NCAA News

[collegehoopjunkie]

IN their annual convention, delegates to the NCAA have voted on two controversial measures.

First, a proposal was made to INCREASE the number of scholarships in many sports. (Basketball was not included in this one, but was likely to be close behind if this one passed)
The smaller schools (mostly mid-majors) banded together and shot this one down, because it was seen as a way for the big schools to lock up more of the talented players.
http://insidehighered.com/news/2006/01/09/ncaa

Secondly, the delgates voted to overturn the new transfer rule that had allowed students who had already received a degree to transfer and be immediately eligible elsewhere.
(Lon Kruger's son took advantage of this rule)
http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2006/Nov-04-Sat-2006/sports/10623887.html
http://www.purdueexponent.org/index.php/module/Section/section_id/18?module=article&story_id=3646
http://www.purdueexponent.org/index.php?module=article&story_id=3646

Both rules were seen as benefitting bigger, stronger schools, at the detriment of the smaller schools.
Way to go NCAA.

 

[mike radigan]

Re: NCAA News

Secondly, the delgates voted to overturn the new transfer rule that had allowed students who had already received a degree to transfer and be immediately eligible elsewhere.

This s-u-c-k-s. Nothing like hurting the student athlete.

 

[tornado]

But Mike-- the kids who fit this rule are already eligible where they are, and can play another year because they have eligibility.
The only thing the previous rule allowed was for the kid once he's gotten his degree to leave freely and transfer anywhere else of his choosing.
I think this could lead to the better programs luring and cherry picking kids from other schools.
But the kid can still transfer, he isn't prohibited, it's just that he will have to sit out a year
just like every other NCAA transfer to a 4-year school has done for decades.
Why should the graduate student get a special privilege not available to any other kid?

Students like Kobby Acquah (at SIU) are not affected by this rule since they are transferring due the cessation of their school's program.
http://www.bradleyfans.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=3837&highlight=kobby

 

[mike radigan]

But Mike-- the kids who fit this rule are already eligible where they are, and can play another year because they have eligibility.
The only thing the previous rule allowed was for the kid once he's gotten his degree to leave freely and transfer anywhere else of his choosing.
I think this could lead to the better programs luring and cherry picking kids from other schools.
But the kid can still transfer, he isn't prohibited, it's just that he will have to sit out a year
just like every other NCAA transfer to a 4-year school has done for decades.
Why should the graduate student get a special privilege not available to any other kid?

Students like Kobby Acquah (at SIU) are not affected by this rule since they are transferring due the cessation of their school's program.
http://www.bradleyfans.com/phpbb/viewtopic.php?t=3837&highlight=kobby

Because his/her current school may not offer the masters program he/she wants. Let's face it, any kid who pursues a masters degree and its rigors is emphasizing academics. He/she should be able to select the curriculum of their choice.

 

[MacabreMob]

Re: NCAA News

Both rules were seen as benefitting bigger, stronger schools, at the detriment of the smaller schools.
Way to go NCAA.

Couple victories for the smaller schools indeed.

 

[mike radigan]

I should add, the really high level players that the BCS schools would cherry-pick are not going to go to grad school anyway. They will go on to play pro ball someplace.

 

[tornado]

Basketball isn't the only sport, and where this will benefit smaller schools is in lesser sports.

Let's say Bradley recruits, and develops a great golfer or soccer player.
They invest four years in the kid, including a redshirt year, and the kid becomes a star by his 5th year. He's a bright kid, like Danny Adams, and has already gotten his undergrad degree and starts working on his masters.
Then just when Jim DeRose is counting on this superstar at BU for his 4th year of athletic eligibility, he leaves the day before school starts and transfers without penalty to rival Creighton and is eligible to begin play right away because Creighton is on national TV several times and because they had a scholarship opne unexpectedly and they called an offered it.

Is this fair, I don't think, so.

 

[MacabreMob]

I should add, the really high level players that the BCS schools would cherry-pick are not going to go to grad school anyway. They will go on to play pro ball someplace.

Mike... I highly doubt Ruffin would leave, but he DOES fall in this category. I can think of an elite team that is in need of an experienced top quality point guard like Ruffin - Duke. Why wouldn't a player like Ruffin check out his options? I don't think Ruffin is likely to end up in the NBA... but he could run the point for Duke for one year.

 

[mike radigan]

Basketball isn't the only sport, and where this will benefit smaller schools is in lesser sports.

Let's say Bradley recruits, and develops a great golfer or soccer player.
They invest four years in the kid, including a redshirt year, and becomes a star by his 5th year. He's a bright kid, like Danny Adams, and has already gotten his undergrad degree and starts working on his masters.
Then just when Jim DeRose is counting on this superstar at BU for his 4th year of athletic eligibility, he leaves the day before school starts and transfers without penalty to rival Creighton and is eligible to begin play right away.

Is this fair, I don't think, so.

Life isn't fair and you cannot legislate everything. And I have to ask why the kid would leave BU unless BU didn't offer the curriculum the kid wanted? To emphasize that point and the fact you mention Danny Adams, he elected to stay at BU in spite of the fact he couldn't get the courses he wanted for a MBA and decided on a double major instead. Also, I really don't think coaches of so-called minor sports will involve themselves in this.

 

[mike radigan]

I should add, the really high level players that the BCS schools would cherry-pick are not going to go to grad school anyway. They will go on to play pro ball someplace.

Mike... I highly doubt Ruffin would leave, but he DOES fall in this category. I can think of an elite team that is in need of an experienced top quality point guard like Ruffin - Duke. Why wouldn't a player like Ruffin check out his options? I don't think Ruffin is likely to end up in the NBA... but he could run the point for Duke for one year.

Mob, Ruff isn't going to grad school at Duke. Book it!

 

[tornado]

Mike, most coaches who have made any comment on this rule are against it for the same reasons I cite.
Even tho the guy who writes the article is FOR the rule as you are.
But if you are really purely for the students and the students' rights, then why not eliminate the one-year sitting-out penalty for transferring altogether?
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=tb-transfertrouble060606&prov=yhoo&type=lgns

Gregg Doyel also writes on the potential problems:
http://216.239.51.104/search?q=cach...+and+"transfer+rule"&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=1

Here are examples of kids who have taken advantage of this rule:

Basketball player-Kevin Kruger
http://www.azstarnet.com/sn/related/157992.php

Football-Ryan Smith
http://www.tbo.com/sports/gators/MGB55X057WE.html
http://sports.yahoo.com/ncaaf/news?slug=rivals-86286&prov=rivals&type=lgns

Michael Braunstein
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/sports/2003526579_uwfb16.html

But I have read of a few volleyball, track, and swimming athletes who have taken advantage, not because they were looking for a better graduate school, but because they saw it as a chance to move to a better school without penalty.


And here's a concern from an athletic director about volleyball transfers:
"I???‚¬?„?m a little concerned that it provides an advantage to schools with more extensive graduate programs"
http://www.momentummedia.com/articles/cm/cm1411/bbgradrule.htm

 

[MacabreMob]

I should add, the really high level players that the BCS schools would cherry-pick are not going to go to grad school anyway. They will go on to play pro ball someplace.

Mike... I highly doubt Ruffin would leave, but he DOES fall in this category. I can think of an elite team that is in need of an experienced top quality point guard like Ruffin - Duke. Why wouldn't a player like Ruffin check out his options? I don't think Ruffin is likely to end up in the NBA... but he could run the point for Duke for one year.

Mob, Ruff isn't going to grad school at Duke. Book it!

But what about a player like Ruffin? That is all I am trying to say. Somewhere, there is a player (like Ruffin) that is very capable of filling a team's needs (like Duke). So I am glad to see this rule keep these kinds of transfers from occuring.

 

[mike radigan]

IMHO, I just do not see it being abused.

 

[MacabreMob]

IMHO, I just do not see it being abused.

IMHO - Whenever there is a loophole - there will be abuse.

 

[mike radigan]

And here's a concern from an athletic director about volleyball transfers:
"I???‚¬?„?m a little concerned that it provides an advantage to schools with more extensive graduate programs"
http://www.momentummedia.com/articles/cm/cm1411/bbgradrule.htm

From your article for the transfer rule:

???‚¬?“I don???‚¬?„?t think we???‚¬?„?ll see a huge effect,???‚¬?? says Shoemake, a member of the NCAA Division I Women???‚¬?„?s Volleyball Committee and San Marcos???‚¬?„?s Senior Woman Administrator. ???‚¬?“You might see a case here or there, but not a wide sweep of students doing this all of a sudden.???‚¬??

Shoemake disagrees with the view that the rule equates to free agency and likes its intent, which is to allow student-athletes who still have eligibility remaining more flexibility when looking for graduate schools. ???‚¬?“This rule is designed for players who want to pursue a graduate program and the school they???‚¬?„?re at doesn???‚¬?„?t have it,???‚¬?? says Shoemake. ???‚¬?“Maybe they???‚¬?„?d like to play for one more year or have their first year of graduate school paid for. This has some huge benefits for students, and I think we???‚¬?„?re just trying to be student-athlete friendly and give them more opportunities.???‚¬??

From your article against the transfer rule:

Not everyone within the volleyball ranks shares Shoemake???‚¬?„?s enthusiasm for the change, however. Kelly Andrews, Associate Athletic Director at the University of Toledo and also a member of the Division I Women???‚¬?„?s Volleyball Committee, says it could affect competitive equality. ???‚¬?“I???‚¬?„?m a little concerned that it provides an advantage to schools with more extensive graduate programs,???‚¬?? Andrews says.

But to me the excerpt below taken from Andrews' statement above is the very reason she should be for the rule:

...to schools with more extensive graduate programs...

My gosh, academics...