Quote:NC State’s Rodney Purvis barred from transferring to Missouri, Cincinnati
Daniel Martin Apr 3, 2013, 8:34 PM EDT
6 Comments
AP
NC State guard Rodney Purvis was granted his release from the Wolfpack after announcing his intent to transfer, but not without a condition. It is often the case that players can be barred from transferring within a conference, but NC State has disallowed him from transferring to Missouri and Cincinnati as well.
Why? Because the Wolfpack are planning to add those two schools to their non-conference schedule and would not want to face him when that time comes.
We’ve seen this situation before. Head coach Bo Ryan got a good deal of negative press when Wisconsin kept Jarrod Uthoff from transferring to certain schools. St. Joe’s coach Phil Martelli went through the same process when he reportedly denied the transfer waiver of Todd O’Brien.
These types of stories seem to draw a good deal of controversy, perhaps because of the restrictions that are already placed on players even before schools get involved with where they are allowed to transfer. As the coaching carousel spins and coaches jump from bench to bench in the off-season without skipping a beat, players are forced to sit out a season.
So should Purvis be allowed to transfer wherever he pleases? He will likely make an impact when he does land. He averaged 8.3 points and 2.4 rebounds per game in his freshman season at NC State.
Daniel Martin is a writer and editor at JohnnyJungle.com, covering St. John’s. You can find him on Twitter:@DanielJMartin_
Yep, UC is hosting NC State and San Diego State next year.
I never had an issue with schools not allowing guys to transfer to certain places. Plenty of options out there.
I dont understand if we are playing them next year and he has to sit out a year for transfering then he would not be able to play anyway or is this a home and home and we are playing them the next two years.
(04-04-2013 01:55 PM)Mark Wolfram Wrote: [ -> ]I dont understand if we are playing them next year and he has to sit out a year for transfering then he would not be able to play anyway or is this a home and home and we are playing them the next two years.
That probably means there is a return game the next year and he would be eligible to play in it. Just a guess.
I understand not allowing someone to transfer in conference but to not allow them to transfer to teams they're playing non-conference is a bit excessive.
(04-04-2013 02:20 PM)RealDeal Wrote: [ -> ]I understand not allowing someone to transfer in conference but to not allow them to transfer to teams they're playing non-conference is a bit excessive.
I disagree, assuming the college in question doesn't have an overly-long list of schools. If you choose to transfer, that's one of the issues you have to deal with as a player.
Perhaps they think the game could end up being critical to their NCAA Tournament resume; the last thing you'd want is for an opponent to have the advantage of knowing your playbook or other information that could be gathered more effectively by a former player.
(04-04-2013 02:30 PM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:20 PM)RealDeal Wrote: [ -> ]I understand not allowing someone to transfer in conference but to not allow them to transfer to teams they're playing non-conference is a bit excessive.
I disagree, assuming the college in question doesn't have an overly-long list of schools. If you choose to transfer, that's one of the issues you have to deal with as a player.
Perhaps they think the game could end up being critical to their NCAA Tournament resume; the last thing you'd want is for an opponent to have the advantage of knowing your playbook or other information that could be gathered more effectively by a former player.
I agree completely. One of the reasons you see a lot of NFL teams bring in a player for a week who is an ex-teammate of an opponent to help get a little extra scouting report, etc.
That being said, I would like to think if a player had a really good reason to go to said school (Family from there, etc), that the team wold understand and allow him to go. But with so many options to choose from, it should not really matter.
It's because UC is going to the ACC and NC State may have to play the Bearcats as many as 3 times in 1 season.....
And while we're stirring it up...NC State to the SEC where they don't want to face him when playing Mizzou.
(04-04-2013 03:07 PM)indycat Wrote: [ -> ]And while we're stirring it up...NC State to the SEC where they don't want to face him when playing Mizzou.
Even further, UC to the SEC with NC State.
(04-04-2013 02:34 PM)BigDawg Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:30 PM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:20 PM)RealDeal Wrote: [ -> ]I understand not allowing someone to transfer in conference but to not allow them to transfer to teams they're playing non-conference is a bit excessive.
I disagree, assuming the college in question doesn't have an overly-long list of schools. If you choose to transfer, that's one of the issues you have to deal with as a player.
Perhaps they think the game could end up being critical to their NCAA Tournament resume; the last thing you'd want is for an opponent to have the advantage of knowing your playbook or other information that could be gathered more effectively by a former player.
I agree completely. One of the reasons you see a lot of NFL teams bring in a player for a week who is an ex-teammate of an opponent to help get a little extra scouting report, etc.
That being said, I would like to think if a player had a really good reason to go to said school (Family from there, etc), that the team wold understand and allow him to go. But with so many options to choose from, it should not really matter.
That being said, remember when Kelly would not let the kid (don't remember the name, real good DE) follow Dantonio to MSU even though his parents lived close by? Kelly said it was because he lied to him.
(04-04-2013 03:16 PM)ctipton Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:34 PM)BigDawg Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:30 PM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:20 PM)RealDeal Wrote: [ -> ]I understand not allowing someone to transfer in conference but to not allow them to transfer to teams they're playing non-conference is a bit excessive.
I disagree, assuming the college in question doesn't have an overly-long list of schools. If you choose to transfer, that's one of the issues you have to deal with as a player.
Perhaps they think the game could end up being critical to their NCAA Tournament resume; the last thing you'd want is for an opponent to have the advantage of knowing your playbook or other information that could be gathered more effectively by a former player.
I agree completely. One of the reasons you see a lot of NFL teams bring in a player for a week who is an ex-teammate of an opponent to help get a little extra scouting report, etc.
That being said, I would like to think if a player had a really good reason to go to said school (Family from there, etc), that the team wold understand and allow him to go. But with so many options to choose from, it should not really matter.
That being said, remember when Kelly would not let the kid (don't remember the name, real good DE) follow Dantonio to MSU even though his parents lived close by? Kelly said it was because he lied to him.
Trevor Anderson
(04-04-2013 02:34 PM)BigDawg Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:30 PM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:20 PM)RealDeal Wrote: [ -> ]I understand not allowing someone to transfer in conference but to not allow them to transfer to teams they're playing non-conference is a bit excessive.
I disagree, assuming the college in question doesn't have an overly-long list of schools. If you choose to transfer, that's one of the issues you have to deal with as a player.
Perhaps they think the game could end up being critical to their NCAA Tournament resume; the last thing you'd want is for an opponent to have the advantage of knowing your playbook or other information that could be gathered more effectively by a former player.
I agree completely. One of the reasons you see a lot of NFL teams bring in a player for a week who is an ex-teammate of an opponent to help get a little extra scouting report, etc.
That being said, I would like to think if a player had a really good reason to go to said school (Family from there, etc), that the team wold understand and allow him to go. But with so many options to choose from, it should not really matter.
An NFL playbook is a little different than NCAA basketball sets (I don't think that move helps much in the NFL either, however). Half the teams are still running Bobby Knight's motion. Do you really think both sides don't know exactly what the other is doing on offense after watching tape for a couple hours?
I just knew someone would throw the realignment crap into this
(04-04-2013 01:55 PM)Mark Wolfram Wrote: [ -> ]I dont understand if we are playing them next year and he has to sit out a year for transfering then he would not be able to play anyway or is this a home and home and we are playing them the next two years.
Even if it's one year and he's sitting out he can help in practice and game preperation can't he?
(04-04-2013 05:09 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote: [ -> ]I just knew someone would throw the realignment crap into this
I couldn't resist...even though the whole realignment mess annoys the Hell out of me. It was too easy.
(04-05-2013 10:32 AM)Crewdogz Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 01:55 PM)Mark Wolfram Wrote: [ -> ]I dont understand if we are playing them next year and he has to sit out a year for transfering then he would not be able to play anyway or is this a home and home and we are playing them the next two years.
Even if it's one year and he's sitting out he can help in practice and game preperation can't he?
He could. I just dont see the issue with him coming here if he wants too. I understand a conference rivial but a non-conf one. Plus as far as i know the games have not been schedule yet so who even knows if they do. Plus I am sure that Mick and the coaches are well versed enough in watching tapes of teams to figure out how they play. I think it is getting our players to do the stuff is the problem.
(04-04-2013 03:16 PM)ctipton Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:34 PM)BigDawg Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:30 PM)Coopdaddy67 Wrote: [ -> ] (04-04-2013 02:20 PM)RealDeal Wrote: [ -> ]I understand not allowing someone to transfer in conference but to not allow them to transfer to teams they're playing non-conference is a bit excessive.
I disagree, assuming the college in question doesn't have an overly-long list of schools. If you choose to transfer, that's one of the issues you have to deal with as a player.
Perhaps they think the game could end up being critical to their NCAA Tournament resume; the last thing you'd want is for an opponent to have the advantage of knowing your playbook or other information that could be gathered more effectively by a former player.
I agree completely. One of the reasons you see a lot of NFL teams bring in a player for a week who is an ex-teammate of an opponent to help get a little extra scouting report, etc.
That being said, I would like to think if a player had a really good reason to go to said school (Family from there, etc), that the team wold understand and allow him to go. But with so many options to choose from, it should not really matter.
That being said, remember when Kelly would not let the kid (don't remember the name, real good DE) follow Dantonio to MSU even though his parents lived close by? Kelly said it was because he lied to him.
There was a little more to this than just lying. MSU was tampering with our players. The MSU was in constant contact with some of the players after they left UC.