- Joined
- Jan 27, 2012
- Messages
- 16,725
This should be good for UM on balance.
No...no we're not (as a voluntary choice). Not on an ongoing and permanent basis.
There is only one way for this long national nightmare to end. Schools have to get as many ICs for Transfers IN as they lose for Transfers OUT.
Any other temporary solution will do significant damage to competitive balance.
This should be good for UM on balance.
A lot of schools aren't even holding walk on tryouts. Without a season and highlight tape...Yup, ain't nobody going anywhere until they got a place to go.
Now if colleges make space for these transfers, think of how that screws over the high school players looking for a scholarship.
Same here. Reminded me of D’s post “we just got a little thinner”. He was the first to let us know that aqm and grace were out while they were still coming to practiceIs it sad that I'm so scarred I saw the thread title and expected to read about a wave of suspensions and/or an NCAA investigation?
Yup, ain't nobody going anywhere until they got a place to go.
Now if colleges make space for these transfers, think of how that screws over the high school players looking for a scholarship.
One of the last barriers to “re-entry” for guys who’ve left south Florida for greener pastures has just been eliminated. Like it or not that is Miami’s current role in the world, this makes it much easier for guys to return. Coupled with NIL provisions (presuming UM will be ahead of the curve here), we could be a prime spot beyond even local guys coming back. Miami has been able to pull guys in without these two advantages, I’d expect this puts us in a much better position to continue that trend.why?
If they don’t fix the ic rules colleges will get down to nfl roster numbers lol. Something has to be done to counteract the movement that’s starting.No...no we're not (as a voluntary choice). Not on an ongoing and permanent basis.
There is only one way for this long national nightmare to end. Schools have to get as many ICs for Transfers IN as they lose for Transfers OUT.
Any other temporary solution will do significant damage to competitive balance.
This and the likeness deal will help Miami more than most think. Miami is very wxcited about the NiL deal.One of the last barriers to “re-entry” for guys who’ve left south Florida for greener pastures has just been eliminated. Like it or not that is Miami’s current role in the world, this makes it much easier for guys to return. Coupled with NIL provisions (presuming UM will be ahead of the curve here), we could be a prime spot beyond even local guys coming back. Miami has been able to pull guys in without these two advantages, I’d expect this puts us in a much better position to continue that trend.
The downside would be guys leaving UM who are already on the team. We’ve not seen that (basketball aside) to this point, and I don’t see why this would *on balance* reverse once passage is easier. Miami will lose guys it doesn’t want to (and lose players like the Johnson kid from the west coast even faster). But until Miami keeps *most* of the top SFLA talent home there will be a sizable yearly crop of guys who rode the pine for a year OOS and are ready to return.
It could be that this introduces a degree of chaos that somehow harms Miami, but I don’t think this makes the NCAA into the wild wild west. The last 3-4 cycles have been as good of a litmus test as we could’ve had for what’s about to happen next.
Explain why please
Without increasing IC's, it's all supply and demand. If the pool of available scholarships shrinks, then demand for the remaining will get more intense. Imagine only having 15 IC's instead of 25. All of a sudden you want to make sure you've got a hit with each one. That incentivizes bags and the like.I will start by saying something needs to happen with IC's to deal with transfers, whether its you get one for every guy you lose or a cap/allotment for just transfer players, something.
In regards to HS players, it might (big assumption) make teams more competitive. Hear me out, all the top 300 HS guys are still going to get scholarships, it is not like they are the ones that are going to be left out.
But maybe some of the big boys fill up with the top 100 recruits and they cant pluck the 200-300 range which will fall to the next tier of school, thus making them more competitive. The ones left out in the cold will be the kids on the fringe of D1 and may have to go FCS route etc.
For example, I just am looking at 2021 team rankings, Bama and OSU finished 1-2 and Bama took 27 commits, OSU took 21. Bama had 16 guys in the top 100, even with transfer rule, those guys are still takes. Bama also took 4 guys ranked 250 or higher, those are the guys that lose their spot for a potential transfer and will undoubtedly find a home else where. OSU had 13 top 150 kids, took 3 kids over 300, those 3 fall to other schools below and the dominoes continue to fall.
The Wild, Wild West is officially upon us:
Immediately eligible: NCAA on verge of transfer rule change
Whether it is the start of free agency in college sports or simply the fair thing to finally do for the athletes, the NCAA is about to make a monumental change to its transfer rules.apnews.com
Without increasing IC's, it's all supply and demand. If the pool of available scholarships shrinks, then demand for the remaining will get more intense. Imagine only having 15 IC's instead of 25. All of a sudden you want to make sure you've got a hit with each one. That incentivizes bags and the like.
Also, if the pool of HS players shrinks, then how can the NCAA hide behind the illusion that they're advocates for the student athlete? There are plenty of kids who would never get to college absent an athletic scholarship.
I see your point that it could help parity, and I agree. Especially in a place like Miami where you can transfer back near home because the grass isn't always greener.
They need to resolve the IC issue if there's any hope of it not ending up a mess.
I'm lost - wasn't this already a thing (the one time transfer concept)?
The tsunami the ncaa has been running from has finally caught up to them.
The counter rule is a dinosaur that will be gone sooner than later. How we manage our 85 when that happens is all that will matter.
Agree completely. The project and take a shot on this kid picks are likely gone now. Also puts the bag schools in a predicament. Do we up our bag for the top guys on our list with more money upfront as a signing bonus if you will to cement the commitment, or do we have to temper expectations realizing they might bounce in a year and nothing we can do so our ROI sucks.Without increasing IC's, it's all supply and demand. If the pool of available scholarships shrinks, then demand for the remaining will get more intense. Imagine only having 15 IC's instead of 25. All of a sudden you want to make sure you've got a hit with each one. That incentivizes bags and the like.
Also, if the pool of HS players shrinks, then how can the NCAA hide behind the illusion that they're advocates for the student athlete? There are plenty of kids who would never get to college absent an athletic scholarship.
I see your point that it could help parity, and I agree. Especially in a place like Miami where you can transfer back near home because the grass isn't always greener.
They need to resolve the IC issue if there's any hope of it not ending up a mess.