RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

NCAA to meet regarding immediate eligibility for transfers

 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dinkytown



Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 2388



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/14/18 3:28 pm    ::: NCAA to meet regarding immediate eligibility for transfers Reply Reply with quote

A short article. No meeting date is specified and immediate eligibility will likely be academic based.

Quote:
One source told FanRag Sports that while “nothing is official,” the expected GPA for a student athlete to earn immediate eligibility as a transfer would be either a “2.7 or 2.8.” Two other separate sources said that if this rule is passed, it would go into effect on August 1, 2018.


https://www.fanragsports.com/rothstein-ncaa-to-meet-soon-about-immediate-eligibility-for-transfers/


Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 3507



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/14/18 4:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Wow. I wonder how much (if any) transfers will increase. But I would expect them, too.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23060



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/14/18 7:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

As much as I in general don't like transfer flipping, I do think they need to come up with a consistent policy one way or the other so there's not so many apparently subjective decisions.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 3561



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/14/18 8:59 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Fighting Artichoke wrote:
Wow. I wonder how much (if any) transfers will increase. But I would expect them, too.


Along with tampering.


Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 15767
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/14/18 9:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Part of me wonders if grades could now be used to ease or handicap players who have their eyes on other horizons.



_________________
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty.
ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 9253



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/15/18 12:52 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Queenie wrote:
Part of me wonders if grades could now be used to ease or handicap players who have their eyes on other horizons.


Great point. What difference should it make if you got a C in American history or a B?

So coaches can't take a new job without having to sit out a year unless they get a top 25% performance review?

Still, it's great the NCAA is moving in the direction of recognizing its blatant exploitation of a work force that drives a multi-billion dollar industry.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 1031



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/15/18 1:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Queenie wrote:
Part of me wonders if grades could now be used to ease or handicap players who have their eyes on other horizons.


I don't know, but I like the proposed provision about guaranteeing a scholarship for the length of a graduate program. That can only be a good thing for a student who really wants that graduate degree.


tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6774



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/15/18 2:40 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

From what I have noticed, In NCAA Women's Volleyball the schools normally release their players to play the next season, but they don't always do so.

Of the 2017 Final Four teams, Nebraska starting middle blocker Brianna Holman had to sit out a year after transferring from LSU.

Florida starting libero Carolyn Knop played immediately after transferring from Michigan.

Penn State starting setter Abby Detering played immediately after transferring from Florida.

Defending champion Stanford didn't have any transfers.


auntie



Joined: 16 May 2006
Posts: 1745
Location: Brooklyn, NY


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/15/18 3:08 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

There have been women players who have taken advantage of the time the were required to sit out by focusing on their undergraduate education and then starting an advanced degree with a scholarship at their new school. This rule change would discourage this practice.



_________________
A woman's place is in the paint--Another artist for Liberty.
Rock Hard



Joined: 02 Aug 2010
Posts: 3116
Location: Chocolate Paradise


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 5:23 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:
Queenie wrote:
Part of me wonders if grades could now be used to ease or handicap players who have their eyes on other horizons.


Great point. What difference should it make if you got a C in American history or a B?

So coaches can't take a new job without having to sit out a year unless they get a top 25% performance review?

Still, it's great the NCAA is moving in the direction of recognizing its blatant exploitation of a work force that drives a multi-billion dollar industry.


I totally agree.



_________________
Do not give what is holy to dogs, and do not throw your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet and turn and tear you to pieces.
Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 15767
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 8:35 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Also, maybe I'm just being dense, but under this scenario, would a student-athlete who didn't make the grade cut-off for immediate eligibility not be able to transfer at all or just end up under the same rules we're currently using?



_________________
We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty.
mzonefan



Joined: 15 Oct 2005
Posts: 3114
Location: Ann Arbor, MI


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 1:24 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

tfan wrote:
From what I have noticed, In NCAA Women's Volleyball the schools normally release their players to play the next season, but they don't always do so.

Of the 2017 Final Four teams, Nebraska starting middle blocker Brianna Holman had to sit out a year after transferring from LSU.

Florida starting libero Carolyn Knop played immediately after transferring from Michigan.

Penn State starting setter Abby Detering played immediately after transferring from Florida.

Defending champion Stanford didn't have any transfers.


Knop was separated from Michigan. It wasn't her choice to transfer, so Michigan would have made it easy.

The B1G waived its transfer rule for Tiffany Clark to play immediately at Wisconsin after transferring from Michigan.


FrozenLVFan



Joined: 08 Jul 2014
Posts: 1031



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 1:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

What would this mean for conference rules? If the NCAA lifted their restrictions, could various conferences still require players to sit out a year for intra-conference transfers?


dinkytown



Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 2388



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 1:33 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Queenie wrote:
Part of me wonders if grades could now be used to ease or handicap players who have their eyes on other horizons.


I saw a tweet that was interesting. If grades are used it would violate privacy laws/FERPA since we would immediately know who has bad grades and who doesn’t.


calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 3050
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 2:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

dinkytown wrote:
Queenie wrote:
Part of me wonders if grades could now be used to ease or handicap players who have their eyes on other horizons.


I saw a tweet that was interesting. If grades are used it would violate privacy laws/FERPA since we would immediately know who has bad grades and who doesn’t.


I don't see this as violating FERPA privacy laws anymore than applying concussion protocols violates HIPPA health care privacy laws. It is applying standards, not violating privacy.


Fighting Artichoke



Joined: 12 Dec 2012
Posts: 3507



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 3:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:
dinkytown wrote:
Queenie wrote:
Part of me wonders if grades could now be used to ease or handicap players who have their eyes on other horizons.


I saw a tweet that was interesting. If grades are used it would violate privacy laws/FERPA since we would immediately know who has bad grades and who doesn’t.


I don't see this as violating FERPA privacy laws anymore than applying concussion protocols violates HIPPA health care privacy laws. It is applying standards, not violating privacy.


As a college prof., I agree.


purduefanatic



Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2333
Location: Indiana


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 3:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Fighting Artichoke wrote:
calbearman76 wrote:
dinkytown wrote:
Queenie wrote:
Part of me wonders if grades could now be used to ease or handicap players who have their eyes on other horizons.


I saw a tweet that was interesting. If grades are used it would violate privacy laws/FERPA since we would immediately know who has bad grades and who doesn’t.


I don't see this as violating FERPA privacy laws anymore than applying concussion protocols violates HIPPA health care privacy laws. It is applying standards, not violating privacy.


As a college prof., I agree.


Not to mention we get kids that are declared academically ineligible, so you clearly know their grades aren't up to snuff. Now, if you made mention of what their actual GPA was ("Mary cannot transfer due to the fact that she only has a 2.23 GPA"), that is probably a different story and may qualify as a violation of privacy laws.


GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5034
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 4:54 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Consistent with the view that the NCAA should stop the exploitation of student-athlete workers -- whether that view is accurate or not -- I would propose eliminating all sports scholarships, as has always been the practice in the sainted Ivy League.

College students should play sports only for the simple joy of playing sports, for physical education, for health and fitness, for voluntary recreation, and to prepare to win the future battles of Waterloo on the playing fields of Eton. In connection with this moneyless regime, all students including those who play sports should be allowed unlimited transfers from school to school.

Boys and girls who aren't interested in academic studies, which are frankly mostly useless in a vocational sense, shouldn't go to college. It's a gigantic waste of money and a huge cash cow for the bloated and increasingly illiberal institutions.

Boys and girls who aren't interested in academics but who would like to try for careers in professional sports, should have opportunities to join minor leagues in the various sports, as baseball has offered for over 100 years. Let there be actual sports companies to employ these budding sports workers.
tfan



Joined: 31 May 2010
Posts: 6774



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/16/18 5:55 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

mzonefan wrote:

Knop was separated from Michigan. It wasn't her choice to transfer, so Michigan would have made it easy.


"separated"? Was there a press release saying she had been kicked off the team?

She played through the end of 2015 for them, so if she was kicked off, it occurred after the season was over. They told a story (can't remember whether I saw video or read it) during the recent NCAA Volleyball tournament about Knop meeting two Florida players when they were all on the USA Junior National Volleyball Team in the summer of 2015. The Florida players encouraged her to apply to transfer to Florida and they also encouraged the Florida coach to accept her ("we found our libero"). So I think Knop was in her last season (Fall 2015) at Michigan regardless of what may have transpired with her and the coach after it ended.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 9253



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/17/18 10:12 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

GlennMacGrady wrote:
Consistent with the view that the NCAA should stop the exploitation of student-athlete workers -- whether that view is accurate or not -- I would propose eliminating all sports scholarships, as has always been the practice in the sainted Ivy League.

College students should play sports only for the simple joy of playing sports, for physical education, for health and fitness, for voluntary recreation, and to prepare to win the future battles of Waterloo on the playing fields of Eton. In connection with this moneyless regime, all students including those who play sports should be allowed unlimited transfers from school to school.

Boys and girls who aren't interested in academic studies, which are frankly mostly useless in a vocational sense, shouldn't go to college. It's a gigantic waste of money and a huge cash cow for the bloated and increasingly illiberal institutions.

Boys and girls who aren't interested in academics but who would like to try for careers in professional sports, should have opportunities to join minor leagues in the various sports, as baseball has offered for over 100 years. Let there be actual sports companies to employ these budding sports workers.


That's the European system, pretty much. Private clubs train and develop athletes.

The issue, I think, is that athletics are a profit center for many universities, regardless of how they play with the books, and no administration wants to kill the golden goose.



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 12596



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/17/18 1:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:

That's the European system, pretty much. Private clubs train and develop athletes.

The issue, I think, is that athletics are a profit center for many universities, regardless of how they play with the books, and no administration wants to kill the golden goose.


Not just European. Baseball, Hockey, Tennis in the US too have parallel systems. It's not the schools' choices, it's the pro leagues, especially the NFL, that concluded long ago that it was cheaper to abuse colleges as their farm system than to finance and run their own.

Why does the WNBA have some of the most restrictive college class/age requirements in all of pro sports? Far more restrictive than its parent NBA. So what are American girls supposed to do? The WNBA and it's players union deny them any choice.

The problem with your theory that the restrictions are all about money is that the restrictions started long before there was any real money. The NLOI, for example, began back in 1964. Sports weren't a "golden goose" in 1964.


ClayK



Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 9253



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/17/18 1:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
ClayK wrote:

That's the European system, pretty much. Private clubs train and develop athletes.

The issue, I think, is that athletics are a profit center for many universities, regardless of how they play with the books, and no administration wants to kill the golden goose.


Not just European. Baseball, Hockey, Tennis in the US too have parallel systems. It's not the schools' choices, it's the pro leagues, especially the NFL, that concluded long ago that it was cheaper to abuse colleges as their farm system than to finance and run their own.

Why does the WNBA have some of the most restrictive college class/age requirements in all of pro sports? Far more restrictive than its parent NBA. So what are American girls supposed to do? The WNBA and it's players union deny them any choice.

The problem with your theory that the restrictions are all about money is that the restrictions started long before there was any real money. The NLOI, for example, began back in 1964. Sports weren't a "golden goose" in 1964.


Perhaps in terms of enrollment, donations and alumni support they more than paid for themselves ...

I don't have access to any 1964 university budgets, but I'd have to guess that schools made money on athletics. Otherwise, why would they have them?

I think baseball is pretty restrictive, really, but as you point out, the players' unions define these terms, pretty much. The colleges are more than happy to go along for the ride ...



_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 12596



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/17/18 2:09 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ClayK wrote:

I don't have access to any 1964 university budgets, but I'd have to guess that schools made money on athletics. Otherwise, why would they have them?


For the same reason grade schools, middle schools, and high schools pay to run sports teams, communities pay for little league teams, parishes sponsor CYO teams, etc.

Sports are considered a way to provide exercise, build character and teamwork, keep kids busy and out of trouble, and lots of other reasons. Have been a traditional part of school programs at all levels for over 100 years.

Why do Division 3 schools sponsor sports? Why do any colleges sponsor field hockey or fencing or water polo? It's certainly not to make money.

Your obsession with sports being all about money and only about money leads you to some misplaced conclusions.

BTW, colleges don't "happily" go along for the ride. Best example is that colleges overwhelmingly want the NBA to get rid of their ridiculous one-year rule and go back to taking high school kids. Colleges don't have a say in the matter.


CBiebel



Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 637
Location: PA


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 4:53 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:


The problem with your theory that the restrictions are all about money is that the restrictions started long before there was any real money. The NLOI, for example, began back in 1964. Sports weren't a "golden goose" in 1964.


I wouldn't quite say that. They weren't as profitable as they are today, but they were profitable (mostly). If you want some perspective on that try reading a couple of books by Murray Sperber:

Shake Down the Thunder

Onward to Victory


The first book is the best, most unbiased book on the early history of ND Football (It puts the growth into the context of what was going on at other schools, the sport in general, academic debates, etc). Sperber isn't a ND fan (he's a Purdue and Cal grad) and he asked for access to various ND records that were squirreled away in the ND Library basement. He found amazing details on the way the program was run and how sports in general at that time were run. The book ends with the Leahy era (1940s).

The second book kind of starts where the first one left off (around the 1940s), but doesn't deal so much with ND (although ND does play a big role in the story), but deals more with the various scandals, new markets, and how college football dealt with them, and how different factions were suggesting different solutions (like ND and a handful of other schools wanting the accrediting agencies to police the athletic programs instead of giving that job to the NCAA, or how the NCAA took over broadcast rights for TV (because they were concerned with gate receipts, not realizing that you could make more money with TV deals). ND was on the losing side of both those battles in the 1950s).

There has been money in college sports for a very long time.


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 12596



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 1:48 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CBiebel wrote:
ArtBest23 wrote:


The problem with your theory that the restrictions are all about money is that the restrictions started long before there was any real money. The NLOI, for example, began back in 1964. Sports weren't a "golden goose" in 1964.


I wouldn't quite say that. They weren't as profitable as they are today, but they were profitable (mostly). If you want some perspective on that try reading a couple of books by Murray Sperber:

Shake Down the Thunder

Onward to Victory


The first book is the best, most unbiased book on the early history of ND Football (It puts the growth into the context of what was going on at other schools, the sport in general, academic debates, etc). Sperber isn't a ND fan (he's a Purdue and Cal grad) and he asked for access to various ND records that were squirreled away in the ND Library basement. He found amazing details on the way the program was run and how sports in general at that time were run. The book ends with the Leahy era (1940s).

The second book kind of starts where the first one left off (around the 1940s), but doesn't deal so much with ND (although ND does play a big role in the story), but deals more with the various scandals, new markets, and how college football dealt with them, and how different factions were suggesting different solutions (like ND and a handful of other schools wanting the accrediting agencies to police the athletic programs instead of giving that job to the NCAA, or how the NCAA took over broadcast rights for TV (because they were concerned with gate receipts, not realizing that you could make more money with TV deals). ND was on the losing side of both those battles in the 1950s).

There has been money in college sports for a very long time.


Yeah, and Texas high schools build $70 million stadiums too, but that doesn't mean all high school sports are money driven.

I'm not sure that you can extrapolate Notre Dsme's experience in football to all sports of every other college.

The NLOI began in 1964. It wasn't until 1981 that the courts broke the NCAA's Monopoly over football TV rights and money started to become meaningful.


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 23060



Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 2:07 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

There's two distinct 'sides':
On one side is Football and men's basketball.
On the other side is all other sports both men and women.

I don't think you can talk about the issue without separating those two sides.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
SO ...I lost a bet with Rock about how many wins Chicago would get this year. My punishment - T. Young as my avatar. Well it could be worse!
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5034
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 01/18/18 2:19 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
There's two distinct 'sides':
On one side is Football and men's basketball.
On the other side is all other sports both men and women.

I don't think you can talk about the issue without separating those two sides.


Exactly. We can rename the two sides the "profit center sports" and the "loss center sports".

To accommodate and balance the competing views of money and player transferability, I propose this compromise:

There should be free transferability and no sit-out years for all sports other than the two profit center sports, football and men's basketball. As to those two sports, we should restrict transfers as much as possible in order to protect the sports profits of our nation's great non-profit institutions of . . . (cough, cough) . . . basket weaving and other higher education.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 57471
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/13/18 1:47 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

DI transfer group requests feedback on rule concepts

https://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/media-center/news/di-transfer-group-requests-feedback-rule-concepts

Quote:
Additionally, the working group is not considering preserving the current rule or requiring all student-athletes to sit out a year without exception



_________________
Don't take no rhythm,
Don't take no style
Gotta thirst for killin',
Grab your vial
Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2072



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/13/18 3:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

They just trying to piss Dawn off more when they announce after FF that everyone can play on transferring Laughing


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page 1 of 1

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin