Possible transfer rule change

NCAA ponders new standard for transfers | StarTribune.com


I wonder how that would impact Tech?

I could both help and hurt. Either way would cause a free agency of sorts at the college level. Big time players would transfer to big time programs with a weakness at their position for a chance at a national title. Highly recruited players that do not start or play as soon as they would like would transfer somewhere else to play. Tech could capitalize here. Some of these schools may recruit 4 five star linebackers in a year; well only 3 can start. So they transfer to get playing time. The only problem at Tech would be that many players won't be able to transfer due to the required credits since Tech requires Calculus and does not provide credit towards degree for many classes other universities offer(college algebra, trig, etc). The NCAA would have to have a policy that allows credits that do not transfer towards progress to a degree at the new school to still count towards NCAA eligibility. Of course that would also allow Tech to recruit JUCOs.

Regardless of what would happen for GT, this is the right thing to do. Football players are not indentured servants and should be able to transfer when they want. The NCAA restrictions are unfair to the kids and give a massive advantage to the schools since one year of playing is lost in most cases under the current transfer rules.

For GT, we recruit in about the 30 to 50th best so I think it would be a slight positive upside when we get transfers from the schools that lied to the kids. But since they would come with a maximum of 3 years eligibility and have to learn our systems, the benefits would be very limited. Again, the NCAA should do what is in the kids interest.

Since a coach can leave at anytime, this just levels the field.

WTF!? This would be very bad for us and any other non-football-factory schools. It's only going to create a free agency market. I guarantee you'll see good athletes being recruited and transferring to factory schools after proving their value while playing at a middling school. I agree that there are some instances in which this would only be fair (say a coach leaving), but this will only make the rich richer and the poor poorer. The only way I see to mitigate free agency is to limit the number of incoming transfers to say 1 per year, but I doubt this would ever happen. Even more, this won't prevent a school from losing all of its players.

I understand what you're saying Nuke, but SA's are free to transfer to any school they wish (provided they qualify) at any time. However, they have to give up the privilege of playing college football for one year. The sit-out-a-year rule is there to keep teams from pilfering other schools' players.

Think about it. If this rule was in place at the time, how many players on our 2008 team would have transferred out? I know that at least 2 of our best SA's have admitted considering transferring.

Originally Posted by dressedcheeseside

I can see it now:

Saben: "Well son, we don't have room for ya in this year's class. Why don't you accept that offer from XYZ State and if you prove yourself, we'll take you next year as a transfer..."

I could DEFINITELY see Nick Saban exploiting the rule like that.

Originally Posted by Animal

I could DEFINITELY see Nick Saban exploiting the rule like that.

+1 Saban to Lee's HS coach. "Tell Vad that we need a QB after ours leaves next year. Tell him if he does good this year, he could come win a title for us after next year." Or CMR after Murray leaves, etc.