Players Transferring

[ScriptOhio]

NCAA drops immediate eligibility hardship waiver for transfers

NCAA athletes who transfer will no longer be able to apply for a hardship waiver to become immediately eligible at a new school starting in 2015-2016.

The NCAA approved the change in April 2014 allowing transfers a possible sixth-year of eligibility. The extra year replaces the ability for a recruit to play immediately at his or her new school if granted a waiver. The sanctioning body sent out a statement earlier in the week addressing questions about the new rule, which goes into effect next school year.

From July 2012-June 2013, the NCAA approved 127 of 236 hardship waiver applications. The amendment applies to athletes not eligible to use a transfer exception and players transferring from one FBS school to another are not eligible to receive a transfer exception.

Entire article: http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaaf...-hardship-waiver-for-transfers-191437627.html

NCAA to study future handling of grad transfers

The NCAA has already changed the way it deals with hardship waivers for transfers. Now, The Association is seemingly set to further stifle the movement of its student-athletes.

The Division I Council Coordination Committee appointed earlier this month the Ad Hoc Transfer Issues Working Group to do what a release describes as “consider where improvements can be made to current [transfer] rules,” with the group focusing “on graduate transfers and permission-to-contact rules.”

Currently, FBS graduate transfers in all sports can transfer to another FBS program without sitting out a season, proved three provisions are met: 1. the student-athlete has graduated from his current institution; 2. the student-athlete enrolls in a graduate program at his new university not offered at his previous one; and 3. the student-athlete’s original university signs off on the transfer.

What the group will look into in the coming months is “whether to update the policy for graduate transfers to more closely mirror a new policy adopted last year for undergraduate transfers.”

Earlier this month, the new policy mentioned above went into effect, effectively eliminating the hardship waiver that provided immediately eligibility for a transfer. Previously, a student-athlete could file an appeal for a hardship waiver on various grounds, the most common one of which was related to illnesses and/or situations in the family that necessitated a move closer to home; now, potential transfers can request a waiver that would extend their eligibility out by another season but cannot gain immediate eligibility.

Normally a graduate transfer would have a single season of eligibility remaining, although there are occasionally exceptions. If the new procedure is adopted — it wouldn’t be in place until the 2016-17 academic year at the earliest — a graduate transfer would be forced to sit out the first season with his/her new program, then have another season of eligibility tacked on the following year if the waiver is granted.

Entire article: http://collegefootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2015/03/28/ncaa-to-study-future-handling-of-grad-transfers/

 

[colobuck79]

[sarcasm]I have faith that the NCAA will get it right. [/sarcasm]

 

[kujirakira]

Needs to allow a bit more movement imo, not less.
I'd like to see transfers from A5 to Mid Majors treated as FBS to FCS currently is, and strike any requirement of approval from current Institution.
The graduate rule has worked well by both awarding and incentivizing athletes that have completed their degree.
But alas it's a system where all the rules are wrote to the advantage of the Universities by the Universities.

 

[MaxBuck]

I'll sign on to these changes just as soon as the NCAA signs legislation preventing coaches from changing jobs.

 

[jwinslow]

Needs to allow a bit more movement imo, not less.
I'd like to see transfers from A5 to Mid Majors treated as FBS to FCS currently is, and strike any requirement of approval from current Institution.

this is a good idea.

The graduate rule has worked well by both awarding and incentivizing athletes that have completed their degree.

It has? Where are the kids transferring legitimately for academics? I see free agency signings under the farce of education for 99% of them. Of course the whole system is a farce, so perhaps it makes sense

 

[kujirakira]

I didn't mean to imply they were transferring for academic reasons... just that it awarded players who finished their degrees and stuck it out with their original school for at least 4 years.
Now if you're a player on the bubble debating a transfer, it will *always* be best to move ASAP.

 

[MaxBuck]

Many players are effectively shoved out the door by their coaches. Given that fact, it's inappropriate IMO to force them to sit a year, possibly losing a year of eligibility if they've already redshirted. Do coaches need to sit out a year when they leave a school?

But then, the NCAA has never been about helping the players, so I'm not holding my breath on any changes for the better.

 

[jwinslow]

Many players are effectively shoved out the door by their coaches. Given that fact, it's inappropriate IMO to force them to sit a year, possibly losing a year of eligibility if they've already redshirted. Do coaches need to sit out a year when they leave a school?

Of course it's appropriate. MOST youngsters contemplate transferring (to varying degrees). Without a deterrent you'd have kids transferring out left and right and schools would begin signing waves of disgruntled freshmen. That's a huge problem and not something considered during your soapbox about the discrepancy between million dollar coaches and single student athletes.

 

[ScriptOhio]

Some (local) CBS Sports guy's take on the issue:

College Basketball’s Transfer Problem

We have a new fight on our hands in the college basketball world.

The big debate has been about possible changes to the one-and-done eligibility rule and whether or not the rule itself is good or bad for college basketball. Well, a new debate has emerged over the last few years, but it’s become more mainstream now as the NCAA has done away with the waivers it was previously granting to college basketball players when transferring schools.

One main point to get out of the way early, I understand both sides of this issue and I’ve done a complete 180 on how I felt about transfers in college basketball.

Now, the reason for this ruling seems to be the continuously growing transfer list every year for college basketball in which players look to move to another program for whatever reason. There are a multitude of reasons for switching teams and it made for a confusing and seemingly arbitrary granting of waivers for some players to be able to play immediately while others had to wait the requisite year in order to do so.

This is called an academic year in residence by the NCAA and the purpose of it seems to be that the student-athlete be given the time necessary to be able to adjust academically to the new school. Direct from the NCAA Transfer Guidebook for 2013-14:

“The NCAA wants your college experience to be exciting, rewarding and successful. The most important result is that you have the opportunity to receive a quality education and take your place among the student-athletes who have attended college, played sports, received their degrees and gone on to make important contributions to society.”

“If you transfer from a two-year school and do not meet the transfer requirements, or you transfer from a four-year school, whether you are an international or domestic student-athlete, this basic transfer rule applies to you: You must spend one academic year in residence at your new school before you are eligible to compete.”

This would be fine, if that were the actual motivation behind everything the NCAA does. But as we’ve seen with recent lawsuits, the NCAA is concerned about protecting its ability to make money off these athletes while still holding to the archaic model of “amateurism” that even the Olympics (one of the slowest moving governing bodies in sports) has moved away from by allowing its athletes to accept sponsorships. If the NCAA were serious about academics, then instances like UNC, or Syracuse wouldn’t still be happening where players were allowed to take and often “guided” to take paper classes that would allow them to stay eligible.

So why do we consider athletes transferring a problem?
.
.
.
continued

Entire article: http://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2015/03/25/college-basketballs-transfer-problem/

NCAA stats linked in above story: https://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/MBBtransfer_Nov2014.pdf

 

[MaxBuck]

Without a deterrent you'd have kids transferring out left and right and schools would begin signing waves of disgruntled freshmen.

So what's your defense of disgruntled (or greedy) coaches changing jobs "left and right?" And why should they have less constraint on movement than the athletes they're coaching?

 

[BUCKYLE]

They should be paid in credit hours. I keep hearing how valuable education is and how the athletes shouldn't complain because they're getting a free education. Pay the coaches in education. Win win.

 

[jwinslow]

So what's your defense of disgruntled (or greedy) coaches changing jobs "left and right?" And why should they have less constraint on movement than the athletes they're coaching?

Bringing up the crappy turmoil of coaches bailing is a terrible argument to increase turmoil elsewhere.

If you want to solve that very separate problem, then institute some sort of coaching termination deadline that comes before signing day. I'm not sure if that solves the problem. I am sure that it should not impact whether or not kids can bail without a penalty.

 

[MaxBuck]

Bringing up the crappy turmoil of coaches bailing is a terrible argument to increase turmoil elsewhere.

If you want to solve that very separate problem, then institute some sort of coaching termination deadline that comes before signing day. I'm not sure if that solves the problem. I am sure that it should not impact whether or not kids can bail without a penalty.

You call it bailing, I call it electing to transfer for reasons individual to the athlete.

Not saying you're wrong, not at all. Just different perspectives on the issue. But my emotions and thinking come down squarely on the side of the athlete above the interests of both coaches and fans. Others disagree, and that's fine.

 

[jwinslow]

You call it bailing, I call it electing to transfer for reasons individual to the athlete.

As one who has surely spent time around 18 year olds, you must know how emotional and volatile they can be. Many players think about leaving and it's important to have that deterrent to make sure they do not cause chaos for their careers and their teams. Why sit on the bench at OSU for the rest of the season if you can transfer and start playing right away elsewhere?

Not saying you're wrong, not at all. Just different perspectives on the issue. But my emotions and thinking come down squarely on the side of the athlete above the interests of both coaches and fans. Others disagree, and that's fine.

I think it's a very crappy deal for the players and wish there was more that could be done when coaches bail (a more fitting term).

 

[MaxBuck]

As one who has surely spent time around 18 year olds, you must know how emotional and volatile they can be. Many players think about leaving and it's important to have that deterrent to make sure they do not cause chaos for their careers and their teams. Why sit on the bench at OSU for the rest of the season if you can transfer and start playing right away elsewhere?

You raise a good point, and it's certainly possible that a lot of young men might make rash decisions that they could regret down the road. I suppose the transfer rules provide a counterbalance to this possibility. But by the time kids are juniors or seniors, that "volatility" (pretty good term) should have abated substantially.

Maybe a good compromise would be to require a year to sit out after a frosh or soph year, but not if a junior or senior transfers. The juniors and seniors are likely the ones who are being shoved out the door by their current schools, and by then the athletes should be able to make their own minds up without coercion.