Seems like an NCAA could solve a lot of things by ending the immediate eligibility aspect of the portal.....

[OG Goat Holder]

...and they have a ready-made excuse - COVID. All these guys weren't able to visit campuses in person, yada yada. But that has now passed. This is the single biggest thing that could get this train back on the rails. The NIL itself isn't much different than before - it's when you combine the NIL and immediate eligibility, that the problem begins. The problem is easily defined - literal bidding wars over every successful player that has even a small amount of success. This seems so easy.

It's time. It's time for the 6th year COVID mother 17ers to take a hike, and it's time to make mother 17ers sit out a year once again, until they graduate. I might grant some eligibility for a coaching change - maybe.

And added bonus, would be an influx of talent back into our JUCOs.

 

[Wesson Bulldog]

Yeah this train has jumped the tracks. It is the wild wild west. My interest level in college sports continues to fade with each passing day. College athletes used to be loyal to their schools, by and large, which enhanced fan loyalty and pride. Now, they have become loyal to the highest bidder and for only one season at a time. It truly is sickening to watch.
I'm not sure what the answers are. I think that this all going to lead to 20-25 schools in a league, and schools like State will be left out. At this point I really don't care if we remain in the SEC or not.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Yeah this train has jumped the tracks. It is the wild wild west. My interest level in college sports continues to fade with each passing day. College athletes used to be loyal to their schools, by and large, which enhanced fan loyalty and pride. Now, they have become loyal to the highest bidder and for only one season at a time. It truly is sickening to watch.
I'm not sure what the answers are. I think that this all going to lead to 20-25 schools in a league, and schools like State will be left out. At this point I really don't care if we remain in the SEC or not.

Yep, and even if the portal is altered, players will still go to the highest bidder but it won't be nearly as pronounced. You'll essentially have two windows - high school, when only a few truly get paid, and then graduation. And of course you can always transfer in between but you'll be penalized and need a waiver (NCAA should really staff up that office).

Of course, coaches' salaries are another area that needs to gotten under control.

 

[Chesusdog]

The NCAA needs an out to curb the transfer-frenzy. There can still be limited exceptions, but I think anyone taking the portal should lose a year. I also believe there needs to be an establishment of tampering rules for contacting student athletes. It'll never happen, but it should.

 

[patdog]

I've said for years, if you transfer, you need to sit out a year. No exceptions. You can be on scholarship and draw NIL money, and the year you sit out doesn't count towards 5 years to play 4 for your first transfer. You're not penalizing any player for transferring, but you are going to make players think twice about whether they really want to transfer. It'll never happen though.

 

[dawgstudent]

...and they have a ready-made excuse - COVID. All these guys weren't able to visit campuses in person, yada yada. But that has now passed. This is the single biggest thing that could get this train back on the rails. The NIL itself isn't much different than before - it's when you combine the NIL and immediate eligibility, that the problem begins. The problem is easily defined - literal bidding wars over every successful player that has even a small amount of success. This seems so easy.

It's time. It's time for the 6th year COVID mother 17ers to take a hike, and it's time to make mother 17ers sit out a year once again, until they graduate. I might grant some eligibility for a coaching change - maybe.

And added bonus, would be an influx of talent back into our JUCOs.

100%. Easiest decision to make.

Go back to old rule - grad transfers get immediate eligibility. Otherwise - sit out a year.

@patdog - I like the idea you don't lose a year of eligibility but you have to sit out. That seems fair.

 

[Dawg1976]

Yep that would stop a lot of this madness. I guess the NCAA is scared of being sued or something.

 

[mstateglfr]

As soon as coaches have to sit a year when they take a new job before finishing out their contract, I will be on board with going back to the arcane rule of forcing student athletes to sit a year when they want to transfer.




A school just paid a guy $77 MILLION dollars to not coach there. $77 MILLION.
Immediate eligibility for 1st time transfers is a small hole to plug in this dam when you have schools that are willing to pay someone that much money to not coach.
Eliminating immediate eligibility would slow things down for a moment, but the impending flood would just come harder.

 

[mcdawg22]

...and they have a ready-made excuse - COVID. All these guys weren't able to visit campuses in person, yada yada. But that has now passed. This is the single biggest thing that could get this train back on the rails. The NIL itself isn't much different than before - it's when you combine the NIL and immediate eligibility, that the problem begins. The problem is easily defined - literal bidding wars over every successful player that has even a small amount of success. This seems so easy.

It's time. It's time for the 6th year COVID mother 17ers to take a hike, and it's time to make mother 17ers sit out a year once again, until they graduate. I might grant some eligibility for a coaching change - maybe.

And added bonus, would be an influx of talent back into our JUCOs.

NIL with no immediate transfer will be worse for State than NIL and no immediate transfers.

 

[aTotal360]

Free transfer + NIL = environment for blue bloods to get blue bloodier

 

[Chesusdog]

I've said for years, if you transfer, you need to sit out a year. No exceptions. You can be on scholarship and draw NIL money, and the year you sit out doesn't count towards 5 years to play 4 for your first transfer. You're not penalizing any player for transferring, but you are going to make players think twice about whether they really want to transfer. It'll never happen though.

I dig the idea that the year wouldn't be lost, just held as a deposit of sorts. I think a lot of these guys would think twice just at having to sit out.

 

[horshack.sixpack]

...and they have a ready-made excuse - COVID. All these guys weren't able to visit campuses in person, yada yada. But that has now passed. This is the single biggest thing that could get this train back on the rails. The NIL itself isn't much different than before - it's when you combine the NIL and immediate eligibility, that the problem begins. The problem is easily defined - literal bidding wars over every successful player that has even a small amount of success. This seems so easy.

It's time. It's time for the 6th year COVID mother 17ers to take a hike, and it's time to make mother 17ers sit out a year once again, until they graduate. I might grant some eligibility for a coaching change - maybe.

And added bonus, would be an influx of talent back into our JUCOs.

Immediate eligibility should only be in the case of a head coaching change.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

The NCAA needs an out to curb the transfer-frenzy. There can still be limited exceptions, but I think anyone taking the portal should lose a year. I also believe there needs to be an establishment of tampering rules for contacting student athletes. It'll never happen, but it should.

I just don't get why they ever thought it was a good idea. I mean you gave the COVID guys an extra year - and they STILL got to play in 2020. All is good there.

NIL should have been granted in the 90s, as a fall out to the SMU stuff. It would be an after-thought by now. Why didn't they learn? Why did they stick their heads in the sand? That's the way the world was, I suppose.

 

[HumpDawgy]

Heck, the NCAA rules our transfers to be ineligible anyway.

 

[bigmixx72]

Give them one transfer and a coaching change transfer without having to sit out. Any other transfer they have to sit out a year.

 

[greenbean.sixpack]

Give them one transfer and a coaching change transfer without having to sit out. Any other transfer they have to sit out a year.

Isn't that what they have now? Plus a grad transfer?

 

[Boom Boom]

...and they have a ready-made excuse - COVID. All these guys weren't able to visit campuses in person, yada yada. But that has now passed. This is the single biggest thing that could get this train back on the rails. The NIL itself isn't much different than before - it's when you combine the NIL and immediate eligibility, that the problem begins. The problem is easily defined - literal bidding wars over every successful player that has even a small amount of success. This seems so easy.

It's time. It's time for the 6th year COVID mother 17ers to take a hike, and it's time to make mother 17ers sit out a year once again, until they graduate. I might grant some eligibility for a coaching change - maybe.

And added bonus, would be an influx of talent back into our JUCOs.

One year at a school before you can play. Freshmen too. Automatic 5th year eligibility (4 on the field). NIL money is paid AFTER it is earned, ie after a season on the field, and over the next year not in a lump sum. Stay at a school, get 4 checks. Transfer, lose a year of eligibility and the check that comes with it. ALL scholarships are 4 years, and transfer with the student. (Necessary to enable academic freedom/movement.) Original school pays their Schollys value (including full tuition) towards COA at the new school, and can recoup it from NIL monies owed. Same deal if the student athlete transfers to a third school, but only if the 2nd school gave a scholly. If not, then no prohibition on immediate eligibility.

 

[Leeshouldveflanked]

As soon as coaches have to sit a year when they take a new job before finishing out their contract, I will be on board with going back to the arcane rule of forcing student athletes to sit a year when they want to transfer.




A school just paid a guy $77 MILLION dollars to not coach there. $77 MILLION.
Immediate eligibility for 1st time transfers is a small hole to plug in this dam when you have schools that are willing to pay someone that much money to not coach.
Eliminating immediate eligibility would slow things down for a moment, but the impending flood would just come harder.

A fool and his money are soon parted.

 

[pseudonym]

I agree eliminating immediate eligibility is the solution, but it will be very difficult politically. It will be interpreted as anti-player. And anything that is perceived as anti-player will be very hard to achieve. I think a lot of people would fear for their careers if they tried to champion something that is perceived that way.

One thing that might make it an easier sell is combining getting rid of immediate eligibility with tweaking the 5-year clock rule so that sitting out for a transfer doesn't count against your clock. So if you want to transfer around for 1-year stints, we'll give you up to 8 years to play 4.

Sadly, I find it difficult to imagine them ever getting rid of immediate eligibility. It's possible we look up in 30 years and look back to this era as the era that killed college sports.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

...and they have a ready-made excuse - COVID. All these guys weren't able to visit campuses in person, yada yada. But that has now passed. This is the single biggest thing that could get this train back on the rails. The NIL itself isn't much different than before - it's when you combine the NIL and immediate eligibility, that the problem begins. The problem is easily defined - literal bidding wars over every successful player that has even a small amount of success. This seems so easy.

It's time. It's time for the 6th year COVID mother 17ers to take a hike, and it's time to make mother 17ers sit out a year once again, until they graduate. I might grant some eligibility for a coaching change - maybe.

And added bonus, would be an influx of talent back into our JUCOs.

Not going to happen.

The NCAA ain’t going to fart in that direction simply because the Courts will sniff it out…

Amazing how people consider themselves to be libertarians until libertarianism affects something they love that affects people’s freedom… **

#inbeforedalock

 

[mstateglfr]

Give them one transfer and a coaching change transfer without having to sit out. Any other transfer they have to sit out a year.

As it stands, they have to sit if they transfer a second time and it isnt a grad transfer.
...so you basically suggest things stay the same.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Amazing how people consider themselves to be libertarians until libertarianism affects something they love that affects people’s freedom… **

I've thought all about that aspect. It's still education and amateur though, and that innovation can't be based all on the almighty dollar. There's a reason programs are multi-year. I hate it when people say, "ThIs Is A bUsInEsS".....no, it's not. It's school. And they will find that out as interest wanes over time, and it'll be up to the post-baby boomers to deal with it.

I really wish the NFL would get involved, and let people go pro a year earlier. Might weed some of this out. But it's the non-NFL guys that are holding folks hostage, so that likely doesn't help all that much.

And one positive of it all - it makes coaches earn their extravagant salaries....at least a little more than before.

 

[Maroon Eagle]

I've thought all about that aspect. It's still education and amateur though, and that innovation can't be based all on the almighty dollar. There's a reason programs are multi-year. I hate it when people say, "ThIs Is A bUsInEsS".....no, it's not. It's school. And they will find that out as interest wanes over time, and it'll be up to the post-baby boomers to deal with it.

…and that (the part I bolded and changed color) is exactly why I think the Courts will be against that.

Students transfer from one college to another all the time— many times without penalties (and those penalties that exist often relate to grades in particular classes).

I’d argue that the NCAA and the universities’ best move to give the players what they want: make them employees but they have to abide employer regulations.

#NLRBonLine1

 

[bigmixx72]

Isn't that what they have now? Plus a grad transfer?

As it stands, they have to sit if they transfer a second time and it isnt a grad transfer.
...so you basically suggest things stay the same.

Thats my mistake then. I thought they can transfer, grad transfer, & transfer if there’s a coaching change without sitting out.

 

[jethreauxdawg]

As soon as coaches have to sit a year when they take a new job before finishing out their contract, I will be on board with going back to the arcane rule of forcing student athletes to sit a year when they want to transfer.




A school just paid a guy $77 MILLION dollars to not coach there. $77 MILLION.
Immediate eligibility for 1st time transfers is a small hole to plug in this dam when you have schools that are willing to pay someone that much money to not coach.
Eliminating immediate eligibility would slow things down for a moment, but the impending flood would just come harder.

I agree with you, but I don’t like it as a fan. The overall product of college football will be better if there are less transfers, but if I was an athlete, I’d like the current system.

 

[Bulldog Bruce]

As soon as coaches have to sit a year when they take a new job before finishing out their contract, I will be on board with going back to the arcane rule of forcing student athletes to sit a year when they want to transfer.




A school just paid a guy $77 MILLION dollars to not coach there. $77 MILLION.
Immediate eligibility for 1st time transfers is a small hole to plug in this dam when you have schools that are willing to pay someone that much money to not coach.
Eliminating immediate eligibility would slow things down for a moment, but the impending flood would just come harder.

Hell has officially frozen over. I agree with something glfr has posted.

 

[Bulldog Bruce]

Man y'all just don't pay attention. It is this way because the NCAA was in control of players that were not under contract. They knew once that was tested they were screwed and were actually proactive for once. It's called collusion in every other circumstance.

Choices are go to multi year scholarships or collective bargaining. They can't just dictate to their workforce every aspect of their life the courts have said.

They still are forcing more of a commitment and higher chance of injury without any additional compensation even though the schools are going to be making more money. And that additional money is still not going to the players. That will quickly become an issue.

 

[OG Goat Holder]

Man y'all just don't pay attention. It is this way because the NCAA was in control of players that were not under contract. They knew once that was tested they were screwed and were actually proactive for once. It's called collusion in every other circumstance.

Choices are go to multi year scholarships or collective bargaining. They can't just dictate to their workforce every aspect of their life the courts have said.

They still are forcing more of a commitment and higher chance of injury without any additional compensation even though the schools are going to be making more money. And that additional money is still not going to the players. That will quickly become an issue.

I still laugh when people use words like "workforce" and "business". It's immensely popular, and a lot of people have found ways to profit off that, so there is business and workforces around it. But at its core, you're still getting a scholarship in college to play a game.

 

[Bulldog Bruce]

I still laugh when people use words like "workforce" and "business". It's immensely popular, and a lot of people have found ways to profit off that, so there is business and workforces around it. But at its core, you're still getting a scholarship in college to play a game.

Yes, a 1 year scholarship. Then when Deion shows up, you have to leave. So really at it's core you are being paid to play so the school can make money. They ain't doing it out of the goodness of their heart. If you had a 1 year academic scholarship, can you go to another school the next year? Can you earn as much money as you are able while on said scholarship? Are you forced not to do any math problems or write any programs when you go to another school on their scholarship?

 

[GloryDawg]

NCAA isn't going to do anything until the right schools get seats on it.