G's Take on Transfers Eligibilty

[explorer88]

Not sure if anyone caught this but yesterday G created a stir by saying if the NCAA allows transfers to play immediately as many are now proposing, the "tampering would be off the charts".

Never thought about it but he is really on to something. He believes BCS school would try to rob mid-major schools of their best players. That is a friggin scary thought and could really change the dynamics of recruiting.

A rule that is supposed to help kids taking away that restriction could screw kids worse as programs would really begin to run players off. A school like Maryland could tamper with a kid like Tyreek and try and convince him to play there or Pittsburgh trying to get Jerrell to transfer there in G's scenario.

Scary stuff. Don't have the link since I am on my phone but if someone could post the link it is interesting reading.

[Deleted]

The link was posted in the media link thread yesterday.

[luhoopsfan]

I thought he was dead-on. The #1 thing I like about Doc G is he is a straight-shooter without being pompous. He has his opinion on things and gives it to you honestly without trying to make you feel like his opinion is the only right answer.

He's dead-on about this though, you would have kids potentially playing for 3 different schools in their career. It's totally against everything college athletics is supposed to be about. They need to keep the sit-out year in place to keep this under control.

[MisterD]

"Everything college athletics is supposed to be about" is protecting the universities investments in their players.

(I don't think Giannini is a hypocrite by any means, I imagine he's 90th percentile at worst in terms of integrity among college coaches, I just think he's too deeply involved to be impartial. Remember, he wasn't going to have to sit out a year if a BCS school came calling with a million dollar offer.)

[theneumann64]

Yeah, I don't think college athletics is about anything but making the most money possible for the people who are involved that are allowed to get paid, but I'm also not interested in being a farm team for the ACC either.

[luhoopsfan]

That's why I said "SUPPOSED" to be about - just because the integrity of college athletics has eroded away doesn't mean we should just accelerate the process.

[MisterD]

I'm taking the flipside of that statement: Given that integrity has been historically missing from college athletics, why not expedite the process of granting it some.

[Deleted]

I take anything that Matt Norlander writes with a grain of salt. IMO, he may be the least knowledgeable national college basketball writer out there.

I think G's main issue is based on recent talk about the possibility of transfers having immediate eligibility across the board. He's right to be against that. It would be a free-for-all if that happened, and the majority of the schools that would benefit are the BCS schools. Norlander claimed in the article that if G had his way, everyone would sit a year, but I did not see a direct quote from G on that.

Norlander never addressed the waiver process in the article which is shoddy reporting. IMO, that is what needs to be fixed. It is too subjective. I think they should still allow waivers (and I'm pretty sure G would agree with this) but there should be specific criteria that needs to be met in order to get that waiver. Right now, it's a crapshoot as to who gets a waiver and who doesn't. There's been some kids who've been denied who seem to have just as legitimate reasons as kids who did get one. Put in specific rules and that problem goes away.