re: Kirby an Mullen speak out against free agency. Fear is that open transfers

quote:

---

Do they have to sit out any classes?

Because it seems like you don’t want to keep the “student” in “student athlete” because your trying to put a limits on “student athletes” that doesn’t exist for “students”

---

I will answer your question after you answer mine.

Are you for the early signing period?

quote:

---

Generally against. They seem pretty beneficial to one side.

And like I said I am against the free transfer rule for sake of competition except in specifics circumstances, but I think the “student athlete” argument isn’t a good

---

I hate the early signing period because it was sold as a protection for the student athlete when it does exactly the opposite. I don't like those types of lies.

The reality is that the LOI is a binding contract and the student exchanges freedoms for scholarships. The scholarship begins as an under-grad.

I can agree to disagree regarding the different treatment to a graduate because that is the carrot touted by the universities to compensate the athletes. "You can get your degree for free". Once that carrot has been reached, the student athlete should be free to pursue a graduate degree not offered by the current university. With that carrot from the LOI no longer relevant, the contractual limitations should also no longer be relevant.

In the end, I see anything that encourages the diploma and rewards academic achievement (do you not think the diploma is a student achievement?) as a great thing for those young men.

That is how you keep the "student" in student athlete. Reward good students with the rights that they lost with their LOI as they began their undergrad degree.

quote:

---

If they aren’t still on track to graduate after they transfer how can you say the original school has been doing what’s best for their education?

---

You are going to need to clarify the question for me.

quote:

---

Do they have to sit out any classes?

Because it seems like you don’t want to keep the “student” in “student athlete” because your trying to put a limits on “student athletes” that doesn’t exist for “students”

---

A student transfer does not need to sit out any classes.

See my post above about the LOI. I am not doing anything. The universities tout "graduating college for free" as an exchange for limiting the rights of the student athlete. The student athletes limit themselves when they agree to the contract.

I agree a diploma is a student achievement but how would transferring hinder that?

They still go to school after.

quote:

---

Do they have to sit out any classes?

---

Not exactly a valid question, given that a student athlete doesn't have to sit out any classes upon transfer. In fact, they are given a scholarship immediately even in spite of the fact that they are required to sit out currently if not a graduate transfer.

With no special circumstances (coach leaves, family issues, etc), I see no reason why all student athletes should be afforded the option of just bailing and going to wherever they want with no penalty at all. The initial school assumes the risk that you may or may not be able to contribute in exchange for a scholarship... upon practicing and learning, you find that you are not quite good enough to start but are good enough to finally be of value to the team... so you take that value and put it on the open market with no downside. Basically, you're asking the initial institute to be a "trade school" or apprenticeship program, and then act as a revolving door.

I think there are a lot of things that are *not* in the favor of the student athlete, but a one year sit penalty for transferring prior to graduation is not one of them. It's within reason so long as the cases with extenuating circumstances have room for appeal and are legitimately considered.

quote:

---

Secondly, Grimes applied to transfer to UF because of a sick family member in Fla where he was from. The NCAA allows that, again, he should be closer to his family with those circumstances rather than keeping him in Ohio.

---

See my comments above. Extenuating circumstances should be considered. Demetris Robertson in similar boat where it sounds like his mom is severely ill and being treated in Atlanta. As of yet, haven't heard whether he will be eligible immediately.

quote:

---

First of all Van Jefferson was going to be released by the NCAA because of the fricking cheating and probation being meted out, a kid shouldn't have to suffer because of what his HC did.

---

That isn't a good reason. You are basically saying that no punishment should ever be given because it punishes those left who weren't involved.

If I read up on the specific van jefferson claim for immediate eligibility, he was lied to during his commitment. And the reason why he should be able to play right away is because of that false pretense.

It isn't because punishment aflicts the innocent (if that were a legitimate claim, no university football program could ever be punished because innocent kids will always be on the sidelines)

quote:

---

The sitting out a year is slavery, they don't own these fricking kids. Let them play 4 years at any fricking school they want.

---

Yeah...u dumb

quote:

---

Do they have to sit out any classes?

---

No but you don't get complete transfer credit either forcing you to retake some classes. Your transfer GPA is also not factored into your graduate GPA at most places either. The only time you get 100% transfer over is when you transfer within the same university system and even then sometimes you have to get waivers for that. So the idea that a regular student is not penalized for transferring is at best ignorance and worst an outright lie.