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

Changes to DI Athletics?

 
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
Ex-Ref



Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8833



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/15 7:59 pm    ::: Changes to DI Athletics? Reply Reply with quote

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2015/04/26/kevin-lennons-opinions-on-some-issues-facing-ncaa/26417563/



http://www.wthr.com/story/28902022/ncaas-new-division-i-chief-puts-transfer-rules-on-priority-list

Quote:
Two ideas being floated would dramatically affect graduate transfers. One would give schools some ability to restrict where those players land. The other would require grad students to sit out one year before becoming eligible, something undergrads already must do.


Queenie



Joined: 18 Nov 2004
Posts: 18013
Location: Queens


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/26/15 8:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

...just how many years of college education does the NCAA want to pay for?



_________________
All your Rebecca are belong to the Liberty.

(now with spelling variations)
summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7745
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/27/15 9:54 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Queenie wrote:
...just how many years of college education does the NCAA want to pay for?


They probably don't want to pay ANY, but really, making graduate transfers sit out a year is ridiculous. They only have one year left, in almost all cases, just let them play already.



_________________
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
NickDMB



Joined: 04 Mar 2015
Posts: 66



Back to top
PostPosted: 04/27/15 2:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
Queenie wrote:
...just how many years of college education does the NCAA want to pay for?


They probably don't want to pay ANY, but really, making graduate transfers sit out a year is ridiculous. They only have one year left, in almost all cases, just let them play already.

Making undergrads sit out for a year is ridiculous too, IMHO.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7745
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/27/15 3:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

NickDMB wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
Queenie wrote:
...just how many years of college education does the NCAA want to pay for?


They probably don't want to pay ANY, but really, making graduate transfers sit out a year is ridiculous. They only have one year left, in almost all cases, just let them play already.

Making undergrads sit out for a year is ridiculous too, IMHO.


I actually agree that undergrads should sit out for some period of time, otherwise there would be unlimited transferring for possibly trivial reasons. I think perhaps two semesters would be long enough, and if a player enrolls in summer school at their new school, the two semesters could start from then and they would be eligible the following January. Or if they transfer midyear and enroll immediately and carry a full load in spring semester and summer school, they could play the following year.



_________________
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
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 66772
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/27/15 3:23 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

My prediction is that you would actually see fewer transfers if players didn't sit out a year. Most transfers are done for academic reasons, to get an extra scholarship year.



_________________
Let us not deceive ourselves. Our educational institutions have proven to be no bastions of democracy.
PUmatty



Joined: 10 Nov 2004
Posts: 16346
Location: Chicago


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/27/15 4:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
My prediction is that you would actually see fewer transfers if players didn't sit out a year. Most transfers are done for academic reasons, to get an extra scholarship year.


That strikes me a pretty dubious claim. Do you have any data to back it up?


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7745
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 04/27/15 8:35 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
My prediction is that you would actually see fewer transfers if players didn't sit out a year. Most transfers are done for academic reasons, to get an extra scholarship year.


I call bullpucky.



_________________
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
GEF34



Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14102



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/01/15 4:21 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
Queenie wrote:
...just how many years of college education does the NCAA want to pay for?


They probably don't want to pay ANY, but really, making graduate transfers sit out a year is ridiculous. They only have one year left, in almost all cases, just let them play already.


Since a good portion of players who will be transferring to a grad school will have already redshirted and the NCAA basically has a 5 years to play 4 years policy it sounds like this is a way to eliminate graduate transfers unless the NCAA is going to start handing out 6th years to all graduate transfers who have previously redshirted.


GEF34



Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 14102



Back to top
PostPosted: 05/01/15 4:28 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

summertime blues wrote:
NickDMB wrote:
summertime blues wrote:
Queenie wrote:
...just how many years of college education does the NCAA want to pay for?


They probably don't want to pay ANY, but really, making graduate transfers sit out a year is ridiculous. They only have one year left, in almost all cases, just let them play already.

Making undergrads sit out for a year is ridiculous too, IMHO.


I actually agree that undergrads should sit out for some period of time, otherwise there would be unlimited transferring for possibly trivial reasons. I think perhaps two semesters would be long enough, and if a player enrolls in summer school at their new school, the two semesters could start from then and they would be eligible the following January. Or if they transfer midyear and enroll immediately and carry a full load in spring semester and summer school, they could play the following year.


In all sports other than baseball, men's and women's basketball, football and men's ice hockey, there is a one time transfer exception that allows players to not sit out a year if they transfer. I don't see why that wouldn't be workable in women's basketball as well. Sure there will be some that transfer for "trivial reasons" as you say, but I don't think there will be a lot more transfers than that currently are now. In all of the other sports that have the one time transfer exception there doesn't seem to be a extreme amount of yearly transfers that it would warrant rethinking the rule.


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