Welcome to MasonHoops.com

Jump in to the discussion! Sign up is easy, we want to hear what you have to say!

Sign Up

OT: Proposed One-time Transfer Exemption

Discussion in 'George Mason Basketball' started by Pablo, Jan 31, 2020.

  1. gmubrian

    gmubrian Starter

    Likes Received:
    1,394
    Trophy Points:
    1,338
    Location:
    Recently escaped proposal hell
    Yes, of course they should be advised of that. They should also be advised of your bias as well that you pointed out earlier, the desire to keep the revenue in your department.
  2. GMUgemini

    GMUgemini Hall of Famer

    Likes Received:
    4,240
    Trophy Points:
    12,840
    How many student-athletes do you think are English majors? It wouldn't be a bias of mine, because they wouldn't matriculate up into the 200/300 level classes. Once they are done with me, they are usually done with English.

    Also, our classroom revenue streams in FYC (first year comp) suck, because we keep caps low, so even though we serve 20,000 students we get like zero revenue from our 101 and 102 classes, because we have 200 professors teaching those 20,000 students.

    Also, I'm not administration, and it's not my job to care about revenue streams. That's the department chair, the dean, and the president's job to worry about those.
  3. gmubrian

    gmubrian Starter

    Likes Received:
    1,394
    Trophy Points:
    1,338
    Location:
    Recently escaped proposal hell
    If it were up to me, yes. Unfortunately, it sounds like this is a one time thing. Why are you so against allowing the students to having more freedom of choice?

    Since you seem to be an “I know what is best for others” type of person, how about I appeal to you on the bleeding heart aspects of this. I suspect this will benefit the lower end athletes more than the higher end ones. Right now. A coach has to ask himself if the player is worth an extra scholarship year (the year he has to sit). That means the coach will be less likely to take on a lesser player. This reduces the overall cost of bringing on these less talented players who get pushed out of another program and have little chance of earning a living at pro basketball. This gives them a chance to continue their education.
  4. gmubrian

    gmubrian Starter

    Likes Received:
    1,394
    Trophy Points:
    1,338
    Location:
    Recently escaped proposal hell
    And yet lost revenue to your department was what you put in your first rebuttal...
  5. GMUgemini

    GMUgemini Hall of Famer

    Likes Received:
    4,240
    Trophy Points:
    12,840
    I was trying to explain how the academic side of the university loses money whenever any student transfers from their school, that retention is really important to the academic side (from both a cost side, but also an academic side). You said the university doesn't lose revenue. I explained how it does. There is also a cost incurred university-wide that a dean could explain to you that I can't. But again, these are low numbers overall (Mason is 30,000+, so 10 athletes transferring a year isn't going to really dent their budget that much, but there is a cost to each one leaving).

    And then there's the classroom cost, meaning if you are a junior and transfer sometimes you have to go and retake 100 and 200 level classes, or classes that were not prereqs at one school become prereqs at another, etc. Or moving from one kind of teaching philosphy (R1) to another (Liberal Arts) or vice versa (someone who starts off at a school like Davidson and then goes to a school like Ohio State might get culture shock in the classroom).

    None of this is in the discussion for any proposed rules around player movement, it's only the athletics side that ever gets talked about.

    And, yes, I'm worried that a player who chooses, say, Michigan as their dream school and gets a scholarship to go there to play basketball getting pushed out because they aren't as good as the next 5 star athlete coming in and this rule makes that easier, because, hey, you won't have to sit out a year anyway. I think this also makes it easier for a coach leaving for a bigger job to take the athletes he wants with him when he goes.

    Call me skeptical that this is giving more power to student-athletes and less power to coaches.
    mkaufman1 likes this.
  6. FreeGunston12

    FreeGunston12 Starter

    Likes Received:
    898
    Trophy Points:
    1,340
    I mean, I wouldn't say this rule makes pushing out athletes easier. What penalty is there for doing it now? Maybe there is a slightly larger base of players to replace one that you push out if the rule goes through.

    Also, look what we went through with Grayer. This rule gets him out one year earlier.
  7. GMUgemini

    GMUgemini Hall of Famer

    Likes Received:
    4,240
    Trophy Points:
    12,840
    I mean that’s if you believe he was trying to leave and not finish playing for Mason. I mean he could have been lying when he said he considered coming back for a fifth season here but decided not to ultimately.

    I don’t want anyone pushed out. I wouldn’t want us to push Mar out even if he’s regressed to the point of being almost unuseable (in the same way L never push Konate out). If a player leaves it should be their decision.
    mason89 and patriot2000 like this.
  8. gmubrian

    gmubrian Starter

    Likes Received:
    1,394
    Trophy Points:
    1,338
    Location:
    Recently escaped proposal hell
    No it doesn't. He sits for the extra year at the new school, not the school he leaves. He leaves his current school just as fast, just has to spend an extra year on the bench at the new school.
    DJ3 likes this.
  9. gmubrian

    gmubrian Starter

    Likes Received:
    1,394
    Trophy Points:
    1,338
    Location:
    Recently escaped proposal hell
    Worry is one thing, feel free to discuss the pros and cons with him, but forcing them to sit for an additional year is hampering the students ability to freely move as he sees fit. They know they are having to take additional classes in this process. Losing a class or two versus a year of their life may be a trade off they want. They may not care about the academic side. They could still redshirt at the receiving end if the coach wanted that as well (to learn the system). This just gives both the option of not taking an extra year. I doubt most athletes are going to their dream academic school in the first place. Most are going to one of a couple that offered them a scholarship.

    I don't think it necessarily benefits all coaches one way or another. I think it benefits one type of coach and is detrimental to another type of coach. And why can't there be something that benefits both the coaches and the students.

    I am for giving the student more control over their destiny. You seem to want restrictions on their movement to protect them from themselves. I guess we just have a different view on life and will have to agree to disagree.
  10. FreeGunston12

    FreeGunston12 Starter

    Likes Received:
    898
    Trophy Points:
    1,340
    He grad transferred. So he didn't sit at TCU. So he did in fact sit at Mason (kinda). He just had to wait a year at Mason to graduate.

    Now, he probably would still need to graduate first due to credits not transferring. So maybe it wouldn't have actually made a difference. I don't know.
  11. gmubrian

    gmubrian Starter

    Likes Received:
    1,394
    Trophy Points:
    1,338
    Location:
    Recently escaped proposal hell
    Excellent point. I was thinking of transfers in general where this rule change would apply. This rule doesn't apply to grad transfers since there is no requirement to sit.
  12. FreeGunston12

    FreeGunston12 Starter

    Likes Received:
    898
    Trophy Points:
    1,340
    You're right. It's a rare situation that probably wouldn't be affected by this rule.
  13. Pablo

    Pablo Hall of Famer

    Likes Received:
    2,868
    Trophy Points:
    7,840
    https://buckeyeswire.usatoday.com/2020/02/02/big-ten-proposal-one-time-transfer-mixed-consequences/:

    "If you stopped watching college football, or college sports in general about ten years ago and decided to pick it back up this past year or two, there’s a good chance you’d be shocked by all the changes. One of the movements that’s changed things drastically is the transfer portal.

    It’s now easier to transfer thanks to the ability to simply put your name in the portal rather than going through the red tape of engineering discussions with opposing programs and coaching staffs through your own athletic department. It’s also has become easier to get waivers approved for the NCAA’s undergraduate transfer rule that makes athletes sit out a year.

    What has resulted is not exactly free agency in college sports, but something moving closer towards it. Heck, just last year alone, three of the four Heisman finalists were kids that transferred to greener pastures and carved out a better situation for themselves. That, of course, will do nothing to curb some of the transfer of top-end athletes.

    It’s been a management nightmare though for coaches, players and administrators. You now have to try and figure out how many scholarships are available, manage to any defections, and even recruit players out of the transfer portal that could make a difference for your program."
    '"The 'year-in-residency' rule has been in place since 1951, but it currently only pertains to five sports — football, baseball, men’s basketball, women’s basketball, and hockey. Now, the Big Ten believes it’s time to make it uniform and make things more transparent and understandable.

    We’ll see where this goes, but there are pros and cons that are evident on the surface. While instituting a one-time transfer would take away the ambiguity of when and who can get an exception to the one-year in residency rule, it would further open the flood gates for kids to transfer. Given the opportunity to move on instead of develop and stick things out, many might pull the rip-chord early and miss out on a better situation in front of them.

    There will be two schools of thought. Many will push the benefits of sticking with something, working through adversity and coming out the better end with a life lesson. There will be another — and perhaps more vocal — side of the argument that will praise the advocate for the individual’s freedom of choice. Yes, there will be Twitter fights.

    Anyway, there’s going to more come out on this. Other conferences, and the NCAA itself, will need to study and weigh in on this proposal. The earliest the Big Ten could adopt the rule would be in 2021, so there’s at least a little bit of time, though that’ll be here before you know it."
  14. GSII

    GSII Hall of Famer

    Likes Received:
    2,456
    Trophy Points:
    7,840
    And then come the super teams that kids will emulate from guys like LeBron. Remember, Rome fell from within and was never the same.

Share This Page