New Transfer Rule – will this have a positive or negative effect on the program

Viewing 3 reply threads

- 10/15/2020 at 11:06 AM #130140
  1
  
  Walkman
  Ute Fan
  
  @btw6btw6
  
  What do you guys think about this proposed rule change. As it is proposed a student athelete could transfer one time during their career with no requirment to sit out a year.
  
  My thought is how might this impact us – could it help us or hurt us in the future.
- 10/15/2020 at 11:10 AM #130141
  1
  
  Central Coast Ute
  Ute Fan
  
  @flip2848
  
  For a team like the Utes it can go both ways. Take Cam Rising for an example as how it will help. As far as hurting goes, a Jack Tuttle could transfer without having to make up lies about hazing. He could just go without consequence and without being made into a liar.
- 10/15/2020 at 12:08 PM #130142
  4
  
  PhiladelphiaUte
  Ute Fan
  
  @philadelphiaute
  
  I’m okay with the rule, so long as coaches can block an athlete from immediate eligibility if they are intending to transfer to a school that is on their schedule in the season they would otherwise be eligible to play.
  
  And if an athlete is a mid-year transfer, they should not be eligible to play until after that season is over.
- 10/15/2020 at 12:32 PM #130143
  1
  
  Utah
  Ute Fan
  
  @utah
  
  I think it helps us as long as they don’t raise the initials each team gets. If that is the case, then the blue bloods won’t have much use for this transfer system. As long as there are only 25 initials in a class, the blue bloods will focus on high school kids.
  
  What it will do is help the smaller schools, like Utah. Instead of spending 25 initials on high school kids, including some low three star kids, Utah will keep those initials open and wait for players they recruited but went to other schools to want to leave.
  
  This will also help those four star kids who get stars in their eyes, go to a big school and get buried on the depth chart. They can then bail and go somewhere else and play right away.
  
  This hurts blue bloods, helps smaller schools and athletes as long as they don’t raise the initials each school has.
  
  If they raise the initials, so a school like Ohio State or Alabama can bring in 30 kids, then you will see those school push out athletes that didn’t work out and cherry pick from smaller schools.
  
  The key is the initials. You have to keep a limit on those.
  - 10/15/2020 at 1:13 PM #130145
    1
    
    Stone
    Ute Fan
    
    @stone
    
    I agree with this. It will largely help the smaller schools. Like @Utah said, very talented players that get buried on the depth chart at Bama may want to transfer to get playing time, but previously hesitated to do so because of the lost eligibility.
    
    It is, of course, possible that a starter at a small school may seek to move up or find a better system – but that would likely be the exception because playing time is usually paramount, and there is rarely a guarantee that a player will start when transferring to a larger school. It will definitely happen (I think Utah hoops shows some prime examples of starters leaving), but it would likely more often go the other way.