I see this happening. You can already see it with some players like Tyler Baron. Had he would have stayed at UT, there would be some hype around him and potential NFL draft talk going into next season, especially bookending with Pearce. Now, since his marry go round transferring no one is talking about him.What if, just for the sake of argument, after the newness of the ability to transfer wears off this actually improves the game and keeps athletes who have the attitude of giving their all for their team in the program? While the uncommitted or weakly committed transfer away?
What happens if/when the universities begin direct payments to players? Will there be multi year contracts involved that will restrict player transfers?
Why are so many football fans such control freaks? Let the market decide.Most likely, or at least in a year-to-year form, which is one of the reasons I've been saying the players becoming employees was inevitable once the NCAA began losing in court. It's the only way schools can restore any of their control over what's become a complete dumpster fire of "do whatever you want."
A thousand thumbs down. Did you really want Dooley, Botch Jones, or Pruitt to stick around for a second longer than they did?Maybe that should change too. Most coaches have contracts with terms, right? Maybe both schools and coaches should be required to fulfill contract terms. No more buyouts, etc. Both agree to 5 years... it's FIVE years. Then the athletes will have security that the coach will be there until the contract is fulfilled at minimum.
Why are so many football fans such control freaks? Let the market decide.
Valid argument, but Constitutionally they have the same rights as regular students, which includes changing schools at their pleasure.You can dislike it from a competitive standpoint, but still feel that players have the right to transfer. I don’t care what Jay Bilas or anyone else who agrees w/ him says, college athletes that are on full scholarship to play whatever sport are not the same as regular students, they’re just not. There are tons more resources that are poured into them before they even arrive to campus, many times when they are still Juniors and seniors in high school. Once they arrive on campus they have special living arrangements, extra academic help in the form of special advising, extra tutoring etc… they have many more resources to nutrition. The list can go on, so no I don’t view them as regular students and for the most part they don’t view themselves as regular students . I think the portal has been glorified bc for every Hendon Hooker or Joe Burrow story there are hundreds of people that just linger out in the portal w/o a landing spot. I get that if you’ve put in the work and you’ve stuck it out for a few years and you need a fresh start. However, I think it does a real disservice to a lot of others who think they are deserving of something that they haven’t yet earned and then they up and leave.
Letting the college know of intention to enroll as student and be on scholarship. Colleges are restricted in #s for enrollment, team numbers, and scholly players. Helps the schools logistically.What is the purpose of an NLI in your mind? If players can disregard the conditions of the NLI do colleges still have to abide by the agreement?
That's fair. Appreciate the thoughts so I can understand you better.No, I do not.
But that said, the "people just dislike change" argument has never held any merit with me. It's just flimsy. As if the idea of any change itself, rather than the substance of the changes and their impact, is what people are responding to. "Change" is neither good nor bad. It is only change. A house burning down is, technically, only a change. Or, in the context of college football, a house with billowing black smoke coming out of the windows is, technically, only a change -- but one can see the smoke and infer that that change might not be for the better.
Now, that said, I'd say that the changes I have seen over the last ten years have not been for the better. If someone believed otherwise, then that's for them and that's their call to make. But the more mercenary nature of both coaches and players, the erosion of regional relevance, the power TV money has over the game, the obsession with turning college football into the NFL (complete with betting lines), the loss of traditional rivalries, and the continued existence of the man in the red hat, I'm pretty comfortable saying that I think these changes are not for the better.
Now, just to be clear, I'm not saying it'll ever change back. The money has changed hands. It's been sold. That's done. That doesn't make it good. Only done.
Steve Spurrier quit on SC in the middle of the season.How do they have the freedom to up and leave at any time? All coaches are under contract, and if they up and leave, their new athletic department pays a big buyout in most cases. Maybe there should be a buyout clause put into players' contracts (which should be coming. Crap, even the NFL has rules governing free agency.
Call me cynical but the free market has always been part of the game. It was just behind the scenes in McDonald's bags and Dodge Chargers and houses and jobs for family members.RIP college football. I’m selfishly sad that the game of my youth is gone , but glad that free market enterprise wins the day.
There is a big difference between controlling things (a budget) and people (athletes).Why does thinking the colleges will want to have control over the 200 million dollar budgets they manage make me a control freak?
And "let the market decide" would allow the schools to do whatever they want, take it or leave it, with absolutely no interference from the government or the legal system, so that's kind of a strange rejoinder. This whole upheaval has been driven by laws that regulate the workplace, and the push to recategorize college athletes as workers.
Non signers can leave school when ever they wish, including in the middle of a semester. They just can't re-enroll elsewhere until the next semester.How many non-athletes transfer in the middle of a semester/quarter? I think it's very few; it's often impossible.
Jimmy Hyams said yesterday that over 1/3 of Tennessee players (football?) were on multi-year NIL deals.
I think it’s kind of crazy from a competitive standpoint to have unlimited free agency and uncapped $. There’s no other level of competitive team sports that practices this. It’s bad for the sport. It’s forcing more and more good coaches to take jobs in lesser roles out of college sports bc the quality of life is not what it once was. Yes the $ is great, but there has to be value in work life balance and that has seen a dramatic shift recently. There has to be a give and take and this whole thing has become about whatever the athletes want they can get. The NCAA really screwed this up when didn’t see this tidal wave coming a long time ago.So what's everyone complaining about, the fact that some actually do it?