Started By
Message
re: So let's break down this new transfer rule thingy ...
Posted on 9/6/17 at 4:09 am to C
Posted on 9/6/17 at 4:09 am to C
quote:
All these restrictions are in place to protect a product for us as consumers that places our needs above the players.
The product is what gets these players million dollar coaching and exposure. Probably shouldn't ruin it for both our sakes.
Might as well just call it free agency, because it's free. This opens up the game to a whole new level of dirty recruiting, among many other negatives.
This post was edited on 9/6/17 at 4:21 am
1
Posted on 9/6/17 at 4:32 am to lsufball19
Well, they would only have like a week to learn the playbook lol
Posted on 9/6/17 at 5:01 am to Lsuchs
quote:
The product is what gets these players million dollar coaching and exposure.
The players get no payment for the increased exposure and million dollar coaches are paid more for their recruiting ability than their skills development. Colleges should be focused on getting these kids jobs at the end of the day. Yes some a NFL prospects and deserve that avenue. Others aren't.
Posted on 9/6/17 at 5:44 am to C
quote:
The players get no payment for the increased exposure and million dollar coaches
They get paid cash in semester stipends, obviously a free education and meals, and the coaching isn't that far from that in the NFL. It isn't uncommon for a big program's staff have multiple former NFL coaches.
It's the NFL that says they won't take them until 3 years after high school, not the NCAA saying they can't go to the league. They are free to make a living doing what they love in Canadian or arena league instead. It's the school affiliation that brings the crowds, and the NCAA is opening a can of worms for themselves by starting to pay college football players more than the same stipend other sports receive.
At the end of the day these are kids playing because they love football right? What are track athletes, wrestlers, baseball players playing for? And are they worked less?
When will Texas high school players start asking for a cut of the profits the big schools make on football? At 16 they could have an after school job instead of "working for free" while the school makes bank.
Also how many colleges do you think can afford to actually pay their players actual salaries. The vast majority of D1 athletic departments are in the red and take money from the state, and football revenue provides the funds that allow the other students to be able to play their sports.
quote:
Colleges should be focused on getting these kids jobs at the end of the day
They are going to school aren't they?
This post was edited on 9/6/17 at 6:07 am
Posted on 9/6/17 at 10:36 am to C
quote:
As much as I hate it, the players should have the freedom to go wherever they are acedimically eligible and a team accepts them. All these restrictions are in place to protect a product for us as consumers that places our needs above the players.
Imagine investing three years in a player's academics and athletic development and then having them poached via a back door. There are unscrupulous actors out there not the least of which are some boosters and agents.
This is opening-up Pandora's proverbial box to all sorts of issues.
Posted on 9/6/17 at 10:58 am to scrooster
quote:
Imagine investing three years in a player's academics and athletic development and then having them poached via a back door. There are unscrupulous actors out there not the least of which are some boosters and agents.
This is opening-up Pandora's proverbial box to all sorts of issues.
I hate it as well, but the grad transfer rules already cracked that box open.
When they decided to make the change allowing athletes to pursue degrees that are offered by their original school, they effectively made it free-agency for grad transfers.
I don't believe a school has any say in where a grad transfer decides to go, either.
Posted on 9/6/17 at 11:25 am to IStillMissDanny
quote:
I don't believe a school has any say in where a grad transfer decides to go, either.
Pretty sure they do.
David Williams transferred to UConn ... then he changed his mind and transferred to Arkansas. Arkansas has to ask permission from mUSChamp ... which he gladly gave. There was a lot of talk about that a few weeks ago.
Posted on 9/6/17 at 11:27 am to JesusQuintana
Can schools still block transfers.
I would imagine SEC schools would block this from happening to other SEC schools.
Bama has nothing to worry about, most wouldn't qualify in good academic standing anyway.
I would imagine SEC schools would block this from happening to other SEC schools.
Bama has nothing to worry about, most wouldn't qualify in good academic standing anyway.
Posted on 9/6/17 at 11:33 am to scrooster
quote:
and 35 underclassmen decide to transfer because they're not going to go bowling ... what happens to Ole Miss? Suddenly they find themselves with, let's say, 25 scholarship players remaining on their roster after graduation and normal attrition ... how is that ground ever made-up?
Every player on the rister is free to transfer at any moment. Right now they would sit out a year. So the situation currently already exist. Shea Patterson is staying like many other players.
The only difference is that Ole Miss shite the bed and the ncaa is forcing every ole miss player to lay in it.
Posted on 9/6/17 at 11:39 am to scrooster
If they really are concerned with the "student" athletes then they should have a minimum of a 3.0 to transfer with a certain number of credits.
Posted on 9/6/17 at 11:54 am to boogiewoogie1978
quote:
If they really are concerned with the "student" athletes then they should have a minimum of a 3.0 to transfer with a certain number of credits.
Totally agree. 100%
But lawyers would strike that down in a hurry.
Posted on 9/6/17 at 11:55 am to scrooster
LSU and Florida can finally audition QB's until they find one that moves the needle?
Page 2 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News