- Sep 8, 2014
- 25,445
- 59,415
As NCAA looks at major transfer reforms, coaches have questions
http://coachingsearch.com/article?a...r-reforms-coaches-have-questions-and-concerns
The NCAA is looking into major reforms in the transfer process. A change isn’t on the horizon yet, but it could have a major impact on teams.
In late June, the NCAA announced the transfer working group would look at permission to contact, grad transfers, “ethical recruiting” and uniformity of rules. It could take away the ability of schools to block a transfer, and it could make grad transfers count for two years of scholarship.
Speaking with several coaches, the No. 1 thing they brought up as a concern is “free agency” with undergraduate players, that schools will recruit active players.
“I think the concept of it sounds a little out there to me,” Tom Herman told CoachingSearch. “I can’t imagine we’d ever introduce something where the end result would be other universities recruiting my players. That would seem to be really weird.”
It's worth noting the NCAA working group has expressed interest in increasing the penalties for coaches who break rules and recruit those active players.
But players have input, too. The Student-Athlete Advisory Committee has proposed a process in which a player would have to notify their current school that they will transfer, and then they're allowed contact with other schools, without needing permission.
Should undergraduate transfers have to sit out a year before becoming eligible to play? It’s been a constant debate as coaches move freely, but it's still unlikely to change. The SAAC has proposed to allow players to play immediately after one transfer, but not if it’s still within the same conference. It’s a less radical idea, but still would face an uphill climb.
“Changing because you’re not happy with something has never been a good thing,” Gary Patterson told CoachingSearch.
The other major issue is graduate transfers and their immediate eligibility. Coaches typically support a backup player moving on to get playing time, but they worry about top players looking to move up in competition for their final year. Of course, if academics are most important, why not let graduating players do what they want?
One potential change could be to count a grad transfer against the scholarship count for two years. The NCAA group is also looking at more ways to hold the receiving schools accountable for their academic progress.
“If you want to do it, make them sit out a year,” Patterson said. "Then see if they do it. Most of them aren’t going to school. They’ve already graduated. What other purpose are we serving? We turn into the NFL, with a free agent.”
Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby emphasized that it's still early in the process, and a lot is on the table. But this looks like the next major area of reform in college sports.
“The transfer working group will cast a broad net, and they'll paint with a broad brush as long as they can,” Bowlsby said. “I think there's a growing belief that intercollegiate athletics is an undergraduate undertaking and that maybe that's the bedrock that we ought to stand on. But it's going to be at least a year-long project, and it's too early at this point to see how it turns out.
“We're looking at this as a clean sheet of paper. I think we have the opportunity to remake it, and that's the manner in which we ought to be looking at it.”
http://coachingsearch.com/article?a...r-reforms-coaches-have-questions-and-concerns
The NCAA is looking into major reforms in the transfer process. A change isn’t on the horizon yet, but it could have a major impact on teams.
In late June, the NCAA announced the transfer working group would look at permission to contact, grad transfers, “ethical recruiting” and uniformity of rules. It could take away the ability of schools to block a transfer, and it could make grad transfers count for two years of scholarship.
Speaking with several coaches, the No. 1 thing they brought up as a concern is “free agency” with undergraduate players, that schools will recruit active players.
“I think the concept of it sounds a little out there to me,” Tom Herman told CoachingSearch. “I can’t imagine we’d ever introduce something where the end result would be other universities recruiting my players. That would seem to be really weird.”
It's worth noting the NCAA working group has expressed interest in increasing the penalties for coaches who break rules and recruit those active players.
But players have input, too. The Student-Athlete Advisory Committee has proposed a process in which a player would have to notify their current school that they will transfer, and then they're allowed contact with other schools, without needing permission.
Should undergraduate transfers have to sit out a year before becoming eligible to play? It’s been a constant debate as coaches move freely, but it's still unlikely to change. The SAAC has proposed to allow players to play immediately after one transfer, but not if it’s still within the same conference. It’s a less radical idea, but still would face an uphill climb.
“Changing because you’re not happy with something has never been a good thing,” Gary Patterson told CoachingSearch.
The other major issue is graduate transfers and their immediate eligibility. Coaches typically support a backup player moving on to get playing time, but they worry about top players looking to move up in competition for their final year. Of course, if academics are most important, why not let graduating players do what they want?
One potential change could be to count a grad transfer against the scholarship count for two years. The NCAA group is also looking at more ways to hold the receiving schools accountable for their academic progress.
“If you want to do it, make them sit out a year,” Patterson said. "Then see if they do it. Most of them aren’t going to school. They’ve already graduated. What other purpose are we serving? We turn into the NFL, with a free agent.”
Big 12 commissioner Bob Bowlsby emphasized that it's still early in the process, and a lot is on the table. But this looks like the next major area of reform in college sports.
“The transfer working group will cast a broad net, and they'll paint with a broad brush as long as they can,” Bowlsby said. “I think there's a growing belief that intercollegiate athletics is an undergraduate undertaking and that maybe that's the bedrock that we ought to stand on. But it's going to be at least a year-long project, and it's too early at this point to see how it turns out.
“We're looking at this as a clean sheet of paper. I think we have the opportunity to remake it, and that's the manner in which we ought to be looking at it.”
