Potential Grad Transfer Rules Change

[CrazyNotCrazie]

Interesting article in the NY Times about potential changes to the grad transfer rule. Basically, if you have a grad transfer in the current season, you lose a scholarship the following season if the grad transfer does not earn their grad degree in their year of eligibility. This rule is being proposed for men's and women's basketball and football.

This seems to make absolutely no sense. I understand that many of the players who grad transfer have virtually no interest in pursuing the graduate degree that they are allegedly transferring for. But the goal of college sports is for the athletes to earn their undergrad degrees, and these athletes have done so, so we should be rewarding them for that. I'm sure there are some athletes who do truly see this as an opportunity to get a free year to start a grad program at a new school. The one year degree time horizon is illogical - there are countless degrees that require more than one year, and as I read this, grad transfers would essentially be forbidden from enrolling in one since it would be impossible for them to complete it.

The article notes that this would have more impact on basketball than football - football can more easily absorb a dead scholarship for a year than basketball can - if a superstar QB who is going to come in and start during his one grad transfer year is available, it is worth it for most football teams to lose a scholarship the following year in order to get him for that one year.

Once again, the NCAA is taking one of its few decent ideas and ruining it. Of course, the article notes that the idea is from Calipari...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/04/sports/ncaa-final-four-graduate-transfers.html

[RPS]

As ever, the NCAA is both stupid and eager to prevent "student-athletes" from having a bit of power and control over their lives. A despicable proposal...and thus pretty much par for the course.

[dukelifer]

Interesting article in the NY Times about potential changes to the grad transfer rule. Basically, if you have a grad transfer in the current season, you lose a scholarship the following season if the grad transfer does not earn their grad degree in their year of eligibility. This rule is being proposed for men's and women's basketball and football.

This seems to make absolutely no sense. I understand that many of the players who grad transfer have virtually no interest in pursuing the graduate degree that they are allegedly transferring for. But the goal of college sports is for the athletes to earn their undergrad degrees, and these athletes have done so, so we should be rewarding them for that. I'm sure there are some athletes who do truly see this as an opportunity to get a free year to start a grad program at a new school. The one year degree time horizon is illogical - there are countless degrees that require more than one year, and as I read this, grad transfers would essentially be forbidden from enrolling in one since it would be impossible for them to complete it.

The article notes that this would have more impact on basketball than football - football can more easily absorb a dead scholarship for a year than basketball can - if a superstar QB who is going to come in and start during his one grad transfer year is available, it is worth it for most football teams to lose a scholarship the following year in order to get him for that one year.

Once again, the NCAA is taking one of its few decent ideas and ruining it. Of course, the article notes that the idea is from Calipari...

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/04/sports/ncaa-final-four-graduate-transfers.html
This is a really dumb idea. Most folks who have no distractions cannot complete a grad degree is one year. At Duke you are required to take 10 classes- or 30 hrs. That would be incredibly hard for an athlete. Sure Duke could create easier degrees but they would need to be available to all. Any kid who decides to graduate and enhance their educational experience should be allowed to do so at the pace they choose- athlete or non athlete.

[Bluedog]

First, there are a few one year masters programs at Duke and elsewhere, which I assume is what most athletes enroll in. Having said that, this proposal would make a lot more sense if it simply said the student athlete must continue advancing towards their graduate degree after eligibility. That would "ensure" they're not simply in grad school for the sport without any intention on actually going through with the masters. But if we're honest with ourselves, of course that's the reason for the vast majority of men's basketball and football players.

[Mtn.Devil.91.92.01.10.15]

This is a really dumb idea. Most folks who have no distractions cannot complete a grad degree is one year. At Duke you are required to take 10 classes- or 30 hrs. That would be incredibly hard for an athlete. Sure Duke could create easier degrees but they would need to be available to all. Any kid who decides to graduate and enhance their educational experience should be allowed to do so at the pace they choose- athlete or non athlete.

I see what you did there.

[HereBeforeCoachK]

First, there are a few one year masters programs at Duke and elsewhere, which I assume is what most athletes enroll in. Having said that, this proposal would make a lot more sense if it simply said the student athlete must continue advancing towards their graduate degree after eligibility. That would "ensure" they're not simply in grad school for the sport without any intention on actually going through with the masters. But if we're honest with ourselves, of course that's the reason for the vast majority of men's basketball and football players.

Yep. And this is a case of the NCAA being:
A: Nakedly cynical
B: Insufferably bureaucratic
C: Tone deaf as to the unintended consequences
D: Having rules made by people who have no clue what they're doing.

And I'm sure this list could grow....

[Neals384]

Yep. And this is a case of the NCAA being:
A: Nakedly cynical
B: Insufferably bureaucratic
C: Tone deaf as to the unintended consequences
D: Having rules made by people who have no clue what they're doing.

And I'm sure this list could grow...

At risk of being busted, I must point out that the NCAA does not have the corner on this market...try Washington DC.

[A-Tex Devil]

As ever, the NCAA is both stupid and eager to prevent "student-athletes" from having a bit of power and control over their lives. A despicable proposal...and thus pretty much par for the course.

While the NCAA would promulgate this rule change, my hunch is that the coaches are the ones pushing this more than anyone.