Transfer rules may change

[Theologator]

I'm going to respectfully disagree w you guys.

Players sign an LOI to play at a SCHOOL....they do not sign an LOI to play for a COACH. Period. A coach is an employee, a student is not. A coach can leave w/ no penalty....but he can also be fired. A player cannot be "fired".

Imagine a scenario where a beloved coach leaves for another school and 8, 10, 12 players decide to transfer to that coach's new school.....then the new coach shows up and another 4, 6, 10 players don't like the new coach and decide to transfer. That school essentially will have been given the death penalty and will be forced to play w/ a 50-60 man roster.

You could see 30 players transfer in one season at some schools, especially when a new coach arrives.

PJ Fleck is a good example; he left Western Michigan and is now at Minnesota. 5 of his WM commit's flipped to Minnesota - now, that's not transferring, but they did not sign w/ WM. There was also reports that PJ Fleck himself reached out to WM players to transfer to Minn:

https://www.hustlebelt.com/2017/2/2...rs-michigan-broncos-ncaa-college-football-mac

Other scenario's could follow;

-An entire position group doesn't like the new DB coach....so they ALL transfer.

-A position coach leaves for another school.....and half his position group transfers into the new school.

I bet there's a Swamp Donkey doppelgänger - say "Gopher Pecker" - on Minnesota's message boards fuming that he's turning them into a MAC school.

 

[GatorSkin]

If a coaching change would be expected to see 40 or 50 guys transfer and teams in danger of not fielding a team Why don't we see a majority of football head coaches in favor of doing away with the transfer sitout year.

After schools would become much more hessitant to fire their head football coach under the threat of such a possibility. Surely almost all head football coaches would favor such a coach job protecton rule?

I seriously doubt coaches would get a vote on a rule change like that so it really doesn't matter if their in favor of it or not.

 

[InstiGATOR1]

But would that be a good or bad thing? Can you imagine if foley had that hanging over his head when deciding whether to fire chump?

It would be a good thing for coaches, particularly marginal coaches. Schools might become much less in a hurry to change coaches, if they had to worry about maybe not being able to field a team in the fall.

 

[InstiGATOR1]

I seriously doubt coaches would get a vote on a rule change like that so it really doesn't matter if their in favor of it or not.

Well really powerful coaches are certainly consulted on such matter, but they would not care. The marginal coach looking for more disincentive for his school to fire him, might well be consulted by the AD or President before a vote on such a rule change. They need not respond in terms of self interest. As we have seen on this page they can pitch their self interest to "fairness" to the players and that is something University presidents usually eat up.

So the question remains, if the conjectured 40 to 50 transfers is likely to happen and teams will struggle to put a team on the field the next fall, where are all the Muschamps etc favoring allowing immediate transfers to enhance their job security?

 

[GatorSkin]

I don't actually see 40 to 50 transfers as realistic if they were to change the rule maybe 15 to 20 which would still be catastrophic.

I'm on the side of there is nothing wrong with the rule so no reason to mess with it. Coaches are paid employees players are not.

I would like to see something in place to encourage coaches and schools to actually finish out contracts but I don't know how they could do that.

 

[Omar's Coming Yo!]

I understand that....but life's not fair. The kid signed w/ UF, not Jim McElwain. Period. You simply cannot have a scenario where the entire roster can transfer without penalty. The 1 year sit-out rule is usually enough to discourage a transfer, especially if the kid is a redshirt sophomore or older (junior, senior to be). It's a good rule....and if it changes it will be ThunderDome!! :D

Players are employees regardless of legal fictions the ncaa creates to say otherwise. They're getting sued for this. They'll lose. Transfers won't hurt major teams just like paying them won't hurt major teams. I'm sure you said the same thing about Oklahoma when they sued the NCAA for antitrust violations because they appeared on TV too many times which broke NCAA rules. But but life's unfair!!! That ruling in OU's favor has led to CFB biggest tv deals today. Everybody's making money but the players. It's time to end these jim crow type restrictions on the CFB marketplace

 

[Omar's Coming Yo!]

https://newrepublic.com/article/120071/ncaa-college-sports-arent-slavery-theyre-jim-crow

 

[Jake from State Farm]

It don't fit........

 

[T REX]

https://newrepublic.com/article/120071/ncaa-college-sports-arent-slavery-theyre-jim-crow

There's one huge problem. All that money...goes back to the university and funds all the other sports programs. There isn't billionaire owners collecting all of the TV monies. Most schools operate in the red. This is fact. There's no money to pay football players.

 

[Omar's Coming Yo!]

My point was that there are people opposed to the rule (sitting out a year), who think it's okay for a kid to transfer and play immediately....which could lead to mass transfers if there's a coaching change. So, if we had a coaching change and 30-40 players say "f*ck it, I'm transferring"....well, no one is taking Andrew Mike or Luke Ancrum....so, that's our new starting OT and DT.

Can you post examples of this happening? Fear mongering only works on the weak minded.

 

[Omar's Coming Yo!]

There's one huge problem. All that money...goes back to the university and funds all the other sports programs. There isn't billionaire owners collecting all of the TV monies. Most schools operate in the red. This is fact. There's no money to pay football players.

Lol.

There's one huge problem. All that money...goes back to the university and funds all the other sports programs. There isn't billionaire owners collecting all of the TV monies. Most schools operate in the red. This is fact. There's no money to pay football players.

There's plenty of ways to pay players. Boosters, cut coaching salaries, get rid of title 9, allow players to get a percentage of TV deals and sell their names. Most these teams are probably doing what Trump did. Claim losses to avoid taxes. If they truly are losing money they can cease to exist. Yet they have no problem paying multiple coaches and administrators tons of money.

 

[T REX]

Lol.

There's plenty of ways to pay players. Boosters, cut coaching salaries, get rid of title 9, allow players to get a percentage of TV deals and sell their names. Most these teams are probably doing what Trump did. Claim losses to avoid taxes. If they truly are losing money they can cease to exist. Yet they have no problem paying multiple coaches and administrators tons of money.

Get rid of title IX? BUWAHAHAHAHAHAHA...not in a million trillion years. Slavery will come back before Title IX goes away. The math isn't there. It never will be.

BTW, they lose money because football supports all of the other sports. You want to change that? Again, slavery will return before you get rid of women's softball so you can pay football players.

 

[Omar's Coming Yo!]

Get rid of title IX? BUWAHAHAHAHAHAHA...not in a million trillion years. Slavery will come back before Title IX goes away. The math isn't there. It never will be.

BTW, they lose money because football supports all of the other sports. You want to change that? Again, slavery will return before you get rid of women's softball so you can pay football players.

You can do both by allowing them to sell their names and sign endorsement deals and get a percentage of Jersey sales. This really isn't that hard to do. Either the NCAA adapts or someone with tons of money sets up a viable alternative and takes their biggest money makers in college football and basketball. Schools could easily cover the costs of NR sports especially major programs that have huge endowments.

 

[Omar's Coming Yo!]

Start with "The Baxter Family" part of Montgomery's title, which tells you who is saving Duke from paying Montgomery's salary. His position is endowed, a trend that started in the Ivy League and is gaining traction among FBS schools, such as Stanford and Northwestern, among others.

Stanford coach David Shaw is the "Bradford M. Freeman Director of Football." Northwestern coach Pat Fitzgerald is the "Dan and Susan Jones Family Head Football Coach." Do you think they include those titles when they introduce themselves at cocktail parties?

This is not a flippant matter to the program, though. An endowed coaching title potentially saves an athletic department millions of dollars.

"There's a misnomer out there that Stanford is swimming in cash," said Shaw, whose coordinators also both hold endowed positions. "We have enough money to do the things we need to do, but we are constantly taking money from donors who are willing to help in any way they can. Especially with the way football coaching salaries have skyrocketed, to be able to offset that through gifts and not have the university bear all that on its own, to free up money for some other things, that's huge."

But the new style of coaching titles becoming almost complete sentences is more than someone picking up the tab for a coach's salary and then getting his name thrown up on the official roster and on a plaque outside the football office.

Last year, Montgomery was the "associate head coach/offensive coordinator/passing game." Now he's the "associate head coach/offensive coordinator." That may seem like he lost a title, but he actually gained playcalling duties, which belonged to Kurt Roper this past season before he left for Florida.
http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...owments-exchange-namesakes-new-trend-coaching

If it works for the coaches it Can work for the players. For instance look at this article. A. SCAR player got a $300k endowment put in her name and will be given to WBB for forever. You wouldn't have to end TITLE 9.
http://www.postandcourier.com/sport...cle_79e72cad-903d-50b7-b140-701d22ef1ed1.html

 

[CGgater]

Can you post examples of this happening? Fear mongering only works on the weak minded.

Kinda hard to give real life examples of a hypothetical. He might be exaggerating the outcome, but it's not implausible. But since nobody else here exaggerates, I can see how you would jump to the "fear mongering" conclusion.

 

[Blacklabgator]

Start with "The Baxter Family" part of Montgomery's title, which tells you who is saving Duke from paying Montgomery's salary. His position is endowed, a trend that started in the Ivy League and is gaining traction among FBS schools, such as Stanford and Northwestern, among others.

Stanford coach David Shaw is the "Bradford M. Freeman Director of Football." Northwestern coach Pat Fitzgerald is the "Dan and Susan Jones Family Head Football Coach." Do you think they include those titles when they introduce themselves at cocktail parties?

This is not a flippant matter to the program, though. An endowed coaching title potentially saves an athletic department millions of dollars.

"There's a misnomer out there that Stanford is swimming in cash," said Shaw, whose coordinators also both hold endowed positions. "We have enough money to do the things we need to do, but we are constantly taking money from donors who are willing to help in any way they can. Especially with the way football coaching salaries have skyrocketed, to be able to offset that through gifts and not have the university bear all that on its own, to free up money for some other things, that's huge."

But the new style of coaching titles becoming almost complete sentences is more than someone picking up the tab for a coach's salary and then getting his name thrown up on the official roster and on a plaque outside the football office.

Last year, Montgomery was the "associate head coach/offensive coordinator/passing game." Now he's the "associate head coach/offensive coordinator." That may seem like he lost a title, but he actually gained playcalling duties, which belonged to Kurt Roper this past season before he left for Florida.
http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...owments-exchange-namesakes-new-trend-coaching

If it works for the coaches it Can work for the players. For instance look at this article. A. SCAR player got a $300k endowment put in her name and will be given to WBB for forever. You wouldn't have to end TITLE 9.
http://www.postandcourier.com/sport...cle_79e72cad-903d-50b7-b140-701d22ef1ed1.html

You're not going to change title 9 unless you get the federal courts to agree with you.

 

[T REX]

Start with "The Baxter Family" part of Montgomery's title, which tells you who is saving Duke from paying Montgomery's salary. His position is endowed, a trend that started in the Ivy League and is gaining traction among FBS schools, such as Stanford and Northwestern, among others.

Stanford coach David Shaw is the "Bradford M. Freeman Director of Football." Northwestern coach Pat Fitzgerald is the "Dan and Susan Jones Family Head Football Coach." Do you think they include those titles when they introduce themselves at cocktail parties?

This is not a flippant matter to the program, though. An endowed coaching title potentially saves an athletic department millions of dollars.

"There's a misnomer out there that Stanford is swimming in cash," said Shaw, whose coordinators also both hold endowed positions. "We have enough money to do the things we need to do, but we are constantly taking money from donors who are willing to help in any way they can. Especially with the way football coaching salaries have skyrocketed, to be able to offset that through gifts and not have the university bear all that on its own, to free up money for some other things, that's huge."

But the new style of coaching titles becoming almost complete sentences is more than someone picking up the tab for a coach's salary and then getting his name thrown up on the official roster and on a plaque outside the football office.

Last year, Montgomery was the "associate head coach/offensive coordinator/passing game." Now he's the "associate head coach/offensive coordinator." That may seem like he lost a title, but he actually gained playcalling duties, which belonged to Kurt Roper this past season before he left for Florida.
http://www.espn.com/college-footbal...owments-exchange-namesakes-new-trend-coaching

If it works for the coaches it Can work for the players. For instance look at this article. A. SCAR player got a $300k endowment put in her name and will be given to WBB for forever. You wouldn't have to end TITLE 9.
http://www.postandcourier.com/sport...cle_79e72cad-903d-50b7-b140-701d22ef1ed1.html

Endowments should be used for academic purposes only, IMHO. The % of athletes that actually make it to the pro level is so small while the % of kids that graduate and use their degree for the rest of their lives is very high.

 

[Omar's Coming Yo!]

Endowments should be used for academic purposes only, IMHO. The % of athletes that actually make it to the pro level is so small while the % of kids that graduate and use their degree for the rest of their lives is very high.

I completely disagree.

 

[Swamp Donkey]

Endowments should be used for academic purposes only, IMHO.

Endowments don't seem to be used for anything other than enriching the attorneys that do the work.

Ever looked at the size of the endowments at major universities? The same ones that claim it's a necessity to raise tuition at many more times the rate of inflation nearly every year at the same time that professors work less and GA/TAs do more and more of the instruction?

 

[T REX]

Endowments don't seem to be used for anything other than enriching the attorneys that do the work.

Ever looked at the size of the endowments at major universities? The same ones that claim it's a necessity to raise tuition at many more times the rate of inflation nearly every year at the same time that professors work less and GA/TAs do more and more of the instruction?

I know Princeton and Stanford have free tuition now if a family makes under a certain amount.

I hope you're making your nickel then :)