One time transfer proposal

[Django]

I'm not sure I see it. Most players that wind up at Big East schools are recruited by those same schools. They chose us.

Yeah I’m not seeing so much “attack the Big East” conspiracy theory either. Creighton has moved up and in on KUs recruits more than any other F5 team and yet Kansas agreed to the scheduling thing with the Big East, and the Big 10 was the first to jump in on the Gavitt Games, I even think it was Delaneys idea. I think it’s more about being fair to the student athletes, and to avoid any future litigation issues. Why waste a year of their athletic lives, which is only about 10-15 years. If it was the SEC I’d be more skeptical on the motives. B1G has a good track record of doing the right thing.

But I sure as shit like this part of what Fieldhouse posted:
NET CONFERENCE RANKINGS
1. Big East
2. Big 12
3. Big Ten
4. Pac-12
5. SEC
6. ACC
NCAA MEN'S BASKETBALL NET RANKINGS
8 Maryland • Big Ten
11 Creighton • Big East
13 Michigan St. • Big Ten
14 Villanova • Big East
16 Seton Hall • Big East
17 Butler • Big East
21 Ohio St. • Big Ten
23 Marquette • Big East
24 Michigan • Big Ten
25 Penn St. • Big Ten
27 Iowa • Big Ten
29 Wisconsin • Big Ten
33 Illinois • Big Ten
34 Purdue • Big Ten
35 Rutgers • Big Ten

Not a single P5-conference basketball coach is happy with the Big East being ranked as the country’s beat basketball conference. The Big Ten schools collectively cannot out-recruit the Big East schools, nor can they collectively out-coach the Big East schools.

[BEwannabe]

The notion the BE would be a vulnerable target is pure folly, basketball only schools in particular BE provide a unique experience to offer. The net impact on top tier programs will be negligible but the churn won’t be positive.

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

I'm not sure I see it. Most players that wind up at Big East schools are recruited by those same schools. They chose us.

Indeed they did. And if you’re a college basketball player who wants to play on a team that makes a run in the NCAA Tournament in March, playing for a Top 5 Big East team [in any given year] is as good of a starting point as anywhere in the country.

But what about the good players at the ‘next 5’ Big East schools who want to play on a team that makes a run in the NCAA Tournament?

Every year, dozens of underclassmen from P5-confernce schools declare early for the NBA Draft, sign with an agent, and go undrafted - creating unexpected holes in the following season’s roster. These players are almost always starters, and their unexpected loss causes major roster problems for their head coaches. Wouldn’t it be convenient for P5-conference coaches if they could replace these players with seasoned veterans or promising freshmen from a lesser program? I believe that a bigger percentage of players from ‘next 5’ Big East schools would be interested in opportunities at other schools if they did not have to sit out a season.

My specific concern is that the basketball programs at DePaul and St. Johns could, in the future, become like Fordham’s, who lands their fair share of A10 All-Rookie Team players, only to see them ‘trade up’ when the opportunity arises.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nick Honor Named to 2019 Atlantic 10 All-Rookie Team – Fordham University – March 12, 2019

Fordham freshman guard Nick Honor was named to the 2019 Atlantic 10 men's basketball All-Rookie team it was announced by the league office today.

Transfer guard Nick Honor officially enrolls with Clemson - Clemson University - May 7, 2019

CLEMSON, S.C. — Clemson University men’s basketball added Fordham transfer guard Nick Honor, announced by head coach Brad Brownell.

Honor, a 5-foot, 10-inch point guard, recently completed his freshman season. He appeared in all 32 games for Fordham, averaging 36.1 minutes per contest. He led the Rams in scoring (15.3 points per game) and finished 37.3 percent from the floor, 33.2 percent from distance, including an impressive 81.6 percent from the foul line. Prior to the Atlantic-10 Conference tournament, Honor was named to the 2019 Atlantic-10 All-Rookie team. He finished the season as the highest scoring freshman in the league.

N.C.A.A. Athletes Could Be Paid Under New California Law - Alan Blinder, New York Times - September 30, 2019

Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill to allow college athletes to hire agents and make money from endorsements. The measure, the first of its kind, threatens the business model of college sports.

California threatened that standard on Monday after Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a bill to allow players to strike endorsement deals and hire agents.

The new law, which is supposed to take effect in 2023, attacks the National Collegiate Athletic Association’s long-held philosophy that college athletes should earn a degree, not money, for playing sports. That view, also under assault in several other states and on Capitol Hill, has held up even as the college sports industry swelled into a behemoth that generated at least $14 billion last year, and as athletes faced mounting demands on their bodies and schedules.

Under the California measure, thousands of student-athletes in America’s most populous state will be allowed to promote products and companies, trading on their sports renown for the first time. And although the law applies only to California, it sets up the possibility that leaders in college sports will eventually have to choose between changing the rules for athletes nationwide or barring some of America’s sports powerhouses from competition.

That last one could be a big problem for the Big East schools (and every other school that isn’t in a P5 conference). Once the NCAA door is open to pay players for basketball, the P5 conferences will keep voting to raise the ante until the ‘salary’ for top players exceeds what private schools can afford. Last year, Ohio State had an income of $210 million from sports. Five years from now, it will be difficult for Xavier to out-bid Ohio State for top HS players.
You get the point. Moving on . . .
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

NET RANKINGS for Last Two Teams in the Big East, Big Ten, and Atlantic 10 - Saturday February 22, 2020 (Same data set as shown in Django’s post.)

64 St. John's • Big East
74 DePaul • Big East

159 Northwestern • Big Ten
184 Nebraska • Big Ten

228 Saint Joseph's • Atlantic 10
276 Fordham • Atlantic 10

There are two reasons why the Big East has a better Conference NET Ranking that the Big Ten.

(1) The Big East has a lot of very good basketball teams, and
(2) None of them have to play Northwestern or Nebraska.

This benefits the Big East teams and is unhelpful to Big Ten teams. If the Big Ten can’t make Northwestern or Nebraska better, the next best thing is to make St. John's and DePaul worse.

Suppose in five years’ time, Ohio State’s starting point guard enters the NBA Draft (as expected), but OSU also unexpectedly loses their back-up point guard, who declares early for the Draft because someone at Rivals gave him five stars. Further suppose that DePaul has an outstanding point guard who just finished his sophomore year averaging 17 points, 6 assists, and has good range.

Ohio State offers him $40,000 per year for the next two seasons, and he doesn’t have to sit out a season. That would be quite a temptation.

The net impact on top tier programs will be negligible but the churn won’t be positive.

I agree. The drive by some P5 conferences to pay players a substantial sum of money for their basketball services, coupled with the drive to eliminate the sit-out season when transferring spells bad news ahead for ‘everyone else.’

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

The notion the BE would be a vulnerable target is pure folly, basketball only schools in particular BE provide a unique experience to offer.

BEwannabe – last night I was looking at the ACC Standings and saw that North Carolina was all alone in last place (in a 15-team conference) with a 3-13 conference record. Noting that is unlikely to be sitting well with Tar Heels fans, something pretty horrible then occurred to me:

NCAA takes step toward allowing one-time transfers for athletes without sitting out - Ben Kercheval & Dennis Dodd, CBS Sports - February 18, 2020

The NCAA's Transfer Waiver Working Group on Tuesday announced a concept is under consideration that would allow undergraduate student athletes in all sports to transfer once without sitting out of competition for one year.

Student-athletes across all sports would be able to transfer once as undergraduates without sitting out a year in residence so long as they: (a) receive a transfer release from their previous school, (b) leave their previous school academically eligible, (c) maintain their academic progress at the new school and (d) depart under no disciplinary suspension.

The current rule mandates that undergraduate transfers in the aforementioned sports must receive a waiver from the NCAA to be eligible immediately.

The waiver process being utilized could allow a change to go into effect as early as this year.

What?

Suppose the no-sit-out-year rule change does go into effect this summer. If I’m North Carolina’s Athletic Director, the first phone call I make is to
Jay Wright to offer him a 6-year guaranteed $50 million contract, on the condition that he brings his top 7 or 8 players with him to Chapel Hill.

Jay likes the Dean Dome, big fan base, and $50 million for six years work.

Jay’s top 7 or 8 players have the supreme honor of playing for one of the greatest college basketball coaches of this century. Does anyone think they won’t follow him to North Carolina if asked (and they don’t have to sit out a day)? Bye-bye Jay and his top 7 or 8 players.

What does Villanova do now? That’s an easy one. Villanova just reloads.

Villanova’s Athletic Director hires the best coach available for $4 million a year, on the condition that he bring his top 7 or 8 players with him to Philadelphia. This behavior will soon become the norm in college basketball. There are 353 Division I teams. Are we all still on the same page here?

Unrestricted free-agency with no sit-out year, for everyone, every April ?

I’ll need a lot of convincing before I think this is good for college basketball or its fans.

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

.
John Calipari on new transfer rule: 'We’re going to be handing out business cards in the handshake line' - Henry Bushnell, Yahoo - March 9, 2020

… Calipari took a question about the FBI’s investigation of hoops corruption and turned it into a long-winded take on a proposed NCAA rule change that would allow football and basketball players to transfer and be eligible immediately.

The Hall of Fame coach, after breaking down the pros and cons of the rule, came to the conclusion: “It’s crazy.”

“This – if they go with it, which I hear they are – it doesn’t hurt Kentucky, it helps us. We’re going to have all kinds of calls, kids wanting to join our program. ... OK. But what does it do to all the mid-majors, low majors, or even the bottom half of the Power Fives?”

Calipari, in considering the rule, has put himself in the shoes of those coaches, the ones who make up a strong majority of Division I college basketball. “I mean, now, who do you recruit?” he asked. “Do you recruit junior college players to know you’ll have ’em? Do you get grad transfers? If you get a really good high school player, is he gonna stay more than one year? Or, if he leaves, what’s it do to the kids in the program – not just him?”

There would, presumably, be penalties for what most professional sports governing bodies consider “tampering.” Coaches wouldn’t, or shouldn’t, be able to actively recruit content players from rival schools in the middle of seasons. The problem, Calipari seemed to say, is enforcement. How do you ensure tampering gets penalized?

His idea is that a coach found guilty should lose his job. “Go to the phones,” Calipari said. “If I called an AAU coach or a high school coach, and he called the kid, we just tampered, I get fired. You fire the coaches.”

However, he conceded: “I just don’t know if they [NCAA officials] are capable of doing that.”

And if they’re not? “We’re going to be handing out, in the handshake line, business cards, when the games end,” Calipari said. “I mean … people don’t know the unintended consequences, and they haven’t talked to coaches enough.

But trying to distinguish between acceptable transfers and unacceptable ones doesn’t seem feasible. That’s what the current system necessitates. It’s what any system necessitates. “I don’t know how you deal with that,” Calipari admitted.

“I mean, it’s crazy.”

I’ve never been a big fan of John Calipari, but in this instance, he hit the nail on the head and I applaud him for speaking out. It is significant that a person of his stature spoke publicly about it.

This is perhaps the most serious issue ever to confront college basketball, and it is imperative that Calipari is followed by more ‘big names’ in college basketball to put an end to this concept before it permanently ruins the game of college basketball.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Here is another closely-related issue that absolutely no one has addressed in print yet:

Chase Johnson Transfers To Dayton From Florida – University of Dayton – January 7, 2019

DAYTON -- University of Dayton men's basketball coach Anthony Grant has announced that Chase Johnson, a 6-foot-9, 219-pound forward from Ripley, West Virginia, will transfer to UD from the University of Florida. Johnson will enroll at UD for the second semester, and be eligible next season after the completion of the first semester. Johnson was rated a four-star performer coming out of high school, and ranked 85th in his class.

If the proposed NCAA rule change that would allow football and basketball players to transfer and be eligible immediately comes into effect, it is quite possible that a judge could rule that it would be unlawful to discriminate against scholarshipped student-athletes who wish to transfer after the first semester.

Remember - the whole rationale behind the proposal is that scholarshipped student-athletes should have the right to transfer to another school without any consequences to their college athletic careers, i.e., that students’ educational rights take precedence over universities’ financial interests [revenue from football and basketball].

Going down the road of permitting college basketball players to transfer at the end of the first semester and be eligible immediately for the second semester will destroy college basketball.

Head coaches whose teams do not perform as well as preseason expectations during the non-conference portion of the schedule will just fire their underperforming players on Christmas eve and replace them with better players from other schools on January 3rd, leaving big holes on the rosters of the teams they left.

The top targets will be players like DePaul’s PAUL REED (6’-9”, 220 lbs. • 14.9 PPG & 10.6 RPG), who will have the option of staying at DePaul (and likely never play in the NCAA Tournament), or become the reserve PF on a team likely to make a deep run in the NCAA tournament (and maybe win a national championship), and still get 20 minutes per game (instead of his usual 32 minutes at DePaul). Every year, dozens of excellent basketball players from NIT (or worse) teams will have similar options to 'trade up' on short notice. Is it even worth continuing with college basketball if this is what it becomes?

[Fieldhouse Flyer]

Sanity prevails:

Report: NCAA unlikely to grant an extra year of eligibility for basketball players – NBC Sports - March 18, 2020

The NCAA is "unlikely" to give another year of eligibility to college basketball athletes whose seasons were cut short due to the cancelation of the NCAA Tournament, according to a report by CBS' Jon Rothstein. This will not only affect the men's and women's basketball athletes, but all winter sports.

A move to grant an extra season of play would surely have been unexpected. Every men's and women's basketball team finished all regular-season competitions before the NCAA cancelled its championship events due to the coronavirus. Some teams had completely wrapped up their 2019-20 season by virtue of losing in their conference tournament.

Allowing players to return, some for a fifth season, to run it back for another chance at a conference or national championship would also create several logistical nightmares.

Granting eligibility wouldn't be just for a select few, it would have to be all or nothing. So those individuals on sub-.500 teams whose seasons were finished would get the extra year if any team projected to make the tournament also got the relief. To allow players to stay on a team, they would also have to lift the scholarship limit of 13 full scholarships on a Division I team to allow high school seniors to play for programs they already committed to. If they lifted the limit, by how much would they lift it and to what end? There would be ripple effects beyond just the upcoming 2020-21 year.

There are a lot of issues the NCAA already has to navigate during this rough climate. An extra year for players who essentially had finished their seasons just doesn't make sense.

This year will just end up being a lost season for everyone.

[billyjack]

Sanity prevails:

Report: NCAA unlikely to grant an extra year of eligibility for basketball players – NBC Sports - March 18, 2020

The NCAA is "unlikely" to give another year of eligibility to college basketball athletes whose seasons were cut short due to the cancelation of the NCAA Tournament, according to a report by CBS' Jon Rothstein. This will not only affect the men's and women's basketball athletes, but all winter sports.

A move to grant an extra season of play would surely have been unexpected. Every men's and women's basketball team finished all regular-season competitions before the NCAA cancelled its championship events due to the coronavirus. Some teams had completely wrapped up their 2019-20 season by virtue of losing in their conference tournament.

Allowing players to return, some for a fifth season, to run it back for another chance at a conference or national championship would also create several logistical nightmares.

Granting eligibility wouldn't be just for a select few, it would have to be all or nothing. So those individuals on sub-.500 teams whose seasons were finished would get the extra year if any team projected to make the tournament also got the relief. To allow players to stay on a team, they would also have to lift the scholarship limit of 13 full scholarships on a Division I team to allow high school seniors to play for programs they already committed to. If they lifted the limit, by how much would they lift it and to what end? There would be ripple effects beyond just the upcoming 2020-21 year.

There are a lot of issues the NCAA already has to navigate during this rough climate. An extra year for players who essentially had finished their seasons just doesn't make sense.

This year will just end up being a lost season for everyone.

That was a good discussion about transfers being allowed immediate movement... we could have had wholesale unlimited movement of players each season, which would've been a crazy situation.

[gtmoBlue]

It's my understanding from the discussion below that the one-rime transfer "rule" will be decided come April.

We already have "wholesale" transfers with the current system, so maybe it doubles. The thing is...not all players/transfers are equal.
Many who wish to transfer will have their hopes dashed as there are limited upward mobility slots to move into, varying interest by coaches at prospective schools,
and few schools with multiple spots to fill. The elites already "batch load" recruits annually, so perhaps a UK/KU might have 2-3 open slots, most schools do not.
Coaches get paid to win, now. It is unlikely that most coaches would purposely under-recruit to save a couple of scholies for potential future transfers.

Most transfer kids move down, not up, to lesser schools in Div1 and even downs to Div2. Players don't magically improve just by mere enrolling/playing at the collegiate level.
Yes, there are a handful who markedly improve and a few who were under-evaluated and recruited, but the analogy is for pearls, not oysters. The numbers are comparatively few.
As for a coach taking his "team" with him to a new destination...to a lesser degree that too is happening already. However, in order to do so on the wholesale level as was illustrated in the above
example, he would have to discard (ask the players to leave) scholarship players who are already at the receiving school. It can be done, but wouldn't set a great precedent/tone at the receiving school.

Flyer is on a roll here, but his overreaction should not be construed as gospel.

[Jet915]

I hope they dont chamge the transfer rule. You are gonna have mass exodus every year. I dont think it will effect us or P5 schools as much but you will have star players from mid and low major schools jumping ship. They in effect will be farm teams for top schools which will kill any semblamce of competitive balance. Why even field a team if your best players leave after a year? Only exception would be if coach leaves or gets fired, they u should be able to transfer without sitting out.

[adoraz]

I don't think immediately eligible transfers would hurt the Big East. We have defined our niche as the best basketball-first conference, with 10/11 schools being private. We are also an average Power conference in recruiting. Currently we don't have players transferring out anymore than the other Power conference schools, so why should we expect that to change if the rule gets changed to immediate eligibility? If anything, I think we've had a net positive transfer flow in recent years with players like Yurt. Would many of our top players coming into this year have left (Powell, Howard, Heron, etc)? I doubt it. Framing this as a B1G vs Big East thing is silly.

That said, the top schools from ALL Power conference would benefit while the bottom schools overall would suffer. Mid/low-major conferences would suffer even more. I don't want this rule to happen.