membership organization, the NCAA agrees changes are needed to continue to support student-athletes, but improvement needs to happen on a national level through the NCAA's rules-making process. Unfortunately, this new law already is creating confusion for current and future student-athletes, coaches, administrators and campuses, and not just in California.

We will consider next steps in California while our members move forward with ongoing efforts to make adjustments to NCAA name, image and likeness rules that are both realistic in modern society and tied to higher education.

As more states consider their own specific legislation related to this topic, it is clear that a patchwork of different laws from different states will make unattainable the goal of providing a fair and level playing field for 1,100 campuses and nearly half a million student-athletes nationwide

Agrees change is needed. Acknowledges they have to address this before collegiate athletics becomes a patchwork of mismatched laws. This is over. Name & image likeness will absolutely be a national reality by 2023. This is the NCAA concession speech.

https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/ncaa-statement-gov-newsom-signing-sb-206

That middle paragraph has enough wriggle-room to fit an army.  What does "realistic in modern society and tied to higher education" even mean?

[lawdog77]

I don't know....per SI the grad transfer up rate increased 5X and will continue to basically raid mid major programs to their detriment. 

Just wait until we combine this with really big schools offering whatever they want by alumni to players for their "likeness"....cannot wait to see how this benefits schools, especially those without football or smaller alumni bases.  Going to be wonderful.

but I thought you said all the grad transfer rule does is raid mid majors?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

You finally admitted to what I have been saying....you don't give a crap about mid majors.   Exactly what I said. I applaud you for the honesty.

I happen to think mid majors are a good thing for college basketball, but you appear not to care as others don't either.  I expect that from someone in one of the largest athletic depts in the country.  Again, I appreciate the honesty.

Show me where I said banning grad transfers is what I propose?  I don't want to ban it, but I do want to make it so it doesn't just benefit the haves at the detriment of the smaller schools.  Unintended consequences which some of us said would happen, did happen. 

The same will happen with this paid likeness nonsense, but if the end game here is that 40 to 50 athletic depts are standing with a chance and no one else matters literally and figuratively, well you will eventually get your wish.  The unintended consequences be damned.

There was nothing that needed to be admitted to. Not giving a sh*t about mid-majors doesn't disqualify my opinion that they are just fine and will be just fine. Since the grad transfer rule was relaxed, only one low-major (Savannah State) dropped from D1 and I doubt that grad transfers had anything significant to do with that. Mid and low majors will still exist in pratical irrelevancy...like they always have.

[The Sultan]

There was nothing that needed to be admitted to. Not giving a sh*t about mid-majors doesn't disqualify my opinion that they are just fine and will be just fine. Since the grad transfer rule was relaxed, only one low-major (Savannah State) dropped from D1 and I doubt that grad transfers had anything significant to do with that. Mid and low majors will still exist in pratical irrelevancy...like they always have.

Ironically, "practical irrelevancy" is the 2019-20 Scoop theme!

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I am curious, but too lazy to look. How many grad transfers transfer up, versus laterally or down?

NCAA recently said that 2.6% of all men's basketball players grad transfer. I can't give you exact numbers but I can tell you from tracking the transfer market for the past 5 years that for about every 1 that transfers from a mid/low major to a high major, there are 2 or 3 that move either laterally or move down. Now that doesn't mean that it doesn't suck for the mid/low-majors that lose star players, but it does mean that it is a relatively small population and there are plenty of opportunities for those coaches to recoup their losses by recruiting their own grad transfers.

[lawdog77]

NCAA recently said that 2.6% of all men's basketball players grad transfer. I can't give you exact numbers but I can tell you from tracking the transfer market for the past 5 years that for about every 1 that transfers from a mid/low major to a high major, there are 2 or 3 that move either laterally or move down. Now that doesn't mean that it doesn't suck for the mid/low-majors that lose star players, but it does mean that it is a relatively small population and there are plenty of opportunities for those coaches to recoup their losses by recruiting their own grad transfers.

so, this cheeks guy is talking out of his cheeks?

[Pakuni]

I am curious, but too lazy to look. How many grad transfers transfer up, versus laterally or down?

Proving I have way too much time on my hands today, I went through what claims to be a complete list of grad transfers this year.
What I found might surprise no one other than Chico's, but there are more than twice as many grad transfers moving on to a lower or similar level than moving up to a higher level.
From the list:

148 committed grad transfers when the list was compiled:
47 moving to a higher level
59 moving to a lower level
42 moving to a similar level (i.e. P6 to P6, mid-major to mid-major, etc.)

And keep in mind, many of those grad transfers moving to a higher level are heading to the mid-major programs Chicos says are being decimated. It's not all big schools stealing kids from the poor mid-majors.
Tulane picked up a kid from Norfolk State. UCF snagged a kid from William & Mary. St. Louis got a player from Eastern Kentucky. Detroit got a player from Abilene Christian. St. Joe's picked up a grad transfer from Maine. And so on.
Haven't done the math, but from looking at the list I'd say only about 15 or so percent of grad transfers are low- and mid-major kids being plucked by the P6.

Here's the list I'm working from:
https://watchstadium.com/news/comprehensive-list-of-college-basketball-players-transferring-12-29-2018/

[mu03eng]

Because IT IS THE LAW.  I'm sorry if defending the law is a problem for you.

Well it's now the law in California that student-athletes can profit off their likeness.....that should end any debate from you right, since ITS THE LAW

[muguru]

Well it's now the law in California that student-athletes can profit off their likeness.....that should end any debate from you right, since ITS THE LAW

It's the law yes, but you know what isn't a law?? That the NCAA can make those athletes ineligible.

[Uncle Rico]

It's the law yes, but you know what isn't a law?? That the NCAA can make those athletes ineligible.

Lots of athletes in lots of states going to be ineligible then.  Sad!

[Pakuni]

It's the law yes, but you know what isn't a law?? That the NCAA can make those athletes ineligible.

Then again:

The bill prohibits the NCAA from barring a university from competition if its athletes are compensated for the use of their name, image or likeness beginning in 2023.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-09-30/college-athlete-endorsement-deals-ncaa-california-law

[MU82]

But MU82 you aren't setting up the rules for an oddly specific and narrow example in which one player left for a better program and the previous program was declared devastated by a person who is paid handsomely to put a team on the floor that can get walloped by other higher level teams in the name of generating revenue for said school

Sorry. I'll try not to let it happen again.

Also, Pakuni and TAMU: Thanks for the research and comments on grad transfers. It's nice to have real facts rather than hoopaloopin' out the wazoo.

It's a great rule that benefits actual students.

Oh, and brewski, thanks for this:

The NCAA is giving up the fight. Statement from the NCAA:

As a membership organization, the NCAA agrees changes are needed to continue to support student-athletes, but improvement needs to happen on a national level through the NCAA's rules-making process. Unfortunately, this new law already is creating confusion for current and future student-athletes, coaches, administrators and campuses, and not just in California.

We will consider next steps in California while our members move forward with ongoing efforts to make adjustments to NCAA name, image and likeness rules that are both realistic in modern society and tied to higher education.

As more states consider their own specific legislation related to this topic, it is clear that a patchwork of different laws from different states will make unattainable the goal of providing a fair and level playing field for 1,100 campuses and nearly half a million student-athletes nationwide

Agrees change is needed. Acknowledges they have to address this before collegiate athletics becomes a patchwork of mismatched laws. This is over. Name & image likeness will absolutely be a national reality by 2023. This is the NCAA concession speech.

https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/ncaa-statement-gov-newsom-signing-sb-206

Change will be incremental, I'm sure. Everybody will adjust. It will be no more of an atom bomb that blows up college sports than when women were allowed to earn athletic scholarships.

I look forward to these hard-working young Americans (and hard-working athletes from other countries playing here, too) being able to profit from their likenesses, just as their non-athletic peers - and the rest of us - can.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

California continues to lose more citizens last five years.....they know what is best for the people and spending time on taking care of NCAA athletes must mean they have solved the worst homeless crisis in the nation.

Politics. Again. pretty boy.

[muguru]

Then again:

The bill prohibits the NCAA from barring a university from competition if its athletes are compensated for the use of their name, image or likeness beginning in 2023.

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2019-09-30/college-athlete-endorsement-deals-ncaa-california-law

I'm not sure if the NCAA fought this, that it would hold up on the state's part..The NCAA isn't breaking any laws(at least in the other 49 states) by banning athletes from competing if they accept payments. I'm no lawyer, but I'm not sure a state can tell an organization like the NCAA what rules they can or can not have, which is essentially what this is doing.

To me it's like the Kansas government passing a bill that says the NCAA can't ban the Kansas basketball team from postseason competition even if they were found to be breaking the rules. That just doesn't fly.

And...the kicker here may be..even if the NCAA can't ban them, who says the individual University or conference can't??

[Cheeks]

Proving I have way too much time on my hands today, I went through what claims to be a complete list of grad transfers this year.
What I found might surprise no one other than Chico's, but there are more than twice as many grad transfers moving on to a lower or similar level than moving up to a higher level.
From the list:

148 committed grad transfers when the list was compiled:
47 moving to a higher level
59 moving to a lower level
42 moving to a similar level (i.e. P6 to P6, mid-major to mid-major, etc.)

And keep in mind, many of those grad transfers moving to a higher level are heading to the mid-major programs Chicos says are being decimated. It's not all big schools stealing kids from the poor mid-majors.
Tulane picked up a kid from Norfolk State. UCF snagged a kid from William & Mary. St. Louis got a player from Eastern Kentucky. Detroit got a player from Abilene Christian. St. Joe's picked up a grad transfer from Maine. And so on.
Haven't done the math, but from looking at the list I'd say only about 15 or so percent of grad transfers are low- and mid-major kids being plucked by the P6.

Here's the list I'm working from:
https://watchstadium.com/news/comprehensive-list-of-college-basketball-players-transferring-12-29-2018/

Why would it surprise me when i already said that was happening.  I've already acknowledged down transfers....hate to break it to you with common sense, but down transfers do not hurt teams.  Addition by subtraction.  Up transfers do hurt teams.

But carry on with the silliness of trying to equate the two.

[Cheeks]

but I thought you said all the grad transfer rule does is raid mid majors?

Show me where I said that is all it does. 

[The Sultan]

Why would it surprise me when i already said that was happening.  I've already acknowledged down transfers....hate to break it to you with common sense, but down transfers do not hurt teams.  Addition by subtraction.  Up transfers do hurt teams.

But carry on with the silliness of trying to equate the two.

But. They. Help. The. Teams. They. Are. Going. To.

[Cheeks]

There was nothing that needed to be admitted to. Not giving a sh*t about mid-majors doesn't disqualify my opinion that they are just fine and will be just fine. Since the grad transfer rule was relaxed, only one low-major (Savannah State) dropped from D1 and I doubt that grad transfers had anything significant to do with that. Mid and low majors will still exist in pratical irrelevancy...like they always have.

If they are just fine and will remain fine, why are so many concerned?  I'm just curious why they have so much fear and I am also curious what you tell the team that loses three players in on season that were supposed to come back...are they just fine?  Are these coaches all liars and making this up?  Is Sports Illustrated making stuff up along with USA Today and others saying it is HURTING some programs?