2019 ATH Bru McCoy

[AugieBall 237]

1 hour ago, LTtxfan said:

Here yah go....

https://www.elevenwarriors.com/ohio-state-football/2019/01/101777/tate-martell-considered-transfer-before-the-2018-season-attorney-says-coaching-turnover-played-a-major-role

From the article: "You try to throw as much against the wall as you can."  That about sums it up.  The coaching change had zero to do with this move.  

[BurntOrangeBlooded15 1692]

This is how you fix this (in my opinion) 

Once a kid commits to a a school, the school puts kid into a database. Isn’t a public database so kids can keep their silent commitments and be able to make their videos. 

Once a kid signs with a school, he has to stay for a minimum of 2 years (6 semesters). At that point, he is allowed 1 restriction free transfer with immediate eligibility.  The kicker is the kid only gets to have this transfer if he hasn’t decommitted during the recruitment process (thus the database).  Would control transferring to just RS sophomores, juniors and seniors and would control the 15 decommitment kids (Hello Jordan Elliott). 

Graduate Transfer rules stay the same.

 

*Yes this means we wouldn’t have gotten Bru, but I’m looking at an overall fix. 

Edited February 11, 2019 by BurntOrangeBlooded15

[fellside 1135]

7 minutes ago, BurntOrangeBlooded15 said:

This is how you fix this (in my opinion) 

Once a kid commits to a a school, the school puts kid into a database. Isn’t a public database so kids can keep their silent commitments and be able to make their videos. 

Once a kid signs with a school, he has to stay for a minimum of 2 years (6 semesters). At that point, he is allowed 1 restriction free transfer with immediate eligibility.  The kicker is the kid only gets to have this transfer if he hasn’t decommitted during the recruitment process (thus the database).  Would control transferring to just RS sophomores, juniors and seniors and would control the 15 decommitment kids (Hello Jordan Elliott). 

Graduate Transfer rules stay the same.

 

*Yes this means we wouldn’t have gotten Bru, but I’m looking at an overall fix. 

You can require them to stay 6 semesters in order to transfer and immediately be eligible, but you can't make them stay 6 semesters in general.  Kids still deserve the option to sit out a year if they're unhappy or have issues.

So it's possible we still get McCoy under that rule if he really is okay with sitting out a year instead of staying at USC.

[Chuckie Finster 23038]

I absolutely get the concerns about guys like Tate jumping from program to program every year, but what precedent are we worried Bru will set?  Even if we pretend to care about the "student" side of things, he didn't lose any progress there.  Are we really worried that suddenly there will be a mass outbreak of 18 year old student athletes who want to switch schools after a week?  And even if there were, wouldn't it be best to allow both parties to move on when someone so quickly feels they made a mistake?

Edited February 11, 2019 by Chuckie Finster

[Burt Macklin 19230]

32 minutes ago, BurntOrangeBlooded15 said:

This is how you fix this (in my opinion) 

Once a kid commits to a a school, the school puts kid into a database. Isn’t a public database so kids can keep their silent commitments and be able to make their videos. 

Once a kid signs with a school, he has to stay for a minimum of 2 years (6 semesters). At that point, he is allowed 1 restriction free transfer with immediate eligibility.  The kicker is the kid only gets to have this transfer if he hasn’t decommitted during the recruitment process (thus the database).  Would control transferring to just RS sophomores, juniors and seniors and would control the 15 decommitment kids (Hello Jordan Elliott). 

Graduate Transfer rules stay the same.

 

*Yes this means we wouldn’t have gotten Bru, but I’m looking at an overall fix. 

So you’re now making silent verbal commitments binding on a kid? Yeah, that’s not a fix to anything. 

[Huckleberry 34578]

How about a rule that makes it to where a coach has to sit out a year unpaid when he changes schools?

[Katfid54 9005]

1 minute ago, Huckleberry said:

How about a rule that makes it to where a coach has to sit out a year unpaid when he changes schools?

Or if you're the poster above, make schools have to hire coaches for a minimum of two years (and make coaches stay for a minimum of two years) before they can take another job.  If they leave before that time period, they have to take a year off.

[Huckleberry 34578]

The real answer also involves the fact that the NCAA now allows the granting of multi-year scholarships. If a player is not on a multi-year scholarship then they should have complete freedom to transfer wherever they want after any season with zero penalty. If a school has not committed a multi-year scholarship to the player for future seasons then they should have absolutely no say on where that player attends school and plays in any following season. Want to control a player? Then guarantee him a scholarship for the years you want to control him.

That's not necessarily applicable to McCoy's situation, but it's a non-starter to me to say that players shouldn't be able to go wherever they want if they haven't been guaranteed compensation (as it exists) for future years.

Honestly, it's still not enough for me to allow coaches to limit transfer destinations, but I can see the sit-out-a-year rule if multi-year scholarships have been guaranteed to the player. But I think that should apply to coaches, as well.

Edited February 11, 2019 by Huckleberry

[BurntOrangeBlooded15 1692]

54 minutes ago, Burt Macklin said:

So you’re now making silent verbal commitments binding on a kid? Yeah, that’s not a fix to anything. 

Why make a commitment if it’s gonna be a big deal?  You look at a kid like Martel or Jordan. Commit, Decommit, recommit, transfer (or multiple for Jordan). Having a kid honor his word to a commitment makes the kids truly evaluate all options before making a decision.  It’s simple, if you aren’t sure, don’t commit to a school.  Simple.   

Plus it’s doesn’t bind the kid to the school.  He can still decommit and go wherever.   And could still transfer after the 2 years.  It would just be a normal sit a year transfer.  

[Gene Parmesan 4064]

58 minutes ago, Huckleberry said:

The real answer also involves the fact that the NCAA now allows the granting of multi-year scholarships. If a player is not on a multi-year scholarship then they should have complete freedom to transfer wherever they want after any season with zero penalty. If a school has not committed a multi-year scholarship to the player for future seasons then they should have absolutely no say on where that player attends school and plays in any following season. Want to control a player? Then guarantee him a scholarship for the years you want to control him.

That's not necessarily applicable to McCoy's situation, but it's a non-starter to me to say that players shouldn't be able to go wherever they want if they haven't been guaranteed compensation (as it exists) for future years.

Honestly, it's still not enough for me to allow coaches to limit transfer destinations, but I can see the sit-out-a-year rule if multi-year scholarships have been guaranteed to the player. But I think that should apply to coaches, as well.

This is the most logical in any step that's designed to limit transfers.  Assuming you aren't in the just let them go wherever they want camp.  If a scholarship is their contract, certainly the multi year version would be the only leg you have to stand on as controlling their ability to transfer.  The idea that we try to control where kids can get their education in an effort to make a better sports program just seems wrong at the core.  I realize that very few transfers are academic related, but it really doesn't matter.  Where someone wants to go to school can have a million variables, and each person is going to have their own priorities.  Whether those priorities are deemed dumb or smart by the masses makes no difference.  If it's a mistake, it's theirs to make and learn from.

I assume in sports that nobody watches this manages to just work itself out just like it does in every other aspect of the free world?  As in you can change jobs, careers, spouses, friends, and schools at will and the earth somehow manages to keep turning. 

[Huckleberry 34578]

2 minutes ago, Gene Parmesan said:

This is the most logical in any step that's designed to limit transfers.  Assuming you aren't in the just let them go wherever they want camp.  If a scholarship is their contract, certainly the multi year version would be the only leg you have to stand on as controlling their ability to transfer.  The idea that we try to control where kids can get their education in an effort to make a better sports program just seems wrong at the core.  I realize that very few transfers are academic related, but it really doesn't matter.  Where someone wants to go to school can have a million variables, and each person is going to have their own priorities.  Whether those priorities are deemed dumb or smart by the masses makes no difference.  If it's a mistake, it's theirs to make and learn from.

I assume in sports that nobody watches this manages to just work itself out just like it does in every other aspect of the free world?  As in you can change jobs, careers, spouses, friends, and schools at will and the earth somehow manages to keep turning. 

Your last paragraph is correct. For example, the Texas softball team this year has 4 starters who played at Oregon last year. Why? Oregon's coach left to come to Texas.

Imagine the end of the world wailing and gnashing of teeth if a football coach left and took 4 players with him to his new school. So why is it okay in softball but not football? Dolla dolla bills y'all.

[Magus Ossis 2997]

Unrestricted transfers but choose between no scholarship or no participation (your first year only, in either case) in the new school unless you completed a degree at the old one (or met one of some set of other pre-established criteria). If someone really wants to transfer, fine-- he is free. If he really wants to play, fine-- he is free. If he wants to commit to one school to play based on getting a free ride and then get a free ride elsewhere, he will have to make an opportunity cost decision. Is it more important for him to get a free college education, to play football, to be where he now wants to be, to avoid the need to complete his degree? Rich kids would be less restricted by this plan but only to the degree that people who can afford college tuition are freer in where they attend in general. And the lawyers they get under the current system pretty much sets different rules for the rich guys anyway.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3871]

If the NCAA wants to let Bru play and needs to come up with a reason that will limit it to a reasonable number of players, they can say that his commitment was based on a coach that had a significant buy out, therefore justifying his reliance on KK's presence more than most.  That would help restrict the conclusion to fewer players.

[Katfid54 9005]

Just now, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

If the NCAA wants to let Bru play and needs to come up with a reason that will limit it to a reasonable number of players, they can say that his commitment was based on a coach that had a significant buy out, therefore justifying his reliance on KK's presence more than most.  That would help restrict the conclusion to fewer players.

Didn't all the KK reports talk about how small his buyout was?  I.e., I remember reading that it was so small, KK just paid it himself, so he could go interview with the Cardinals.

[SuingToGetAMessageBoard? 3871]

2 minutes ago, Katfid54 said:

Didn't all the KK reports talk about how small his buyout was?  I.e., I remember reading that it was so small, KK just paid it himself, so he could go interview with the Cardinals.

Yes, but the buyout exists and probably would be enough to claim some justifiable reliance, and would not be something that exists with a lot of low level coaches.  There has to be some way to limit it to a *significant* coach instead of any old WR coach 1 year out of college. 

[SydneyCarton 49477]

13 minutes ago, Katfid54 said:

Didn't all the KK reports talk about how small his buyout was?  I.e., I remember reading that it was so small, KK just paid it himself, so he could go interview with the Cardinals.

Off the top of my head, I thought the buyout was 300k? For some reason that number is sticking in my head. Anyone else remember?

[Katfid54 9005]

14 minutes ago, SuingToGetAMessageBoard? said:

Yes, but the buyout exists and probably would be enough to claim some justifiable reliance, and would not be something that exists with a lot of low level coaches.  There has to be some way to limit it to a *significant* coach instead of any old WR coach 1 year out of college. 

Oh, so your first post was wrong and the barrier is only that the coach that leaves has to have had a buyout?  Not that it be "significant"?

Be consistent, dude.  Pick a lane.

Edited February 11, 2019 by Katfid54

[Katfid54 9005]

7 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

Off the top of my head, I thought the buyout was 300k? For some reason that number is sticking in my head. Anyone else remember?

The number sticking out in my head was in the $100k-ish (maybe $125k or $150k)?

[Machinator 32103]

$150K

https://cardswire.usatoday.com/2019/01/08/az-arizona-cardinals-kliff-kingsbury-usc-buyout/

[SydneyCarton 49477]

3 minutes ago, Katfid54 said:

The number sticking out in my head was in the $100k-ish (maybe $125k or $150k)?

You're right, per various reports it was 150k.

 

https://dailycaller.com/2019/01/09/kliff-kingsbury-usc-buyout-arizona-cardinals-150000/

[Katfid54 9005]

[Gene Parmesan 4064]

 

12 minutes ago, Katfid54 said:

Oh, so your first post was wrong and the barrier is only that the coach that leaves has to have had a buyout?  Not that it be "significant"?

Be consistent, dude.  Pick a lane.

Seeing as how not all coaching contracts are public the NCAA basing decisions from tweets of the supposed buyout involved seems like the dumbest thing ever.  Which means that will probably be how they handle it.

[Hmbre97 6337]

I think the NCAA should institute a Bru McCoy rule like Rivals did. If a kid signs a LOI on NSD1 or early enrolls in a school but decides to transfer before NSD2, they are treated like a regular recruit as far as eligibility goes. This would only impact a handful of kids at most each year and would just treat them as if they never signed the first LOI.

 

They could also have language that said student athlete loses their spring scholarship if they early enrolled and missed the deadline to move schools. Using Bru as an example, if he changed his mind after the deadline to withdraw and also enroll at Texas, he would either choose to stay at USC on his own dime or drop and then come to Texas in the summer on scholarship with the rest of the 2019 class. I think this would be adequate and fair enough to keep a lot of kids from doing it who just get home sick or other minor issues.

 

 

 

 

[Johnny Sack 8397]

19 hours ago, Tex Pete said:

That’s an absurd scenario. Players who transfer to OU are always granted immediate eligibility, without a loss of a year no matter what the circumstances are. 

Jalen Saunders has serious allergies, man!

[Gene Parmesan 4064]

2 hours ago, Huckleberry said:

Your last paragraph is correct. For example, the Texas softball team this year has 4 starters who played at Oregon last year. Why? Oregon's coach left to come to Texas.

Imagine the end of the world wailing and gnashing of teeth if a football coach left and took 4 players with him to his new school. So why is it okay in softball but not football? Dolla dolla bills y'all.

That's what I figured.  Since they are actually thought of as students in those scenarios it makes sense that they let them get an education at whatever school would have them.  Pretty much like every other aspect of American life works.

[LTtxfan 49988]

6 hours ago, AugieBall said:

From the article: "You try to throw as much against the wall as you can."  That about sums it up.  The coaching change had zero to do with this move.  

Reading comprehension a problem??

From Article on Tate: " Ultimately, he did transfer, and a major reason why was Meyer's retirement and the resulting staff turnover, Martell's attorney Travis Leach told Rowland. That staff turnover, among other things, will be used to make his case for immediate eligibility next season."

Edited February 11, 2019 by LTtxfan

[texifornia 59010]

Just now, LTtxfan said:

Reading comprehension a problem??

From Article: " Ultimately, he did transfer, and a major reason why was Meyer's retirement and the resulting staff turnover, Martell's attorney Travis Leach told Rowland. That staff turnover, among other things, will be used to make his case for immediate eligibility next season."

The "used to make his case" = "throwing shit at a wall"

He's clearly transferring because he's falling down the depth chart with Fields incoming (hell, his OC is still there), but the lawyer needs to muddy the waters to make any kind of case.

[SydneyCarton 49477]

3 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Reading comprehension a problem??

From Article on Tate: " Ultimately, he did transfer, and a major reason why was Meyer's retirement and the resulting staff turnover, Martell's attorney Travis Leach told Rowland. That staff turnover, among other things, will be used to make his case for immediate eligibility next season."

Against my better judgement, you do realize that what you're pasting doesn't do anything to disprove Augie's point, right? There's a difference between what the attorneys will officially use to make a successful case versus the reality of his transfer. Sort of like, say, a racist comment actually had zero to do with Fields choosing to transfer to Ohio State. 

[LTtxfan 49988]

51 minutes ago, texifornia said:

The "used to make his case" = "throwing shit at a wall"

He's clearly transferring because he's falling down the depth chart with Fields incoming (hell, his OC is still there), but the lawyer needs to muddy the waters to make any kind of case.

Hey I don't like Tate....

And I get that Fields coming to Ohio State is a big factor in Tate transferring.  Also agree Tate's attorney will be "throwing shit at a wall" in hopes of approval for the waiver.  But Tate was unhappy how Ryan Day used him in games in 2018, and now Day is the head guy.  So part of Tate's reason for transferring is also due to Ryan Day's elevation to Head Coach.

Edited February 11, 2019 by LTtxfan

[ztejas 44223]

2 hours ago, Hmbre97 said:

I think the NCAA should institute a Bru McCoy rule like Rivals did. If a kid signs a LOI on NSD1 or early enrolls in a school but decides to transfer before NSD2, they are treated like a regular recruit as far as eligibility goes. This would only impact a handful of kids at most each year and would just treat them as if they never signed the first LOI.

 

They could also have language that said student athlete loses their spring scholarship if they early enrolled and missed the deadline to move schools. Using Bru as an example, if he changed his mind after the deadline to withdraw and also enroll at Texas, he would either choose to stay at USC on his own dime or drop and then come to Texas in the summer on scholarship with the rest of the 2019 class. I think this would be adequate and fair enough to keep a lot of kids from doing it who just get home sick or other minor issues.

 

 

 

 

I don't think this is a good idea. What's to keep recruiting departments from going after players between NSD1 and NSD2? I think this is part of the problem with having 2 signing days. 

Also, players could sign somewhere on NSD1, "try out" the school, and then back out without repercussions. 

What if their high school sweetheart breaks up with them January 3rd and that was the main reason they stayed home? Now they're basically an unsigned recruit?

It would make NSD1 totally meaningless. 

[texifornia 59010]

5 minutes ago, LTtxfan said:

Hey I don't like Tate....

And I get that Fields coming to Ohio State is a big factor in Tate transferring.  Also agree Tate's attorney will be "throwing shit at a wall" in hopes of approval for the waiver.  But Tate was unhappy how Ryan Day used him in games in 2018, and now Day is the head guy.  So part of Tate's reason for transferring is also due to Ryan Day's elevation to Head Coach.

Right, the staff has strong continuity from when he committed and signed, which makes the "coaching change" excuse dumb.

Meanwhile, Bru's side of the ball at SC has seen a lot of turnover and broken promises.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

9 minutes ago, ztejas said:

I don't think this is a good idea. What's to keep recruiting departments from going after players between NSD1 and NSD2? I think this is part of the problem with having 2 signing days. 

Also, players could sign somewhere on NSD1, "try out" the school, and then back out without repercussions. 

 

NMNM

Edited February 11, 2019 by Johnny Sack

[Johnny Sack 8397]

I don't see Bru's deal being a big issue.

[ztejas 44223]

Just now, Johnny Sack said:

They can't practice prior to spring ball starting.  Which is after NSD2

They can move into their dorms, meet teammates and coaches, meet females, and attend classes, though.

[Johnny Sack 8397]

Just now, ztejas said:

They can move into their dorms, meet teammates and coaches, meet females, and attend classes, though.

For what, like two weeks?

[Vertigo 20492]

1 hour ago, LTtxfan said:

Reading comprehension a problem??

From Article on Tate: " Ultimately, he did transfer, and a major reason why was Meyer's retirement and the resulting staff turnover, Martell's attorney Travis Leach told Rowland. That staff turnover, among other things, will be used to make his case for immediate eligibility next season."

I wonder how many of our guys would have hit the transfer portal after Herman's first offseason and lackluster year? One thing this does is ups the impact of coaching changes and the tenacity with which they institute their culture. Unless you are bringing in a legend, you are likely to see an exodus of guys from a program when the HC turns over. 

[ztejas 44223]

1 minute ago, Johnny Sack said:

For what, like two weeks?

What is the point you're trying to make? That 18 year olds wouldn't take advantage of the rule change Hmbre proposed?

They are ALREADY taking advantage of a more strict set of rules. You might as well get rid of the 1 year of sitting out transfer policy. 

 

[TKthunder2 5059]

4 hours ago, ztejas said:

What is the point you're trying to make? That 18 year olds wouldn't take advantage of the rule change Hmbre proposed?

They are ALREADY taking advantage of a more strict set of rules. You might as well get rid of the 1 year of sitting out transfer policy. 

 

Yeah, seems like the 1 free transfer rule would be easy to implement.  2nd transfer (even if grad transferring) would require you to sit a year.  This would solve the Bru issue and Tate issue, but if Tate decided to transfer after graduating he’d be up shit creek.

The Tate scernario really gets under my skin.  Can’t believe that spoiled little asshat couldn’t finish his degree.  Regardless of our opinion of them, a bachelor’s from Ohio State (and a chance at getting a master’s from Miami) would be a huge accomplishment for the vast majority of people and this little fucker is treating it like it’s worthless.  He’s not going to play in the NFL so this is so fucking stupid.

[totallynotabuttpirate 5482]

1 minute ago, TKthunder2 said:

Yeah, seems like the 1 free transfer rule would be easy to implement.  2nd transfer (even if grad transferring) would require you to sit a year.  This would solve the Bru issue and Tate issue, but if Tate decided to transfer after graduating he’d be up shit creek.

The Tate scernario really gets under my skin.  Can’t believe that spoiled little asshat couldn’t finish his degree.  Regardless of our opinion of them, a bachelor’s from Ohio State (and a chance at getting a master’s from Miami) would be a huge accomplishment for the vast majority of people and this little fucker is treating it like it’s worthless.  He’s not going to play in the NFL so this is so fucking stupid.

He's ass, my dude. 

[LTtxfan 49988]

On 2/11/2019 at 7:52 AM, AugieBall said:

From the article: "You try to throw as much against the wall as you can."  That about sums it up.  The coaching change had zero to do with this move.  

 

I'm wrong.... Apologies to AugieBall and all others

Chris Hummer quote:

Martell is a different sort of case.

The former Top247 quarterback loudly proclaimed his intention to compete with Fields before the five-star arrived in Columbus. Yet Martell left Ohio State shortly after Fields’ announcement. Martell’s transfer reasoning seems simple: He wanted to play and thought he had a better opportunity to do so elsewhere.

https://247sports.com/Article/Tate-Martell-transfer-waiver-breakdown-change-NCAA-transfer-system-128973860/

 

Interesting stat in the article.....

Publicly, it’s presumed Martell will challenge for immediate eligibility citing Ohio State’s sudden coaching change from Urban Meyer to Ryan Day. Martell’s lawyer, Travis Leach, has said as much. But Martell’s waiver will have more layers than that. You should fully expect Martell to cite a number ofprevious precedents in his appeal, including potential “egregious behavior” by Ohio State or the more recent modification to the wavier guidelines that allows an athlete to cite "documented mitigating circumstances that are outside thestudent-athlete's control and directly impact the health, safety and well-being of the student-athlete.". Fifty-one of 64 NCAA players who appealed for immediate eligibility since that modification saw their waivers approved, per the most recent NCAA data.

Edited February 12, 2019 by LTtxfan

[Foosters 18269]

19 hours ago, ztejas said:

What is the point you're trying to make? That 18 year olds wouldn't take advantage of the rule change Hmbre proposed?

They are ALREADY taking advantage of a more strict set of rules. You might as well get rid of the 1 year of sitting out transfer policy. 

 

ok, cool

[jdhorn92 1594]

18 hours ago, TKthunder2 said:

Yeah, seems like the 1 free transfer rule would be easy to implement.  2nd transfer (even if grad transferring) would require you to sit a year.  This would solve the Bru issue and Tate issue, but if Tate decided to transfer after graduating he’d be up shit creek.

The Tate scernario really gets under my skin.  Can’t believe that spoiled little asshat couldn’t finish his degree.  Regardless of our opinion of them, a bachelor’s from Ohio State (and a chance at getting a master’s from Miami) would be a huge accomplishment for the vast majority of people and this little fucker is treating it like it’s worthless.  He’s not going to play in the NFL so this is so fucking stupid.

Yeah i agree.  No way Martell gets favorable treatment.  And for that matter, i dont see where Bru does either.  Fields had the slur , do I can see why the bogus NCAA granted his waiver, but Martell and Bru seem unlikely, unless the Mccoys have emails stating or text to support something blatant or promised during the recruiting process.

[Magus Ossis 2997]

Tate lawyer to tOSU: tell NCAA to grant my transfer, and tell them it is for my health, but there are sensitive issues involved.

tOSU: ¿Mande?

Lawyer: What happens in Zach Smith tOSU practices stays in Zach Smith tOSU practices, amirite?

tOSU to NCAA: let him play. Seriously.

[futureman 22691]

On 2/11/2019 at 9:51 AM, Chuckie Finster said:

I absolutely get the concerns about guys like Tate jumping from program to program every year, 

tate has transferred schools one time.  once. 

[Chuckie Finster 23038]

1 minute ago, futureman said:

tate has transferred schools one time.  once. 

Hey genius, I'm talking about the Pandora's Box that people fear will be opened if Tate's transfer gets approved.  One where players can transfer every year without repercussions if they aren't happy with their place on the depth chart.

[futureman 22691]

27 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Hey genius, I'm talking about the Pandora's Box that people fear will be opened if Tate's transfer gets approved.  One where players can transfer every year without repercussions if they aren't happy with their place on the depth chart.

no you’re not.  you thought Tate had transferred twice.  because you’re an idiot. 

[Get ln My Van 934]

Who gives a shit if players can transfer from year to year without repercussions. If they pay for the classes or the schools are willing to give scholarships then fuck it. Let the kids go where they want and think they have the best chance to succeed.

[ShowMeALoss 143]

I believe the transfer portal will be a very good thing in the long run. It flushes out players that are not happy and could potentially become cancers to the team and teams get to bring in new blood to plug holes. Nothing good ever comes out of forcing people to do stuff against their free will.

[JBJ 3817]

Open free agency would be not be good for the sport.  It'd be rife with tampering and opens up a lot of avenues for corruption.  And it would detract from the fan experience.

Expanding the circumstances for instant transfer (no playing time, coaching change, institution infractions, etc) and getting rid of the "sue for waiver" process makes more sense.

Edited February 14, 2019 by JBJ

[Huckleberry 34578]

Open free agency would be fine. People underestimate the commitment that the vast majority of players have to their teammates and the simple inertia resisting most people making a change of that magnitude in their lives.

The only limitation that makes sense to me is what I posted previously. If a school has guaranteed a multiyear scholarship to a player and he has accepted then he should be limited. It's ridiculous that in the current system the school has no obligation to renew a scholarship for the next year but the player is obligated to stay at the school under penalty of sitting out a year, losing eligibility, or both (not to mention the current school being able to limit destinations).