|
Post by Lucas Lee on May 19, 2020 16:33:27 GMT -5
What's your thoughts? Good or bad thing? www.syracuse.com/orangebasketball/2020/05/consequences-of-ncaas-one-time-transfer-proposal-i-dont-want-to-be-the-jv-program-for-the-power-5.htmlSome of the big concerns highlighted in the article: - Poaching Players (“I don’t want to end up being the JV program for the Power Five,” said Binghamton coach Tommy Dempsey.)
- Recruiting (“You almost have to have a couple scholarships available.....because you’re looking to see what will happen..." Jim Boeheim)
- Academics and APR (“When you transfer from one institution to another, you’re going to lose some credits along the way,” Tommy Dempsey said.)
“My concern is the unintended consequences are just scary,” Earl said. “Having played low-level professional basketball, it’s not a world that I think you want to make college basketball. But we’re headed in that direction.”
|
|
|
Post by Lucas Lee on May 20, 2020 16:44:22 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by deano on May 21, 2020 7:36:46 GMT -5
Yeah, it's a huge thing if we don't have Grif for this upcoming season.
|
|
|
Post by cusefan2016 on May 21, 2020 8:38:24 GMT -5
No griffin but also probably means no Sarr for Kentucky. Which I bet puts them in the drivers seat for Frank.
|
|
|
Post by JazzNC on May 21, 2020 11:39:42 GMT -5
We definitely need AG to be ruled eligible. I can understand the Binghamton coach quote about not wanting to be the JV squads to the P5. It’s legit.
|
|
|
Post by Lucas Lee on May 22, 2020 7:24:10 GMT -5
No griffin but also probably means no Sarr for Kentucky. Which I bet puts them in the drivers seat for Frank. That's a good take I hadn't really considered. Sounds about right though.
|
|
|
Post by Lucas Lee on May 22, 2020 7:27:15 GMT -5
We definitely need AG to be ruled eligible. I can understand the Binghamton coach quote about not wanting to be the JV squads to the P5. It’s legit. Yes. I feel like that's my response to a lot of these NCAA issues when they first arise. It's common sense! Why wouldn't you pay the kids! Why can't they transfer and just play! All of it causes sort of this strange reaction where I'm very much against the NCAA. Then, some of the counterarguments come out, and I do have sympathy in both directions. There is a lot of upfront effort, cost for everyone, not just P5 schools in getting these kids on campus. It really in some ways wouldn't be fair at all for every non-P5 school to just sit there and wait for their best players to get called up to the big leagues when they explode. Which doesn't mean they can't transfer, but it makes sitting out a year seem more reasonable. I don't know. These things are all very complicated to hash out in your head. So, as much as I HATE the NCAA I do see how the struggles arise in coming up with the "right way" to do it.
|
|
|
Post by Lucas Lee on May 22, 2020 7:30:41 GMT -5
I suppose the other side to that is, is it fair to someone like say Carey or Goodine to have to sit a year if they want to get out though? They're not trying to upgrade, they're trying to escape a situation where our coach hates using the bench. Which, may mean they overestimated their talent, or misjudged how they would be used, but they're sold something, and at the end they don't feel like that's what they bought.
And again, that doesn't mean SU or the player is at fault, but that's how recruiting works to some extent. Why should they have to sit out? They're just trying to escape, not chase the brighter lights. I can't even win this argument with myself. lol
|
|
|
Post by deano on May 22, 2020 8:15:55 GMT -5
We definitely need AG to be ruled eligible. I can understand the Binghamton coach quote about not wanting to be the JV squads to the P5. It’s legit. Yes. I feel like that's my response to a lot of these NCAA issues when they first arise. It's common sense! Why wouldn't you pay the kids! Why can't they transfer and just play! All of it causes sort of this strange reaction where I'm very much against the NCAA. Then, some of the counterarguments come out, and I do have sympathy in both directions. There is a lot of upfront effort, cost for everyone, not just P5 schools in getting these kids on campus. It really in some ways wouldn't be fair at all for every non-P5 school to just sit there and wait for their best players to get called up to the big leagues when they explode. Which doesn't mean they can't transfer, but it makes sitting out a year seem more reasonable. I don't know. These things are all very complicated to hash out in your head. So, as much as I HATE the NCAA I do see how the struggles arise in coming up with the "right way" to do it. If a coach can leave a school and they are immediately allowed to coach why can't a player transfer and play immediately then.
|
|
|
Post by JazzNC on May 22, 2020 8:46:21 GMT -5
All of these issues have validity, and both sides have arguments. It truly isn’t black and white. I really think it just comes back to having ethics return to the game (and society as a whole, but that’s another matter). Perhaps trying to make a black and white rule isn’t what’s best? Maybe each transfer case should be looked at on an individual basis. Of course that opens the door for lack of consistency in how it’s applied from student athlete to student athlete. It’s truly hard to come up with a solution that works equitably for everyone. I just keep coming back to a return to ethics, and doing the right thing. You may say I’m a dreamer...
Maybe college basketball should be for players who want degrees and are willing to stay all four years. Kids make a decision after high school... college for 4 years, G league, or NBA draft. It would weed out the kids that are going to Kentucky and other programs where it’s blatantly obvious they’re NOT there for educational purposes.
THEN, the kids who go to school should be paid stipends and tuition but that’s it because they’re not NBA prospects to begin with (in my proposal), and they sign contracts to stay at schools for the duration with clauses which would have to be very carefully written with minimal loopholes for the chance to get out (severe/terminal family illness/death, etc)
We all know the system is broken... how to fix it is a really tough job.
|
|
|
Post by cusefan2016 on May 22, 2020 9:10:04 GMT -5
Well that's why the NCAA is trying to institute a black and white rule. They got flooded with waivers every year and look awful when some get randomly approved and others do not.
The baseball/football model is certainly interesting. If you enroll you cant go to draft for 3 years. I see the merits of both sides I think but they are not wrong in that this rule will essentially have transfers become FA. One area I totally side with the players is that if a coach leaves/gets fired they should be automatically eligible.
|
|
|
Post by Lucas Lee on May 22, 2020 9:42:38 GMT -5
Yes. I feel like that's my response to a lot of these NCAA issues when they first arise. It's common sense! Why wouldn't you pay the kids! Why can't they transfer and just play! All of it causes sort of this strange reaction where I'm very much against the NCAA. Then, some of the counterarguments come out, and I do have sympathy in both directions. There is a lot of upfront effort, cost for everyone, not just P5 schools in getting these kids on campus. It really in some ways wouldn't be fair at all for every non-P5 school to just sit there and wait for their best players to get called up to the big leagues when they explode. Which doesn't mean they can't transfer, but it makes sitting out a year seem more reasonable. I don't know. These things are all very complicated to hash out in your head. So, as much as I HATE the NCAA I do see how the struggles arise in coming up with the "right way" to do it. If a coach can leave a school and they are immediately allowed to coach why can't a player transfer and play immediately then. They're all really fair points - I struggle with what the right thing to do is. I suppose the argument would be that for coaches, you're operating in an open market. You do well, you leave, you do poorly, you're fired. Bother sides have, and perhaps need, some leverage. If you give all the leverage to the student-athlete, is there also the equivalent downside? Should you be able to just "fire" the underperforming player no questions asked? "Jalen, you kind of disappointed - I know it's November 8th, mid-semester, but you gotta go. We like you, you're a good kid, but take the pink slip and bounce." I suppose to some extent, that does happen though when kids are more or less "asked" not to return.
|
|
|
Post by Lucas Lee on May 22, 2020 9:47:03 GMT -5
Well that's why the NCAA is trying to institute a black and white rule. They got flooded with waivers every year and look awful when some get randomly approved and others do not. The baseball/football model is certainly interesting. If you enroll you cant go to draft for 3 years. I see the merits of both sides I think but they are not wrong in that this rule will essentially have transfers become FA. One area I totally side with the players is that if a coach leaves/gets fired they should be automatically eligible. Yes, it does seem like the "best" system can review and approve each waiver in a very thoughtful, and considerate way and make the "right" decision. However, it's all open to interpretation so no "right" decision will ever exist considering all the circumstances, and with social media, people are pretty adept at figuring out which kids seem slighted, or given preference - and perhaps even why. That just makes for unnecessary drama. Ultimately, as a first step, that rule you mention really must be implemented. You signed up for something - and those circumstances have changed dramatically. Perhaps the student-athlete shouldn't be able to follow the coach, to discourage the coach selling himself as a "brand-ready coach with players to accompany his move," but otherwise, no reason the kid should be stuck in a situation that may be detrimental to his life and wasn't really what he signed up for. Regarding the three year rule - I do wonder how it would impact basketball. It would be interesting to see how it played out though.
|
|
|
Post by cusefan2016 on May 22, 2020 10:32:06 GMT -5
The thing with the 3 year rule is, I am not sure any top 150 views himself as a 3 year.
Even kids in the mid 50s think they only need 2 years.
|
|
|
Post by Lucas Lee on May 24, 2020 12:48:37 GMT -5
The thing with the 3 year rule is, I am not sure any top 150 views himself as a 3 year. Even kids in the mid 50s think they only need 2 years. Yeah, we've seen that hit with a couple of our recent players that stepped on the scene. I suppose that's the case with most of these kids - and part of the reason they get to where they are. It's likely why you end up with kids going three or four deep at certain positions (with all 4/5 stars) places like Alabama football, when they could find a much quicker path to starting for other schools.
|
|