NCAA to approve one-time free transfer for football

[Machinator 32,097]

Quote

All Division I student-athletes will have a one-time opportunity to transfer and compete immediately beginning in the 2021-22 academic year, if legislation adopted by the Division I Council is ratified by the Division I Board of Directors. The board meets April 28.

The Council met via videoconference today and Wednesday.

The Council expanded the one-time transfer exception to all sports, which means student-athletes who play baseball, football, men’s and women’s basketball, and men’s ice hockey have the same chance as all other student-athletes to transfer and play right away. If ratified by the board, the change is effective for student-athletes who have not transferred before and want to compete at a new school as early as this fall.

Council member Caroline Lee, the Division I Student-Athlete Advisory Committee vice chair, said the student-athletes she represents are “ecstatic” with the rule change.

“SAAC feels honored to be a part of this major decision and landmark legislation,” said Lee, who played soccer and earned a degree in biology pre-medicine at Southeastern Louisiana. “The ability to compete immediately offers the utmost flexibility and support of the student-athletes we serve and is a positive step toward improving their overall experience and future success.”

“Allowing student-athletes a one-time opportunity to transfer and compete immediately provides a uniform, equitable and understandable approach that benefits all student-athletes,” said Council vice chair Jon Steinbrecher, who chairs the Working Group on Transfers and is commissioner of the Mid-American Conference. “The decision is consistent with Division I’s goal of modernizing its rules to prioritize student-athlete opportunity and choice.”

Members also adopted deadlines for student-athletes to provide written notification of transfer if they want to compete immediately. The deadlines will be May 1 for fall and winter sport student-athletes and July 1 for spring sport student-athletes, but the Council also granted a blanket waiver for this year only that sets the date for all student-athletes as July 1. Members noted the May 1 deadline was just a month away, and the waiver would provide students additional time they might need to decide.

The dates were selected based on a desire to balance providing flexibility for student-athletes to make informed transfer decisions with protecting the interests of students who don’t transfer but will be impacted by those who do.

Some exceptions to the deadlines would apply in cases of a head coaching change or canceled athletics scholarship before July 1.

Transferring college athletes also must meet progress-toward-degree requirements and be otherwise academically eligible to compete immediately after transfer, and both the head coach at the new school and the student-athlete must certify that no tampering took place. Schools cannot object to schools to which a student-athlete wants to transfer. The waiver process will continue to be available for students who do not meet the criteria of the one-time transfer exception or who wish to transfer more than once.

Student-athletes will have access to education regarding the impacts and implications of transferring, including academic requirements and financial aid policies. An online module will be created to assist schools with ensuring student-athletes can access this education, which is intended to help student-athletes make informed decisions before entering the NCAA Transfer Portal.

Division I has been working on modernizing its transfer rules for some time. Several working groups have made some notable progress, including the 2018 change that eliminated the requirement that student-athletes get permission from their current school to speak with other schools. That change also created the Transfer Portal.

In December, the Council continued its trend toward providing maximum flexibility for student-athletes during the pandemic and granted a waiver that allowed all students who had transferred and were sitting out their year in residence the ability to compete this season. That waiver applied only to student-athletes who had transferred by the start of fall 2020.

 

[Huckleberry 32,704]

Good rule change but QB recruiting/transfers is going to be crazy,

[SDG 3,319]

This is great for the kids that get lost on the depth chart and ma actually create better competition amongst the 2+ tier programs.  

[Blotto 23,434]

56 minutes ago, SDG said:

This is great for the kids that get lost on the depth chart and ma actually create better competition amongst the 2+ tier programs.  

Its scientific fact that some people's forearms develop later in life than others, so this is also great news for those hs recruits that may have been overlooked by aggy when they were 16,17 and may not have gotten in enough "jar time"

[bluto 4,894]

Consequences will never be the same... but seriously this combined with players making money from their likeness are gonna be an incredible 1-2 punch. Just be happy we’re a big dog on the block even if our performance has been lacking (gentle)

[BurntOrange&White 39,665]

I think there should be some sort of repercussion if the athlete decides to transfer again after the one time. Personally I think they should lose an year of elgibility if you decide to transfer a second time. With that said that does not include grad transfers as you have earned your degree.

[n64ra 1,078]

One time means each student is allowed to do it once in their college career?

[DigglerontheHoof 21,065]

I don't disagree w/ the call but potential unintended consequences could be interesting.  

[ouflak 60]

2 hours ago, n64ra said:

One time means each student is allowed to do it once in their college career?

As coaches, regular students, research grads, assistant coaches, administrators, staff, etc... are allowed to transfer without penalty as much as they'd like, I don't think there will be any restrictions on how often they can transfer. It's just that they may face a loss of eligibility for subsequent transfers, assuming they aren't already graduates - the rule of which hasn't been affected. I personally think that even the 'one time' bit of this is doomed, and probably in short order.

Edited April 16, 2021 by ouflak

[BurntOrange&White 39,665]

2 minutes ago, ouflak said:

As coaches, regular students, research grads, and administrators, staff, etc... are allowed to transfer without penalty as much as they'd like, I don't think there will be any restrictions on how often. It's just that they may face a loss of eligibility if they transfer, assuming they aren't already graduates - the rule of which hasn't been affected. I personally think that even the 'one time' bit of this is doomed, and probably in short order.

How often do coaches change jobs within the conference? Specifically football? If you want to give them same opportunities as coaches then treat them like the coaches. If they don’t live up to expectations or perform, then cut them as well. If they want the business of NIL and etc then treat the game like a business and welcome the players to the real world. 

Edited April 16, 2021 by BurntOrange&White

[ouflak 60]

6 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

How often do coaches change jobs within the conference? Specifically football? 

 

Coaches? I think not so much. You guys got the Tech Basketball coach recently. I know OU has supplied a number coordinators in the past. As for regular students, 37% will transfer at some point. Multiple times? No idea. Research grads, administrators, university staff, etc... - not even sure where you'd find those numbers.

Edited April 16, 2021 by ouflak

[Herpa Derpa 6,112]

2 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

How often do coaches change jobs within the conference? Specifically football? If you want to give them same opportunities as coaches then treat them like the coaches. If they don’t live up to expectations or perform, then cut them as well. If they want the business of NIL and etc then treat the game like a business and welcome the players to the real world. 

Are you aware that many kids in the portal didn't enter willingly? Coaches backdoor recruits all the time. Hell, Saban's made it part of his model and nobody raises a finger in protest.  Non-athlete students regularly transfer to another school in the same conference.  The argument about competitive balance or that some 18 year old that never saw the field is going to expose all your secrets to your hated rival is a red herring. It just doesn't happen. The restriction is simply another way for coaches and programs to control every aspect of an athlete's life while on campus to the point where they want to control their prospective future elsewhere. It's offensive and asinine in a so-called land of freedom and liberty. /soapbox

[BurntOrange&White 39,665]

1 minute ago, Herpa Derpa said:

Are you aware that many kids in the portal didn't enter willingly? Coaches backdoor recruits all the time. Hell, Saban's made it part of his model and nobody raises a finger in protest.  Non-athlete students regularly transfer to another school in the same conference.  The argument about competitive balance or that some 18 year old that never saw the field is going to expose all your secrets to your hated rival is a red herring. It just doesn't happen. The restriction is simply another way for coaches and programs to control every aspect of an athlete's life while on campus to the point where they want to control their prospective future elsewhere. It's offensive and asinine in a so-called land of freedom and liberty. /soapbox

And coaches changing jobs all the time is a bigger red herring. Playing college football on scholarship isn’t a right, it’s a privilege. Don’t conflate the two. 

Edited April 16, 2021 by BurntOrange&White

[TrashMaster G 17,391]

3 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

I think there should be some sort of repercussion if the athlete decides to transfer again after the one time. Personally I think they should lose an year of elgibility if you decide to transfer a second time. With that said that does not include grad transfers as you have earned your degree.

Public flogging.  Let it be so.

 

25 minutes ago, ouflak said:

As coaches, regular students, research grads, assistant coaches, administrators, staff, etc... are allowed to transfer without penalty as much as they'd like, I don't think there will be any restrictions on how often they can transfer. It's just that they may face a loss of eligibility for subsequent transfers, assuming they aren't already graduates - the rule of which hasn't been affected. I personally think that even the 'one time' bit of this is doomed, and probably in short order.

There is no penalty for athletes who transfer now.  They can still graduate, go to parties, etc.  The eligibility thing doesn't apply to coaches, regular students, research grads, etc., so that is just a useless comparison.

 

23 minutes ago, BurntOrange&White said:

How often do coaches change jobs within the conference? Specifically football? If you want to give them same opportunities as coaches then treat them like the coaches. If they don’t live up to expectations or perform, then cut them as well. If they want the business of NIL and etc then treat the game like a business and welcome the players to the real world. 

Do you even SEC, bro?

[ouflak 60]

17 minutes ago, TrashMaster G said:

Public flogging.  Let it be so.

Quote

As coaches, regular students, research grads, assistant coaches, administrators, staff, etc... are allowed to transfer without penalty as much as they'd like, I don't think there will be any restrictions on how often they can transfer. It's just that they may face a loss of eligibility for subsequent transfers, assuming they aren't already graduates - the rule of which hasn't been affected. I personally think that even the 'one time' bit of this is doomed, and probably in short order.

There is no penalty for athletes who transfer now.  They can still graduate, go to parties, etc.  The eligibility thing doesn't apply to coaches, regular students, research grads, etc., so that is just a useless comparison.

 

I was just answering the previous question about subsequent transfers, not the initial transfer which, as you state, is now free of penalty. Presumably conferences, or perhaps even individual schools, will come up with rules for subsequent transfers. Who knows what that will look like? But I think it will probably be along the lines of the previous loss-of-eligibility-must-sit-out flavor. I also think that they won't last long either once properly challenged. Since one of the key original arguments for allowing this new rule change was that nobody else associated with a university has such restrictions/penalties, I suspect even the 'one-time-only' part is going to go by the wayside soon enough.

Edited April 16, 2021 by ouflak

[dingleberryswitzer 2,724]

4 hours ago, n64ra said:

One time means each student is allowed to do it once in their college career?

Once per semester.  It’s called the “bru McCoy “ rule.

[n64ra 1,078]

2 hours ago, ouflak said:

As coaches, regular students, research grads, assistant coaches, administrators, staff, etc... are allowed to transfer without penalty as much as they'd like, I don't think there will be any restrictions on how often they can transfer. It's just that they may face a loss of eligibility for subsequent transfers, assuming they aren't already graduates - the rule of which hasn't been affected. I personally think that even the 'one time' bit of this is doomed, and probably in short order.

This what I am thinking but wanted to understand what 'one time' meant here. We're heading to full free agency. Hell, maybe coaches can start trading players.

[notre dame joe 172]

There's no rule saying coaches cannot be fired or hired at any time i.e. during a game.  

 

I think there should be a rule saying intra-game transfers should be between quarters.  Probably at halftime if the player is going to transfer to the opponent's program.

[956 Worldwide 34,444]

Don’t love this.  It is certainly a rule that’s going to help the rich get richer and is going to burn the smaller schools.  And it’s going to introduce, even more than now— recruiting into the ranks of active college football players.  It’s going to suck for coaches, who are going to have to recruit their own players and will have to think like pro coaches in terms of keeping your star players touches and minutes even if it’s not who needs to be on the field. And it’s really going to hurt when the coach at Troy State, who does the research and takes a chance on a raw two star who breaks out, gets to hear “sorry coach, but Dabo called and I really need the exposure for my junior year.” 
 

It’s getting hard for me to maintain an interest in college football, seems like they are stealing the WORST aspects of pro sports and leaving the best. I’d much rather them just say “pay the kids big bucks but everyone signs a four year contract, period.”

[ouflak 60]

4 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

 And it’s really going to hurt when the coach at Troy State, who does the research and takes a chance on a raw two star who breaks out, gets to hear “sorry coach, but Dabo called and I really need the exposure for my junior year.”

Yeah maybe... It's just... why doesn't Clemson already have 2 or 3 four/five star backs on the roster and on scholarship? And why wouldn't they have some pretty decent backups for those? Is there a recruiting issue? And if there is, what makes anybody think they'll have any better luck recruiting that two-star break out from < insert school >? I can see this transfer thing getting out of hand if teams are allowed to have limitless rosters with limitless scholarships, and extended game time by an extra 4 hours or something, so everybody can play and get 'exposure'. But I have not even heard a peep that any of those other kind of changes are coming down the line along with this. Which means the Bama/tOSU/Clemson/OU's of the world will still only be able to put so many people on their teams at so many positions, with only so much of a guarantee of playing time. There's no doubt your scenario is going to happen for those situations, that we know happen every year, where some team has a position that gets riddled with injuries and other issues, and that bigger name team reaches on down the heirarchy to pull some players up to fill in. And even that assumes they've got the scholarship/roster slots open (an injury doesn't necessarily open those up). However, I think the actual effect is going to be far more modest than some are predicting.

Edited April 17, 2021 by ouflak

[Beau Vine 54,004]

6 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Don’t love this.  It is certainly a rule that’s going to help the rich get richer and is going to burn the smaller schools.  And it’s going to introduce, even more than now— recruiting into the ranks of active college football players.  It’s going to suck for coaches, who are going to have to recruit their own players and will have to think like pro coaches in terms of keeping your star players touches and minutes even if it’s not who needs to be on the field. And it’s really going to hurt when the coach at Troy State, who does the research and takes a chance on a raw two star who breaks out, gets to hear “sorry coach, but Dabo called and I really need the exposure for my junior year.” 
 

It’s getting hard for me to maintain an interest in college football, seems like they are stealing the WORST aspects of pro sports and leaving the best. I’d much rather them just say “pay the kids big bucks but everyone signs a four year contract, period.”

We've had this rule in the majority of NCAA sports for a bunch of years now.

[Huckleberry 32,704]

2 minutes ago, Beau Vine said:

We've had this rule in the majority of NCAA sports for a bunch of years now.

Yep. 

And I think the fact that some posters don't realize programs already can cut players and not renew their scholarship also shows the depth of knowledge we're dealing with here. 

[BurntOrange&White 39,665]

2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Yep. 

And I think the fact that some posters don't realize programs already can cut players and not renew their scholarship also shows the depth of knowledge we're dealing with here. 

Suggesting they leave and putting them deep down on depth chart is a tad different than just being able to not renew their scholarship without notice. 

[notre dame joe 172]

On 4/17/2021 at 6:23 AM, ouflak said:

Yeah maybe... It's just... why doesn't Clemson already have 2 or 3 four/five star backs on the roster and on scholarship? And why wouldn't they have some pretty decent backups for those? Is there a recruiting issue? And if there is, what makes anybody think they'll have any better luck recruiting that two-star break out from < insert school >? I can see this transfer thing getting out of hand if teams are allowed to have limitless rosters with limitless scholarships, and extended game time by an extra 4 hours or something, so everybody can play and get 'exposure'. But I have not even heard a peep that any of those other kind of changes are coming down the line along with this. Which means the Bama/tOSU/Clemson/OU's of the world will still only be able to put so many people on their teams at so many positions, with only so much of a guarantee of playing time. There's no doubt your scenario is going to happen for those situations, that we know happen every year, where some team has a position that gets riddled with injuries and other issues, and that bigger name team reaches on down the heirarchy to pull some players up to fill in. And even that assumes they've got the scholarship/roster slots open (an injury doesn't necessarily open those up). However, I think the actual effect is going to be far more modest than some are predicting.

Yes it's hard to say whom this hurts.  Bama and Clemson already have all the talent they need and have added Jucos.  So how often do either really need a breakout from Troy State?  I think most of the transfers will be the 4*s who are still third on the depth chart their sophomore year.  The HC wants them to wait and develop while their agent is looking around for a team that offers a starting job.  

 

So it may just hurt all programs equally.

 

 

[Machinator 32,097]

 

[Machinator 32,097]

 

[Machinator 32,097]

[Machinator 32,097]

[Machinator 32,097]

[Machinator 32,097]