Umm-limited Transfer Rule

The buy outs vary from coach to coach. Players have not had to repay their scholarship money and they shouldn't have to. They performed on their one year scholarship. Did you know the scholarships are annual? No 4 year rides. A lot of one year schoolies renewed 2-3-4 times. (bc of covid or injury) Not everyone knows that.
There was a trend to move scholarships to a multiple-year model, for the duration of eligibility. A lot of public criticism of coaches running off players who weren’t stars after a few seasons, to be replaced by incoming recruits. I’m not sure which conferences adopted this model, if any.
 
Advertisement
I think what might be underestimated here in relation to the marquee kids is the potential for NIL deals to actually have bite. A kid might take a real financial hit and/or be rendered unable to sign any new deals at new schools if he signed a strongly worded deal at the previous school.

I also think this might be where the pendulum swings a little back toward the institutions and away from player empowerment both in the legal system and with public opinion. A signed deal is much easier for a court to favor and a signed contract is something fans like to impose their own (often faux) "ethics" upon in saying it needs to be honored or enforced.
IIRC some NIL deals with collectives were exclusive, even if technically not linked to a school. So a kid signing with the Tennessee Collective opts to transfer to Arizona, for example, suddenly sees his NIL earning vanish because he is no longer useful to the Collective.
 


psych-psych-woody.gif
Even better, multiple transfers within season.
 
IIRC some NIL deals with collectives were exclusive, even if technically not linked to a school. So a kid signing with the Tennessee Collective opts to transfer to Arizona, for example, suddenly sees his NIL earning vanish because he is no longer useful to the Collective.
Right. From what I remember, if Nico transfers to USC his NIL rights remains with the Tennessee Collective, and he gets nothing thereafter.
 
Every player wanting to transfer needs a team to transfer to. As long as the rosters are limited, no problem.

I’m in favor of a reduction from 85 to 80 and then to 75, over time.
That's the final shoe to drop.

Unlimited rosters.
 
Advertisement
Florida high schools have been like this for years.
 
There is a lot to take from that but the main takeaway for me from an academic standpoint is why would a kid keep bouncing from one school to another? I mean if your goal is to eventually graduate, then you are wasting a lot of time and effort. From a football perspective, you could have for an example a star like a Jordan Addison say "you know what, USC isnt what I expected. I think I'll go back to PA and enroll at Pedo State. Lots of possibilities and it appears a lot more good than bad, IMO

Then again, it may be NCAA trying to prove they are still important. They are sill maggots in a trash can with the king maggot stepping down soon.
Kids who consider multiple transfers are probabaly less interested in graduating that getting the best playing opportunities.
 
Back
Top