| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
undersized_post
Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2864
Back to top |
|
SDHoops
Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 1183
Back to top |
|
undersized_post
Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2864
Back to top |
|
Howee
Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15734
Location: OREGON (in my heart)
Back to top |
|
Queenie
Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18029
Location: Queens
Back to top |
 Posted: 03/02/21 12:09 am ::: |
Reply  |
|
I'm not naming names because I don't have the breadth and depth of knowledge to look smart doing it.
St. John's: since coaches don't transfer, I'd settle for a confident floor leader of a point guard, someone who could deal with Tartamella's micro-management and let it go in one ear and out the other.
Seton Hall: height plskthxbai (I recognize that Coach Bozzella is inordinately fond of giving those who are vertically challenged at their positions a fair shot, but sometimes I just want a banger in the post, y'know?)
Michigan: a second reliable scorer, we've had too many nights where it was Naz and... ... ... uh...
I haven't been following any of my other teams closely enough to know their weak points. This not seeing games in person thing ronks.
_________________
Ardent believer in the separation of church and stadium.
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 12:15 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| we (Stanford) could definitely use another PG. This year we had the benefit of having three: Williams, Wilson, and Van Gytenbeek who may turn out ok, but ITM I don't think we have a second PG behind her...and I'm hoping Tara is not thinking she can turn Haley Jones into a Didi Richards type PG. Jones is really good at other things but she's a turnover waiting to happen as a ball handler. Maybe Jump can help out but she is such a good shooter, I'd like her to concentrate on that instead of PG duties. So....not sure where that PG is coming from but we need one.
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 10:12 am ::: |
Reply |
|
As the NCAA inevitably continues to loosen restrictions on transfers -- which of course it should as coaches aren't restrained -- the "wishlist" will become more of a "free agent market."
Why should a quality point guard come off the bench for 12 minutes a game because an all-American is ahead of her when she could be starting for a tournament team somewhere else?
So I expect more and more players and coaches to work the system and seek out the missing pieces in the offseason. Of course, if the NCAA could abandon a little more of the hypocrisy that flows through its organizational veins by the quart, it would simply allow every player to move freely, and every coach to recruit transfers. (Coaches hate that because they'd have to work a lot harder for their very large salaries.)
Which would make every offseason a lot more fun, aside from giving players the freedom of movement they deserve.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
summertime blues
Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7822
Location: Shenandoah Valley
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 10:19 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| JMU---I like our team. I just want some sticky on their hands so they stop the turnovers. That is all.
_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 10:33 am ::: |
Reply |
|
So how do you propose this "free agency" gets handled? Can a student-athlete transfer any day, any week, any time of the year. So, Suzie (a PG) plays sparingly for Maryland in a blow out win at Penn State on Saturday. While there, she noticed that the Nittany Lions had a real lack of ball-handling and decides to reach out to them on Sunday. Turns out they have a scholarship and love the way she plays. She puts her name in the transfer portal on Monday and transfers there immediately. That next weekend she plays for Penn State at Nebraska. All of this is assuming she is in good academic standing.
Is that how you envision this? Does this also lead to trading of student-athletes? Does it lead to cutting student-athletes in the middle of the year so they can pick up a transfer that they perceive to be a better player?
There is some sarcasm there but also genuinely curious as to how you and others on here actually envision this transfer thing to play out.
|
|
undersized_post
Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2864
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 10:35 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
As the NCAA inevitably continues to loosen restrictions on transfers -- which of course it should as coaches aren't restrained -- the "wishlist" will become more of a "free agent market."
Why should a quality point guard come off the bench for 12 minutes a game because an all-American is ahead of her when she could be starting for a tournament team somewhere else?
So I expect more and more players and coaches to work the system and seek out the missing pieces in the offseason. Of course, if the NCAA could abandon a little more of the hypocrisy that flows through its organizational veins by the quart, it would simply allow every player to move freely, and every coach to recruit transfers. (Coaches hate that because they'd have to work a lot harder for their very large salaries.)
Which would make every offseason a lot more fun, aside from giving players the freedom of movement they deserve. |
I agree that transfers certainly make things more interesting. However, I have to say that it annoys me a bit that certain top-10 teams (not naming names) only stay at the top because they rely on a constant flow of successful incoming transfers.
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 11:53 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
As the NCAA inevitably continues to loosen restrictions on transfers -- which of course it should as coaches aren't restrained -- the "wishlist" will become more of a "free agent market."
Why should a quality point guard come off the bench for 12 minutes a game because an all-American is ahead of her when she could be starting for a tournament team somewhere else?
So I expect more and more players and coaches to work the system and seek out the missing pieces in the offseason. Of course, if the NCAA could abandon a little more of the hypocrisy that flows through its organizational veins by the quart, it would simply allow every player to move freely, and every coach to recruit transfers. (Coaches hate that because they'd have to work a lot harder for their very large salaries.)
Which would make every offseason a lot more fun, aside from giving players the freedom of movement they deserve. |
It works in pro sports because of salary caps. In the current setup in wcbb your plan would turn 300 D1 programs into a farm system for the other 50 who have the resources and will to go out and recruit players from other programs. I also wonder if there are many players in the lower 300 programs that would help a program with dreams of going deep into the NCAA's.
I'm sure that there is still some of that going on now through the use of surrogates. Back in the distant past it's my understanding that there were no restrictions on raiding other programs and Summit won her first title when she talked 2 of her Olympic team mates into transferring to Tenn. Soon after there was a new rule restricting that behavior.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 4:38 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| linkster wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
As the NCAA inevitably continues to loosen restrictions on transfers -- which of course it should as coaches aren't restrained -- the "wishlist" will become more of a "free agent market."
Why should a quality point guard come off the bench for 12 minutes a game because an all-American is ahead of her when she could be starting for a tournament team somewhere else?
So I expect more and more players and coaches to work the system and seek out the missing pieces in the offseason. Of course, if the NCAA could abandon a little more of the hypocrisy that flows through its organizational veins by the quart, it would simply allow every player to move freely, and every coach to recruit transfers. (Coaches hate that because they'd have to work a lot harder for their very large salaries.)
Which would make every offseason a lot more fun, aside from giving players the freedom of movement they deserve. |
It works in pro sports because of salary caps. In the current setup in wcbb your plan would turn 300 D1 programs into a farm system for the other 50 who have the resources and will to go out and recruit players from other programs. I also wonder if there are many players in the lower 300 programs that would help a program with dreams of going deep into the NCAA's.
I'm sure that there is still some of that going on now through the use of surrogates. Back in the distant past it's my understanding that there were no restrictions on raiding other programs and Summit won her first title when she talked 2 of her Olympic team mates into transferring to Tenn. Soon after there was a new rule restricting that behavior. |
First, the top 50 schools already treat the others as a farm system, and anyone who lawyers up can justify immediate eligibility -- which means the rich can game the system and the poor cannot.
Second, why should the schools' interest take precedence over the players' best interests? Why do schools get to choose? They make their money off the players, after all.
So let the players do what they feel is best for them -- and have the same freedom coaches and athletic directors do, to move to a place that affords them the best opportunities.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 4:45 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
So how do you propose this "free agency" gets handled? Can a student-athlete transfer any day, any week, any time of the year. So, Suzie (a PG) plays sparingly for Maryland in a blow out win at Penn State on Saturday. While there, she noticed that the Nittany Lions had a real lack of ball-handling and decides to reach out to them on Sunday. Turns out they have a scholarship and love the way she plays. She puts her name in the transfer portal on Monday and transfers there immediately. That next weekend she plays for Penn State at Nebraska. All of this is assuming she is in good academic standing.
Is that how you envision this? Does this also lead to trading of student-athletes? Does it lead to cutting student-athletes in the middle of the year so they can pick up a transfer that they perceive to be a better player?
There is some sarcasm there but also genuinely curious as to how you and others on here actually envision this transfer thing to play out. |
Here would be my plan:
1) High school athletes sign a contract with the school they wish to attend. The contract can be any length, prohibit transfers, involve money, whatever the school and player can agree on. (High school players and their families could hire agents so that the schools can't bully them.)
2) Those contracts would then specify when a player could transfer -- not during the season, and conceivably not after one sport is done so that the player could play a different sport at a different school.
So instead of the NLI being forced on players, there would now be recruitment, just as there is for top science and math students.
The reality would be that the vast majority of high school athletes would sign a standard deal -- which might be two, three or four years -- with no negotiation. And they would sign for basically what they get now: a scholarship and certain benefits.
But elite athletes, the ones who generate income, would now be able to negotiate on even terms, and sign negotiated contracts with special provisions allowing or preventing transfers.
This doesn't seem that complicated to me since after a few years, a "standard" deal would emerge and it would be just like signing an NLI. And my guess would be that standard deal would include an opt-out after two seasons for both parties, which would be great for everyone.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
Colerr
Joined: 16 Mar 2012
Posts: 569
Location: Missouri
Back to top |
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 4:53 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| linkster wrote: |
| Back in the distant past it's my understanding that there were no restrictions on raiding other programs and Summit won her first title when she talked 2 of her Olympic team mates into transferring to Tenn. Soon after there was a new rule restricting that behavior. |
Summitt recruited Olympians and future HOFers Trish Roberts from Emporia State and Cindy Brogdon from Mercer to play for the LVs
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/02/21 6:14 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
| Back in the distant past it's my understanding that there were no restrictions on raiding other programs and Summit won her first title when she talked 2 of her Olympic team mates into transferring to Tenn. Soon after there was a new rule restricting that behavior. |
Summitt recruited Olympians and future HOFers Trish Roberts from Emporia State and Cindy Brogdon from Mercer to play for the LVs |
And that is only part of the list. Much of her early success was built on transfers from smaller schools in the early days. Players realized that Tennessee was going to be better for them, and the looser rules at the time allowed them to follow their dreams.
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
ucbart
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 2815
Location: New York
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/03/21 8:52 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| pilight wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
| Back in the distant past it's my understanding that there were no restrictions on raiding other programs and Summit won her first title when she talked 2 of her Olympic team mates into transferring to Tenn. Soon after there was a new rule restricting that behavior. |
Summitt recruited Olympians and future HOFers Trish Roberts from Emporia State and Cindy Brogdon from Mercer to play for the LVs |
And that is only part of the list. Much of her early success was built on transfers from smaller schools in the early days. Players realized that Tennessee was going to be better for them, and the looser rules at the time allowed them to follow their dreams. |
And I don't think there was anything wrong with that. The 80's were different times, especially for female athletes. Those transfers helped grow the game, IMO.
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/03/21 9:40 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
Here would be my plan:
1) High school athletes sign a contract with the school they wish to attend. The contract can be any length, prohibit transfers, involve money, whatever the school and player can agree on. (High school players and their families could hire agents so that the schools can't bully them.)
2) Those contracts would then specify when a player could transfer -- not during the season, and conceivably not after one sport is done so that the player could play a different sport at a different school.
So instead of the NLI being forced on players, there would now be recruitment, just as there is for top science and math students.
The reality would be that the vast majority of high school athletes would sign a standard deal -- which might be two, three or four years -- with no negotiation. And they would sign for basically what they get now: a scholarship and certain benefits.
But elite athletes, the ones who generate income, would now be able to negotiate on even terms, and sign negotiated contracts with special provisions allowing or preventing transfers.
This doesn't seem that complicated to me since after a few years, a "standard" deal would emerge and it would be just like signing an NLI. And my guess would be that standard deal would include an opt-out after two seasons for both parties, which would be great for everyone. |
So if I read this correctly, you seem to be saying that the system really isn't awful as it works for a huge percentage of the student-athletes and would continue to work the way it does today but the system should be overhauled for the very small percentage of elite athletes?
I feel like the NFL needs to develop a minor league system like baseball, hockey and what the NBA has started doing as well. In my mind, if that would happen, you wouldn't have any need for what you are proposing. A high school kid that perceives they are good enough to be a professional at their sport would have multiple routes to choose: go to college, sign to play in a developmental league or head to Europe. If they choose the college route, they accept the rules as they written. If they go the professional route, they jump into the real world just like the rest of the high school kids that go directly to the work force from high school.
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11140
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/03/21 9:51 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| ClayK wrote: |
Here would be my plan:
1) High school athletes sign a contract with the school they wish to attend. The contract can be any length, prohibit transfers, involve money, whatever the school and player can agree on. (High school players and their families could hire agents so that the schools can't bully them.)
2) Those contracts would then specify when a player could transfer -- not during the season, and conceivably not after one sport is done so that the player could play a different sport at a different school.
So instead of the NLI being forced on players, there would now be recruitment, just as there is for top science and math students.
The reality would be that the vast majority of high school athletes would sign a standard deal -- which might be two, three or four years -- with no negotiation. And they would sign for basically what they get now: a scholarship and certain benefits.
But elite athletes, the ones who generate income, would now be able to negotiate on even terms, and sign negotiated contracts with special provisions allowing or preventing transfers.
This doesn't seem that complicated to me since after a few years, a "standard" deal would emerge and it would be just like signing an NLI. And my guess would be that standard deal would include an opt-out after two seasons for both parties, which would be great for everyone. |
So if I read this correctly, you seem to be saying that the system really isn't awful as it works for a huge percentage of the student-athletes and would continue to work the way it does today but the system should be overhauled for the very small percentage of elite athletes?
I feel like the NFL needs to develop a minor league system like baseball, hockey and what the NBA has started doing as well. In my mind, if that would happen, you wouldn't have any need for what you are proposing. A high school kid that perceives they are good enough to be a professional at their sport would have multiple routes to choose: go to college, sign to play in a developmental league or head to Europe. If they choose the college route, they accept the rules as they written. If they go the professional route, they jump into the real world just like the rest of the high school kids that go directly to the work force from high school. |
But why not allow players to sign a contract that allows them to transfer after a year or two years? And the contract could also let the college off the hook after as year or two?
And why not allow high school families to have agents?
This way, the power shifts from the corrupt and hypocritical NCAA to individual negotiations with colleges. A scholarship-level athlete could then shop for the best deal, and the market -- rather than the NCAA or the colleges -- would decide what's fair. Right now, college athletes have agreements forced on them with no options, which some would call central planning. Why not let them decide for themselves what works for them?
Or, to put it another way, what about the present vastly imbalanced system is worth saving?
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/03/21 11:08 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
| But why not allow players to sign a contract that allows them to transfer after a year or two years? And the contract could also let the college off the hook after as year or two? |
The NLI is a contract. They were designed as a one-year renewable contract but everyone wanted it to be upped to a 4 year guarantee and now that is an option for schools and student-athletes. So, do people want the old way where you could part ways after a year or 2 or even 3 or do they want the 4-year guarantee? Either you get the option to leave on your won or risk getting cut OR you get the security of a 4 year guarantee. You can't have it both ways. I think the one year renewable is perfectly fine.
| ClayK wrote: |
And why not allow high school families to have agents?
This way, the power shifts from the corrupt and hypocritical NCAA to individual negotiations with colleges. A scholarship-level athlete could then shop for the best deal, and the market -- rather than the NCAA or the colleges -- would decide what's fair. Right now, college athletes have agreements forced on them with no options, which some would call central planning. Why not let them decide for themselves what works for them?
Or, to put it another way, what about the present vastly imbalanced system is worth saving? |
Seeing as you have brought up math and science kids, do they get agents? Do they need agents? If they don't, why do high school athletes?
For the vast majority of college sports, the student-athletes do negotiate for the best deal. With the exception of 5 or 6 sports, most deal with equivalencies so if Jill gets offered a half scholarship at Duke for field hockey, she can mention that to the powers that be at Maryland and potentially get a 3/4 scholarship or even a full. The only sports that are "head count" and thus only offer full scholarships are football and basketball on the men's side and basketball, volleyball, tennis and gymnastics on the women's side. So the other 2 dozen or so sports sponsored by the NCAA only provide equivalencies and the student-athletes can negotiate benefits with schools.
Exactly what are women's basketball players going to negotiate anyway? I love women's basketball and made a career of it for quite a while, but the money just is not generated through that sport like it is for men's hoops and football. In fact, most programs lose money. I feel like so much of what you are advocating for is really only applicable to football (not so much men's hoops now as they have the G league they can go to directly from high school to get paid).
The only other point I would make is this: Trevor Lawrence is the QB at Clemson that is certainly going to be the #1 pick in the NFL draft later this year. How many people knew who he was coming out of HS vs where he is today? Had there been a minor league for football, I'm sure he would have done well right out of high school but would he have gained the notoriety and recognition that he did at Clemson? He was provided a platform to achieve fame and get a massive payday. Sure, Clemson packed a stadium and gained substantially from his play. While I agree someone like that should be able to capitalize some on his likeness, autograph, etc, I also feel like he gained a ton thanks to Clemson. From the scholarship to use of all their facilities, from room and board to individual trainers teaching/coaching/healing him and all the other things involved he was given everything at no cost to him over his 3 or 4 year career to get to where he is today.
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66900
Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/03/21 11:57 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Seeing as you have brought up math and science kids, do they get agents? Do they need agents? If they don't, why do high school athletes? |
Do math and science students sign NLIs? If there are going to be contracts, both parties should have the right to representation and counsel.
And yes, there are people who act as agents for students. You'd be surprised how flexible universities can be when it comes to top academics.
_________________
I'm a lonely frog
I ain't got a home
|
|
GlennMacGrady
Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 8225
Location: Heisenberg
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/03/21 4:37 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Clay, you have long favored the elimination of the sit-out year for transfers and for athletes to be allowed to make money on the side. But this talk of contracts is confusing me.
The NLI is a one-year contract. It is not governed by the NCAA, but by the Collegiate Commissioners Association. No high school athlete has to sign it -- it is voluntary -- and no high school athlete is barred from having a lawyer review it. I have long advocated that elite high school athletes should consider not signing NLI's because they are non-negotiable and mostly one-sided in favor of the schools. I advocate this in the belief that no school will deny a scholarship to an elite player even if she doesn't sign an NLI.
That leaves the issue of the contract that accompanies just a regular (non-NLI) scholarship offer. I'm not sure, but I believe at most schools they are one-year deals, renewable each year for a maximum of five years. Players can transfer at the end of any year, or even in in the middle of the year if the school releases them to do so.
But transferring raises the possibility of the NCAA sit-out year, which has nothing to do with the scholarship contracts between the athletes and the schools, but is imposed by NCAA bylaws. On the other hand, the NCAA seems to be in the process of officially dropping the sit-out year bylaw, if they haven't already done so in practice prior to this year.
The players seem to be getting closer to what what might be called free agency, and some states are passing or considering laws allowing students to make side money from their names and reputations. |
|
purduefanatic
Joined: 10 Aug 2011
Posts: 2819
Location: Indiana
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/03/21 6:40 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| pilight wrote: |
| purduefanatic wrote: |
| Seeing as you have brought up math and science kids, do they get agents? Do they need agents? If they don't, why do high school athletes? |
Do math and science students sign NLIs? If there are going to be contracts, both parties should have the right to representation and counsel.
And yes, there are people who act as agents for students. You'd be surprised how flexible universities can be when it comes to top academics. |
He was referring to how those students get recruited by schools, he never mentioned contracts. And come on, you and I both know that parents, high school coaches AND more importantly, club coaches act as "agents" for their student-athletes.
FYI, I have a child that is being "recruited" by several schools due to his all A's and high PSAT scores. There are lots of offers of scholarship monies and other benefits.
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32335
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/03/21 7:23 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| seems like the original thread got hi-jacked into this same ol, same ol conversation.
|
|
undersized_post
Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2864
Back to top |
| Posted: 03/03/21 9:10 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| myrtle wrote: |
| seems like the original thread got hi-jacked into this same ol, same ol conversation. |
yup
|
|
|
|
