How would you change/fix the Transfer Portal?

[scottdude8]

There's been a lot of talk in the "2023 Transfer Portal" thread about whether or not the transfer portal is good or bad, and how it should be tweaked to make things better moving forward. I figured it was time to make a designated thread for such discussions rather than derailing the other thread every few days

I'm of the opinion that allowing student athletes the same freedoms as other students (students don't have to "sit out" a year if they transfer to a new academic program) and other athletes (free agency) is a net positive, especially after so many years of the NCAA being, well, the NCAA. But there's also the real counterpoint that having 1/5 of all players (I think that's the number I read) in the transfer portal means it's almost untenable to manage a roster, let alone generate roster continuity.

With that in mind, here's what I would try to implement if I was put in charge of the NCAA for a day:
-Players can transfer once with immediate eligibility.
-Players automatically get the option to transfer again with immediate eligibility if their head coach leaves.
-Players can apply for a second immediate eligibility transfer if either A) They want to move closer to home due to family concerns, or B) There are serious allegations of a toxic/abusive environment in their current program (I'm thinking here of the reported racial comments made by TCU's coach that prompted a transfer, for instance).
-Players can transfer a second time with immediate eligibility as a graduate transfer; however, if this is their second transfer, doing so means they only have one year of eligibility remaining. So, if someone wanted to transfer a second time as a graduate transfer but had two years of eligibility remaining, they can be immediately eligible but forfeit one year of eligibility.

The above isn't all that earth shattering, and is basically just a next step in stuff the NCAA is already trying to enforce. Here's where I'd get creative:
-There are two "immediate eligibility transfer windows" in which a player can use these immediate eligibility transfers. The first is between the end of their first season and before their second, and the second is after their third season. Essentially, if you stick around after your first season, you're committing to the program for the next two seasons as well.
-Exceptions would be made similar to the above: if a coach leaves, there are family reasons to move closer to home, or their is an abusive/toxic environment you can immediately transfer at any time.
-A player who wishes to transfer in the "dead" period between their first and third seasons can do so, but either A) Has to redshirt a year, or B) forfeits a year of eligibility.

Obviously these aren't fully articulated rules, but they're things that have been rattling around my head and I think a nice potential starting point for a conversation. Now, tell me how wrong I am

[Dukehk]

Make it like it was before. All players must sit out one year.

However, with one caveat. If there is a coaching change, then you are allowed to transfer immediately.

Otherwise, same as before, sit out one year other than for exceptional cases.

[Bluedog]

Make it like it was before. All players must sit out one year.

However, with one caveat. If there is a coaching change, then you are allowed to transfer immediately.

Otherwise, same as before, sit out one year other than for exceptional cases.

Problem is "exceptional cases" became much more commonplace...

The thing I don't get about transfers is the academic side. Do schools really let you take 3 years of courses at a different college and then 1 year at your college and somehow you get a degree for the university you already went to for a year?!? Duke certainly doesn't, which I guess is why we've only been taking grad transfers or transfers after a year.

I think players should have more agency/control just like "normal students" so that shift is positive in that regard, but it's frankly it's turned into a mess IMHO. And clearly most top D1 basketball players are NOT "normal students" (i.e. their motivating factors/incentives of choosing schools are very different from that of a typical student).

[Papa John]

Make it like it was before. All players must sit out one year.

However, with one caveat. If there is a coaching change, then you are allowed to transfer immediately.

Otherwise, same as before, sit out one year other than for exceptional cases.

If all players must sit out one year upon deciding to transfer, then any coach who 'transfers' from one school to another must also sit out one year. If the athletes have a completely artificial limitation placed upon them, then we should also impose the same completely artificial limitation upon the coaches, just to be fair.

[dukelifer]

There's been a lot of talk in the "2023 Transfer Portal" thread about whether or not the transfer portal is good or bad, and how it should be tweaked to make things better moving forward. I figured it was time to make a designated thread for such discussions rather than derailing the other thread every few days

I'm of the opinion that allowing student athletes the same freedoms as other students (students don't have to "sit out" a year if they transfer to a new academic program) and other athletes (free agency) is a net positive, especially after so many years of the NCAA being, well, the NCAA. But there's also the real counterpoint that having 1/5 of all players (I think that's the number I read) in the transfer portal means it's almost untenable to manage a roster, let alone generate roster continuity.

With that in mind, here's what I would try to implement if I was put in charge of the NCAA for a day:
-Players can transfer once with immediate eligibility.
-Players automatically get the option to transfer again with immediate eligibility if their head coach leaves.
-Players can apply for a second immediate eligibility transfer if either A) They want to move closer to home due to family concerns, or B) There are serious allegations of a toxic/abusive environment in their current program (I'm thinking here of the reported racial comments made by TCU's coach that prompted a transfer, for instance).
-Players can transfer a second time with immediate eligibility as a graduate transfer; however, if this is their second transfer, doing so means they only have one year of eligibility remaining. So, if someone wanted to transfer a second time as a graduate transfer but had two years of eligibility remaining, they can be immediately eligible but forfeit one year of eligibility.

The above isn't all that earth shattering, and is basically just a next step in stuff the NCAA is already trying to enforce. Here's where I'd get creative:
-There are two "immediate eligibility transfer windows" in which a player can use these immediate eligibility transfers. The first is between the end of their first season and before their second, and the second is after their third season. Essentially, if you stick around after your first season, you're committing to the program for the next two seasons as well.
-Exceptions would be made similar to the above: if a coach leaves, there are family reasons to move closer to home, or their is an abusive/toxic environment you can immediately transfer at any time.
-A player who wishes to transfer in the "dead" period between their first and third seasons can do so, but either A) Has to redshirt a year, or B) forfeits a year of eligibility.

Obviously these aren't fully articulated rules, but they're things that have been rattling around my head and I think a nice potential starting point for a conversation. Now, tell me how wrong I am

Make it so no player can transfer into UNC. Then it is fine.

[dlmzzz]

There's been a lot of talk in the "2023 Transfer Portal" thread about whether or not the transfer portal is good or bad, and how it should be tweaked to make things better moving forward. I figured it was time to make a designated thread for such discussions rather than derailing the other thread every few days

I'm of the opinion that allowing student athletes the same freedoms as other students (students don't have to "sit out" a year if they transfer to a new academic program) and other athletes (free agency) is a net positive, especially after so many years of the NCAA being, well, the NCAA. But there's also the real counterpoint that having 1/5 of all players (I think that's the number I read) in the transfer portal means it's almost untenable to manage a roster, let alone generate roster continuity.

With that in mind, here's what I would try to implement if I was put in charge of the NCAA for a day:
-Players can transfer once with immediate eligibility.
-Players automatically get the option to transfer again with immediate eligibility if their head coach leaves.
-Players can apply for a second immediate eligibility transfer if either A) They want to move closer to home due to family concerns, or B) There are serious allegations of a toxic/abusive environment in their current program (I'm thinking here of the reported racial comments made by TCU's coach that prompted a transfer, for instance).
-Players can transfer a second time with immediate eligibility as a graduate transfer; however, if this is their second transfer, doing so means they only have one year of eligibility remaining. So, if someone wanted to transfer a second time as a graduate transfer but had two years of eligibility remaining, they can be immediately eligible but forfeit one year of eligibility.

The above isn't all that earth shattering, and is basically just a next step in stuff the NCAA is already trying to enforce. Here's where I'd get creative:
-There are two "immediate eligibility transfer windows" in which a player can use these immediate eligibility transfers. The first is between the end of their first season and before their second, and the second is after their third season. Essentially, if you stick around after your first season, you're committing to the program for the next two seasons as well.
-Exceptions would be made similar to the above: if a coach leaves, there are family reasons to move closer to home, or their is an abusive/toxic environment you can immediately transfer at any time.
-A player who wishes to transfer in the "dead" period between their first and third seasons can do so, but either A) Has to redshirt a year, or B) forfeits a year of eligibility.

Obviously these aren't fully articulated rules, but they're things that have been rattling around my head and I think a nice potential starting point for a conversation. Now, tell me how wrong I am

Scott, what's your thinking on restricting the # of years for grad transfers? What would that add/fix?

I would think if a person graduates, they should get the benefit of having redshirted, etc.

[dlmzzz]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think that NCAA scholarships are a 1 year commitment from the school. Duke has always honored them as a 4 year commitment, but that is only through policy. I think that if you put restrictions on player's ability to transfer, and commit them to the school, the school should be similarly committed to the player.

I'm not sure that's really enforceable, though. If a coach wants to run a player off, it's really hard to stop that. That imbalance/inequity makes me lean toward allowing transfer freedom.

[scottdude8]

Problem is "exceptional cases" became much more commonplace...

The thing I don't get about transfers is the academic side. Do schools really let you take 3 years of courses at a different college and then 1 year at your college and somehow you get a degree for the university you already went to for a year?!? Duke certainly doesn't, which I guess is why we've only been taking grad transfers or transfers after a year.

I think players should have more agency/control just like "normal students" so that shift is positive in that regard, but it's frankly it's turned into a mess IMHO. And clearly most top D1 basketball players are NOT "normal students" (i.e. their motivating factors/incentives of choosing schools are very different from that of a typical student).

I know its very common in Michigan for students to do their first two years at a cheaper school that they can often commute to from home (Oakland University is one example) and then transfer to U of M or MSU for their final two years, at which point their "degree" is from that final institution. I believe this can even happen when the initial school is a community college. So it's a common practice to defray the outlandish costs of higher education for everyone, making it not quite reasonable for college athletes as well IMHO.

Scott, what's your thinking on restricting the # of years for grad transfers? What would that add/fix?

I would think if a person graduates, they should get the benefit of having redshirted, etc.

My thought process there was more a way of encouraging/rewarding people to stay at their school rather than rushing to graduate in order to grad transfer. Not the most well-thought out element of my plan, I admit, and it probably won't have as much of an effect once the COVID year disappears.

[uh_no]

I know its very common in Michigan for students to do their first two years at a cheaper school that they can often commute to from home (Oakland University is one example) and then transfer to U of M or MSU for their final two years, at which point their "degree" is from that final institution. I believe this can even happen when the initial school is a community college. So it's a common practice to defray the outlandish costs of higher education for everyone, making it not quite reasonable for college athletes as well IMHO.



My thought process there was more a way of encouraging/rewarding people to stay at their school rather than rushing to graduate in order to grad transfer. Not the most well-thought out element of my plan, I admit, and it probably won't have as much of an effect once the COVID year disappears.

Duke, on the other hand, is very stingy about both accepting transfers, and which credits they will accept of incoming transfers, often making students retake certain classes. It goes both ways.

I'm not intersted in being penal to players, I'm also not interested in the free agency we have right now. It's just impossible to build a team.

I think one improvement could be the transfer portal does not occur until after the NBA draft entry deadline. That way at least you're not penalized for encouraging players to test the waters.

[Phredd3]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think that NCAA scholarships are a 1 year commitment from the school. Duke has always honored them as a 4 year commitment, but that is only through policy. I think that if you put restrictions on player's ability to transfer, and commit them to the school, the school should be similarly committed to the player.

It depends on the conference. NCAA rules require scholarships to be in writing, but they can be for a period of 1 to 5 years. No NCAA member schools can remove or reduce a scholarship within the agreed, written period (except "for cause" - i.e. athlete loses eligibility or commits outright misconduct on or off the court, including academic fraud [think about that *coughcheatscough*]). Most schools and conferences, however, limit all scholarship agreements to a one year period as a matter of policy. So the Power 5 Conferences all then agreed that, although technically single-year agreements, P5 schools cannot fail to renew an athletic scholarship for reasons of injury or poor athletic performance. Other conferences are free to adopt this same rule (and I'm not sure which conferences have actually done so). Note schools can also can remove (i.e. fail to renew) a scholarship for violations of institutional policy outside the realm of athletics (e.g. poor academic performance).

So, it's a technically a one-year commitment from the school, but it's really kind of a four-to-six-year commitment for most of the schools we care about on this board.

[Bluedog]

It depends on the conference. NCAA rules require scholarships to be in writing, but they can be for a period of 1 to 5 years. No NCAA member schools can remove or reduce a scholarship within the agreed, written period (except "for cause" - i.e. athlete loses eligibility or commits outright misconduct on or off the court, including academic fraud [think about that *coughcheatscough*]). Most schools and conferences, however, limit all scholarship agreements to a one year period as a matter of policy. So the Power 5 Conferences all then agreed that, although technically single-year agreements, P5 schools cannot fail to renew an athletic scholarship for reasons of injury or poor athletic performance. Other conferences are free to adopt this same rule (and I'm not sure which conferences have actually done so). Note schools can also can remove a scholarship for violations of institutional policy outside the realm of athletics (e.g. poor academic performance).

So, it's a technically a one-year commitment from the school, but it's really kind of a four-to-six-year commitment for most of the schools we care about on this board.

The B1G was the first conference to guarantee four year scholarships in 2014 (for all sports). Football coaches were saying it put them at a competitive disadvantage vis a vis the SEC, as SEC schools ALWAYS had more players on the rosters than scholarships available and then would essentially "cut" a few players to meet the numbers (and there's a natural summer melt at times), whereas the B1G football coaches couldn't have commitments from more than the NCAA max scholarships numbers so would lose a few players over the summer and then be short a few (although do you really need 85 scholarships to field a football team?).

In 2015, the NCAA instituted a rule for all P5 schools saying scholarships can't be revoked for athletic performance, although I'm not sure what that means totally in practice and if the SEC has abandoned its prior practice or not.

[Devil549]

Make it simple transfer 1 time play right away, if coach leaves for any reason (fired or on their own) can transfer just like first time. Grad transfer plays right away and second transfer sits 1 year for any reason no hardship.

I will also say I coached in HS and @ DIII level for 37 years (this year was my last) and kids will quit a team a lot quicker today than when I started in mid 80s.

[CameronBornAndBred]

Make it so no player can transfer into UNC. Then it is fine.

Make it so no player can transfer FROM Carolina. Extend their misery.

[azzefkram]

There's been a lot of talk in the "2023 Transfer Portal" thread about whether or not the transfer portal is good or bad, and how it should be tweaked to make things better moving forward. I figured it was time to make a designated thread for such discussions rather than derailing the other thread every few days ...

... Obviously these aren't fully articulated rules, but they're things that have been rattling around my head and I think a nice potential starting point for a conversation. Now, tell me how wrong I am

Scott, you really are a good dude. Far nicer than me, though I'll admit that is not the highest hurdle. In fact, a dear friend from Duke often refers to me as the nicest mean guy he's ever met.

Anywho, on to the portal. I would not change the portal so much as clarify it. As an undergraduate, you are allowed one transfer without sitting out. After that transfer, any subsequent transfer requires sitting out a season. There are no exceptions. What if my coach leaves/is fired? No exceptions. What if my great aunt thrice removed has seasonal allergies? No exceptions.

As a graduate, you are allowed one transfer without sitting out.

I would also have a portal window. It would open 2 weeks after the championship game and then close 6 weeks after opening.

[Nugget]

There's been a lot of talk in the "2023 Transfer Portal" thread about whether or not the transfer portal is good or bad, and how it should be tweaked to make things better moving forward. I figured it was time to make a designated thread for such discussions rather than derailing the other thread every few days

I'm of the opinion that allowing student athletes the same freedoms as other students (students don't have to "sit out" a year if they transfer to a new academic program) and other athletes (free agency) is a net positive, especially after so many years of the NCAA being, well, the NCAA. But there's also the real counterpoint that having 1/5 of all players (I think that's the number I read) in the transfer portal means it's almost untenable to manage a roster, let alone generate roster continuity.

With that in mind, here's what I would try to implement if I was put in charge of the NCAA for a day:
-Players can transfer once with immediate eligibility.
-Players automatically get the option to transfer again with immediate eligibility if their head coach leaves.
-Players can apply for a second immediate eligibility transfer if either A) They want to move closer to home due to family concerns, or B) There are serious allegations of a toxic/abusive environment in their current program (I'm thinking here of the reported racial comments made by TCU's coach that prompted a transfer, for instance).
-Players can transfer a second time with immediate eligibility as a graduate transfer; however, if this is their second transfer, doing so means they only have one year of eligibility remaining. So, if someone wanted to transfer a second time as a graduate transfer but had two years of eligibility remaining, they can be immediately eligible but forfeit one year of eligibility.

The above isn't all that earth shattering, and is basically just a next step in stuff the NCAA is already trying to enforce. Here's where I'd get creative:
-There are two "immediate eligibility transfer windows" in which a player can use these immediate eligibility transfers. The first is between the end of their first season and before their second, and the second is after their third season. Essentially, if you stick around after your first season, you're committing to the program for the next two seasons as well.
-Exceptions would be made similar to the above: if a coach leaves, there are family reasons to move closer to home, or their is an abusive/toxic environment you can immediately transfer at any time.
-A player who wishes to transfer in the "dead" period between their first and third seasons can do so, but either A) Has to redshirt a year, or B) forfeits a year of eligibility.

Obviously these aren't fully articulated rules, but they're things that have been rattling around my head and I think a nice potential starting point for a conversation. Now, tell me how wrong I am

I would sign on to all of your proposals through this:

"-Players can transfer once with immediate eligibility.
-Players automatically get the option to transfer again with immediate eligibility if their head coach leaves.
-Players can apply for a second immediate eligibility transfer if either A) They want to move closer to home due to family concerns, or B) There are serious allegations of a toxic/abusive environment in their current program (I'm thinking here of the reported racial comments made by TCU's coach that prompted a transfer, for instance).
-Players can transfer a second time with immediate eligibility as a graduate transfer;"

And stop there. I think if you've graduated there's no problem letting the player use all of their seasons of eligibility. And, I think the windows for allowing transfers/dead periods probably aren't necessary. But, I do agree with you that the NCAA needs to take seriously the application of the "one free transfer" aspect of this -- the "exceptions" you list for allowing a second free transfer make sense to me, but I think they should be adhered to -- the current system is resulting in too many waivers and the players seem to be under the impression that it's now "no transfers have to sit out at all," which just encourages players to wander from school to school each year.

Maybe the only other limit I would be inclined to impose is to not open the transfer portal until 3-4 weeks after the end of the season, so that players have some time to finish the school year/cool down/talk with their coaches about roles for the following season and see how things shake out with NBA draft declarations before pulling the trigger on transfers. That would be a burden on coaches with more uncertainty about their rosters into the summer, but I don't have too much sympathy for that (it's why they get the big bucks).

[CrazyNotCrazie]

Scott, you really are a good dude. Far nicer than me, though I'll admit that is not the highest hurdle. In fact, a dear friend from Duke often refers to me as the nicest mean guy he's ever met.

Anywho, on to the portal. I would not change the portal so much as clarify it. As an undergraduate, you are allowed one transfer without sitting out. After that transfer, any subsequent transfer requires sitting out a season. There are no exceptions. What if my coach leaves/is fired? No exceptions. What if my great aunt thrice removed has seasonal allergies? No exceptions.

As a graduate, you are allowed one transfer without sitting out.

I would also have a portal window. It would open 2 weeks after the championship game and then close 6 weeks after opening.

I largely agree with this. I really do not like the current situation at all. I like order, structure, etc. and this is pure chaos. I liked the old way a lot better. But I understand why it is important for student-athletes to have more rights. The devil is in finding the happy medium.

I have mixed feelings about the following the coach carve out. A big part of me says that you should primarily be buying into the university and not the basketball team/coach. But at the same time, if you went to Duke to do a PhD studying under James Bonk (dating myself here a bit) and he left for another school, you might want to follow him, so this should be considered similarly.

I do strongly believe in the "student" side of things because of the hundreds of players in the portal, most will make little or none of their lifetime income playing basketball. But I struggle with a way to do that. Saying a student has to have passed classes in order to transfer could permit the school they are leaving to screw around with grades if they are leaving on bad terms, and that is not OK. So I am not sure how to do this and would rather have nothing than something that is poorly conceived or is begging for cheating.

I do like the idea of having a limited time period, and making it not start until after the tournament. In some situations multiple players might be competing for the same spot at a new school so players on teams making a deep NCAA run should not be penalized. I'm guessing this rule will be frequently abused and hard to enforce, but it is worth making an effort.

I think that once you graduate you should be able to do whatever you want. That is the ultimate goal. Graduate in three years with one of the years being a redshirt year so you have two years left? Good for you - you have two years at the new school, even if you transferred once already. This situation got a bit out of control with the bonus covid year but that is winding down, so the number of grad transfers who already transferred who also have two years of eligibility left is going to be really minimal going forward.

[azzefkram]

I have mixed feelings about the following the coach carve out. A big part of me says that you should primarily be buying into the university and not the basketball team/coach. But at the same time, if you went to Duke to do a PhD studying under James Bonk (dating myself here a bit) and he left for another school, you might want to follow him, so this should be considered similarly.

Ahhh Bonkistry. Such fond memories. I too went back and forth on the coach thing but here's why I landed where I did. The player already had 2 shots with no consequences (initial recruitment and first transfer) to get the coach thing right. That feels like enough for me.

[House P]

I would also have a portal window. It would open 2 weeks after the championship game and then close 6 weeks after opening.

Maybe the only other limit I would be inclined to impose is to not open the transfer portal until 3-4 weeks after the end of the season, so that players have some time to finish the school year/cool down/talk with their coaches about roles for the following season and see how things shake out with NBA draft declarations before pulling the trigger on transfers.

I do like the idea of having a limited time period, and making it not start until after the tournament. In some situations multiple players might be competing for the same spot at a new school so players on teams making a deep NCAA run should not be penalized. I'm guessing this rule will be frequently abused and hard to enforce, but it is worth making an effort.

I also like the idea of carefully timing the portal window. Perhaps there would be one date for players to enter their name into the portal and another for the first day a player could officially commit to a new program. Perhaps the second date wouldn't be until after the deadline to withdraw from the NBA draft. That way coaches and players would have a good idea of who is returning to each team's roster before making any commitments.

This seems to be the way professional sports attempt to organize the chaos. Everybody knows who will be a free agent far before anyone officially joins a new team.

If we really believe that the buzz around player movement is good for the sport, the "signing period" could be strategically timed to dominate the sports news cycle for a couple weeks.

[kako]

Please correct me if I am wrong, but I think that NCAA scholarships are a 1 year commitment from the school. Duke has always honored them as a 4 year commitment, but that is only through policy. I think that if you put restrictions on player's ability to transfer, and commit them to the school, the school should be similarly committed to the player.

I'm not sure that's really enforceable, though. If a coach wants to run a player off, it's really hard to stop that. That imbalance/inequity makes me lean toward allowing transfer freedom.

I think this is a key point. The situation needs to be reasonably equitable from all sides. If a player can get cut from a school at the end of each year, the player should be able to move from each school at the end of year. If 4-year (or multi-year) commitments are put in place by the school, then there can be talk about refining the portal process. Until then, schools must deal with it. Putting the restrictions in first without addressing the scholarship situation seems unfair to me.

9F

[Neals384]

Make it so no player can transfer FROM Carolina. Extend their misery.

Maybe let them transfer from UNcheat, but they cannot play until they have earned enough credits at the new school to replace credits from bogus courses from the old school.