Reason behind the Transfer Portal

[Hoo's That]

All the transfer portal did was create a farm system for the "BIG BOYS" ...If Ohio St, Bama, LSU, Clemson, Georgia...etc. Ever find themselves "thin" or "weak" at a given position heading into a season. They will use that offseason, through back-channels, to get word to a quality/good player at a smaller school (ie Indiana, Syracuse, Boston College, TCU...etc) and entice them to transfer to their school to make more $$$$ and to be on a larger platform to get noticed.

This is a total major league/minor league set up and now with money involved the transfer portal is just a way for the big boy football schools to throw around their clout, money, and numerous advantages they have over the smaller football schools to "cherry-pick" the good players the smaller schools develop.

The gap between the "haves" and the "have-mores" will just get greater because of the transfer portal.

The transfer Portal is two-way (even the Dr. Pepper commercial showed that). All the changes to the rules, etc., about transferring did nothing to expand roster size limits or increase the number of scholarships. For every player one of the "big boys" takes, they have to let one go. There are a number of really good players who are going to have to decide whether they want to ride the pine for one of the "big boys" or get significant playing time and exposure elsewhere. People said the same thing about basketball and how everyone was going to Duke or Kentucky. It didn't happen there and it won't happen in football either. Onesies and twosies were going to happen anyway. The change to the transfer rule just lets them play without sitting out a year.

 

[Stern]

The transfer Portal is two-way (even the Dr. Pepper commercial showed that). All the changes to the rules, etc., about transferring did nothing to expand roster size limits or increase the number of scholarships. For every player one of the "big boys" takes, they have to let one go. There are a number of really good players who are going to have to decide whether they want to ride the pine for one of the "big boys" or get significant playing time and exposure elsewhere. People said the same thing about basketball and how everyone was going to Duke or Kentucky. It didn't happen there and it won't happen in football either. Onesies and twosies were going to happen anyway. The change to the transfer rule just lets them play without sitting out a year.

Comparing football and basketball I don't see it in this instance. Apples and hand grenades comparison. And the big boys "losing 1" marginal player to cherry-pick a "GREAT" player from a smaller school they will take that trade off every time

 

[SUbear]

How old are you? Are you really suggesting that kids shouldn't be able to transfer and play because it hurts your viewing pleasure? LOL It's their life.

They enter into a contract when they accept a scholarship. They can transfer, but they should be made to follow the contract requirements just like any adult person. Not following their contract is the immature thing to do.
Breaking the contract had a penalty of a year, now it is free for all to not live up to. How is this mature?
You as usual are insulting to other posters who express their opinion that does not agree with yours.

 

[SUbear]

The transfer Portal is two-way (even the Dr. Pepper commercial showed that). All the changes to the rules, etc., about transferring did nothing to expand roster size limits or increase the number of scholarships. For every player one of the "big boys" takes, they have to let one go. There are a number of really good players who are going to have to decide whether they want to ride the pine for one of the "big boys" or get significant playing time and exposure elsewhere. People said the same thing about basketball and how everyone was going to Duke or Kentucky. It didn't happen there and it won't happen in football either. Onesies and twosies were going to happen anyway. The change to the transfer rule just lets them play without sitting out a year.

So you gain a star from another program and let a bench warmer go. yea that seems equitable for the top programs. Use sarcasm font here.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

They enter into a contract when they accept a scholarship. They can transfer, but they should be made to follow the contract requirements just like any adult person. Not following their contract is the immature thing to do.
Breaking the contract had a penalty of a year, now it is free for all to not live up to. How is this mature?
You as usual are insulting to other posters who express their opinion that does not agree with yours.

You have the terms of that "contract"? Please point out how they breach the "contract" if they transfer?

 

[SUbear]

Yeah, I'm the one who demands players stay at a place they don't want to be and I need to grow up. LOL I guess any business should be able to force a person to stay at their employment or sit out a year if they leave their employment. That would be pretty dumb. Just like making players stay at the same school while their coaches can get up and leave any time.

You have heard of employment contracts that have penalties for leaving right? They do not prevent it but you have to honor their provisions.
The idea that coaches can leave anytime is a red herring when conparing to this. Coaches have contracts too, and they have to live up to those contracts, if their employers do not put a penalty clause in whose fault is that?

 

[tep624]

Think of this scenario, an art student is on scholarship at School A and wants to transfer to School B and School A says, "sorry you need to sit out a year from studying art. We gave you a free year of education, housing and supplies, you can't leave without being penalized."

It sounds ridiculous!

But it’s not art. It’s athletics. The art school doesn’t rely on the art student to put out a weekly product that is a collective team effort last I checked. There also aren’t thousands of people coming to the art school on weekly basis who are invested in a product. So this comparison, like it has always been, is a false equivalent.

Secondarily, if an art student is on scholarship, it’s probably a lot harder for them generally to transfer to another institution on scholarship.

 

[SUDadx2]

That would be admitting the players are employees, which would mean they would have to be compensated. NCAA is avoiding that at all costs.

Student athletes are compensated. Compensation comes in many forms; student athletes receive tuition, books, room and board, tutoring services plus a COA monthly stipend. The annual value of this package at SU is valued at more than 70K.

If considered an “employee” wouldn’t the value of this compensation be taxable?

No one wants that.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

The arguments based in concern for the student athlete are so patronizing. How many fans worry about the well-being of the student more than what they do on the field? I'd hazard a guess its a small number if people are being honest.

Its interesting to see the twisted logic to say the transfer rule is bad for the players that are freely choosing to use the rules to their perceived advantage and make their own individual life choice. Or is that really not the argument and its more of a paternalistic view that "we" know what's better for individuals we have never met. The concerns over a strangers academic progress and future rings hollow in my opinion. Its very paternalistic and anti-freedom of choice. Its interesting that I haven't heard many (or any) players come out against the new transfer rule or the transfer portal.

If the actual objection is really about the game of college football and its "ruination" due to the new transfer rule I'd say at least that argument is genuine. However, keeping the old system of restrictions on players to benefit the universities alone (as there was no benefit to players with the prior rule) is fundamentally unfair.

The sham of student-athlete at the highest levels of DI sports has been exposed and like any change to inequitable systems in the past there will be much resistance from those affected negatively. That resistance doesn't mean its a negative in my opinion.

Anyway, my two pennies.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

You have heard of employment contracts that have penalties for leaving right? They do not prevent it but you have to honor their provisions.
The idea that coaches can leave anytime is a red herring when conparing to this. Coaches have contracts too, and they have to live up to those contracts, if their employers do not put a penalty clause in whose fault is that?

I was inquiring as to whether you have the "contract" student athletes sign and what clause specifically that they are violating by transferring? Its a rhetorical question though. You don't nor does anyone since they aren't breaching any contract by transferring.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

Student athletes are compensated. Compensation comes in many forms; student athletes receive tuition, books, room and board, tutoring services plus a COA monthly stipend. The annual value of this package at SU is valued at more than 70K.

If considered an “employee” wouldn’t the value of this compensation be taxable?

No one wants that.

Go away with this tired argument.

Receiving tuition and educational benefits that are only redeemable at the home institution isn't compensation. It's Company Scrip.

 

[Louie and Bouie]

Student athletes are compensated. Compensation comes in many forms; student athletes receive tuition, books, room and board, tutoring services plus a COA monthly stipend. The annual value of this package at SU is valued at more than 70K.

If considered an “employee” wouldn’t the value of this compensation be taxable?

No one wants that.

More importantly for the other side (the real money makers), it would lead to workmen's comp, unemployment, right to unionize and collective bargaining.

Only one side doesn't want that. Hint: its not the high end DI athlete.

 

[Hoo's That]

So you gain a star from another program and let a bench warmer go. yea that seems equitable for the top programs. Use sarcasm font here.

Those "bench warmers" are also 4 or 5 stars who didn't work out for one reason or another. Someone was recruited over them, didn't get along with the coach, etc. This "half empty glass" is balanced on a knife edge. All it takes is for one "stolen star" not to work out and the whole concept comes crashing down. Does any program want a disgruntled prima donna playing for them? When anyone transfers, you have to wonder how good a fit they were to begin with.

Late add: I can't speak for how it is at SU, but I know UVa would take some of Bama's or Georgia's bench warming DBs in a heartbeat assuming we could get them in school.

 

[SUDadx2]

Go away with this tired argument.

Receiving tuition and educational benefits that are only redeemable at the home institution isn't compensation. It's Company Scrip.

Hmmm….

1 - Company scrip is illegal (FLSA 1938).

2 - COA stipends are actually money. I think it used to be close to $500 a month at SU.

3 - Some people actually believe the benefits of an education are redeemable for a lifetime.


The discussion will continue to evolve as long as elements of the discussion change.

 

[LeMoyneCuse]

Hmmm….

1 - Company scrip is illegal (FLSA 1938).

2 - COA stipends are actually money. I think it used to be close to $500 a month at SU.

3 - Some people actually believe the benefits of an education are redeemable for a lifetime.


The discussion will continue to evolve as long as elements of the discussion change.

Company scrip is illegal. That's why they don't call Tuition / Room & Board / etc. compensation.

Also, non-athlete students who qualify can receive similar full-benefit scholarships and support, and their on-campus efforts don't yield millions of dollars in profit + major exposure for the university.

Also, "Some people actually believe the benefits of an education are redeemable for a lifetime."

Yeah, that's why most (not all) football players (and athletes) are allowed to pick from one of a few, vague majors (at Cuse, its Child and Family Studies and Communication and Rhetorical Studies) that fit around the football schedule, while players are expected to dedicate more than a 40 hour work week just to football. The education part is a face-saver only.

 

[SUDadx2]

Yeah, that's why most (not all) football players (and athletes) are allowed to pick from one of a few, vague majors (at Cuse, its Child and Family Studies and Communication and Rhetorical Studies) that fit around the football schedule, while players are expected to dedicate more than a 40 hour work week just to football. The education part is a face-saver only.

I won’t deny the unfortunate reality of your statement. But, that’s a different discussion; Division I athletics and academic integrity.

 

[Sudano]

How old are you? Are you really suggesting that kids shouldn't be able to transfer and play because it hurts your viewing pleasure? LOL It's their life.

They get a scholarship commitment from a school for the year so yes they should have to finish the year, or semester for that matter. And yes they shouldn't be able to transfer in the middle of the game, or season.
Transfer after a season. It hurts the student and yes it hurts the integrity of the sport. Transfer but there has to be some requirement or restriction for the student too.

 

[Sudano]

Company scrip is illegal. That's why they don't call Tuition / Room & Board / etc. compensation.

Also, non-athlete students who qualify can receive similar full-benefit scholarships and support, and their on-campus efforts don't yield millions of dollars in profit + major exposure for the university.

Also, "Some people actually believe the benefits of an education are redeemable for a lifetime."

Yeah, that's why most (not all) football players (and athletes) are allowed to pick from one of a few, vague majors (at Cuse, its Child and Family Studies and Communication and Rhetorical Studies) that fit around the football schedule, while players are expected to dedicate more than a 40 hour work week just to football. The education part is a face-saver only.

You act as if Football is being done to these players, it's a two way street. You educate me for free and train me for a possible pro football career. They can major in anything they want, but most (not all) ask what majors will allow me to concentrate on football training more.

 

[Stern]

The arguments based in concern for the student athlete are so patronizing. How many fans worry about the well-being of the student more than what they do on the field? I'd hazard a guess its a small number if people are being honest.

Its interesting to see the twisted logic to say the transfer rule is bad for the players that are freely choosing to use the rules to their perceived advantage and make their own individual life choice. Or is that really not the argument and its more of a paternalistic view that "we" know what's better for individuals we have never met. The concerns over a strangers academic progress and future rings hollow in my opinion. Its very paternalistic and anti-freedom of choice. Its interesting that I haven't heard many (or any) players come out against the new transfer rule or the transfer portal.

If the actual objection is really about the game of college football and its "ruination" due to the new transfer rule I'd say at least that argument is genuine. However, keeping the old system of restrictions on players to benefit the universities alone (as there was no benefit to players with the prior rule) is fundamentally unfair.

The sham of student-athlete at the highest levels of DI sports has been exposed and like any change to inequitable systems in the past there will be much resistance from those affected negatively. That resistance doesn't mean its a negative in my opinion.

Anyway, my two pennies.

Make no mistake it is GREAT for the players. It just will make the sport less interesting over time when the very few big schools are able to cherry-pick and get ALL of the great players. And schools the size of Syracuse are just stepping stones for a kid to come, make his name, and leave to go elsewhere to make more $$$ or play on a bigger platform.

College basketball ruined its regular season and lost a lot of popularity by how they ran the sport and decisions they did years ago. College football is quickly on the same track (I know the transfer portal and NIL go across all sports but hurts this one the most). Transfer Portal, NIL, and Expanded playoff...the regular season will mean diddly squat soon and wake up most casual fans when the playoff starts once that happens. Just like in basketball for most casual fans wake them up in March when they can fill out their bracket. Unless you live in Columbus, Baton Rouge, the state of Alabama, or South Carolina...the regular season becomes more meaningless in college football once the playoff gets expanded.

Transfer portal is no doubt great for the players, just bad overall for the sport and the fans.

 

[HRE Otto IV]

Is a schools still required to hold an opening should a kid not find a new home?

 

[dasher]

Maybe they're less tenable in your industry (media?) but they hold up quite well in others.

And what person (or company) wants to deal with a legal battle to resolve a non compete agreement. They'd all just wait out the year.

I think you are probably right there. In the drug and air and military industry, I think employers are more worried about work product than the employee themselves. I have been on both sides in my industry. the non compete never hold up. I did get a especially nasty letter from one employer though.

 

[dasher]

Is a schools still required to hold an opening should a kid not find a new home?

I don't believe so. And plenty of kids will be left without a chair when the music stops.

 

[tep624]

I'm fine with freedom of movement but I think there have to me some basic stipulations because right now it's a free for all and quite frankly a mess.

First year freshman (Non RF) can transfer at their first year but they have to sit out a year if they do.

Players can only enter the portal the last 2 weeks of a semester.

No more mid season departures, no more freshman on campus a month that didn't start and throw their name it. That quite frankly is a bunch of nonsense.

Outside of that, if a player wants to leave, they should be able to do so with no penalty.

 

[SUDadx2]

Try this…

Anyone can leave at anytime, but…

If a player enters the portal after the season starts and cannot use a redshirt year to cover the immediate season (has played in more than four games or has already used their RS year) said player will be responsible for a prorated portion of the tuition, room and board to the school where they are currently enrolled.

- An exception would be for any player who enters the portal after their teams regular season schedule has been completed, but no sooner than December 1st.

Players can decide not to play at any time, but a school should not be on the hook financially for a player who decides not to play during the season.

As a fan I don’t like the thought of having to pay tuition, room and board for a player who has decided not to honor their contract.

I don’t like what all of this in-season movement can do to a team’s culture.

December 1st so players can be recruited, and teams can start recruiting replacements before the December signing date.