forums

Major potential rule change - Transfers eligible immediately

Absolutely terrible idea.

Anyone that is in favor of it now won't be after Bama and a few other schools are taking all the top players from every other team in the country. And by "taking" them, I mean paying them.
 
Advertisement
Meat said:
crimson_cane said:
Fans are free market capitalist except for when it comes to sports.
Click to expand...

You want to watch professional football, there's a league for that. It's called the NFL. Go watch that.
Click to expand...

Umm that's not a free market either and in some ways the NFL can be just as restrictive for players. At least in college you can pick which team you want to play for while in the NFL the team initially picks you. Then you are basically forced to sign a boiler plate contract that keeps you with the team for 3-5 years.

So now what's your point?
 
I don't know whether it's a great idea, there are way too many variables at play and I'm not smart enough to weigh them all. But can we stop acting like the world will set on fire if this happens. Schools, players, coaches, and AD's would adapt. Some schools would suffer from it, some schools would benefit.
 
CanesFan23 said:
Absolutely terrible idea.

Anyone that is in favor of it now won't be after Bama and a few other schools are taking all the top players from every other team in the country. And by "taking" them, I mean paying them.
Click to expand...

This
 
Advertisement
Liberty City El said:
My take on it is, I don't necessarily like it, but I don't hate it either.

If College sports truly is amateurism, it doesn't make much sense to force a kid to sit out a whole season just because he transferred.

It definitely opens up the door for kids to leave a lot faster for not getting PT, but they do that anyway & in all reality, those players won't be convinced regardless of what you say to'em.

It's usually better for your locker room to get guys outta there with that type of a mentality in the first place.

We tend to look at this stuff as always negative to Miami, but the same pros & cons benefit every program, we could benefit from this rule just as much as it could potentially cause problems.

It's all really just about how your Coach runs the program to begin with. Bama has a bunch of transfers every year & kids still line up around the block to sign with them.

This will affect middle of the road teams, for top programs it won't really matter overall.
Click to expand...

Any other kid on a scholarship that isn't athletic can transfer and start doing whatever around their talent or passion right away. They can also make bank if they wanted without anyone questioning it. To me same thing even if we don't like it.

Personally, considering how much talent comes out of South Florida, I think all and all we gain more than we lose with others wanting to come back home mitigating people who decide to leave.
 
Advertisement
My initial thought was also that I didn't like it. I also worry about a huge upsurge in transfers and an attempt being made to create "super teams" through transfers. God no please no NBA menality created in our college football!!
 
GPA requirement is key.

It should be like a 3.5 GPA across ~75 Credits. That could be a real incentive to do well, and would mean its extending grad transfers to Jr / High achieving So, not a free for all.
 
The rule should stay the same with one exception. If a coach leaves before his contract is finished, then the players get to transfer without having to sit out. What Herman did at Houston is a perfect example. You can't force kids to stay at a school for 3-4 years when the coach only sticks for one.

Otherwise keep the rule as is. Free agency while good for the players has made professional sports in general worse. The amount of turnover is ridiculous. There isn't any continuity.

Imagine a Cane that one year talks about hating the Noles then the next year he's playing for them. **** ain't right.
 
Advertisement
Can't see this being good for the college game without some limiting controls built in. If in fact kids are currently getting "bags" to sign with certain programs, those programs will just continue to buy the kids they want each year by dropping more bags. I can see some circumstances where kids should be able to transfer without a sit out penalty, like head coach leaves or sanctions come down, and when a kid transfers he should be able to go wherever he wants, but total freedom to transfer whenever with no penalty invites more under the table payments as schools strive to cash in on talent. Sort of like baseball with no salary cap. Rich will get richer and college game will suffer.
 
Marky Mark and the NCAA Funky Bunch will do whatever the P5 powers, i.e. their conference bosses like Delaney, and the the $chool$ in charge ('Bama, O$Uck, LSU, Oregon, etc.) want on the football side...And what makes the most money for them in March.

Competitive balance? Equity? :ttdG2M10mxVZxan.jpg This is the NCAA, remember?
 
Advertisement
ACC:ACC - James Coley - Leaves OC job at FSU to become OC at Miami
SEC:SEC - Tommy Tuberville - Leaves Head Coach job at Ole Miss to take Head Coach job at Auburn
SEC:SEC - Will Muschamp - Florida Head Coach to Auburn DC to South Carolina HC in 2 years
PAC12:pAC12 - Steve Sarkisian - USC OC to Washington Head Coach to USC Head Coach
BIG10:BIG10 - Larry Johnson - DL coach at PSU to DL coach at OSU
BIG12:BIG12 - Kevin Sumlin - TxA&M to OK

Examples above of coaches who've taken jobs in the same conference as their next job. But athletes can't transfer in conference? Ridiculous!

"...Kansas State blocked all 35 of the sophomore’s (Core Sutton) potential transfer destinations, including D-II and FCS schools. When he appealed, the university stood by Snyder’s decision. In his interview, Sutton said that Snyder did not hint that he would block his release in their initial conversation on the matter. It was only when the school notified him that all 35 requests had been denied that he realized Snyder’s intentions."

That has to stop. Eliminate the restrictions on the kids and it will make the game even better and the student athletes.
 
Last edited:
NVA CANE said:
The rule should stay the same with one exception. If a coach leaves before his contract is finished, then the players get to transfer without having to sit out. What Herman did at Houston is a perfect example. You can't force kids to stay at a school for 3-4 years when the coach only sticks for one.

Otherwise keep the rule as is. Free agency while good for the players has made professional sports in general worse. The amount of turnover is ridiculous. There isn't any continuity.

Imagine a Cane that one year talks about hating the Noles then the next year he's playing for them. **** ain't right.
Click to expand...

So, if a coach leaves and there is a mass transfer of players, the next coach is stuck filling up the roster with walk-ons? Can they transfer to the coaches new destination?
Does the ****ed team get extra scholarships in the next cycle? Slippery slope. Coaches could really **** over a program badly and not even have to be Al Golden.
 
This would destroy college football.

Not a fan of the restrictions on where a player can transfer though.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top