How to control the transfer portal

[MeanGreenZen]

My daughter’s rec basketball league has stricter player movement rules than the current NCAA. 

This version of the transfer portal is bad for the game and must be amended. 

The portal should be available for the guys stuck on the end of the bench who don’t get an opportunity to play (Kason Martin).

But there has to be some restriction on player movement to allow teams to build rosters and not lose every valuable player they develop without compensation. 

A few suggestions: 

If you DID NOT get to play in some number of games for your team last season, let’s say half the games (but people smarter than me can figure out how many games it should be), you can transfer and be eligible to play immediately. This protects the players who don’t get an opportunity in their current situation. 

But if you DID get to play in X games, you can only transfer under these conditions:

1. You have to sit out a year and lose a year of eligibility.

Or

2. The school that you transfer to must “transfer” one of their 25 annual scholarships to the school you are leaving. If this happens, you are immediately eligible at your new school. This allows superstars to transfer schools, but also compensates the school that invested in and developed that player. 

In the scenarios above, everyone wins: the guy stuck on the end of the bench, the star who wants a different opportunity, the school that lands the star and the school that loses the star. 

Prove me wrong. 

[Marty]

Makes too much sense , the NCAA won't ever approve it.

[golfingomez]

40 minutes ago, MeanGreenZen said:

My daughter’s rec basketball league has stricter player movement rules than the current NCAA. 

This version of the transfer portal is bad for the game and must be amended. 

The portal should be available for the guys stuck on the end of the bench who don’t get an opportunity to play (Kason Martin).

 

What is this based on?

[TheColonyEagle]

That’s interesting about the scholarship swap…..

Penn St gets the Murphy Twins, they give UNT 2 of their scholarships. I say they even pay for the scholarships. Sort of like a compensatory pick. (Not really but sort of)

It would help the G5s that the P5s are picking over and would reward the ones that are recruiting well and developing players.  Which is why it will never happen. But it seems like that would be fair. 

[ntexeagle]

I have thought all along that the most equitable solution is for the team that gains a portal transfer  be required to repay the cost of schooling.  Colony Eagle and I are on the same page.

[NT93]

3 hours ago, MeanGreenZen said:

Prove me wrong. 

I can’t.

Edited February 2, 2022 by NT93

[tmjerm]

I like the track you’re on with this.  My first thought is that blue bloods, or even all P5’s, would probably not be on board because it allows them to so freely cherry pick the best G5 players.  If there was enough democracy in the rule making process, I think it’s a good idea. 

[Censored by Laurie]

two caveats before I make a point...

1. on principle, I believe we should have as free of player movement as is practical. if I'm a full scholarship music major at UT and find an opportunity to better my future at UNT, I can pursue that with no penalty. if coaches can make commitments and then bolt, then so too can 18-22 year olds. whether it's the choosing the best path for pro-ball, the most fun for college ball or the best degree path...I think all student athletes should have freedom in those decisions.

2. I don't have data on the habits of those in the transfer window historically, so I welcome corrections...but...

my gut feeling is that the cases of G5 schools "developing" talent for P5 schools is a bit (far?) less prevalent than that of P5 bench players being significant contributors on G5 rosters. 

maybe this feels rawer for some bc the Murphy twins are almost certainly going to transfer "up"...maybe Brammer gets a look a level up as well...but we've another dozen or so dudes who are likely making lateral moves at best, if not transferring down. 

peer programs have used the portal to improve significantly. 

so...maybe the frustration is best more directed at how we've utilized the portal as opposed to the portal itself needing correction

[greenminer]

26 minutes ago, Censored by Laurie said:

two caveats before I make a point...

1. on principle, I believe we should have as free of player movement as is practical. if I'm a full scholarship music major at UT and find an opportunity to better my future at UNT, I can pursue that with no penalty. if coaches can make commitments and then bolt, then so too can 18-22 year olds. whether it's the choosing the best path for pro-ball, the most fun for college ball or the best degree path...I think all student athletes should have freedom in those decisions.

I don't think I'm ready to make this leap.

In any other endeavor, there is no ticking clock.  I can take 8 years to finish my music degree and, in theory, they can give me scholarships every single semester.

The NCAA limits these athletes to 4 playing years in 5 calendar years.

I'm not going to unpack all this, but I just believe there are some very different implications because of it.

[MeanGreenZen]

9 hours ago, Censored by Laurie said:

two caveats before I make a point...

1. on principle, I believe we should have as free of player movement as is practical. if I'm a full scholarship music major at UT and find an opportunity to better my future at UNT, I can pursue that with no penalty. if coaches can make commitments and then bolt, then so too can 18-22 year olds. whether it's the choosing the best path for pro-ball, the most fun for college ball or the best degree path...I think all student athletes should have freedom in those decisions.

2. I don't have data on the habits of those in the transfer window historically, so I welcome corrections...but...

my gut feeling is that the cases of G5 schools "developing" talent for P5 schools is a bit (far?) less prevalent than that of P5 bench players being significant contributors on G5 rosters. 

maybe this feels rawer for some bc the Murphy twins are almost certainly going to transfer "up"...maybe Brammer gets a look a level up as well...but we've another dozen or so dudes who are likely making lateral moves at best, if not transferring down. 

peer programs have used the portal to improve significantly. 

so...maybe the frustration is best more directed at how we've utilized the portal as opposed to the portal itself needing correction

No, in the real world you can’t just quit and take whatever job you want, often there are contracts that must be honored and also non-compete clauses that limit free movement. 

I bet even the bluebloods are tired of losing their backup QBs and third WRs. 

[Censored by Laurie]

9 hours ago, greenminer said:

I don't think I'm ready to make this leap.

In any other endeavor, there is no ticking clock.  I can take 8 years to finish my music degree and, in theory, they can give me scholarships every single semester.

The NCAA limits these athletes to 4 playing years in 5 calendar years.

I'm not going to unpack all this, but I just believe there are some very different implications because of it.

I think the ticking clock makes it even more vital for freedom of movement. an athlete has only 5 years to maximize their potential/experience. 

[NorthTexasWeLove]

Athletes should be able to move freely...after one year of sitting as a transitional period. Go back to the old rule. This one is horrible for the game. Even NFL players are obligated to their contracts. Even NFL teams have salary caps. This is the wild, wild west. It's insane.