New transfer rules on the horizon?

[UNT18Grad]

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/28724972/acc-student-athletes-allowed-one-transfer-exemption

Just read this short article about how the ACC has unanimously decided to join the Big Ten in wanting to allow all student athletes to transfer once without having to sit out a year.  With 2 of the Power 5 conferences on board it seems like this will likely be a change that's made within the next few years.  I can see this being both good and bad for a school like UNT, thoughts?

[UNT Mean Green]

Yikes...this is almost like free agency. Hopefully there will be plenty of clarity in the rules & regulations to preclude "open recruiting" while a student athlete is enrolled at an institution. 

[DentonLurker]

I’m all for it. Coaches preach loyalty until the next job opens up. They don’t have to sit out. Seems fair to me.

[Jonnyeagle]

55 minutes ago, UNT18Grad said:

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/28724972/acc-student-athletes-allowed-one-transfer-exemption

Just read this short article about how the ACC has unanimously decided to join the Big Ten in wanting to allow all student athletes to transfer once without having to sit out a year.  With 2 of the Power 5 conferences on board it seems like this will likely be a change that's made within the next few years.  I can see this being both good and bad for a school like UNT, thoughts?

Very bad for UNT.  Any good player like Woolroige will transfer out after a good year.

[El Paso Eagle]

could be read as .... There is now an easy out for G5 or lower P5 team players who are playing really well to move on to another school.

This could potentially hurt the G5 schools by pulling their best players

G5 could benefit by getting P5 players who are not happy

[El Paso Eagle]

55 minutes ago, UNT Mean Green said:

Yikes...this is almost like free agency. Hopefully there will be plenty of clarity in the rules & regulations to preclude "open recruiting" while a student athlete is enrolled at an institution. 

If they do this I would like to see them change the current redshirt rule to be for first year players only

[greenminer]

Weird.  I thought the rule to sit out a year was at the NCAA level, not conference.

[El Paso Eagle]

58 minutes ago, UNT Mean Green said:

Yikes...this is almost like free agency. Hopefully there will be plenty of clarity in the rules & regulations to preclude "open recruiting" while a student athlete is enrolled at an institution. 

Very unlikely. Could see a worst-case scenario where a popular coach is let go, or an unpopular coach is not let go where there is a mass exodus

I would like to see them give schools who lose a player this way a "exemption" to the 23 scholarships per year rule and allow them, if they choose, to add the additional number that they have transfer out 

[El Paso Eagle]

Just now, greenminer said:

Weird.  I thought the rule to sit out a year was at the NCAA level, not conference.

At this point the NCAA is sticking around to receive $$

They (NCAA) will do what the P5's tell them and say thank you

[untbowler]

1 hour ago, UNT18Grad said:

https://www.espn.com/college-sports/story/_/id/28724972/acc-student-athletes-allowed-one-transfer-exemption

Just read this short article about how the ACC has unanimously decided to join the Big Ten in wanting to allow all student athletes to transfer once without having to sit out a year.  With 2 of the Power 5 conferences on board it seems like this will likely be a change that's made within the next few years.  I can see this being both good and bad for a school like UNT, thoughts?

honestly not sure what the big deal is, other than it would put football on level with other sports that do not force transfers to sit one year, unless not released or intra-conference. 

[El Paso Eagle]

Just now, untbowler said:

honestly not sure what the big deal is, other than it would put football on level with other sports that do not force transfers to sit one year, unless not released or intra-conference. 

With all due respect, look at the current transfer portal and the revised red-shirt rules. The best intentions aside, this will become a cluster F

 

[untbowler]

Just now, El Paso Eagle said:

With all due respect, look at the current transfer portal and the revised red-shirt rules. The best intentions aside, this will become a cluster F

 

again all other sports do not force a transfer to sit a year, so in this case allows player to play immediately for all, not just the p5's or Grad Transfers. Will this be good for UNT? Who knows, like others said good and bad. 

As for the RS rules and current transfer rules, NCAA made all of that FUBAR anyways, this would at least put all FBS teams on a level playing field, by not having to request waivers and garbage. 

[El Paso Eagle]

15 minutes ago, untbowler said:

again all other sports do not force a transfer to sit a year, so in this case allows player to play immediately for all, not just the p5's or Grad Transfers. Will this be good for UNT? Who knows, like others said good and bad. 

As for the RS rules and current transfer rules, NCAA made all of that FUBAR anyways, this would at least put all FBS teams on a level playing field, by not having to request waivers and garbage. 

Not just for UNT, but all G5, I can see P5 schools using this to fill gaps. I can see the day, when for a number of potential reasons, a school, let's say it's us, looses 8+ players in a single year. It could potentially devastate he program. I hope the NCAA will allow schools that lose players to get extra scholarships to replace them. 

[HoustonEagle]

I see this as good for football and bad for basketball

[Cr1028]

1 hour ago, Jonnyeagle said:

Very bad for UNT.  Any good player like Woolroige will transfer out after a good year.

Maybe bad for UNT, maybe good for UNT. It may be the thing that finally breaks our draft drought. Right now players on our roster are typically viewed as undrafted rookie free agent at best. If we have a few transfer out and make an impact at places as Woolridge has, it will bring peoples perception of our athletes up. Also, it could give us a chance at landing better players out of high school if they know they aren’t “stuck” at a G5 all 4 years if they work hard and succeed.

It is great for the players and that is who should matter most.
 

If Woolridge had stayed, he would be one of the stars on our team. A ream that is one of the best in  CUSA and have a good chance to be a 12 to 16 seed in the NCAA tourney so long as we handle business in the conference tourney. Instead, he gave us 3 good years, left us better than he found us, is one of the better players on the #2 team in the nation and is probably mentioned as the transfer from North Texas in just about every Zags national broadcast. It worked out well for him. I wouldn’t begrudge him his year in the son because of the 3 good years he gave us. I say good for Woolridge.
 

NOW, if he had a stellar true freshman season and then transferred out? I’d feel much differently about the situation.

[meaniegreenie]

2 hours ago, greenminer said:

Weird.  I thought the rule to sit out a year was at the NCAA level, not conference.

Yeah, that was my reaction as well.  Like EPE said, NCAA just appears to be a spineless entity that's just there to get money for as long as they can.

[greenminer]

3 hours ago, El Paso Eagle said:

At this point the NCAA is sticking around to receive $$

They (NCAA) will do what the P5's tell them and say thank you

It’s one thing if they’re dealing with player applications (medical waivers/transfers) on a case-by-case basis. It is quite a different level to have a hard rule in your handbook and to just let conferences create their own rules in lieu of it.

Not that you’re wrong, but Saying, “yeah, the NCAA just bends over for the P5s” doesn’t seem to completely sum up everything that’s going on here.

[NorthTexasSportsNetwork]

I have mixed feelings about this. I mean it’s like free agency in the NFL kinda, but also if they really like what’s going on at the university then why leave.

I just feel that it would ruin the G5

[UNT18Grad]

12 hours ago, greenminer said:

It’s one thing if they’re dealing with player applications (medical waivers/transfers) on a case-by-case basis. It is quite a different level to have a hard rule in your handbook and to just let conferences create their own rules in lieu of it.

Not that you’re wrong, but Saying, “yeah, the NCAA just bends over for the P5s” doesn’t seem to completely sum up everything that’s going on here.

The NCAA still mandates this decision across all sports, not individual conferences.  I was simply saying that since 2 of the 5 major conferences are already on board the others will shortly follow and NCAA won't go against something their money makers are all for. 

The reality of a typical UNT team is that we don't have a huge amount of guys who could go to a Power 5 team and be a guaranteed significant contributor.  I don't think saying that we might have 1 per season, if that, is something too crazy when it comes to football.  There is a still the risk that a player might not even see the field trying to move up and I don't think the number of guys trying to make that leap will significantly grow for us.

I think our biggest concern would be depth guys or guys who just lost out on a job choosing to go to a school at our level or below for a chance to see the field.  However, that could also end up being a positive for us too with players coming to UNT for the same reason. 

Edited February 19, 2020 by UNT18Grad

[greenjoe]

I see this as very bad for North Texas and similar "mid major" teams. 

A player that a P-5 team passed on goes to a G-5 school and does really well.  This new rule would give the P-5 team, which likely had the opportunity to sign the player in the first place, a "second bite at the apple" .  The G-5 school, North Texas, is left with nothing after spend countless hours coaching this player, getting said player into playing shape, and maybe rehabbing an injury.

Very good for big programs.  Very bad for programs that don't always get first pick.

GO MEAN GREEN

[El Paso Eagle]

6 minutes ago, greenjoe said:

I see this as very bad for North Texas and similar "mid major" teams. 

A player that a P-5 team passed on goes to a G-5 school and does really well.  This new rule would give the P-5 team, which likely had the opportunity to sign the player in the first place, a "second bite at the apple" .  The G-5 school, North Texas, is left with nothing after spend countless hours coaching this player, getting said player into playing shape, and maybe rehabbing an injury.

Very good for big programs.  Very bad for programs that don't always get first pick.

GO MEAN GREEN

I wonder if this will apply to FCS and lower division players moving up to G5/P5 schools?

[El Paso Eagle]

Come to think of it this could also be a blessing for the G5 schools ...

Think of how many of the top FCS teams are loaded with P5/G5 transfers who did not want to sit out. This could also greatly change the landscape of the FCS teams 

[GrandGreen]

This rule would greatly benefit the better teams and will decimate lower tier teams.

Fine would likely have been gone after one year at NT.

The argument that it currently works at non-revenue sports is misleading.   Schools do lose players in these sports frequently to more successful programs.  Even though there is nothing close to the competition for players that occurs in football and basketball. 

Just another change that will decrease competition at all levels. 

[forevereagle]

5 hours ago, GrandGreen said:

This rule would greatly benefit the better teams and will decimate lower tier teams.

Fine would likely have been gone after one year at NT.

The argument that it currently works at non-revenue sports is misleading.   Schools do lose players in these sports frequently to more successful programs.  Even though there is nothing close to the competition for players that occurs in football and basketball. 

Just another change that will decrease competition at all levels. 

Not sure this logic works. Teams will still have the scholarship limits every year for new players and total players. If you load up on transfers, you will have to pay the piper at some point within those limits.

Maybe Fine leaves, but he would have to bet that he would be able to get the starting job somewhere else since they would not be able to contact him while he is under scholarship here. Players will have to make that bet that they can go somewhere else and land the job. Is that a bet they will make? I think it is more likely to benefit us since a player buried on the depth chart may decide to come here and try to win the job than a starter here decides to go and maybe doesn't see the field elsewhere.

[southsideguy]

if this goes through we will be nothing but a farm team for the P-5 schools.    Might as well fold up the tent and go home.