The Big Ten quietly proposed legislation last year that would allow players in every sport to transfer once in their careers without sitting out a year in residence at their new institution. If adopted, the legislation would mark one of the biggest competitive changes in the history of college sports.

Football and basketball coaches who have been critical of recent changes in the transfer process would have their worst fears realized -- essentially, one-time free agency would be available for all college athletes.

"I think it's the right thing to do," Michigan athletic director Warde Manuel told CBS Sports. "I don't know who's going to freak out and who's not going to freak out. That doesn't come into my thinking about it."


https://www.cbssports.com/college-footba...ut-a-year/

Completely agree with this proposal, and long overdue.

(01-31-2020 08:58 PM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Completely agree with this proposal, and long overdue.

The ones who lie get to do it anyway, like Ohio St.'s QB Fields.

Its fair. Schools don't have to renew scholarships.

They just need to define the penalties for recruiting. If you have contact before they put their name in the portal, they are permanently ineligible at your school and have to sit out a year before transferring. And the school recruiting them gets a 5 scholarship reduction and 1 year bowl ban. No leeway on penalties.

There needs to be dates that it has to be done by to qualify for a "no sit out" transfer. A coach has to know what he needs when he's recruiting and getting close to national signing date. Otherwise, these coaches will have the impossible job of trying to recruit 25 HS kids he's chasing without knowing where all his opening are---plus he has to recruit all 85 kids he already has on the roster---and he'll have to do it all at the same time. lol...good luck with that.

Screw the coaches. The rules are stacked in their favor --same for high school transfers here in California-- and against the student. In any other pre-professional field you can transfer at a whim and continue to participate in projects and activities for your career. Why are athletics different? Why are athletic coaches powers over students special? They should not, not in high school not in college.

Semipro coming?

This is so teams like Michigan can say “hey, sorry we overlooked you and you’re a stud at Western Michigan. Come on aboard!”

It’s basically allowing guys to showcase what they can do at smaller schools, with an open license to be poached at anytime.

This will effectively kill the G5.

We’re basically doing it already. Saw a stat that 70% if waiver requests were granted last year. The more influential the school, the more likely the waiver was granted.

I tend to agree in this idea, But understand it is suggested because it will be great for B10 and SEC schools. They are weak at a spot they can try to raid lesser conf teams for needed replacement players.

(02-01-2020 08:37 AM)esayem Wrote:  This is so teams like Michigan can say “hey, sorry we overlooked you and you’re a stud at Western Michigan. Come on aboard!”

It’s basically allowing guys to showcase what they can do at smaller schools, with an open license to be poached at anytime.

This will effectively kill the G5.

It’s to a point where you expect an alternative narrative or outcome from these things because the schools and conferences have NEVER looked out for the kids themselves. There’s always a benefit to the school and this is no different.

I would hate being a football player right now. Turnover and the other rules in D1, you get wooed and worked over by a program and then they change priorities or plans. Rather than do the noble thing, which had been done for years, and kept the game competitive, strong, and stable, now you just want to be able to delete kids at will. They’re hardly students anyway.

And it’s typical. The AD’s are saying they are committing to what the kids want. Right, like you get nothing out of this.

I think D1 is beyond saving. But, at this point, now I’m starting to look at the NFL and thinking...why aren’t you doing anything about this? Get your g-d development league together and adopt what baseball and hockey has already. Not doing anything and D1 doing this? The sport will be doomed.

(02-01-2020 08:37 AM)esayem Wrote:  This is so teams like Michigan can say “hey, sorry we overlooked you and you’re a stud at Western Michigan. Come on aboard!”

It’s basically allowing guys to showcase what they can do at smaller schools, with an open license to be poached at anytime.

This will effectively kill the G5.

It will definitely not be good for G5 teams, but what about lower level power teams? Hey you Vanderbilt player, you can’t win a championship there. Transfer to LSU and be a star for us and we can compete right away for a championship. Hey Mississippi State, Arkansas, South Carolina player, your team has issues right now - come join us at Alabama and get a ring.

This needs to be really thought out and the ramifications of it. Every time they come up with a rule that seems like it could be a good thing for the student athletes, there are always those that abuse the rule in a different spirit than the rule was intended to be used.

(01-31-2020 08:48 PM)Attackcoog Wrote:  "I think it's the right thing to do," Michigan athletic director Warde Manuel told CBS Sports.

A statement rife with sincerity.

(02-01-2020 09:44 AM)SkullyMaroo Wrote:  

(02-01-2020 08:37 AM)esayem Wrote:  This is so teams like Michigan can say “hey, sorry we overlooked you and you’re a stud at Western Michigan. Come on aboard!”

It’s basically allowing guys to showcase what they can do at smaller schools, with an open license to be poached at anytime.

This will effectively kill the G5.

It will definitely not be good for G5 teams, but what about lower level power teams? Hey you Vanderbilt player, you can’t win a championship there. Transfer to LSU and be a star for us and we can compete right away for a championship. Hey Mississippi State, Arkansas, South Carolina player, your team has issues right now - come join us at Alabama and get a ring.

This needs to be really thought out and the ramifications of it. Every time they come up with a rule that seems like it could be a good thing for the student athletes, there are always those that abuse the rule in a different spirit than the rule was intended to be used.

That's true as well, but I imagine they will impose some intra-conference ban.

For the record, I am against this, and I am against the current redshirt rule. A player should absolutely be able to transfer anywhere they want, but the instant gratification is a joke. There is a reason it is called a "commitment".

The G5 can be a farm league. Good thinking, let’s do it!

(02-01-2020 05:46 AM)sierrajip Wrote:  Semipro coming?

It’s interesting that you say that along with some others here because, from a legal perspective, it’s the current restriction on transferring that actually makes each student look more like a “semipro” employee. It has the same effect as a non-compete clause in a contract that could be a major factor in establishing an employer/employee relationship (even if the parties try to superficially make it look like a 1099 relationship or, in the case of colleges, a scholarship).

If it was truly an amateur sport without any real financial considerations, then why would a school care about a student transferring? We all should know that it’s the fact that the schools want their cake and eat it, too (apply employee-type restrictions on player movement but still trying to call them amateurs), that these transfer restrictions exist.

The lawyer side of me actually sees this stance by the Big Ten as an additional way for the conference to continue to argue that there *isn’t* an employer/employee relationship between the school and the student. The fact that it could also help their top programs poach talent without transfer waiting periods is a significant bonus while also creating the positive perception of students being able to have more freedom and control.

We are G5 and our AD is 100% in support of the proposal.

Quote:Ryan Bamford
@UMassADBamford
·
1h
Love this. Been saying for the last year to anyone that would listen that in addition to NIL progress we need to permit S-As to transfer once without eligibility ramifications.

In general, if young men/women are having a good academic & athletic experience they won’t transfer!

I think it’s fair.

Sure, some players will have big years at G5 schools and transfer upstream, but also guys who lose starting jobs at P5 programs can move downstream for playing time. An since the AAC is right in the middle, we will reap the rewards of both (maniacal laugh)!

(02-01-2020 08:37 AM)esayem Wrote:  This is so teams like Michigan can say “hey, sorry we overlooked you and you’re a stud at Western Michigan. Come on aboard!”

It’s basically allowing guys to showcase what they can do at smaller schools, with an open license to be poached at anytime.

This will effectively kill the G5.

There will probably be more 4 star P5 on P5 crime with the transfer rules in the future than overlooked 3 stars in the G5 who just blossomed. It is an inexact science of trying to keep a steady pipeline at every position even for P5 who get to select the best of the best recruits. There is a reason that 3 out of the 4 playoff teams had transfer QBs from other P5s this year . Look at Clemson's back up who actually has NFL scouts hang out and watch him at practice. When you are a Blue chip College Football Program you create a problem of log jams of talent and only so many players can play at one time and you typically only go with one QB so that stud back up is going to want to transfer to get more playing time and increase their NFL draft prospects. It basically makes the recruiting process never ending. We see it already in Basketball. AT ECU if we happen to land a great player which is rare and he turns into a really good player we see xyz P5 reach out to players High School coach to see if they are happy or maybe want to transfer. High School Coach says hey Syracuse likes you and next thing you know our player is gone. We have a really good sophomore in Jaden Gardner who is averaging over 20 pts a game and has a solid game. I don't think UNC is going to go beating down his door but he will definitely get feelers after this season as to his happiness etc.. I would be pleasantly shocked if he ended up as a 4 year player at ECU. ECU Football it is more likely we end up with a player the P5s are interested in so it will definitely not shock me when very good players start getting contacted through back door channels or they initiate the contact themselves to gauge the interest in their talents at the P5 level. It will always be a system where the rich get richer and the those on the outside of the country club looking in have to fight for table scraps . Our best hope is to get P5 4 star talent that is tired of sitting on the bench and are realistic they are not going to the NFL but don't want to spend 4 years beefing up the depth chart for a team loaded with talent. 96% of these kids are never going Pro so some might figure out they want to play as much as they can since it for a majority of them the last time they play Football in their lives. Once College Football is over it is over

(02-01-2020 04:11 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  Screw the coaches. The rules are stacked in their favor --same for high school transfers here in California-- and against the student. In any other pre-professional field you can transfer at a whim and continue to participate in projects and activities for your career. Why are athletics different? Why are athletic coaches powers over students special? They should not, not in high school not in college.

Ehh. Its not that big a deal to simply require that a player make a transfer decision by certain date. Its no different than having a cut off date for registration. The team has a right to know where they stand.

Frankly, I think this is probably a bad idea for everyone other than a handful of top king pin programs. Its an even worse idea when paired with third party compensation via "name and likeness" and the new 4 game redshirt rule. Between transfers and redshirts---you could potentially literally have entire rosters completely gutted by a coaching change to the point they cant even field a team. You could also incite "runs" on a schools talent by poaching a couple of key guys. Once its clear the star QB and receiver arent returning---that teams senior rich roster is ripe to be raided by other teams looking to fill specific holes. The team could literally suffer a run on their talent base simply because they lost 2 key players.

Basically, what this rule does is end the concept of building a program. You will no longer be able to slowly rebuild a program by developing high school talent anymore. All the emerging players you develop will be poached. Do you want to return to a team that next year will hope to win the 6 games needed for a bowl invite----or go to a team competing for a championship? How can you rebuild a team by developing high school talent in that environment? Even the free market allows pro teams to lock players in place for a period of time long enough to give the team and players the ability to develop. This rule is literally dripping with unintended consequences.

(02-01-2020 01:42 PM)Steve1981 Wrote:  We are G5 and our AD is 100% in support of the proposal.

Quote:Ryan Bamford
@UMassADBamford
·
1h
Love this. Been saying for the last year to anyone that would listen that in addition to NIL progress we need to permit S-As to transfer once without eligibility ramifications.

In general, if young men/women are having a good academic & athletic experience they won’t transfer!

Tulane AD Troy Dannen is also backing this proposal. I don't think this is the end of the world as you know it.