I think the rules could be bigger for basketball than in football...

in basketball- 1 guy could make a huge difference. Seton Hall has a senior some think could be an all American this year. With the new rules- what would stop say a Kentucky from poaching him and putting him with their other 1 and dones?

it's got that damn Jeffrey Kessler written all over it.

(09-06-2017 02:48 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  No. I love the constant overreactions of doom every time something changes. As a fan of a G5, we get a lot of transfers from "P5" schools who either sit a year or go JC for a year. There are not enough starting roster spots to keep everyone happy at a "P5" school and making it easier to transfer will open the gates in that direction as well. The only people hurt by this are the fans who enjoy seeing a large pat of each recruiting class play together for 4 years or so.

I understand this sentiment, but being honest, I see a lot of these guys who transfer out of a P5 program go to the G5 and not live up to their billing. There's a reason why these guys were third string players at their former stops (they were over ranked out of high school, they had no work ethnic, low IQ/couldn't grasp advanced playbook, etc.).

If anyone truly cares about student athletes, they would do well to keep the probability of turning pro in the back of their minds. Based on the latest info I've seen from the NCAA, the statistics are broken down by sport. For example, for getting into the NFL from college ball, the chances are 1.5%. The NCAA methodology is based solely on draft picks, and if you want to be really generous and include rookie free agents also signed by each team, then I'd double the number to a 3% that a college football player MAKES it to the NFL. That's not counting on whether the guy can make a solid - or even a mediocre career. That's just to walk thru the front door.

http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/...170314.pdf

Bottom line is if you really cared about these kids, then the correct answer is for them to simply stay put and get the degree.

I don't have statistics for the percentage of kids who play football on scholarship who otherwise is not college material. The numbers of kids like this as a percentage of the team has to be significant. Maybe not a majority but I'd guess it ranges from 20% to 40% from team to team. Maybe it's even higher, IDK. In those cases, the REAL SOLUTION is to not go play college ball at all but to go to a TRADE SCHOOL.

(09-06-2017 03:18 PM)miko33 Wrote:  If anyone truly cares about student athletes, they would do well to keep the probability of turning pro in the back of their minds. Based on the latest info I've seen from the NCAA, the statistics are broken down by sport. For example, for getting into the NFL from college ball, the chances are 1.5%. The NCAA methodology is based solely on draft picks, and if you want to be really generous and include rookie free agents also signed by each team, then I'd double the number to a 3% that a college football player MAKES it to the NFL. That's not counting on whether the guy can make a solid - or even a mediocre career. That's just to walk thru the front door.

http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/files/...170314.pdf

Bottom line is if you really cared about these kids, then the correct answer is for them to simply stay put and get the degree.

I don't have statistics for the percentage of kids who play football on scholarship who otherwise is not college material. The numbers of kids like this as a percentage of the team has to be significant. Maybe not a majority but I'd guess it ranges from 20% to 40% from team to team. Maybe it's even higher, IDK. In those cases, the REAL SOLUTION is to not go play college ball at all but to go to a TRADE SCHOOL.

Speaking of academics, I wonder how this will affect the APR scores. Will players who transfer from my G5 alma mater to go onto a P5 school be carved out so it doesn't take a hit on its APR?

This is a wash at worst. I think there's a better argument that it could benefit the G5. A lot of players get buttsore over playing time / getting buried at P5's and transfer to G5. I don't recall many transfers "up".

(09-06-2017 06:49 AM)DavidSt Wrote:  Unless they stay at a school like Boise State that wins. It is no guarantee that they will become a starter at a P5 school if they are like 4th or 5th in line. At least you still be a starter at QB at the G5 schools.

That's how I see it too David. I think this is more likely to benefit G5 schools or at worst it's a wash.

(09-06-2017 02:48 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  No. I love the constant overreactions of doom every time something changes. As a fan of a G5, we get a lot of transfers from "P5" schools who either sit a year or go JC for a year. There are not enough starting roster spots to keep everyone happy at a "P5" school and making it easier to transfer will open the gates in that direction as well. The only people hurt by this are the fans who enjoy seeing a large pat of each recruiting class play together for 4 years or so.

Go back and look. How many of the transfers moving into the G5 from the P5 go on to become "stars". Typically those transfers are kids that are buried on the depth chart which would indicate either they arent very hard workers or they arent that good. On the other hand, the stars at the G5 level are players that played far above their "star rating" in high school. So, explain to me how the G5 trading their stars for under performing P5 "busts" is not going to expand the already large talent gap.

Look, G5 football will exist---but within 5-10 years, it will not longer be even remotely competitive with P5 football. Thats what I mean that G5 football will end "as we know it". It will be more like FCS.

(09-06-2017 03:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 02:48 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  No. I love the constant overreactions of doom every time something changes. As a fan of a G5, we get a lot of transfers from "P5" schools who either sit a year or go JC for a year. There are not enough starting roster spots to keep everyone happy at a "P5" school and making it easier to transfer will open the gates in that direction as well. The only people hurt by this are the fans who enjoy seeing a large pat of each recruiting class play together for 4 years or so.

Go back and look. How many of the transfers inot the G5 from the P5 go on to become "stars". Typically those transfers are kids that are buried on the depth chart which would indicate either they arent very hard workers or they arent that good. On the other hand, the stars at the G5 level are players that played far above their "star rating" in high school. So, explain to me how the G5 trading thier stars for under performing P5 "busts" is not going to expand the already large talent gap.

Look, G5 football will exist---but within 5-10 years, it will not longer be even remotely competitive with P5 football. Thats what I mean that G5 football will end "as we know it".

Your starting running back was a Texas transfer.

(09-06-2017 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is pretty serious as it literally means the end of G5 football as we know it. It will no longer be competitive on the field vs the P5.

How do you figure?

(09-06-2017 03:29 PM)bullet Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:24 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 02:48 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  No. I love the constant overreactions of doom every time something changes. As a fan of a G5, we get a lot of transfers from "P5" schools who either sit a year or go JC for a year. There are not enough starting roster spots to keep everyone happy at a "P5" school and making it easier to transfer will open the gates in that direction as well. The only people hurt by this are the fans who enjoy seeing a large pat of each recruiting class play together for 4 years or so.

Go back and look. How many of the transfers inot the G5 from the P5 go on to become "stars". Typically those transfers are kids that are buried on the depth chart which would indicate either they arent very hard workers or they arent that good. On the other hand, the stars at the G5 level are players that played far above their "star rating" in high school. So, explain to me how the G5 trading thier stars for under performing P5 "busts" is not going to expand the already large talent gap.

Look, G5 football will exist---but within 5-10 years, it will not longer be even remotely competitive with P5 football. Thats what I mean that G5 football will end "as we know it".

Your starting running back was a Texas transfer.

And the Wisconsin running back that transferred in didnt play a down. Neither did the Baylor tight end, the Oklahoma offensive lineman, or the LSU linebacker. On the other hand, a true star running back, Sims transferred to W Virginia to play his Sr year because he had already graduated and wouldnt have to sit out a year. Just saying that often the kids transferring in from P5 schools were not living up to their 4/5 star rating for a reason.

I think this might be it for me as a college sports fan. There's nothing left in the tank when there's nothing to really enjoy about this stuff. It's turned into such a business, but, until it actually ever functions like real businesses, it's a sham. It's definitely anti-competitive; anti-trust is long overdue.

You don't get to this point unless you look at some of the habitual abusers of recruiting and hoarding, like Alabama and USC football or Kentucky basketball and say "well, I can't beat them, so let's join them." You're essentially telling D1 that what those programs do is fine. It is not. Getting kids and then letting them go so they can't instantly play again across the field from you is such a dirty play. Ok, you take away the risk assumed by student athletes a bit...you still don't come close to the actual root of the problems. And this is just getting stale.

What saddens me the most is that these are places of higher learning and culture. This is what they do with athletics? This is okay to college presidents to do to students? I mean, it makes sense; schools turn increased costs onto the students like it's nothing without any concern, and then expect states and other sources to back them up financially. What the heck is happening? This is what sits at the top of D1 institutions. I am sad for what students have to deal with and pay for. They are wasting money.

(09-06-2017 03:34 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is pretty serious as it literally means the end of G5 football as we know it. It will no longer be competitive on the field vs the P5.

How do you figure?

Because you will see a flow of star G5 players up to P5 schools and a flow of underperforming P5 players down to G5 schools. How long will a star QB stay at a G5 when Bama is on the line and there is no penalty for transferring. It aint rocket science. The best high schools players overwhelmingly select P5 destinations. Why exactly do you think proven star G5 players would be any different given the opportunity?

(09-06-2017 03:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:34 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is pretty serious as it literally means the end of G5 football as we know it. It will no longer be competitive on the field vs the P5.

How do you figure?

Because you will see a flow of star G5 players up to P5 schools and a flow of underperforming P5 players down to G5 schools. How long will a star QB stay at a G5 when Bama is on the line and there is no penalty for transferring. It aint rocket science. The best high schools players overwhelmingly select P5 destinations. Why exactly do you think proven star G5 players would be any different given the opportunity?

You're not presenting a compelling argument why this would primarily be G5 to P5 movement. There are a limited # of roster positions and a limited amount of playing time. Why transfer just to sit behind a 5-star player? G5's don't get those guys, P5's do. If anything this works in favor of G5's. Why the heck would a player transfer someplace where there's even more competition to see the field?

Most of these kids do not end up playing in the NFL... and those that are NFL bound are likely not the ones that will transfer. Lost in all this is the effect on EDUCATION. The deal is that you play football for the school, in return for a free (relatively) education. That's the deal, and at the end you have a valuable college degree. Post college, it's a huge influence for your earning potential and success...

If the NCAA and the P5 start treating CFB like an NFL farm system... kids will start jumping schools which will negatively effect their degree... THAT is why the 1-year wait should stay in place to discourage transfers except in legit hardship cases.

Are we going back to one-year scholarships too?

(09-06-2017 03:58 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:34 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is pretty serious as it literally means the end of G5 football as we know it. It will no longer be competitive on the field vs the P5.

How do you figure?

Because you will see a flow of star G5 players up to P5 schools and a flow of underperforming P5 players down to G5 schools. How long will a star QB stay at a G5 when Bama is on the line and there is no penalty for transferring. It aint rocket science. The best high schools players overwhelmingly select P5 destinations. Why exactly do you think proven star G5 players would be any different given the opportunity?

You're not presenting a compelling argument why this would primarily be G5 to P5 movement. There are a limited # of roster positions and a limited amount of playing time. Why transfer just to sit behind a 5-star player? G5's don't get those guys, P5's do. If anything this works in favor of G5's. Why the heck would a player transfer someplace where there's even more competition to see the field?

This guy gets it.

(09-06-2017 03:58 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:34 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is pretty serious as it literally means the end of G5 football as we know it. It will no longer be competitive on the field vs the P5.

How do you figure?

Because you will see a flow of star G5 players up to P5 schools and a flow of underperforming P5 players down to G5 schools. How long will a star QB stay at a G5 when Bama is on the line and there is no penalty for transferring. It aint rocket science. The best high schools players overwhelmingly select P5 destinations. Why exactly do you think proven star G5 players would be any different given the opportunity?

You're not presenting a compelling argument why this would primarily be G5 to P5 movement. There are a limited # of roster positions and a limited amount of playing time. Why transfer just to sit behind a 5-star player? G5's don't get those guys, P5's do. If anything this works in favor of G5's. Why the heck would a player transfer someplace where there's even more competition to see the field?

The numbers flow would probably be about equal. Its a quality issue. The G5 would be sending up thiier stars where as the flow from the P5 would be underperforming busts that are buried 3 deep on the depth chart. The P5 isnt interested in G5 busts and P5 stars arent moving to the G5. The exchange of numbers might be the same---hell, it may even be more P5 players moving to the G5 (though I doubt it). The key here is which way is the quality flowing. Lets put it differently. How many quality players on your team transferred to an FCS school (where they are immediately eligible) in order to gain immediate playing time? Probably not many. The quality athletes arent going to step down---only the ones that have no chance of getting on the field are interested in such a move. For the G5, the net quality flow will be out---not in. The G5 survives by developing 2-stars the P5 passed over in HS into FBS 4/5-stars. Under the new rule, the P5 would be able to get those too.

Look, it doesnt matter in G5 vs G5 battles. Its about the differnece between G5 and P5. Right now there are G5 teams that are competitive against top tier P5 teams. That wont be the case withing 5-10 years under the proposed new rule.

Brett McMurphy‏
@Brett_McMurphy

Sources told me there are no proposals or votes to allow immediate transfers & if so, earliest rule could happen is not until 2020 or 2021

(09-06-2017 04:33 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:58 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:34 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 10:26 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  This is pretty serious as it literally means the end of G5 football as we know it. It will no longer be competitive on the field vs the P5.

How do you figure?

Because you will see a flow of star G5 players up to P5 schools and a flow of underperforming P5 players down to G5 schools. How long will a star QB stay at a G5 when Bama is on the line and there is no penalty for transferring. It aint rocket science. The best high schools players overwhelmingly select P5 destinations. Why exactly do you think proven star G5 players would be any different given the opportunity?

You're not presenting a compelling argument why this would primarily be G5 to P5 movement. There are a limited # of roster positions and a limited amount of playing time. Why transfer just to sit behind a 5-star player? G5's don't get those guys, P5's do. If anything this works in favor of G5's. Why the heck would a player transfer someplace where there's even more competition to see the field?

The numbers flow would probably be about equal. Its a quality issue. The G5 would be sending up tiier stars where as the flow from the P5 would be underperforming busts that are buried 3 deep on the depth chart. The P5 isnt interested in G5 busts and P5 stars arent moving to the G5. The exchange of numbers might be the same---hell, it may even be more P5 players moving to the G5 (though I doubt it). The key here is which way is the quality flowing. Lets put it differntly. How many quality players on your team transferred to an FCS school (where they are immediately eligible) in order to gain immediate playing time? Probably not many. The flow of quality athletes flows up---not down.

This simply is not the case. Arkansas State QB left OU after a year and went JC. He lit up Nebraska and was 8-2 as a starter in his first year of playing FBS last year. Kendrick Edwards left Arkansas and had over 100 yards and a TD in the same game. There are plenty of very talented and often more talented players on the bench at a given P5. Sometimes they have not matured yet, the coach doesn't evaluate talent well, the system is not a good fit, etc. but there are simply not enough slots for 85 scholarship athletes to be happy. Dee Liner is another guy who is flourishing but was buried on the Alabama depth chart where they sign 4 and 5 star guys to sit on the bench.

The player transferring "up" is going to have to contend with a crop of highly touted recruits as soon as he arrives on campus.

Now, it could level some things out AMONG some P5 schools if they could poach from one another within a conference.

(09-06-2017 04:42 PM)Crump1 Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 04:33 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:58 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:53 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  

(09-06-2017 03:34 PM)Hood-rich Wrote:  How do you figure?

Because you will see a flow of star G5 players up to P5 schools and a flow of underperforming P5 players down to G5 schools. How long will a star QB stay at a G5 when Bama is on the line and there is no penalty for transferring. It aint rocket science. The best high schools players overwhelmingly select P5 destinations. Why exactly do you think proven star G5 players would be any different given the opportunity?

You're not presenting a compelling argument why this would primarily be G5 to P5 movement. There are a limited # of roster positions and a limited amount of playing time. Why transfer just to sit behind a 5-star player? G5's don't get those guys, P5's do. If anything this works in favor of G5's. Why the heck would a player transfer someplace where there's even more competition to see the field?

The numbers flow would probably be about equal. Its a quality issue. The G5 would be sending up tiier stars where as the flow from the P5 would be underperforming busts that are buried 3 deep on the depth chart. The P5 isnt interested in G5 busts and P5 stars arent moving to the G5. The exchange of numbers might be the same---hell, it may even be more P5 players moving to the G5 (though I doubt it). The key here is which way is the quality flowing. Lets put it differntly. How many quality players on your team transferred to an FCS school (where they are immediately eligible) in order to gain immediate playing time? Probably not many. The flow of quality athletes flows up---not down.

This simply is not the case. Arkansas State QB left OU after a year and went JC. He lit up Nebraska and was 8-2 as a starter in his first year of playing FBS last year. Kendrick Edwards left Arkansas and had over 100 yards and a TD in the same game. There are plenty of very talented and often more talented players on the bench at a given P5. Sometimes they have not matured yet, the coach doesn't evaluate talent well, the system is not a good fit, etc. but there are simply not enough slots for 85 scholarship athletes to be happy. Dee Liner is another guy who is flourishing but was buried on the Alabama depth chart where they sign 4 and 5 star guys to sit on the bench.

The player transferring "up" is going to have to contend with a crop of highly touted recruits as soon as he arrives on campus.

Now, it could level some things out AMONG some P5 schools if they could poach from one another within a conference.

Nobody is saying you wont pick up an occasional nice grab from the P5. What Im telling you is your losses will be worse than your pickups. The occasional "win" is not the rule. Sure, sometimes Arky State beats out the Hogs for a recruit. Yeah, sometimes the a 2-star Red Wolf turns out to be better than a Arkansas 4-Star. But overall, the Hogs are a more attrractive place and they will win the talent battle more often. Its essentially high school recruiting all over again--but with your present roster. Youve presented no compelling argument as to why a G5 would consistently gain or even maintain their talent level in face of that same competition when they certainly do not consistently win that battle at the high school recruiting level.

I just dont see how this would end well for the G5. I think it turns the G5 into the the college football version of the the NBA's "D" league.