(02-01-2018 04:38 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote: If the coaches can walk around freely, so should the kids. The fact that it hasn't been implemented yet shows there is no honor among the thieves, still.
This will happen for the kids...but not until there's a solution for schools losing the scholarship. And since there never was a firm adoption of the full-commitment from schools to kids no matter who the coach was, this alternative seems disingenuous and self-serving. It allows the "not my kid" practice of house-cleaning to remain, and by giving the kids some more freedom, also allows the school who sheds the kids to invest less in supporting them finding alternatives.
You'll still have that unspoken rule thing about taking certain programs' guys in places...that will never change.
Well---coaches do have to pay a monetary penalty. A year off was a good compromise that avoided any monetary penalty to the player.
I have to say I am somewhat sympathetic to players who sign with a coach only to see him leave a year later. Heck, with the current early signing date, the coach who signs you in December could be gone by January.
I really dont care for the one and done/high transfer rate mentality we see in college basketball. That said, its hard to say its not fair to allow the kids to go elsewhere if their coach leaves.
The problem I see is---even if a team gets extra scholarships for lost transfers--we are talking about losing not only your coach, your staff---but also established kids with experience in the program. Its going to be very hard to avoid a massive drop off every time a coach leaves. So--Ive been giving this some thought.
How about this as an option? If a coach leaves a program, the kids there can go to another program without sitting a year. Now add this----If you transfer TO a school with a NEW coach, you can transfer from anywhere, without losing a year. I think I'd tie the number of transfers allowed to "a school losing its coach" to the number of players that leave that same team via transfer after it lost its coach. So, if 4 are lost via transfer after losing a coach---then 4 could come in from anywhere and be immediately eligible via transfer.
I think that might work in conjunction with extra scholarships for players that transfer out. So, lets say you lose 6 players to transfer the year your coach leaves. You replace all 6 with transfers from other schools that are immediately eligible. In that case, you get no extra scholarships. If you lose 6, but replace 3 with transfers that are immediately eligible, then you'd have 3 extra scholarships to give that year (28 instead of 25---assuming that giving 28 would not put you over the 85 man hard total scholarship cap).
I think something like that might keep a school's performance from dropping completely off the table every time a coach left.