New Transfer Rule on the verge of passing

[fordham96]

So it will be a one time NO penalty transfer (no sit year).  There will be some cutoff dates to qualify except if a coach is fired or leaves (after the cutoff date) then an exception can be made.

Also interesting, conferences will need to get in line with the new rule with regards to intra-conference transfers.  I assume with regards to the BE that means they will have to get rid of their rule that forbids it altogether.  But not sure on that.

[URL]https://www.si.com/college/2021/04/01/ncaa-transfer-rule-change-no-penalty[/URL]Intra-conference transfers are another sticking point. Many leagues force players to sit a year when moving from one conference school to another. Conferences would have to adjust their own rules to mirror the NCAA’s new change. At least at one conference, the ACC, already lifted its intra-conference transfer rule earlier this year. The Pac-12 did so in 2019. 

 

[MCNPA]

I think this is reasonable.  I still prefer avoiding intro-conference transfers if possible and hope that remains as per each conferences. I assume they’d have to sit out if wanting to transfer a second time.  

 

[beast of the east]

So it will be a one time NO penalty transfer (no sit year).  There will be some cutoff dates to qualify except if a coach is fired or leaves (after the cutoff date) then an exception can be made.

Also interesting, conferences will need to get in line with the new rule with regards to intra-conference transfers.  I assume with regards to the BE that means they will have to get rid of their rule that forbids it altogether.  But not sure on that.

[URL]https://www.si.com/college/2021/04/01/ncaa-transfer-rule-change-no-penalty[/URL]Intra-conference transfers are another sticking point. Many leagues force players to sit a year when moving from one conference school to another. Conferences would have to adjust their own rules to mirror the NCAA’s new change. At least at one conference, the ACC, already lifted its intra-conference transfer rule earlier this year. The Pac-12 did so in 2019. 

The dates are what will make this thing more workable in future years.    With so many exercising this year, and for many it won't work out so well, perhaps next year's group will be much smaller.

 

[NCJohnnie]

I'm good with the one time free transfer rule; also like the May 1 notification date absent a subsequent coaching change. Hope this passes as it is imho a very good compromise between some needed flexibility/freedom for athletes and some stability for the sport(s).

 

[beast of the east]

I'm good with the one time free transfer rule; also like the May 1 notification date absent a subsequent coaching change. Hope this passes as it is imho a very good compromise between some needed flexibility/freedom for athletes and some stability for the sport(s).

I do like the idea of flexibility for student athletes, but perhaps then that the idea of a 4 year scholarship be awarded annually. .  Maybe athletes are guaranteed as many years of scholarship as they are willing to commit to without having a no-sit transfer.  It would give schools a much better idea of who they can count on to stick around.

 

[monte]

Does this year count as a one time transfer? If not, we'll likely see a lot of turnover next year as well. It should reduce over time. 

 

[beast of the east]

Does this year count as a one time transfer? If not, we'll likely see a lot of turnover next year as well. It should reduce over time. 

My guess is that it will reduce over next 2 years then stabilize.   

 

[IDRAFT]

I'm good with the one time free transfer rule; also like the May 1 notification date absent a subsequent coaching change. Hope this passes as it is imho a very good compromise between some needed flexibility/freedom for athletes and some stability for the sport(s).

Couldn’t agree more. Kids deserved more flexibility than they had but this allows some cohesion to the programs.
 

 

[Moose]

Someone told me Matt Painter had an idea. 

Allow free transfers but only after sophomore year.  The concept makes sense.  Kids panic after the first year and leave but I guess the flip side is they can leave after freshman year and turn pro as it is.

Again parameters of any sort are good and welcomed to support free movement but put some realistic rules around it.

 

[RedStormNC]

not a bad idea, but schools should then commit to at least two years of scholarship.

 

 

[L J S A]

Give everyone five years of eligibility and everyone is immediately eligible after transferring, but you lose one year every time you transfer. 

 

[beast of the east]

How bout ending the charade that playing a D1 revenue producing sport has anything to do with scholarship, and allow players who attended a school to play an unlimited amount of years for a "franchise" school, and pay them for that service.   Rather than have a D'Angelo Harrison play ball in places where we never heard of and would never see him, pay them and he can have a pro career for the St. John's franchise.

 

[mjmaherjr]

How bout ending the charade that playing a D1 revenue producing sport has anything to do with scholarship, and allow players who attended a school to play an unlimited amount of years for a "franchise" school, and pay them for that service.   Rather than have a D'Angelo Harrison play ball in places where we never heard of and would never see him, pay them and he can have a pro career for the St. John's franchise.

our school would be in the red

 

[GardenCity62]

If the college coaches feel that the immediate eligibility rule creates a level of chaos that they can’t live with they can propose to go back to the one year sit out for athletes with the college coaches agreeing to fulfill the number of years in their contract before they jump to what is almost always a higher paying job at a better school. 
It is hard to justify making athletes sit out a year when coaches are free to jump schools whenever they want.

 

[Moose]

According to Verbal Commits there are 1186 players in the portal.  I've been vocal about the extra Covid year so was able to split out the players in the portal.

There are 332 players who are either SENIORS or RS SENIORS.  That's a lot of players who eligibility should be finished.

Freshman- 159
RS Freshman- 57
Soph- 213
RS Soph- 70
Junior- 208
RS Junior- 147

 

[dee]

Someone told me Matt Painter had an idea. 

Allow free transfers but only after sophomore year.  The concept makes sense.  Kids panic after the first year and leave but I guess the flip side is they can leave after freshman year and turn pro as it is.

Again parameters of any sort are good and welcomed to support free movement but put some realistic rules around it.

I dont like the rule. These kids have no loyalty and you cant build or in our case rebuild a program with kids going out year after year. This will really hurt st John's. Look at what is happening this year. So if you are lefs say julian champagne  or a similar player. Why not jump to Villanova? Why plague for st John's a team that cant get a ticket to the big dance. I'm sure we will get transfers and th ed y will be scrubs. The ones no one else wants. 
 

 

[dee]

Someone told me Matt Painter had an idea. 

Allow free transfers but only after sophomore year.  The concept makes sense.  Kids panic after the first year and leave but I guess the flip side is they can leave after freshman year and turn pro as it is.

Again parameters of any sort are good and welcomed to support free movement but put some realistic rules around it.

I dont like the rule. These kids have no loyalty and you cant build or in our case rebuild a program with kids going out year after year. This will really hurt st John's. Look at what is happening this year. So if you are lefs say julian champagne  or a similar player. Why not jump to Villanova? Why plague for st John's a team that cant get a ticket to the big dance. I'm sure we will get transfers and th ed y will be scrubs. The ones no one else wants. 
 

 

[Money]

Someone told me Matt Painter had an idea. 

Allow free transfers but only after sophomore year.  The concept makes sense.  Kids panic after the first year and leave but I guess the flip side is they can leave after freshman year and turn pro as it is.

Again parameters of any sort are good and welcomed to support free movement but put some realistic rules around it.

I dont like the rule. These kids have no loyalty and you cant build or in our case rebuild a program with kids going out year after year. This will really hurt st John's. Look at what is happening this year. So if you are lefs say julian champagne  or a similar player. Why not jump to Villanova? Why plague for st John's a team that cant get a ticket to the big dance. I'm sure we will get transfers and th ed y will be scrubs. The ones no one else wants. 

 

So the coach who recruited Champ (the guy you are so worried about transferring to Nova) will now only be able to get scrubs!  Good take!!

 

[boo haarvey]

Someone told me Matt Painter had an idea. 

Allow free transfers but only after sophomore year.  The concept makes sense.  Kids panic after the first year and leave but I guess the flip side is they can leave after freshman year and turn pro as it is.

Again parameters of any sort are good and welcomed to support free movement but put some realistic rules around it.

I dont like the rule. These kids have no loyalty and you cant build or in our case rebuild a program with kids going out year after year. This will really hurt st John's. Look at what is happening this year. So if you are lefs say julian champagne  or a similar player. Why not jump to Villanova? Why plague for st John's a team that cant get a ticket to the big dance. I'm sure we will get transfers and th ed y will be scrubs. The ones no one else wants. 


 

So the coach who recruited Champ (the guy you are so worried about transferring to Nova) will now only be able to get scrubs!  Good take!!

Way to oversimplify.  His point is that CMA was successful at recruiting and developing under the radar kids.  With this new rule, most kids aren’t going to stay around long enough to develop.  It places much more of a premium on recruiting instant impact players.  Only those who adjust will succeed.  As a program with no recent history of success and a less than desirable campus, we’re at a disadvantage.  The new rule does not favor a system coach like CMA, but we’ll see.