Vote in January on this one. How does this complicate the already packed portal?
Replies sorted oldest to newest
I’m not sure what the article means by reversing a trend from the 60’s. This could be done about ten years ago in baseball.
Transferring is just musical chairs. There’s the same number of chairs.
The transfer sit-out rule used to apply only in football and basketball. It was applied to baseball somewhere around 2009, the same time they adopted the 25% minimum rule.
The stated justification was that baseball had a lower graduation rate than many other sports. The problem with that was, it didn't weigh the 3rd year draft eligibility into the review of that issue; it blamed transferring for it, really without a lot of evidence.
The reality is that in a world where coaches can come to you in June and tell you that your money has been reduced or even eliminated for the next year, players need to have the ability to shop around to protect themselves. True, the NCAA has since allowed schools to provide 4-year guarantees on money, but the NCAA has not REQUIRED that the guarantees be given. As of now, the "Power 5" conferences have a rule making 4-year guarantees automatic, but at the hundreds of other D1 programs, you had better speak up and ask for it, or you won't get it.
Imposing the sit-out rule in baseball was a disgraceful error and I hope the NCAA reverses the mistake at long last. But given the NCAA's track record, I won't hold my breath.
The NCAA put the transfer rule in place to hold baseball coaches and athletic departments accountable for players not graduating due to consistent transfer in and out of programs. It had the worst graduation rate in all of college sports.
Teams now have to meet performance goals through the annual performance plan, aka APR.
Plus, as told to me a while back, coaches had trouble keeping their teams competitive. There was also a lot of coaches having their players recruit for them during the summer, which is a NCAA violation.
That doesn't stop a new coach from telling a kid "you don't fit my plans, if you ever want to play again look somewhere else".
A coach really said that? Maybe I am naive, but I just don't see a coach who values his reputation and his job using those words.
Those words are said at every P5 school, every year, to somewhere between 0 and 6 kids.
I know players are let go every year, but is it said just like that, or do they say something like, " we don't see you in our plans for next year". Or do they say, "we can't promise you a lot of at bats, or innings."
True. But if finances are an issue, or if the player wants his diploma to come from his current school, the player can stay at the school. And as a "counter," he almost certainly keeps his jersey and therefore, his opportunity to change coach's mind.
More players should call the bluff. There's no point having leverage if you don't use it when the time comes.
This is why it is so important to do a lot of research on where a player chooses to go to school to study and play baseball. Two different decisions! If baseball doesn't work out can the player still stay on campus all 4 years to earn a degree? I hope the answer is yes.
I’m sure it varies depending on different personalities and various cultures. Point being that P5 schools find a way to not hang onto players they don’t want. The 4 year scholarship “promise” at P5 schools is a false security.
I have never agreed with that approach. Until now. Given the current situation, with rosters past full everywhere you look, finding someplace else to go will be a big problem. Unless you have a transfer already lined up calling the bluff may be the best move. But it’s risky and you had better be prepared for the consequences
Point taken asshole. The kid has been given a chance at a very similar DI school. Hopefully if circumstances permit (covid) we'll see how things play out.
I was not referring to your situation specifically. I’m not even aware of what your situation is. You obviously took my comment personally when it wasn’t intended that way. Your post was a great lead in to make the point that the 4 year scholarship promise at P5 schools is a false sense of security.
Every player has to decide what's most important if he comes face to face with this situation. If you're being cut loose, pro ball is most likely not in your future. How much money do you want to give up just to TRY to play (with no guarantees) somewhere else? And what if your current school's diploma would be more valued as you begin your post-baseball career search? What if not all your credits will transfer, so that you have to do an extra semester or more?
We're not talking about MLB free agents here. For 95% or more of college players, when baseball stops helping to improve your overall situation, it's time to move on from the attitude that baseball controls all your life decisions. Even the time to hang 'em up completely comes for everyone at some point. For a college player, it's coming soon anyway. A player in his 20's is a grown man and needs to make mature decisions.
Your post is exactly why the NCAA put baseball transfer rules into place.
Your post is exactly why the NCAA put baseball transfer rules into place.
I agree with this being a big reason for transfer rules. The problem is, the transfer rules do no good if there is no place to transfer to that wants more players. In effect what the NCAA has done, IMO, is negate the effectiveness of the transfer option by allowing all players an additional year of eligibility due to Covid19 shutdown of 2020 season. Teams at every level now have (some combination) of 5 recruiting classes on campus. I talked to coaches at 3 different schools the other night (2 JuCo & 1 D1 - all top flight programs) and all 3 said they have more players than they need on campus right now and can’t imagine bringing in a transfer at semester. There isn’t time now to give all the kids a fair look. So yeah, you can transfer. But the odds of improving your baseball situation are long. As always it will be easier if you are a stud pitcher - every program has room for one of those. Same if you are a stud catcher. After that, good luck.
That may have been the stated reason for the NCAA's doing what it did. And the graduation rate is a legitimate concern. But what they did hurts players without helping to solve the problem, or even to make any improvements at all.
The NCAA also needs to remember that all sorts of college students transfer every year for all sorts of reasons. Of those, only athletes in football, basketball and baseball find themselves barred from their chosen extra-curricular activities for a year. For football and basketball, at least you got a full ride in exchange for this proscription. To impose this on a baseball player who might be getting no more than 25% and who, on average, is getting something like 41%, is overbearing.
My daughter majored in musical theater. Imagine that she had transferred, only to find that she couldn't be in any theater productions for a year. Crazy, right? Now change "daughter" to "son" and "musical theater" to "baseball" and tell me how it makes any more sense.
Agree that there is no place to transfer to. However, I think when the dust settles, maybe next year, coaches will not be giving seniors extra years, because they won't give them $$$. Then it's time to move on.