Interesting take on transfer rule

Interesting article

Some very valid points made

I don't always agree with Kendal Rodgers articles but I think that was pretty accurate as to what goes on often and how smaller programs lose out. For the bigger programs who don't really develop players (yes there are many) they are forced to do a better job at recruiting and developing their players. I always stated this was a really big problem at so many schools, lack of player development because it was too easy to replace.

The only thing I can't figure out, Winthrop often plays on the big stage against big programs. A very ideal situation for a good players to really stand out. Why so many transfers?

I had no idea Phil has left Winthrop. I thought he signed a pro deal.

I think that wide open transfers is as bad as the new rule.
I only believe the transfer should be allowed if the coach cuts the player and on a case by case situation.

I know of three mid-major players from one school who have been tempted with transfer offers during the past year. Two offers were from Big 12 schools and one was from a CAA school. Thankfully for the mid-major, all of the players decided to stay put.

If this many players from just one mid-major were presented with offers, I would imagine the practice was pretty prevalent nationwide.

What was interesting was reading some of the comments on the rivals board. Apparently, Winthrop has been the benificiary of a steady stream of transfers also (one mentioned a regular pipeline from South Carolina). People at prestigious D1's that weren't getting the playing time they had hoped were funneling back to the mid majors.

Again, if a coach does not want a player he recruited and CUTS him, let the kid transfer to someone who does want him without penalizing the kid!
That would be the only exception. Seems pretty darn simple.

quote:

Again, if a coach does not want a player he recruited and CUTS him, let the kid transfer to someone who does want him without penalizing the kid!
That would be the only exception. Seems pretty darn simple.

What went on in the cape was widely practiced by many schools. One player from the cape left a smaller D1 program to go to Clemson. His reason was better exposure and better chance in the draft. He didn't perform well, he most likely would have been better off staying put and his parents told me the worst move they ever made was for him to transfer.

The summer son was on cape one of his teammates transfered from a powerhouse D1 to a smaller successful program (most likely on recommendation from team players) and went from not playing to doing very well.

It can work both ways.

I agree that Winthrop transfered many in, a recipient from larger programs where players weren't contibuting.

quote:

Originally posted by thats-a-balk!:
Again, if a coach does not want a player he recruited and CUTS him, let the kid transfer to someone who does want him without penalizing the kid!
That would be the only exception. Seems pretty darn simple.

Why would a coach cut a player with the new rules(unless he is ineligible). It's now more important to keep your players in your program.

Makes you wonder why college coaches risk sending players to summer teams. Phil was at the Cape .

If they could establish a link back to the coach there should be severe fines for interfering with players.

BHD,
If the coach didn't like it, he doesn't have to grant transfer. What coach would stand in the way of not allowing a player to transfer to a bigger program and get a reputation for that?
Those days are gone.

TPM I value commitment and guys get noticed at every level. Some may even get better exposure at a smaller school like Winthrop .
A coach/college that invests money and time in you deserves the commitment from the player.
If the coach no longer sees the player as part of their plan then the player should be able to transfer where he is wanted.

I am very aware of summer teams being a place where other players talk to guys about transferring to their school. If it is the coach telling the player to do this there should be penalties. I believe there is a no tamper rule.

I am sure this is a practice that has been going on in all leagues for many years. I can't go as far as to say that coaches encourage it.

All it takes is one player to mention to his summer teammates he's not happy and if the players think he might fit in, they most likely would encourage their program. The player or coach cannot contact each other unless the player has asked for a release.
In one case that I know of, personally, the player had already gotten a release from his school and free to do as he pleased with no reprecussions on either side. In another case I also know of, one coach left and the player was looking to play elsewhere.

I actually know of one coach who told his players to look for new players at summer collegiate ball.
I find it hard to believe that C Hudak would complain if Phil Carey had not forced his hand to release him. I see he is on the 08 roster of Texas A&M. He was one of his starters.

quote:

Originally posted by BobbleheadDoll:
A coach/college that invests money and time in you deserves the commitment from the player.

Overall, the transfers rule makes sense. I just have an issue with walk on players having to sit a year if they transfer.
Yes, coach has invested time but not really any money.
The article compares the transfer rule to football and basketball.....as has been mentioned ad nauseum, the big diff is that most college football and basketball players get full schollys.....
I would have absolutely ZERO issues with the transfer rules if the NCAA upped the total schollys significantly....

quote:

Originally posted by jbbaseball:

I would have absolutely ZERO issues with the transfer rules if the NCAA upped the total schollys significantly....

I don't get this? So you are saying that it's ok to sit out a year and still have coaches that recruits poorly, don't develop their staff and cut players and players that don't make good decesions as long as they have full scholarships everything is ok?

don't understand that either ?

quote:

Originally posted by TPM:

quote:

Originally posted by thats-a-balk!:
Again, if a coach does not want a player he recruited and CUTS him, let the kid transfer to someone who does want him without penalizing the kid!
That would be the only exception. Seems pretty darn simple.

Why would a coach cut a player with the new rules(unless he is ineligible). It's now more important to keep your players in your program.

I guess this is why!

"still have coaches that recruits poorly, don't develop their staff and cut players"

quote:

I am sure this is a practice that has been going on in all leagues for many years. I can't go as far as to say that coaches encourage it.

Before the xfer rule the only way a coach, IMO, could be thought of "not encouraging" the transfer is by not accepting the player to begin with. Publicly he may say he doesn't encourage transfers but he's probably the first in line with a hug and "welcome to the team" message and that is "backdoor encouragement" IMO. A "downward" transfer may have indicated that a player felt he was out of his league, and while I may commend his honesty, he should still have to pay the piper. While not knowing top programs and coaches personally, I venture to say that elite school coaches are so egotistical and power hungry that they would go to all ends to make their team better. That may be the pressure their under, but does that make it right?

Bottom line a school commits a scholarship to an athlete to represent that school, if the school reneges on the % of that agreement then the door should be open for xfer. But the "sit" rule I feel ultimately is a result of the elite schools using the lower and mid-majors as their personal development league, and many times use their elite players as recruiters during the summer leagues seasons. I personally know this because my son was approached by players of big Conference teams in the Northwoods League and I personally watched the "lure" successfully happen with a college teammate of his. Everything was great "at home" until he went to the Cape.

It's a great rule that if nothing else teaches a kid commitment and penalty and at the same time the coaches.........ah.........it may be to late for them to see the wrong in it.

I gues I did not articulate my position properly....I MEANT to say that if baseball had the same "relative" # of schollys as fball or bskball (i.e. on the order of 30) then I would have no issues with the sit rule on transfers.
Because the "rules" would then be similar to football and basketball......but I know that will not happen in my lifetime....

Sorry to "rile" some of you up

jbbaseball,
Ok got ya now and understand.

TAB,
Why did so many programs recruit players and barely have transfers and others have revolving doors? IMO, because it was easy for a coach to allow 45+ in fall and then let go whoever he felt didn't measure up that year, replacing him with someone else or just let them sit on the bench in case they were needed. That's the lazy coaches way and due to APR and graduation rates, you can't do that anymore with the NCAA looking over your shoulder.

Coaches have to be very careful now and make sure they do their homework, everyone of those 35 players have to be there and remain there because he needs them to be, in one way or the other.

Something quickly I did. Not sure teh conclusion one can draw.
I chose randomly 6 mid D1 programs and 9 "elite" schools.
Of the transfers listed (and I don't know when those transfers occured) more of the top programs transfers were from junior colleges where mostly the mid D1 schools were from those "elite". 3 top programs (CWS participants)had mostly JC players.

Junior college transfers don't come from top summer programs.
I don't see where the top schools are using the the lower mid D1 programs for personal development. I do see where they might be using JUCOs.

JMO.

TPM-

I only answered your question

Why would a coach cut a player with the new rules(unless he is ineligible). It's now more important to keep your players in your program.

with your quote!

I don't get this? So you are saying that it's ok to sit out a year and still have coaches that recruits poorly, don't develop their staff and cut players and players that don't make good decesions as long as they have full scholarships everything is ok?

quote:

Originally posted by thats-a-balk!:
TPM-

I only answered your question

Why would a coach cut a player with the new rules(unless he is ineligible). It's now more important to keep your players in your program.

with your quote!

I don't get this? So you are saying that it's ok to sit out a year and still have coaches that recruits poorly, don't develop their staff and cut players and players that don't make good decesions as long as they have full scholarships everything is ok?

We must be miscommunicating.

quote:

I don't see where the top schools are using the the lower mid D1 programs for personal development. I do see where they might be using JUCOs.

The numbers do not really stand out that this is the trend but you have to look at them a little deeper to see my point. Below are a list of transfers over the last couple years. There are three types to deal with.....

Higher school to a lower school- This may indicate that the player was "out of his League", saw the light, and moved where he belonged.

Lateral Move- This is gets a little saucy, was there some outside persuasion that pushed the transfer?

Lower school to a higher school This is where theres a fox in the hen house IMHO. The other side of the coin in this scenario is the kid for selfish reasons quit on his team and his initial commitment for greener pastures.


2006 d1 xfers

2007 d1 xfers

rz,
Good points on all types of transfer.

I am not a proponant of transfer, more of commitment for both player and coach, which includes honesty on both parts. I am not a porponate of transfering to seek greener pastures. I am not in favor of players recruiting for coaches during summer leagues or what goes on in HS these days.

I do see a bit in where hitches in the sit out rule may occur, this will forces lots of homework on both parts, for player and for coaches of all programs, but really feel strongly that this is perhaps a BETTER way to solve many issues that occur within baseball programs. It also will , according to some seperate and help define what a player really wants as his career goal.
JMO.