Hi experts: Quick question regarding the transfer rules. From reading the threads re D-1 to D-1 transfer issues, including the most recent illuminating "Goff" thread,  I'm wondering if anyone has seen/heard about a movement to try and wrest control of a student's baseball life from the NCAA overlords (exaggeration intentional!). I really do understand the perspective of trying to protect students from hopping around without actually studying/graduating etc. But...sure seems like NCAA rules transfer rules are stacked firmly against students' interest. Has there ever been a lawsuit (America's favorite method of retaliation)? Is resistance futile? 

Original Post

As TPM pointed out, after the restrictive transfer rules were enacted, graduation rates rose. Why would you go back to an era where graduation rates were lower?

Nothing prohibits an athlete from transferring; just that a recruited player going from D1 to D1 has to sit a year. 

But under certain circumstances - as illustrated by Alabama - a new coach can make a serene college career blowup, and the player has no recourse. Recently, one of the Weicsz triplet's filed an action against the NCAA's sit out rule based upon coaching changes. He lost - but the case hasn't (didn't) go far enough to draw any conclusions as to how courts would finally rule.

The problem of taking the NCAA to court is twofold: time and money. Courts are not really designed to reach a final determination rapidly, so by the time the 19 year old player would get a favorable final ruling (maybe, if) would be about five years after he graduates from college. And, of course, who funds the case against the deep pocketed NCAA. (In the Weiscz case, where the court granted the kid the right to play via a TRO, the school decided to sit the kid - because if the TRO was dissolved or did not ripen into a PI or permanent injunction, all games would have been forfeited.)

It's a delicate balancing act: trying to get kids graduating (to keep off public and government pressure) close to on time (on the one hand) and allowing free transfers JUST to play baseball (academics and future be damned) (on the other hand).

The transfer rules are not in the students' best interests.  They only benefit the athletic program, and only a few of them, and in only a couple of sports.  I can't believe it hasn't been eliminated.  The time has come.

Last edited by SultanofSwat

hitting this older thread,   my understanding is that the transfer rules will be voted on shortly,  possibly this month.  This hits particularly close to home now that my son is transferring.  I'm hoping they change, and I do believe that the "sit a year" is ridiculous.   Particularly when the transfer is through no fault of his own. 

'm hoping they change at some point, but have little faith that they'll change in time to benefit my son-  he's going to continue pursuing his baseball career at a juco in florida, then see how things shake out next year.

 

I don't have a problem with the transfer rule as it is.  You know going in what it is....it's not like you're getting surprised after your sophomore year when you decide it's not a good fit.  Colleges aren't created to give kids a spot to play a sport...they're created for education.  I do think that if you're a recruted/scholarship athlete and the coach that was the HC when you got there leaves or is fired, then you should have the opportunity to transfer with no sitting out.  Other than that one thing, I think the rest of the rule(s) are good the way they are.  It's bad enough that JUCO kids can show up at D1's after their sophomore year and possibly take a spot from a kid who has been there for 2 seasons....they don't need any more new guys coming around.

I hear you, and I agree - or should say, agreed with a lot of what you are saying.  However, when a coach comes to a kid,  after freshman year,  and says, something to the effect of "Son, these guys playing in front of you, they aren't leaving for the draft, I have two juco studs coming in as well,  and playing time is going to be hard to come by next year- you can stay if you want, but I think you need to go somewhere you can play every day"  

for all intents and purposes, the kid is being cut- for baseball reasons.  Why should he have to sit a year  if there's a an opportunity out there? 

don't misunderstand, I'm glad the coach was honest with him- this way he's not wasting his sophomore year.  He's going to go the 4-2-4 route, and although not ideal, we will deal with it.   

I just think it's a bad rule in this situation, the kid didn't decide to leave, the coach highly encouraged him to leave. 

Buckeye 2015 posted:

I don't have a problem with the transfer rule as it is.  You know going in what it is....it's not like you're getting surprised after your sophomore year when you decide it's not a good fit.  Colleges aren't created to give kids a spot to play a sport...they're created for education.  I do think that if you're a recruted/scholarship athlete and the coach that was the HC when you got there leaves or is fired, then you should have the opportunity to transfer with no sitting out.  Other than that one thing, I think the rest of the rule(s) are good the way they are.  It's bad enough that JUCO kids can show up at D1's after their sophomore year and possibly take a spot from a kid who has been there for 2 seasons....they don't need any more new guys coming around.

Buckeye 2015,

NCAA transfer rules only benefit the school. When a young recurit signs a NLI to play at a top DI program they aren't thinking about transferring. Top DI coaches are already recuritng your replacement before/when you are signing. Some coaches are men of character, but most aren't. It's a business, but when a better looking player shows up, they toss aside that kid that did everything he was asked to do and comitted too when he signed his NLI. If you're a stud, and most aren't, it's a little different. 

If a player gets asked to move along because he's 3 deep and JC guys are coming in as well, he should be allowed to go DI to DI. That coach is just looking for his scholarship money or to open a slot for the 28 man roster.

Regarding JC transfers, every top DI has them. Those coaches hope that JC transfer takes a spot away from a kid that's been there for two years. It's called competetion.

I get it, the NCAA doesn't want players jumping from team to team. But under certain conditions, it should be allowed. The NCAA says it's about graduation, that's BS. I've seen stud players only take the weakest classes, minimum of credits, knowing that they are only trying to stay eligiable to get drafted. Never planning on graduation.

I can assure that being released from a team is devastating to a kid that has lived up to his end of the deal, but the coach hasn't done the same. Might be a little different if the rules were changed, but I'm not holding my breath.  

As much as i enjoyed the college baseball/softball experience (self and two kids) the concept of college sports is absurd. Most of the rest of the world agrees. But as long as football and basketball are money and/or PR generators ** nothing will change. 

Players should be able to transfer at the end of a semester if the coach departs or the program is placed on probation. Want to end cheating that leads to probation? Have the NCAA suspend coaches without pay for the duration. Players who don't play X amount of time should be eligible for transfer at the end of the semester. Maybe each conference could have a transfer eligibility arbitration department.

** applications bump up after successful seasons

Last edited by RJM
Picked Off posted:

Buckeye 2015,

NCAA transfer rules only benefit the school. When a young recurit signs a NLI to play at a top DI program they aren't thinking about transferring. Top DI coaches are already recuritng your replacement before/when you are signing. Some coaches are men of character, but most aren't. It's a business, but when a better looking player shows up, they toss aside that kid that did everything he was asked to do and comitted too when he signed his NLI. If you're a stud, and most aren't, it's a little different. 

If a player gets asked to move along because he's 3 deep and JC guys are coming in as well, he should be allowed to go DI to DI. That coach is just looking for his scholarship money or to open a slot for the 28 man roster.

Regarding JC transfers, every top DI has them. Those coaches hope that JC transfer takes a spot away from a kid that's been there for two years. It's called competetion.

I get it, the NCAA doesn't want players jumping from team to team. But under certain conditions, it should be allowed. The NCAA says it's about graduation, that's BS. I've seen stud players only take the weakest classes, minimum of credits, knowing that they are only trying to stay eligiable to get drafted. Never planning on graduation.

I can assure that being released from a team is devastating to a kid that has lived up to his end of the deal, but the coach hasn't done the same. Might be a little different if the rules were changed, but I'm not holding my breath.  

Exactly....as is every spot on the team.....and every job in life after they are out of school.  I guess my last post sounded wrong.  I don't have a problem with Juco kids coming in.  They can only get 2 years of school at a JUCO....and transfer to D1 for the last 2 (and obviously baseball).   I would never question a kid moving up from Juco to D1 because he is also getting a D1 education.  Guys transferring for baseball reasons is a different story.  It's not necessary. My son is at a D1, albeit not a P5.  They brought in 2 Juco kids this year.  They actually asked my son to take a reduction in scholarship money to help out.  He declined the offer    One of the 2 ended up being their starting....the other started 5 or 6 games but by year end was getting a couple AB's a week....and likely won't return.  The kid came in.....and I think actually forced a couple of the current kids to work harder knowing he was there to take their position.  They beat him out.  The JUCO kid came in knowing there were no guarantees....just like the current kids did coming out of HS.   Bottom line....if you work hard and can play....you're going to play.  If you can't, you won't.  Funny thing is, and now that my son is a junior I see it every day......freshmen seem to think that "oh, I was recruited and I'm on scholarship....so I'll start or play a lot".   Guess what....there are 3 years of kids ahead of you who are probably bigger, stronger and faster.    Most kids don't go into their freshman year of HS saying "Oh, I was the best 8th grader....so I'll beat out the Seniors".....why do they go into college as a freshman thinking "I was a great HS player....I'll beat out the Seniors".    There's no way to know, but I'd love to have a way to figure out how many kids leave after their freshman or sophomore years for "greener pastures".....who may have ended up playing a lot their junior or senior year if they had stayed.  I also wonder how many transfer....end up in the same situation, but continue to blame everyone else for the fact that they don't play?   At some point, if you don't play there's nobody to blame but yourself.....but it just seems like it's much easier to just say "Oh, this coach hates me...I'm transferring".     Rant over lol

Last edited by Buckeye 2015
RJM posted:

As much as i enjoyed the college baseball/softball experience (self and two kids) the concept of college sports is absurd. Most of the rest of the world agrees. But as long as football and basketball are money and/or PR generators ** nothing will change. 

Players should be able to transfer at the end of a semester if the coach departs or the program is placed on probation. Want to end cheating that leads to probation? Have the NCAA suspend coaches without pay for the duration. Players who don't play X amount of time should be eligible for transfer at the end of the semester. Maybe each conference could have a transfer eligibility arbitration department.

** Admissions bump up after successful seasons

How would that work?  This goes back to my post above....you aren't guaranteed one minute of playing time when you sign an NLI.    Allowing a kid to transfer based on playing time would just be an absolute nightmare.  You could have 90% of your freshman transferring after their first season just because they didn't play enough.   A coach could sit a kid for 3/4 of the year....then play him the last 5 innings of the last game of the year to get him past the "playing time" number so he couldn't leave.  

When my son was being recruited.....The conversation we had went something like this...... "ok, you want to play D1 baseball....here's the deal....you are going to stay at whatever school you sign to go to....unless there is a coaching change.   You're not transferring because of baseball.  If you end up hating the game, fine, you can quit baseball, but you're not playing somewhere else just because you're not pitching enough or getting enough at bats.  Those things are up to you....work hard and earn the playing time....don't leave just because things are tougher than you expected.   If you want to go D2 or D3 because you hope you'll play more....decide now...not 2 years from now".   He agreed.....and he has busted his butt the whole time and is getting plenty of P/T.   They have had kids come in with this "expectation" that they are somehow guaranteed something.  They find out real quick they aren't and they are gone....either done with baseball altogether or off to a small school.   It's been said on here 1000's of times....make sure you love the game BEFORE you go to college to play....or you'll end up hating it once you get there.

Last edited by Buckeye 2015
Buckeye 2015 posted:
Picked Off posted:

Buckeye 2015,

NCAA transfer rules only benefit the school. When a young recurit signs a NLI to play at a top DI program they aren't thinking about transferring. Top DI coaches are already recuritng your replacement before/when you are signing. Some coaches are men of character, but most aren't. It's a business, but when a better looking player shows up, they toss aside that kid that did everything he was asked to do and comitted too when he signed his NLI. If you're a stud, and most aren't, it's a little different. 

If a player gets asked to move along because he's 3 deep and JC guys are coming in as well, he should be allowed to go DI to DI. That coach is just looking for his scholarship money or to open a slot for the 28 man roster.

Regarding JC transfers, every top DI has them. Those coaches hope that JC transfer takes a spot away from a kid that's been there for two years. It's called competetion.

I get it, the NCAA doesn't want players jumping from team to team. But under certain conditions, it should be allowed. The NCAA says it's about graduation, that's BS. I've seen stud players only take the weakest classes, minimum of credits, knowing that they are only trying to stay eligiable to get drafted. Never planning on graduation.

I can assure that being released from a team is devastating to a kid that has lived up to his end of the deal, but the coach hasn't done the same. Might be a little different if the rules were changed, but I'm not holding my breath.  

Exactly....as is every spot on the team.....and every job in life after they are out of school.   My son is at a D1, albeit not a P5.  They brought in 2 Juco kids this year.  They actually asked my son to take a reduction in scholarship money to help out.  He declined the offer    One of the 2 ended up being their starting....the other started 5 or 6 games but by year end was getting a couple AB's a week....and likely won't return.  The kid came in.....and I think actually forced a couple of the current kids to work harder knowing he was there to take their position.  They beat him out.  The JUCO kid came in knowing there were no guarantees....just like the current kids did coming out of HS.   Bottom line....if you work hard and can play....you're going to play.  If you can't, you won't.  Funny thing is, and now that my son is a junior I see it every day......freshmen seem to think that "oh, I was recruited and I'm on scholarship....so I'll start or play a lot".   Guess what....there are 3 years of kids ahead of you who are probably bigger, stronger and faster.    Most kids don't go into their freshman year of HS saying "Oh, I was the best 8th grader....so I'll beat out the Seniors".....why do they go into college as a freshman thinking "I was a great HS player....I'll beat out the Seniors".    There's no way to know, but I'd love to have a way to figure out how many kids leave after their freshman or sophomore years for "greener pastures".....who may have ended up playing a lot their junior or senior year if they had stayed.  I also wonder how many transfer....end up in the same situation, but continue to blame everyone else for the fact that they don't play?   At some point, if you don't play there's nobody to blame but yourself.....but it just seems like it's much easier to just say "Oh, this coach hates me...I'm transferring".     Rant over lol

Buckeye,

 

I think you're missing the point. Everyone knows that there will be competion. Not talking about kids hating the coach and transfering. This about the Coach coming to a player, who has done his job, fulfilled his comittment and than being asked to leave. Coaches do this way to frequently. They know if they tell a kid he won't be getting play time next year and he will give them a release to go play elsewhere. It's their way of getting out of 5 year deals, getting scholarship money back and openning up roster spots for new players.

If a player is unhappy with his choice , that's different. But if you were recurited, given a schalorship and than the coach doesn't want to honor it because he made the mistake, the player should be able to transfer. The coach has nothing to lose.

JC's, DII, DIII & NAIA's are a clearing house for DI drops. If you figure it out after freshman year you can go the 4-2-4 route. If you get released after sophomore year, JC is not an option due to continued academic advancement having two years of classes under your belt. Currently, the only options are DII, DIII & NAIA in this scenario or sit out a year will being enrolled at the school you want to transfer into. Very few coaches are going to wait, they just move on with the next batch of players.

Transfers will always be a part of the game. How the NCAA handles them is what most believe should be changed.

Buckeye,   I'm with you on all that- I get the competition part, loving the game, etc.    I played d1 football, my wife was a d1 athlete, I get it. 

  All I'm saying is that there are cases- my son included- where the coach is telling them to move on.   It's not the kids choice to move on because of playing time. 

 My son was at an elite (for baseball)   non power 5 school in the south,   there are no multi year guaranteed scholarships as there are in some of the power 5 schools.    There's no financial incentive to develop any of the freshmen.  if you aren't ready to contribute, you're out the door.   11 of the 27 on the traveling roster are either juco, 5th year guys, or transfers from other d1 programs that sat a year. 

There is one sophomore position player left out of a large freshman class from 2016.   Next year there will be one or two sophomore position players left from the large 2017 class.    the 2018 class has another 15-16 kids, I'm guessing that 1-4 of these will survive to sophomore year.   Many of these did not leave because they chose to- they left because the coach told them to.   

Why should they have to sit a year when they were essentially cut? 

Not that it matters what any of us think, the NCAA won't change it, they are there to control the labor, not to advocate for the students. 

I get it.....but the vast majority of transfers aren't kids who had the coach come to them and say "you aren't going to play".  Yes, that happens, but in most cases it's just kids who aren't the big man on campus like they thought they would be and just feel like moving is the best option....when in reality it's the easy way out.  Trust me I get it....my son was 24 hours away from telling the coaches he was done after his freshman year.  Fortunately, a friend who was both a former college player and a coach sat down with him and told him that "it's normal for a freshman...everybody hates it...it's hard, school is hard...but stay with it and you'll be happy you did".   He did and he is.    I don't know any coach who has ever come up to a kid after his junior year and said "Hey Johnny, I know you started every game for me last year, had a .980 fielding percentage and hit .320, but I just don't need you next year".   That doesn't happen.  The kids that get "asked" to leave are the kids that weren't playing for a variety of reasons.  Of the kids who have left at my son's school since he's been there, 2 of have had had that conversation with coaches...but it was definitely a 2 way street.  They had "given up" long ago.  They came in expecting to be "the man"...and weren't....not because the coach hated them, but because they didn't perform so they didn't play.  They could have stayed....and proven the coach wrong...and trust me, with the way this year went, they'd have gotten chances to earn a spot back, which is what I mentioned earlier, but neither did...they just bolted.   A kid who is finishing up his freshman year had a really tough year....and let it get to his head.  He kept getting opportunities...and just couldn't get it done.   He's leaving and blames everyone but himself.  Again, I get it...things happen and kids leave, but at some point not every transfer can be blamed on coaches.  Trust me, if any coaches deserved to have kids leave, it's my son's staff, but not every kid is built to just "walk away".   Some will stick it out, work harder and deal with the results good or bad.

pabaseballdad posted:

Buckeye,   I'm with you on all that- I get the competition part, loving the game, etc.    I played d1 football, my wife was a d1 athlete, I get it. 

  All I'm saying is that there are cases- my son included- where the coach is telling them to move on.   It's not the kids choice to move on because of playing time. 

 My son was at an elite (for baseball)   non power 5 school in the south,   there are no multi year guaranteed scholarships as there are in some of the power 5 schools.    There's no financial incentive to develop any of the freshmen.  if you aren't ready to contribute, you're out the door.   11 of the 27 on the traveling roster are either juco, 5th year guys, or transfers from other d1 programs that sat a year. 

There is one sophomore position player left out of a large freshman class from 2016.   Next year there will be one or two sophomore position players left from the large 2017 class.    the 2018 class has another 15-16 kids, I'm guessing that 1-4 of these will survive to sophomore year.   Many of these did not leave because they chose to- they left because the coach told them to.   

Why should they have to sit a year when they were essentially cut? 

Not that it matters what any of us think, the NCAA won't change it, they are there to control the labor, not to advocate for the students. 

PADad....I wasn't replying about your son....we were answering at the same time.   My thoughts were just generalities based on what I've seen at my son's school and with friends and former HS and travel teammates who went to other schools. 

buckeye, no worries, didn't take it personally,  and I'm glad it worked out for your son.   I just have a different perspective now after seeing how this has all played out.  I do believe my son was at one of the more brutal programs, so it's probably not like this everywhere, although I'm not sure.  I'm just thankful that the coach ripped off the scab- I'm glad he didn't tell him to hang in there, keep getting better, and he would have a chance to compete - because he would have stayed.  I think they needed the scholarship money back- they were deep in returning upper classmen so they made a business decision.  Coach even had a full scholarship juco lined up for him when he had the meeting with my son. 

It's brutal but it's just business.   Hopefully some of the parents at the beginning of the recruiting process will read these threads and learn.   In hindsight, we would do things differently! but like life, you deal with the change and move on.  It will all work out!

 

pabaseballdad posted:

. It's brutal but it's just business.   Hopefully some of the parents at the beginning of the recruiting process will read these threads and learn.   In hindsight, we would do things differently! but like life, you deal with the change and move on.  It will all work out! 

I'm reading and taking notes.  This summer my kid will be a rising HS Soph.  What would you do differently in hindsight?

Last edited by 3and2Fastball
3and2Fastball posted:
pabaseballdad posted:

. It's brutal but it's just business.   Hopefully some of the parents at the beginning of the recruiting process will read these threads and learn.   In hindsight, we would do things differently! but like life, you deal with the change and move on.  It will all work out! 

I'm reading and taking notes.  This summer my kid will be a rising HS Soph.  What would you do differently in hindsight?

boy- now you are putting me on the spot!

One thing I'd do differently for sure is truly vet the juco scene coming out of HS.  I did not understand it, never even considered it.

for my son (and everyone is different) he is an athlete with tools- and this is going to sound like bragging, but I'm going to paint the picture.  He has tools- fast, strong arm,  big bat.    was a pro prospect, top 150 in PG.  In hindsight I realize now that he was behind from an experience perspective.    he's a kid from the north, didn't play great competition, and didn't play as much as a lot of the southern or west coast kids.  He needed experience and coaching.    JUCO may have been a good route out of HS to get that experience.  Financially it can be a much better route-  there's 11.7 scholarships in d1, he was lucky enough to get a very good D1 scholarship- but it's still partial.  D1 Juco's have a 24 scholarship limit.  some are very well funded.  so I think Juco may have been a better route for HIM, not saying that's better for everyone.

IMO, the NCAA's PR about the "year in residence" is crap. They say it "encourages them to make decisions motivated by academics as well as athletics."  The rule was introduced in 1991. I don't believe any numbers from the NCAA about increased graduation rates as a result of that rule. Heck, I can't even find any numbers to support that argument.
And if the year in residence is so important, why does it only apply to D1 football, baseball, basketball and men’s ice hockey? Everyone else is using the one-time exception. Is it because those are the sports with the lowest graduation rates, or is it because those are the sports with big money? BTW, those "year in residence" kids can still practice, so how much additional free time do they really have?
At least the NCAA was discussing a change to the rule this year ("four-year transfer student-athletes who meet specific grade-point average and progress-toward-degree requirements be able to compete immediately at the second school.")
Seems like the simplest thing would be to allow kids to compete the next year as long as the previous coach signs off on it. That would at least solve most of the problem like pabaseballdad's kid ran into. I'm sure most of these coaches who feel like they have to over-recruit don't feel good about blocking a kid's options after they let them go.

I guess I'm very used to the sitting out one year rule, as that's the way it is in HS sports around here, i.e. if you decide to transfer to a private HS as a junior, you can't play on a Varsity team for one year.

If the coach of a college team more or less tells a player that he isn't wanted, I don't see why a player has to sit out if he wants to transfer to another school.

A poster above nailed it, though. The whole "sports scholarship" things is nuts. Go to minor league teams if all you want is to play baseball. 

MidAtlanticDad posted:
IMO, the NCAA's PR about the "year in residence" is crap. They say it "encourages them to make decisions motivated by academics as well as athletics."  The rule was introduced in 1991. I don't believe any numbers from the NCAA about increased graduation rates as a result of that rule. Heck, I can't even find any numbers to support that argument.
And if the year in residence is so important, why does it only apply to D1 football, baseball, basketball and men’s ice hockey? Everyone else is using the one-time exception. Is it because those are the sports with the lowest graduation rates, or is it because those are the sports with big money? BTW, those "year in residence" kids can still practice, so how much additional free time do they really have?
At least the NCAA was discussing a change to the rule this year ("four-year transfer student-athletes who meet specific grade-point average and progress-toward-degree requirements be able to compete immediately at the second school.")
Seems like the simplest thing would be to allow kids to compete the next year as long as the previous coach signs off on it. That would at least solve most of the problem like pabaseballdad's kid ran into. I'm sure most of these coaches who feel like they have to over-recruit don't feel good about blocking a kid's options after they let them go.

X10!  If the year in residence is so important, then why are freshmen allowed to play?  there are so many inconsistencies in the NCAA rules.  It's a ridiculous organization.  I've come to the conclusion that they are going to screw it up no matter what they do.  Maybe the best answer is to come to grips with the fact that these kids are essentially pro players- they spend over 40 hours a week at their craft (the 20 hour limit is a joke) .  The coaches are paid handsomely- so are the AD's the marketing folks, even the administrative assistants, trainers, etc, etc etc  are making a living off the athletics.  Let the free market rule.  if they are released they should become free agents, sign with the highest bidder.   

Buckeye 2015 posted:
RJM posted:

As much as i enjoyed the college baseball/softball experience (self and two kids) the concept of college sports is absurd. Most of the rest of the world agrees. But as long as football and basketball are money and/or PR generators ** nothing will change. 

Players should be able to transfer at the end of a semester if the coach departs or the program is placed on probation. Want to end cheating that leads to probation? Have the NCAA suspend coaches without pay for the duration. Players who don't play X amount of time should be eligible for transfer at the end of the semester. Maybe each conference could have a transfer eligibility arbitration department.

** Admissions bump up after successful seasons

How would that work?  This goes back to my post above....you aren't guaranteed one minute of playing time when you sign an NLI.    Allowing a kid to transfer based on playing time would just be an absolute nightmare.  You could have 90% of your freshman transferring after their first season just because they didn't play enough.   A coach could sit a kid for 3/4 of the year....then play him the last 5 innings of the last game of the year to get him past the "playing time" number so he couldn't leave.  

When my son was being recruited.....The conversation we had went something like this...... "ok, you want to play D1 baseball....here's the deal....you are going to stay at whatever school you sign to go to....unless there is a coaching change.   You're not transferring because of baseball.  If you end up hating the game, fine, you can quit baseball, but you're not playing somewhere else just because you're not pitching enough or getting enough at bats.  Those things are up to you....work hard and earn the playing time....don't leave just because things are tougher than you expected.   If you want to go D2 or D3 because you hope you'll play more....decide now...not 2 years from now".   He agreed.....and he has busted his butt the whole time and is getting plenty of P/T.   They have had kids come in with this "expectation" that they are somehow guaranteed something.  They find out real quick they aren't and they are gone....either done with baseball altogether or off to a small school.   It's been said on here 1000's of times....make sure you love the game BEFORE you go to college to play....or you'll end up hating it once you get there.

Everything worked out for my son better than expected. He would have stayed had it not worked out. But I try to look at the big picture rather than just one personal scenario.

If a coach tells a kid he’s not projected to get on the field why should he have to sit out a year or go to three schools in three years (4-2-4) to play? If a coach over recruits and cuts the kid why should he have to sit out to transfer? What if a  new coach comes in and doesn't want the player recruited by the previous coach? 

There are many variables. Everyone is told they will compete for a position. But sometimes its nothing but a line.Some kids are nothing more than third string insuramce and the coach knows it. Why shoukd this player have to sit to transfer? 

I do recognize some players end up in bad situations because they (and the families) did not do their homework. Some have no idea how many transfers typically come in. Some dont realize everyone on the team was all whatever in high school. 

Some players reach for their dream school rather than the school fawning over them. I was the one who brought go where they love you to the board. TR repeated it jntil it was hammered home. 

I was at a NC State - Boston College game. My son was in high school at the time. I woukd engage parents asking about their son’s journey. I was chatting with the dad of the NC State RFer. The kid was starting as a freshman. I asked if UNC recruited him. UNC was at their peak at the time. The dad said UNC showed interest and made an offer. NC State showed love and made an offer. Go where they love you. 

As mentioned a conference could have a transfer eligibility committee to make decisions.

 

3and2Fastball posted:
pabaseballdad posted:

. It's brutal but it's just business.   Hopefully some of the parents at the beginning of the recruiting process will read these threads and learn.   In hindsight, we would do things differently! but like life, you deal with the change and move on.  It will all work out! 

I'm reading and taking notes.  This summer my kid will be a rising HS Soph.  What would you do differently in hindsight?

I will speak to this as well. For us, it was hard to turn down a scholarship from a top school. When the offering school had been a regional power, and had been to the CWS in the last decade, you throw caution to the wind and sign. Our son played his freshman year, did very well and was told he had a good chance for more play time next year. Fast forward to the fall, struggled some early, finished strong and again made the spring roster. Didn't get a sniff of play time, was told he would be red shirted, than two weeks before the season ended, he was told that he wouldn't see play time next year and offered a release and help finding a new home. Did I mention, he had a 4 year guarantee on his financial agreement. He had offers to enroll at other DI's, but didn't want to sit out another year.

In the end it all worked out, but initially a gut punch. He dropped to a DII, still had scholarship money. He finished with 43 appearances & 35 starts, 215 IP and is 7th in wins all time in his programs history. He received his degree and will have his MBA by this time next year. Would we have done it differently? Probably, but you can't turn back time. 

We have been blessed by the game of baseball and like the game itself, it's unpredictable. Find the right school, research the program history, talk to past, present and future players when you can. Check roster sizes, history and transfers and it's still only a guess.

 

3and2Fastball posted:
pabaseballdad posted:

. It's brutal but it's just business.   Hopefully some of the parents at the beginning of the recruiting process will read these threads and learn.   In hindsight, we would do things differently! but like life, you deal with the change and move on.  It will all work out! 

I'm reading and taking notes.  This summer my kid will be a rising HS Soph.  What would you do differently in hindsight?

I too have no issues with the current rules. I never did. 

There is documentation that graduation rates have improved. I suppose the NCAA would have them. You see, programs were being punished for low graduation rates, losing scholarships, that's how bad it was. Not if the player was drafted. The goal is to graduate in 4 years. If a player transfers and loses credits in that transfer they don't graduate when they are supposed to, that was the entire premise behind the rule. 

College sports is a business. The way I see it, it's the coaches job to win, the players job to get his degree and graduate.

Be smart. Choose wisely where you can get a degree and play baseball.

 

Last edited by TPM

If it’s really about education players would get four years and be gone. If it’s really about education basketball programs would be heavily penalized for recruiting one and dones. If it’s really about education players would only be accepted on academic merit.

Last edited by RJM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×