Apparently, some Michigan pundits have been discussing the meaning of the Big 10's recent support for one waiver-free transfer for college athletes. In their justification lies the true crux of the issue and that is "These schools, though, should also be able to cherry-pick among a talented lot of upperclassmen that have performed for Group of 5 programs..."

If transferring out is for the benefit of the student athlete, and recruiting restrictions of active players not interested in transferring are in place, why make mention of "cherry picking" G5 players because, well, they are MICHIGAN? Will they also vote to change the rules and allow for active recruiting of players not seeking transfer? Specifically mentioned are guys like Omar Bayless and Darrynton Evans.

Michigan Should Benefit...

Just further proof that NCAA is a business, not student athletes. The NCAA football is the minor league system for the NFL and now they want to use G5 as a AA system for P5.

It will also draw a further gap between the 2, if you have a star player he will get “picked up” by a P5 that can further his chances of getting into the league.

So, based on their practice of over-recruiting and the resultant attrition, these "Michigan" type teams believe they should be able to then cherry pick the best players from others. That's a classic case of entitlement thinking. They believe they're entitled to all the top recruits and still have a chance to pick up any that might slip past them if they turn out to be promising. I have some issues with the restrictions put on athletes, like having to sit out a year if they transfer. That said, G5 programs invest a lot in developing these players. These guys don't generally come out of HS ready to play at that high level. They get redshirt years to develop and tons of coaching in order to get them up to speed.

Here's a thought: Since we already have a transfer portal, if program wants to take on of these players and make him immediately eligible, that program would have to reimburse the players current school for the cost of one year's worth of scholarship plus another year for any redshirt year provided by the original school. At least that way, there would be a benefit to the program losing an athlete. I'm sure that would never fly though.

Ridiculous.

(02-04-2020 12:03 PM)Yosef84 Wrote:  So, based on their practice of over-recruiting and the resultant attrition, these "Michigan" type teams believe they should be able to then cherry pick the best players from others. That's a classic case of entitlement thinking. They believe they're entitled to all the top recruits and still have a chance to pick up any that might slip past them if they turn out to be promising. I have some issues with the restrictions put on athletes, like having to sit out a year if they transfer. That said, G5 programs invest a lot in developing these players. These guys don't generally come out of HS ready to play at that high level. They get redshirt years to develop and tons of coaching in order to get them up to speed.

Here's a thought: Since we already have a transfer portal, if program wants to take on of these players and make him immediately eligible, that program would have to reimburse the players current school for the cost of one year's worth of scholarship plus another year for any redshirt year provided by the original school. At least that way, there would be a benefit to the program losing an athlete. I'm sure that would never fly though.

Or you get to pick a non-starter from that teams previous year roster in exchange. :-)

(02-04-2020 12:49 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 12:03 PM)Yosef84 Wrote:  So, based on their practice of over-recruiting and the resultant attrition, these "Michigan" type teams believe they should be able to then cherry pick the best players from others. That's a classic case of entitlement thinking. They believe they're entitled to all the top recruits and still have a chance to pick up any that might slip past them if they turn out to be promising. I have some issues with the restrictions put on athletes, like having to sit out a year if they transfer. That said, G5 programs invest a lot in developing these players. These guys don't generally come out of HS ready to play at that high level. They get redshirt years to develop and tons of coaching in order to get them up to speed.

Here's a thought: Since we already have a transfer portal, if program wants to take on of these players and make him immediately eligible, that program would have to reimburse the players current school for the cost of one year's worth of scholarship plus another year for any redshirt year provided by the original school. At least that way, there would be a benefit to the program losing an athlete. I'm sure that would never fly though.

Or you get to pick a non-starter from that teams previous year roster in exchange. :-)

Why would you want a non-starter? (Thats a non-starter from me). I honestly can't think of a single player on Michigans roster that i'd have traded Darrynton Evans for.

For real though, then you get players unions involved because there can't be "trades".

Hence why this is a terrible idea.

(02-04-2020 12:59 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 12:49 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 12:03 PM)Yosef84 Wrote:  So, based on their practice of over-recruiting and the resultant attrition, these "Michigan" type teams believe they should be able to then cherry pick the best players from others. That's a classic case of entitlement thinking. They believe they're entitled to all the top recruits and still have a chance to pick up any that might slip past them if they turn out to be promising. I have some issues with the restrictions put on athletes, like having to sit out a year if they transfer. That said, G5 programs invest a lot in developing these players. These guys don't generally come out of HS ready to play at that high level. They get redshirt years to develop and tons of coaching in order to get them up to speed.

Here's a thought: Since we already have a transfer portal, if program wants to take on of these players and make him immediately eligible, that program would have to reimburse the players current school for the cost of one year's worth of scholarship plus another year for any redshirt year provided by the original school. At least that way, there would be a benefit to the program losing an athlete. I'm sure that would never fly though.

Or you get to pick a non-starter from that teams previous year roster in exchange. :-)

Why would you want a non-starter? (Thats a non-starter from me). I honestly can't think of a single player on Michigans roster that i'd have traded Darrynton Evans for.

For real though, then you get players unions involved because there can't be "trades".

Hence why this is a terrible idea.

Pretty sure he was joking.

(02-04-2020 01:12 PM)Yosef84 Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 12:59 PM)ericsaid Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 12:49 PM)CajunAmos Wrote:  

(02-04-2020 12:03 PM)Yosef84 Wrote:  So, based on their practice of over-recruiting and the resultant attrition, these "Michigan" type teams believe they should be able to then cherry pick the best players from others. That's a classic case of entitlement thinking. They believe they're entitled to all the top recruits and still have a chance to pick up any that might slip past them if they turn out to be promising. I have some issues with the restrictions put on athletes, like having to sit out a year if they transfer. That said, G5 programs invest a lot in developing these players. These guys don't generally come out of HS ready to play at that high level. They get redshirt years to develop and tons of coaching in order to get them up to speed.

Here's a thought: Since we already have a transfer portal, if program wants to take on of these players and make him immediately eligible, that program would have to reimburse the players current school for the cost of one year's worth of scholarship plus another year for any redshirt year provided by the original school. At least that way, there would be a benefit to the program losing an athlete. I'm sure that would never fly though.

Or you get to pick a non-starter from that teams previous year roster in exchange. :-)

Why would you want a non-starter? (Thats a non-starter from me). I honestly can't think of a single player on Michigans roster that i'd have traded Darrynton Evans for.

For real though, then you get players unions involved because there can't be "trades".

Hence why this is a terrible idea.

Pretty sure he was joking.

Thank you, El Capitan Obvious