|
|
Post by willtalk on Apr 18, 2019 19:43:52 GMT -8
The point is that the Grad transfer rule was enacted To accommodate Grad Transfer Students. The NCAA want to be used for the purpose it was originally intended, which is to give students the opportunity to finish a Graduate degree. And to curtail Universities from using it as a loophole to acquire a one-year transfer. Losing a scholarship is no big deal for WBB. Most teams seldom use them all anyway. Now for football that might be another matter.
This would also potentially keep teams from loading their rosters and then when a better Grad Student comes along dumping one of their other recruits. It won't stop it but it should certainly make it more difficult.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Apr 19, 2019 18:22:05 GMT -8
NCAA chickened out, defeated this proposal. The rich guys stay rich and will continue to cherry-pick talented kids from the mid- and low-majors who have no intention at all in getting their MA degrees but use the loophole as de-facto free agency.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaverwbb fan on Apr 19, 2019 18:23:49 GMT -8
NCAA chickened out, defeated this proposal. The rich guys stay rich and will continue to cherry-pick talented kids from the mid- and low-majors who have no intention at all in getting their MA degrees but use the loophole as de-facto free agency. I don't think they chickened out. They already announced it was not expected to pass last week. |
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Apr 19, 2019 19:18:44 GMT -8
NCAA chickened out, defeated this proposal. The rich guys stay rich and will continue to cherry-pick talented kids from the mid- and low-majors who have no intention at all in getting their MA degrees but use the loophole as de-facto free agency. What's wrong with "free agency" for students who have participated for 4 years in good standing and earned their undergraduate degrees? At that point, haven't both sides met their obligations to each other? And let's not forget that while the S/A is exclusively committed to their school for 4 years, the school can pull their scholarship at any time they feel fit, for any reason. I'm 100% for the S/A's here. And always will be. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Apr 19, 2019 19:32:47 GMT -8
And let's not forget that while the S/A is exclusively committed to their school for 4 years, the school can pull their scholarship at any time they feel fit, for any reason.
Pac-12 scholarships are guaranteed for four years and cannot be pulled, except for cause. This has become the general rule of thumb through intercollegiate athletics.
The undergraduate S/A can transfer at any time he/she wants, often without penalty in many sports. Since the transfer rate in some sports now approaches 30-40%, it's pretty obvious the S/A isn't committed to a his/her first choice for four years.
This rule change would not have inhibited grad transfers at all. In fact, it would have protected them, GUARANTEEING them a scholarship for the entire two years it takes to get their MA, not just for the one season they are eligible for. Now, if an S/A actually wants to complete an MA program, he/she is not guaranteed money will be available if the program is fully scholarshipped with players who still have eligibility remaining.
|
|
|
|
Post by Werebeaver on Apr 19, 2019 20:08:11 GMT -8
And let's not forget that while the S/A is exclusively committed to their school for 4 years, the school can pull their scholarship at any time they feel fit, for any reason.Pac-12 scholarships are guaranteed for four years and cannot be pulled, except for cause. This has become the general rule of thumb through intercollegiate athletics. The undergraduate S/A can transfer at any time he/she wants, often without penalty in many sports. Since the transfer rate in some sports now approaches 30-40%, it's pretty obvious the S/A isn't committed to a his/her first choice for four years. This rule change would not have inhibited grad transfers at all. In fact, it would have protected them, GUARANTEEING them a scholarship for the entire two years it takes to get their MA, not just for the one season they are eligible for. Now, if an S/A actually wants to complete an MA program, he/she is not guaranteed money will be available if the program is fully scholarshipped with players who still have eligibility remaining. Thanks for the info. Doing some googling I see that the "Power 5" conferences agreed together to guarantee scholarships for 4 years starting in 2015. However I still feel that students who have done everything right, earned their degree and remained in good standing with their team for 4 years, should have the option to continue their education and play that remaining season of eligibility at a school of THEIR choosing. As I've repeatedly stated, I'm for the student-athlete in this case and the current rule provides the graduated S/A with options that they deserve and have earned. The proposed rule would have reduced those available options - because that's exactly what it was designed to do. |
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Apr 19, 2019 20:22:06 GMT -8
Actually, the rule change would have moved the grad transfer option back closer to its original intention, transferring because the academic field you wish to study in graduate school wasn't available at your current school. Instead most of these grad transfers become phony graduate students because a P5 team needs them for three or six months to fill a hole. They might take six hours in some worthless interdisciplinary studies program but have no intention of earning an MA.
We disagree. No big deal.
|
|
|
|
Post by shelby on Apr 19, 2019 20:56:48 GMT -8
Well, I also disagree along with you. If everything was on the up and up and the program was filling it's original intentions - then there would be no questions or need for in depth analysis by the Universities and the NCAA. Maybe it started out okay, but it has devolved into a game with all of the schools that can successfully bend the rules. Those with money from obscure, untraceable sources as well as no ethics or moral compass.
|
|
