GatewayRedbirds.com

Those are good suggestions, CF82.

Maybe allow them to transfer only once, without repercussions, or maybe no transfers once you finish your Sophomore year? I don't know, but as CF82 says, there has to be a reasonable compromise.

Should be able to transfer without penalty if the coach leaves. Should not have any restrictions on where they can transfer when sitting out a year. But I would keep the one-year rule otherwise.

cardsfansince82 wrote:

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote: Students are free to transfer from school to school whenever they want without any repercussions, so it only makes sense that student athletes are treated the same way.

Not exactly. There's a lot of examples of schools either not releasing guys from scholarships or trying to dictate where they are allowed to transfer. I don't think it's great that guys have to sit out a year, but I don't think free agency in college athletics is good either. Some sort of compromise can be found. Maybe they are eligible right away but don't have postseason eligibility? Or if you pay your own way you are eligible immediately? Making them sit out X% of games is probably not ideal.

I think you misunderstood beerstrike. A random student doesn’t have to sit out of classes for a year when they transfer.

Re the pay for eligibility, bad idea. Either only helps rich kids or invites more dark money into college sports.

Socnorb11 wrote:Allowing kids to transfer wherever, whenever, would essentially mean that most mid-major and low-major D1 athletic programs would become irrelevant. They'll essentially become farm systems for the Duke's, Kansas', NC"s and Kentucky's of the world.

We're mostly talking about college basketball anyway (which is already a bit of a joke with the one-and-done's), so I don't really care either way.

Anecdotally, college basketball has more transfer activity already. Mid-major players who do really well early transfer, and power 5 players who can’t get minutes transfer too. The increase in grad transfers underscores it. I’m sure there’s winners and losers, but it’s not a 1 way street. Look no further than Loyola this year for an example, their best player Custer couldn’t get time at Iowa State, transferred to Loyola and blossomed.

lukethedrifter wrote:

cardsfansince82 wrote:

AWvsCBsteeeerike3 wrote: Students are free to transfer from school to school whenever they want without any repercussions, so it only makes sense that student athletes are treated the same way.

Not exactly. There's a lot of examples of schools either not releasing guys from scholarships or trying to dictate where they are allowed to transfer. I don't think it's great that guys have to sit out a year, but I don't think free agency in college athletics is good either. Some sort of compromise can be found. Maybe they are eligible right away but don't have postseason eligibility? Or if you pay your own way you are eligible immediately? Making them sit out X% of games is probably not ideal.

I think you misunderstood beerstrike. A random student doesn’t have to sit out of classes for a year when they transfer.

Re the pay for eligibility, bad idea. Either only helps rich kids or invites more dark money into college sports.

Right, I've never heard of a school not allowing a student on a scholastic scholarship to transfer to a rival school or sit out a year.

Fundamentally, once a player signs, they lose all leverage while still not being guaranteed anything as their scholarship can be taken. And, I'm against such lopsided 'contracts' especially when the players aren't being paid much of anything.

Here's what a scholarship offer letter looks like, these are all over the place online. Note the vague and massive NCAA mandated loophole it creates for schools to void a scholarship.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-footba ... ia-arizona