(02-01-2018 02:08 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(02-01-2018 11:53 AM)Attackcoog Wrote:  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.

I'd be sympathetic to the schools and whatever risk they assume were they to actually guarantee scholarships universally. If you did, and the kid decides to take a walk, now you can attach governance that gives some stipulations, because the kid is literally walking away from a full commitment.

As is, yeah, there are some scenarios where the wait time is negated, but most of the other rules already serve the school. And, really, does doing this for the kids, now we have to think about the schools' risks again?!

Get better at recruiting, and get smarter with it, I say. And stop giving scholarships to kids who don't belong at your school. Or, stop with the doublespeak at these schools where one year they want you, and the next they don't because a coach says so...as in, vet your coaches and force them to keep the kids...and if not, simply don't hire the guy. Why is that so hard?

UUmmmm---the kid picks the school. Not the other way around. Hell, he can walk on anywhere for that matter.

To be fair, I actually suggested a fix that helps protect the schools while actually giving MORE student athletes additional options to move around. My suggestion was to let players from ANY school transfer without sitting out if they transfer to a school that LOST its coach. How does that in any way hurt the student athlete?