Welcome Guest! Create an Account login email: password: remember me: BASKETBALL Latest News News Archive Schedule/Results Multi-Media Recruiting FOOTBALL Latest News News Archive Schedule/Results Multi-Media Recruiting MESSAGE BOARD Message Home - Ohio Basketball - Ohio Basketball Recruiting - The O Zone - Ohio Football - Ohio Football Recruiting - Ohio Volleyball - Ohio Baseball - Ohio Olympic Sports... - General OU Discussion... - Website Feedback... - Posting Policy Edit My Profile Private Messages Logout CHAT LINKS site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp Message Board BobcatAttack.com Message Board Ohio Basketball Topic:  Big10 proposed ground legislation Topic:  Big10 proposed ground legislation Author Message BillyTheCat General User Member Since: 10/6/2012 Post Count: 9,808 Status: Offline     Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/2/2020 11:06:59 AM  Every undergrad gets 1 free transfer. With the Big Ten sponsoring this legislation I think it will be seriously considered, and is definitely pro student-athlete. Back to Top Bobcat1996 General User Member Since: 1/2/2017 Post Count: 829 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/2/2020 11:19:08 AM  BillyTheCat wrote: Every undergrad gets 1 free transfer. With the Big Ten sponsoring this legislation I think it will be seriously considered, and is definitely pro student-athlete. Don't like this rule, but it will probably pass. Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 3,491 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/2/2020 11:36:45 AM  Glad to see this legislation on the table and hope it passes. Coaches are allowed to leave without penalty, players should be able to, as well. Add to that that coaches/schools can choose to not renew scholarships and this is a necessary step. Back to Top Alan Swank General User Member Since: 12/11/2004 Location: Athens, OH Post Count: 7,074 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/2/2020 5:39:51 PM  Might as well drop the term student athlete then and quit pretending in some of the sports. If you get one free do over it's quite obvious that you went to school A and then to school B simply to play. Back to Top JSF General User Member Since: 1/29/2005 Location: Houston, TX Post Count: 6,430 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/2/2020 6:03:38 PM  Alan Swank wrote: Might as well drop the term student athlete then and quit pretending in some of the sports. If you get one free do over it's quite obvious that you went to school A and then to school B simply to play. So the athletes who participate in sports that don't have the one year rule are not student-athletes in your view? "Loyalty to a hometown or city is fleeting and interchangeable, but college is a stamp of identity."- Kyle Whelliston, One Beautiful Season. My blog about depression and mental illness: https://bit.ly/3buGXH8 Back to Top BillyTheCat General User Member Since: 10/6/2012 Post Count: 9,808 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/2/2020 6:28:15 PM  Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote: Glad to see this legislation on the table and hope it passes. Coaches are allowed to leave without penalty, players should be able to, as well. Add to that that coaches/schools can choose to not renew scholarships and this is a necessary step. The second part (non-renewing) is so rare, you’ve got to search real hard to find cases of that happening. Back to Top BillyTheCat General User Member Since: 10/6/2012 Post Count: 9,808 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/2/2020 6:32:41 PM  Alan Swank wrote: Might as well drop the term student athlete then and quit pretending in some of the sports. If you get one free do over it's quite obvious that you went to school A and then to school B simply to play. Any student can transfer, when they figure out a school is not the best fit. why not athletes? The good thing about this is it takes out lawyers and exemptions, which have become so arbitrary they themselves have become a joke. Back to Top BillyTheCat General User Member Since: 10/6/2012 Post Count: 9,808 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/2/2020 6:33:44 PM  JSF wrote: Alan Swank wrote: Might as well drop the term student athlete then and quit pretending in some of the sports. If you get one free do over it's quite obvious that you went to school A and then to school B simply to play. So the athletes who participate in sports that don't have the one year rule are not student-athletes in your view? Exactly, because more sports do not have the one year rule than those who do. Why and how is that fair? Back to Top OUcats82 General User Member Since: 1/9/2005 Location: Cincinnati, OH Post Count: 1,853 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/3/2020 8:36:28 AM  There will definitely be some athletes who abuse this rule and there will be plenty of coaches who look to pluck some overlooked talent etc. to go from school A to school B. But there are far more athletes who will never play beyond college who will simply want to be somewhere that they feel happy, closer to home, appreciated, and able to play/contribute etc. It can be easy to forget that these young people are making decisions on where to spend 4-5 years and hopefully where to set the course for their lives based on a handful of campus visits, conversations over the phone/text, and other brief interactions. Ohio-The State University Back to Top Alan Swank General User Member Since: 12/11/2004 Location: Athens, OH Post Count: 7,074 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/3/2020 8:46:00 AM  JSF wrote: Alan Swank wrote: Might as well drop the term student athlete then and quit pretending in some of the sports. If you get one free do over it's quite obvious that you went to school A and then to school B simply to play. So the athletes who participate in sports that don't have the one year rule are not student-athletes in your view? I'm just not a big fan of the term student-athlete. Back to Top OU_Country General User Member Since: 12/6/2005 Location: On the road between Athens and Madison County Post Count: 8,343 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/3/2020 9:43:30 AM  Assuming this rule is applied to all student athletes (sorry Alan) in all sports across the board, this is the best way to go. And I'm all on board for it **IF** it also eliminates the grad transfer rule, and everyone has to have a sit out year for all transfers after the first one. The one case I see exceptions, and it should be standardized, is when a coaching staff leaves, players should be able to leave without the sit out year. But I've always thought this. Eliminate all the opportunities for appeals that don't involve injuries or special circumstances like family or illness. Bottom line, NCAA needs to set the rules, transparently, and stick to them across all member institutions. Back to Top rpbobcat General User Member Since: 4/28/2006 Location: Rochelle Park, NJ Post Count: 3,547 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/3/2020 10:58:19 AM  OU_Country wrote: Assuming this rule is applied to all student athletes (sorry Alan) in all sports across the board, this is the best way to go. And I'm all on board for it **IF** it also eliminates the grad transfer rule, and everyone has to have a sit out year for all transfers after the first one. The one case I see exceptions, and it should be standardized, is when a coaching staff leaves, players should be able to leave without the sit out year. But I've always thought this. Eliminate all the opportunities for appeals that don't involve injuries or special circumstances like family or illness. Bottom line, NCAA needs to set the rules, transparently, and stick to them across all member institutions. As I've posted previously,I transferred from O.U. for Academic reasons. But,since I was a D1 athlete (soccer),I still had to sit out one year. The NCAA wouldn't even consider an exemption. That would have left me with 1 year of eligibility for soccer. Fortunately,based on the timing of my transfer,I had 2 years of eligibility for wrestling. I agree with everything in your first paragraph including the Grad. Transfer rule and a 1 year sit out after your first transfer. I also agree with no sit out when a coaching staff leaves. I also believe that the NCAA needs to come up with uniform criteria for any appeal,especially medical red shirts. As a former wrestler,I follow NCAA wrestling,big time. Right now,there is a "sliding scale" for Medical Red Shirts",especially when granting a 6th year of eligibility. In fact,because of injury,one wrestler,could,with medical and Olympic red shirts come back for an 8th season. Olympic Red shirts are also something that wrestlers take advantage of. Last Edited: 2/3/2020 11:02:35 AM by rpbobcat Back to Top Jeff McKinney Moderator Member Since: 11/12/2004 Post Count: 6,102 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/3/2020 2:01:57 PM  I am against this proposed rule change. It will result in unmitigated poaching of mid major players by high majors. It will truly be an outlaw situation. Even if "recruitimg" of mid major players isn't allowed, it will definitely be going on behind the scenes. This is another step toward ruining mid major basketball. Back to Top CatsUp General User Member Since: 4/15/2019 Post Count: 756 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/3/2020 2:39:44 PM  Jeff McKinney wrote: I am against this proposed rule change. It will result in unmitigated poaching of mid major players by high majors. It will truly be an outlaw situation. Even if "recruitimg" of mid major players isn't allowed, it will definitely be going on behind the scenes. This is another step toward ruining mid major basketball. Agree. I think it would be a fantasy to think the Big Ten, or any other big conference for that matter, has the well-being of the student athlete in mind in wanting to see this change. As is always their driving force, this is about money and gaining the winning edge. Somewhere within the confines of the conference offices they have determined that getting those players, who develop late, or have been missed, to transfer, will enable their teams, especially those who are part of the last few teams selected for the tournament, to be a little better. Instead of maybe losing to the mid majors in the early rounds of the tournament the slight improvement will lead to more wins. Thus, go further in the tournament, get even more money for the conference teams. Something I don’t think the “money hounders” take into consideration though is that many fans (me included) of mid-majors and those who like it when underdogs advance will lose interest in the whole tournament. It will become boring to them. They will decide to do other things with their money and time, thus making the overall pie smaller. If they think everyone will just start supporting some other school I think they are greatly mistaken. Must they remain greedy and never be content with how good they have it now? By the way this would greatly impact G5 football too in my opinion. Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 3,491 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/3/2020 3:22:19 PM  Jeff McKinney wrote: I am against this proposed rule change. It will result in unmitigated poaching of mid major players by high majors. It will truly be an outlaw situation. Even if "recruitimg" of mid major players isn't allowed, it will definitely be going on behind the scenes. This is another step toward ruining mid major basketball. Yep, this is almost certainly the case. I just can't realy reconcile putting the needs of mid-major basketball ahead of the rights of a student-athlete. I'm just not sure how it's possible to accomplish that, and so I think this imperfect solution's the best path. Back to Top OhioCatFan General User Member Since: 12/20/2004 Location: Athens, OH Post Count: 14,168 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/3/2020 8:34:20 PM  This will not just affect BB non-P6 and FB non-P5 schools. You'll see Kentucky recruiting players from Ohio State and Duke and seeking immediately eligible transfers. In football, you'll see SEC pilfering the B1G with great success. The only schools that will do well here will be the ones at the very top of the heap in their respective sports, and ones who have coaches who develop strong bonds with their players and, therefore, there is a great deal of loyalty among the players. But, in general, it'll be a very destablizing rule, if adopted. I suspect it's not at all a "done deal" yet and will have major opposition within the NCAA fold. The only BLSS Certified Hypocrite on BA "It is better to be an optimist and be proven a fool than to be a pessimist and be proven right." Note: My avatar is the national colors of the 78th Ohio Veteran Volunteer Infantry, which are now preserved in a climate controlled vault at the Ohio History Connection. Learn more about the old 78th at: http://www.78ohio.org Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 3,491 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/4/2020 9:24:47 AM  OhioCatFan wrote: This will not just affect BB non-P6 and FB non-P5 schools. You'll see Kentucky recruiting players from Ohio State and Duke and seeking immediately eligible transfers. In football, you'll see SEC pilfering the B1G with great success. The only schools that will do well here will be the ones at the very top of the heap in their respective sports, and ones who have coaches who develop strong bonds with their players and, therefore, there is a great deal of loyalty among the players. But, in general, it'll be a very destablizing rule, if adopted. I suspect it's not at all a "done deal" yet and will have major opposition within the NCAA fold. Why is it that only the folks at the top will benefit? Won't the Ohio's of the world benefit, as well? Can't OU go "pilfer" a quarterback from James Madison or a Point Guard from the Patriot League? And more to the point: if a student athlete wants to attend a different school, what justification does one use to stop them? Competitive balance? Back to Top UpSan Bobcat General User Member Since: 8/30/2005 Location: Upper Sandusky, OH Post Count: 3,799 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/4/2020 9:52:03 AM  Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote: Why is it that only the folks at the top will benefit? Won't the Ohio's of the world benefit, as well? Can't OU go "pilfer" a quarterback from James Madison or a Point Guard from the Patriot League? Sure, but then the MAC is losing a guy who is Big Ten quality and was underrated and replacing him with a a guy who is MAC-level and was underrated. Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 3,491 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/4/2020 11:09:14 AM  UpSan Bobcat wrote: Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote: Why is it that only the folks at the top will benefit? Won't the Ohio's of the world benefit, as well? Can't OU go "pilfer" a quarterback from James Madison or a Point Guard from the Patriot League? Sure, but then the MAC is losing a guy who is Big Ten quality and was underrated and replacing him with a a guy who is MAC-level and was underrated. If a guy is Big 10 quality I'm happy to let him play in the Big 10. If we can't convince somebody to stay at OU on the merits of OU, but rather because we've devised a system that makes leaving too risky/complicated, that feels like a bad system to me. Back to Top Jeff McKinney Moderator Member Since: 11/12/2004 Post Count: 6,102 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/4/2020 12:45:01 PM  It would lead to a JUCO type environment where you literally don't know who's going to be on your roster. Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 3,491 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/4/2020 1:29:28 PM  Jeff McKinney wrote: It would lead to a JUCO type environment where you literally don't know who's going to be on your roster. I don't doubt that. How do we justify the current system? Athletes can't transfer the way typical students can because. . .? Why? Competitive balance in athletics? Roster construction? Back to Top Robert Fox General User Member Since: 11/16/2004 Location: Knoxville, TN Post Count: 2,039 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/4/2020 1:49:40 PM  If a school offers a kid a scholarship to play, there should be some contractual obligation--both ways. The school has to follow through with the scholarship, and the kid has to follow through with the commitment to the team. Back to Top Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame General User Member Since: 7/30/2010 Post Count: 3,491 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/4/2020 2:06:58 PM  Robert Fox wrote: If a school offers a kid a scholarship to play, there should be some contractual obligation--both ways. The school has to follow through with the scholarship, and the kid has to follow through with the commitment to the team. I think there is, right? The kid has to meet the school's requirements both athletically and academically to keep the scholarship. That's the agreement. The question is does the kid deserve to be penalized for changing his mind and pursuing another opportunity he deems to be a better fit? Back to Top Robert Fox General User Member Since: 11/16/2004 Location: Knoxville, TN Post Count: 2,039 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/4/2020 2:55:43 PM  The "sit one year" thing is to deter athletes from making rash decisions about changing schools. Without that as a deterrent, will athletes change willy nilly? Yep, probably. Will that, in turn, impact the schools and their ability to compete? Yep, probably. So what is the solution? Do we stick with a solution that seeks to keep things in some order, or do we throw that away in pursuit of idealism, knowing that idealism may cause greater problems? If you agree there are no perfect solutions, than you must choose the solution that is the most tolerable. More and more I like the idea of club sports. No scholarships. No big money. No corruption. Just athletes who play for the love of the game. Back to Top CatsUp General User Member Since: 4/15/2019 Post Count: 756 Status: Offline     RE: Big10 proposed ground legislation    Posted: 2/4/2020 3:14:49 PM  Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote: Robert Fox wrote: If a school offers a kid a scholarship to play, there should be some contractual obligation--both ways. The school has to follow through with the scholarship, and the kid has to follow through with the commitment to the team. I think there is, right? The kid has to meet the school's requirements both athletically and academically to keep the scholarship. That's the agreement. The question is does the kid deserve to be penalized for changing his mind and pursuing another opportunity he deems to be a better fit? As we know it's been mentioned before by BTC and others that rarely is the athletic scholarship taken away as long at the student-athlete maintains their academics. I think if the players are going to be given more freedom to move from program to program going forward maybe it's only fair for the programs to start re-evaluating more critically whether or not they want to keep players who are not living up to what the expectations were when they signed. Or, even if they have, just replace them if someone better comes along. Wouldn't that be total freedom for all? And, this may be necessary for those programs decimated by transfers to remain competitive. Furthermore, If we choose to pursue "total freedom", why really stop at one transfer per student-athlete if it's really about them? Is that "fair"? For instance, a player could transfer to a more prominent program at the end of their freshman year. They could play the first semester of their sophomore year for the new program. If that didn't work out they could transfer back to their original program for the next semester if they would take them. I could be wrong but I don't think it is too much of a stretch to think these considerations, and others, could at some point become part of the conversation, and ultimately the results as the rules loosen up. Back to Top Showing Replies:   1 - 25  of 43 Posts Jump to Page:   1 | 2    Next > View Other 'Ohio Basketball' Topics                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               WHO'S ONLINE There are 254 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com 254 Guests 0 Registered Users There are no other users looking at this page.

Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties