FCS is becoming an FBS farm league

[Milktruck74]

I posed this on the socon thread, but I figured I'd get a larger response in it's own thread...sorry if this is a repeat for you..

I wonder if it is better to take kids out of the portal that are seasoned, rather than take a HS kid, spend 2 years developing him, only to have him poached by a bigger school. IT is as if the Portal Rules have made FCS a farm league for FBS Schools.

Obviously it is pure speculation and we won't really know for a few years, but.... I wonder how many of the 22's that signed directly out of HS are still with their original team in 24 0r 25? With the old transfer rules, an FCS school that signed 20 kids, with normal attrition (grades, injury, etc) would be lucky to have 10 of them on the roster 4 seasons later ...I'll bet that number drops to 5 or 6 in 2026.

[WestCoastAggie]

I’m okay with this.

[kdinva]

agree, if a player wants out after, say two seasons, he can only go to another FCS team, or D2.

[FormerPokeCenter]

I'm conflicted over this one....

On one hand, I'm glad to see talented kids like Jabril Cox get to move from FCS to FBS and test his mettle at LSU. One the other, I watched Darion Dunn transfer from McNeese to Texas, and then only get one start as a Longhorn. Texas didn't ask Dunn to enter the portal. That was all on him, but I feel like he would have benefitted from another year playing every down and might have had the opportunity to play at the next level...Texas got depth and filled a need, but at what cost to Dunn? And at what cost to McNeese who invested a lot of time and effort only to see him leave early. For small schools, that's tough. It's like taxing the poor to feed the rich....

But, they're 20ish, so they're gonna make stupid decisions....

[Libertine]

agree, if a player wants out after, say two seasons, he can only go to another FCS team, or D2.


xlolxxlolxxlolx...

...oh, wait. You're serious? xeyebrowx

First, good luck putting that policy in place with the NCAA or with any NCAA conference. I guess they're not facing enough anti-trust problems already.
Second, assuming you could put that policy in place, good luck recruiting any kids higher than D2-caliber anyway.

Milktruck's concerns are valid but they aren't new by any means. FBS and P5 has been poaching FCS and mid-major talent for years in all sports, long before the transfer portal made it fashionable. Off the top of my head, lightly-recruited Jaylan Foster parlayed a Big South Freshman of the Year award at Gardner-Webb into a scholarship at South Carolina (2016) and not-recruited-at-all-despite-his-last-name Seth Curry turned a stellar freshman year for Liberty basketball into a starting role at Duke (2009). That's just the Big South and I'm sure there have been plenty more in other and better FCS/mid-major conferences. Before, back door contacts -- not sports agents in the official sense, but people who could talk to each other and make things happen with plausible deniability from the kid -- were usually involved with these kind of moves which is why the transfer portal was created, to take this process out of the back channels and make it streamlined and transparent.

I think you can make valid arguments either way whether the transfer portal is a good thing or a bad thing but, pragmatically speaking, it's not really a new thing.

[ElCid]

I generally don't like the transfer thing. But I only have our experience to go on. We get a special, very unique kind of recruit. They know what the score is, mostly. We don't get transfers for obvious reasons. But this also means we don't lose many. Occasionally we have a second or third year leave but they are far and few between. More usual is a fifth year grad student bailing who already has his degree, but even they are not common. And that is only if they have legit pro aspirations. So we have a two edged sword. We don't lose many to transfer, and we don't get many, or any except 5th year. In any event we have an enviable graduation rate and that is the most important thing in the big picture.

[lionsrking2]

I posed this on the socon thread, but I figured I'd get a larger response in it's own thread...sorry if this is a repeat for you..

I wonder if it is better to take kids out of the portal that are seasoned, rather than take a HS kid, spend 2 years developing him, only to have him poached by a bigger school. IT is as if the Portal Rules have made FCS a farm league for FBS Schools.

Obviously it is pure speculation and we won't really know for a few years, but.... I wonder how many of the 22's that signed directly out of HS are still with their original team in 24 0r 25? With the old transfer rules, an FCS school that signed 20 kids, with normal attrition (grades, injury, etc) would be lucky to have 10 of them on the roster 4 seasons later ...I'll bet that number drops to 5 or 6 in 2026.

Who could have predicted it, right? The old rules were in place for a reason but, for better or worse, we're now seeing the side effects of open free agency. Combined with NIL and an extra Covid year, we're in a place we've never been before. I suppose it's good for some athletes and some programs at the top, but I do not believe it's good for the long term health of intercollegiate athletics as a whole. Schools, coaches, and athletes will adjust and try to make the best of it, but we're going to lose opportunities for a countless number of high school kids who otherwise may have had gotten an education. It is shocking the number of recruitable high school athletes—in all major sports—who have no four-year offers or are still available. It's easy to say they can go to a D-II, D-III, NAIA or JC but those divisions have limited scholarships. For many of these kids, an athletic scholarship is their only viable path to earn a degree. Maybe it'll even out as the Covid year guys move on, and kids start to think twice before jumping ship, but as long as there are multitudes of kids in the portal, schools are going to shop where the experience is. It's no different than recycling: the more recycled material in the marketplace, the less need there is for extraction or original production. The more kids in the transfer portal, the less the need to take chances on high school players, and risk losing them a couple of years down the road after they develop.

As for strategy moving forward, my guess is the Southeastern Lions will be very active in the transfer portal. As it was, we've always been active, but the feeling now is there are so many experienced players available, it makes more sense to bring in someone with D-I experience, more mature, who can plug-in-play, and has already used their one-time free transfer, than trying to develop high school players who may either bust or leave once they develop. We'll still recruit and sign high school kids, but we'll be more selective—at least as long as our current staff is in place. Not saying it's a good thing, but it's where we are and what makes the most sense in trying to compete on a national level.

[WestCoastAggie]

To be frank, amateur Athletics is a farce at best with a rather interesting elitist past.

[lionsrking2]

To be frank, amateur Athletics is a farce at best with a rather interesting elitist past.

What's left of amateurism has developed into a farce, I agree with that, but the origninal concept was well-intentioned in my view. But, the lust for currency, and the power that comes with it, is a corrupting force that is ingrained in human nature.

[unknown3]

agree, if a player wants out after, say two seasons, he can only go to another FCS team, or D2.


Why? They should be able to transfer as they see fit.

[Puddin Tane]

Im sure its the first thing on their minds, how do they get their college credit hours transferred all over the place? School B doesnt automatically accept hours from school A.

[walliver]

FCS will be lower than a farm league.

In baseball, lower level teams are subsidized to some extent to develop players. In FCS, FCS schools may redshirt a players and develop him only to lose him when his talents develop. In professional sports there are mechanisms in place to compensate teams. I can't figure out any appropriate way to do this in college football.

I know that many of us in the SoCon would have loved for Armanti Edwards or Adrian Peterson to move up, but I don't like the new rules. I fear that many schools will transition to the Pioneer League model if a high number of their players leave. More troublesome is that high school players are getting fewer good offers, and many entering the portal are finding that they are not worth what they have been told.

[lionsrking2]

Why? They should be able to transfer as they see fit.

Student-athletes have always been able to transfer as they see fit. They haven't always been immediately eligible, unless transferring down in subdivision or class or applying for and receiving a waiver.

[bonarae]

FCS will be lower than a farm league.

I know that many of us in the SoCon would have loved for Armanti Edwards or Adrian Peterson to move up, but I don't like the new rules. I fear that many schools will transition to the Pioneer League model if a high number of their players leave. More troublesome is that high school players are getting fewer good offers, and many entering the portal are finding that they are not worth what they have been told.

I agree 100%. But why are you comparing to the PFL?

[UpstateBison]

I'm conflicted over this one....

On one hand, I'm glad to see talented kids like Jabril Cox get to move from FCS to FBS and test his mettle at LSU. One the other, I watched Darion Dunn transfer from McNeese to Texas, and then only get one start as a Longhorn. Texas didn't ask Dunn to enter the portal. That was all on him, but I feel like he would have benefitted from another year playing every down and might have had the opportunity to play at the next level...Texas got depth and filled a need, but at what cost to Dunn? And at what cost to McNeese who invested a lot of time and effort only to see him leave early. For small schools, that's tough. It's like taxing the poor to feed the rich....

But, they're 20ish, so they're gonna make stupid decisions....

I am conflicted as well. We lost Jabril, Adam Cofield and Josh Hayes to FBS programs. The real impact was losing Trey Lance and Dillon Radunz because of the fall 2020 fiasco. It looks like Christian Watson and Cordell Volson will be drafted. NDSU may be a bit different than other FCS schools with NFL attention but it will be interesting to see how it plays out in the future.

Ultimately, I think a one time, immediate transfer is ok.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Lehigh Football Nation]

Every pro league restricts free agency in some way - Tom Brady simply can't sign a 10 day contract for the Bengals right now and be Joe Burrow's backup, and the Bengals coaching staff couldn't text Tom in the middle of his game against the Rams to ask him. It's hard for me to understand why the NCAA simply can't do some basic restrictions on the portal to prevent students from "entering the portal" mid-season and to prosecute or punish any school, coach or sports agent who tries to recruit them mid-season. But the NCAA, completely leaderless, seems to be unwilling to set any rules whatsoever.

Many, many of these problems would be solved if you said, "If you're an underclassman you can't transfer. If you're a junior with 3 years left, 2 years left, a senior or a grad student, do it, but only in this window of January 15th to July 31st." But the NCAA, as I mentioned, has no leadership.

[lionsrking2]

Every pro league restricts free agency in some way - Tom Brady simply can't sign a 10 day contract for the Bengals right now and be Joe Burrow's backup, and the Bengals coaching staff couldn't text Tom in the middle of his game against the Rams to ask him. It's hard for me to understand why the NCAA simply can't do some basic restrictions on the portal to prevent students from "entering the portal" mid-season and to prosecute or punish any school, coach or sports agent who tries to recruit them mid-season. But the NCAA, completely leaderless, seems to be unwilling to set any rules whatsoever.

Many, many of these problems would be solved if you said, "If you're an underclassman you can't transfer. If you're a junior with 3 years left, 2 years left, a senior or a grad student, do it, but only in this window of January 15th to July 31st." But the NCAA, as I mentioned, has no leadership.

The rules were perfectly fine the way they were: free one time transfer if transferring down in class or subdivision; possibility of waiver if transferring laterally or up, if circumstance warranted, or if free transfer already used. Student-athletes have always had the right to transfer schools, but there is no right to participate in intercollegiate athletics. It's a privilege and quite reasonable to place some restrictions to prevent full-on free agency. Combined with the NIL, it's completely out of hand. But the horses are out the barn door now, and ain't coming back. There are no enforceable rules anymore—anything goes now.

[FUBeAR]

In professional sports there are mechanisms in place to compensate teams. I can't figure out any appropriate way to do this in college football.
Give ‘em what they want and what the Chief Legal Counsel for the US Dept. of Labor has already determine they are … make ‘em employees under contract(s) with buyout clauses. The movement of Coaches is always cited as justification for the current transfer rules, so let’s go with that. Those schools with departing Coaches always receive handsome compensation if the contract is broken.

We know P5 Football is certainly not ‘amateur’ athletics anymore (if it ever was)…just stop the charades. Now one of the benefits these employees can opt into is free tuition…so we can still feel good about our Teams cuz some of the Players might actually be students at dear old Whatsamatta U.

[FUBeAR]

Every pro league restricts free agency in some way - Tom Brady simply can't sign a 10 day contract for the Bengals right now and be Joe Burrow's backup, and the Bengals coaching staff couldn't text Tom in the middle of his game against the Rams to ask him. It's hard for me to understand why the NCAA simply can't do some basic restrictions on the portal to prevent students from "entering the portal" mid-season and to prosecute or punish any school, coach or sports agent who tries to recruit them mid-season. But the NCAA, completely leaderless, seems to be unwilling to set any rules whatsoever.

Many, many of these problems would be solved if you said, "If you're an underclassman you can't transfer. If you're a junior with 3 years left, 2 years left, a senior or a grad student, do it, but only in this window of January 15th to July 31st." But the NCAA, as I mentioned, has no leadership.
Exactly…the NCAA is in an abdication free fall. They are nothing more than the contractor the HOA hires to collect dues and send-out notices to mow your yard.

What emerges from D1 Football ‘managing itself’ is going to be most interesting.

[WestCoastAggie]

Every pro league restricts free agency in some way - Tom Brady simply can't sign a 10 day contract for the Bengals right now and be Joe Burrow's backup, and the Bengals coaching staff couldn't text Tom in the middle of his game against the Rams to ask him. It's hard for me to understand why the NCAA simply can't do some basic restrictions on the portal to prevent students from "entering the portal" mid-season and to prosecute or punish any school, coach or sports agent who tries to recruit them mid-season. But the NCAA, completely leaderless, seems to be unwilling to set any rules whatsoever.

Many, many of these problems would be solved if you said, "If you're an underclassman you can't transfer. If you're a junior with 3 years left, 2 years left, a senior or a grad student, do it, but only in this window of January 15th to July 31st." But the NCAA, as I mentioned, has no leadership.

From my understanding, if you enter the transfer portal in October, for example, you'll need to remain enrolled in your classes at your current schools and finish the semester eligible to enroll in the spring AND make it through the NCAA clearinghouse. I suspect if you're entering the portal not eligible to transfer, you're going to remain stuck and become an APR casualty (once penalties are enforced once more).

[WestCoastAggie]

And how can you have a "free agency" if players aren't being compensated or being represented by a union that collectively bargained a labor deal on their behalf?

[Libertine]

Many, many of these problems would be solved if you said, "If you're an underclassman you can't transfer. If you're a junior with 3 years left, 2 years left, a senior or a grad student, do it, but only in this window of January 15th to July 31st." But the NCAA, as I mentioned, has no leadership.

This restricts the free movement and trade of an uncontracted and uncompensated individual so, again, good luck getting this past an even halfway decent anti-trust lawyer.

As WCA mentioned just above me, the current situation isn't free agency at all. A free agent would be someone who is actually contracted to be paid for their contributions by an employer for a specified period of time, none of which applies. Also, while it may not appear so to the casual -- or jilted -- fan or to clickbait-mongering sportswriters, college athletes cannot now just transfer willy-nilly because, while the NCAA has rightly given up on controlling a lot of the things about a student-athlete's life, NCAA eligibility standards still remain as do federal Title IX regulations as well as the admission requirements of individual schools. Just because the transfer portal makes it easier for a student to leave your school, doesn't necessarily make it easier for them to go somewhere else.

Also, consider the idea that the athlete who transfers out of a school at the earliest opportunity may have never wanted to go to that school in the first place but it just happened to be their only opportunity. This happens way more often than you would think, particularly for players from small high schools or those from tough socioeconomic backgrounds. God forbid that those kid excel on the field and create a market for themselves that they can exploit to find a better or happier situation for themselves. Preventing that in any other area of business would be considered unconscionable but, for unpaid student labor, we're OK with that?

[Panther88]

And how can you have a "free agency" if players aren't being compensated or being represented by a union that collectively bargained a labor deal on their behalf?

Nail, meet hammerhead. Bingo!

Student-athletes have an autonomous right to do/transfer as they please, w/out restriction and without institutional accountability. More power to them!

[caribbeanhen]

Nail, meet hammerhead. Bingo!

Student-athletes have an autonomous right to do/transfer as they please, w/out restriction and without institutional accountability. More power to them!

So let’s just have minor league football and stop the student athlete charade

bonus babies signing out of high school for millions

[Libertine]

So let’s just have minor league football and stop the student athlete charade


Would you honestly rather have that? It's reductive to consider this as an either/or situation. Colleges can still put an exciting product on the field, they can still maintain their academic integrity and students can benefit directly from the value of their talents. Just because this might look different doesn't mean it's bad.


bonus babies signing out of high school for millions

Kids already sign for millions out of high school -- or before -- in baseball, basketball and soccer. Why should football players be cut out of that?

[caribbeanhen]

Would you honestly rather have that? It's reductive to consider this as an either/or situation. Colleges can still put an exciting product on the field, they can still maintain their academic integrity and students can benefit directly from the value of their talents. Just because this might look different doesn't mean it's bad.



Kids already sign for millions out of high school -- or before -- in baseball, basketball and soccer. Why should football players be cut out of that?


They shouldn’t be, but where is the incentive to go to class if you’re already a millonario 🤑

[FUBeAR]

they can still maintain their academic integrity
xlolxxrotatehxxlolxxrotatehxxlolx

[FormerPokeCenter]

I realize that words and phrases change meaning over time. Some things mean the exact opposite of what they originally meant, given the way street vernacular arises. Language evolves....Sick, Wicked, Smokin...all those carry connotations that are different than their original meanings.....Sometimes phrases take on meanings that ignore the oxymoronic juxtaposition of certain words. Jumbo Shrimp, for instance. Military Intelligence. Justice Department....you get the picture.

Right now, though, we're seeing the phrase "student athelete" undergo a similar evolution....

[walliver]

This may represent the future of big-time football -

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/09/30/nlrb-decision-paves-way-college-athlete-rights

a more detailed article:
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/are-student-athletes-employees-or-students-nlrb-general-counsel-issues-non-binding

Here, Joe Biden's NLRB general council wants to ban the term "student athlete":
https://www.forbes.com/sites/karenweaver/2021/09/29/nlrb-takes-direct-aim-at-ncaas-term-student-athlete-addresses-athlete-collective-bargaining/?sh=18c659697a7e

What is worrisome about all this is that there are only a handful of athletic programs which are profitable. Even if football and men's basketball make money, the profit is eaten up by other sports. Outside of the Power 5 and their luxurious TV packages, no-one has the money to pay players any meaningful amount, especially if they want to remain Title IX compliant.

[WestCoastAggie]

This may represent the future of big-time football -

https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2021/09/30/nlrb-decision-paves-way-college-athlete-rights

a more detailed article:
https://www.natlawreview.com/article/are-student-athletes-employees-or-students-nlrb-general-counsel-issues-non-binding

Here, Joe Biden's NLRB general council wants to ban the term "student athlete":
https://www.forbes.com/sites/karenweaver/2021/09/29/nlrb-takes-direct-aim-at-ncaas-term-student-athlete-addresses-athlete-collective-bargaining/?sh=18c659697a7e

What is worrisome about all this is that there are only a handful of athletic programs which are profitable. Even if football and men's basketball make money, the profit is eaten up by other sports. Outside of the Power 5 and their luxurious TV packages, no-one has the money to pay players any meaningful amount, especially if they want to remain Title IX compliant.

Way back in the day, Schools actually wanted to pay players to join their football teams. However, elite institutions like those in the Big 10 went against it, and decided to employ scholarships and invented the term "student-athlete".

[Libertine]

They shouldn’t be, but where is the incentive to go to class if you’re already a millonario 螺

Counterintuitively, they may be more incentivized to go to class than before. Before, S-A's literally had everything handed to them and any thought of making (legitimate) money off of their talents was a future endeavor. Now with NIL, it's more obvious from the outset that players are their own businesses and their own brands which must be maintained and developed. A player who won't see the field because they're academically ineligible won't see that green either.

[ElCid]

Counterintuitively, they may be more incentivized to go to class than before. Before, S-A's literally had everything handed to them and any thought of making (legitimate) money off of their talents was a future endeavor. Now with NIL, it's more obvious from the outset that players are their own businesses and their own brands which must be maintained and developed. A player who won't see the field because they're academically ineligible won't see that green either.

I'm glad you are an optimist and see "the player" rising, instead of "the school's" academics lowering.

[JacksFan40]

It is what it is. Some players don’t get looked at by the FBS teams when they are in high school. They shouldn’t be punished for that and never allowed to showcase their skills on a broader platform like the FBS. Plus for the top FCS schools they’re already competing with the G5 for recruits, so their only risk is if the players transfers to a P5. Even still most top FCS recruits already have P5 offers.

[Libertine]

I'm glad you are an optimist and see "the player" rising, instead of "the school's" academics lowering.

It might for some but, as I said before, nothing about this is an either/or situation. There's over a thousand schools playing NCAA sports across the three divisions, all of whom have their own situations and are having to deal with NIL and the transfer portal in their own way.

[Go Lehigh TU Owl]

The vibe I get within higher-ed is if athletes start getting paid directly from their respective college/university for their "contributions to institutional advancement" then "normal students" will seek some form of monetary compensation for their part in the school's advancement and sustainability. Students are producing basic course work and research that is often exploited by the institution or professor. Paying to partake in such "educational work" can make it an even bitter pill to swallow. Not saying I agree with this. Rather, this is a path that is starting to get worn in...

The "traditional" NCAA model of college athletics is nearing a DOA status thus a rebirth of some capacity is inevitable. Ultimately, I foresee a "good amount" of institutions getting out of the intercollegiate athletic "business" over the next 10-15 years. I could also see some schools going the for-profit route too. Granted, this is all a rather "thrown together" hypothesis....

[ElCid]

The vibe I get within higher-ed is if athletes start getting paid directly from their respective college/university for their "contributions to institutional advancement" then "normal students" will seek some form of monetary compensation for their part in the school's advancement and sustainability. Students are producing basic course work and research that is often exploited by the institution or professor. Paying to partake in such "educational work" can make it an even bitter pill to swallow. Not saying I agree with this. Rather, this is a path that is starting to get worn in...

The "traditional" NCAA model of college athletics is nearing a DOA status thus a rebirth of some capacity is inevitable. Ultimately, I foresee a "good amount" of institutions getting out of the intercollegiate athletic "business" over the next 10-15 years. I could also see some schools going the for-profit route too. Granted, this is all a rather "thrown together" hypothesis....

I hate to say it, but you are getting warm. What about bands as well. They won't play for free. Our pipe band and band use to play in lots of places like public settings for events or "openings." Money to be made there. A whole host of money making opportunities all across the activity spectrum at a college or university. I think colleges will need to make a choice what route they will take. The backlash from donors could be grave. So I wouldn't expect rash decisions. And you have the whole private/public situation to sort out as well.

[FUBeAR]

Counterintuitively, they may be more incentivized to go to class than before. Before, S-A's literally had everything handed to them and any thought of making (legitimate) money off of their talents was a future endeavor. Now with NIL, it's more obvious from the outset that players are their own businesses and their own brands which must be maintained and developed. A player who won't see the field because they're academically ineligible won't see that green either.
1) Players are getting NIL deals before they are even enrolled. So, obviously, ‘seeing the field’ is not a requirement to ‘catch that bag’ for certain Players

2) As they are now “Employee-Athletes” vs “Student-Athletes,” there is no way that Academic Eligibility requirements will stand up to legal tests. Heck, as “Employee-Athletes,” it’s doubtful that requiring enrollment in a certain College/University would be upheld as a lawful condition of employment. Enrollment in the Schools for which they are Employee-Athletes will soon become an optional benefit that they may select as part of their overall benefits plans.

[FormerPokeCenter]

I want it noted for the record that I called my shot over the summer...


The law of the land is now that college athletes are now employees....which means you have to pay them....you can't ignore the SCOTUS decision and pretend that it doesn't apply to the FCS. That's why the SCOTUS decision is so horrible...it doesn't deal with classification of schools, it deals with the status of the players....College football is doomed....

[TennBison]

So many FCS schools beat their chest when they land a FBS transfer. They are like "we got one". But act like they were raped when one of theirs makes the jump from FCS to the FBS. Kids get overlooked coming out of high school all the time and shine at the FCS level. Just like in the real world, these kids should be able to take their talent to the school of their choice if an opportunity presents itself. If you had a job you started out of college and they trained you in your profession to be great you would be pissed if there was some rule or law preventing you from going to a different company that wanted to pay you more or was a better fit for you. This is just the way things are going to be from now on, kids are going to jump all around from now on. Some FCS schools are going to be less affected. NDSU for instance is not going to lose kids to the likes of New Mexico, Nevada, Miami(of Ohio), Toledo etc. Sure, SEC and Big Ten schools would be able to pick from NDSU with success. Make your program great and you end up with less loss and more gain in this problem.

[ElCid]

So many FCS schools beat their chest when they land a FBS transfer. They are like "we got one". But act like they were raped when one of theirs makes the jump from FCS to the FBS. Kids get overlooked coming out of high school all the time and shine at the FCS level. Just like in the real world, these kids should be able to take their talent to the school of their choice if an opportunity presents itself. If you had a job you started out of college and they trained you in your profession to be great you would be pissed if there was some rule or law preventing you from going to a different company that wanted to pay you more or was a better fit for you. This is just the way things are going to be from now on, kids are going to jump all around from now on. Some FCS schools are going to be less affected. NDSU for instance is not going to lose kids to the likes of New Mexico, Nevada, Miami(of Ohio), Toledo etc. Sure, SEC and Big Ten schools would be able to pick from NDSU with success. Make your program great and you end up with less loss and more gain in this problem.

That is one way to look at it. But being an athlete in college is not suppose to be a job and therefore your comparison isn't really accurate. Now I know a lot of people are trying to make it that way, but that's was never the intent. A student goes to college for an education. If they also play a sport they can get a scholarship. But the sport interest has become more important than the education and it has become the only factor it seems.

I know, cue all those who are going to say, that's what it has become and my thought above is archaic and no longer applies. But you have to ask yourself, ever wonder why interest has dropped in the sport. It's this new mentality. The true loyal fans are dropping away. I don't believe that the current professional pushers of this new view of college sports realize that the thing they are exploiting is slowly being damaged by their viewpoint and actions. You need to just look at attendance in the last 15 years to see it's affects. Now this isn't the only reason, but it is a big factor.

Personally I care about and support athletes who want to go to my school to get an education and a degree there. I don't care about someone who does a touch and go and splits for a better offer. If that happens a lot, my attendance and monetary support will reflect that position. Now it doesn't happen much at my school, but I bet a lot of folks feel the same way at many schools. I fear for the future.

[FUBeAR]

Just like in the real world, these kids should be able to take their talent to the school of their choice if an opportunity presents itself. If you had a job you started out of college and they trained you in your profession to be great you would be pissed if there was some rule or law preventing you from going to a different company that wanted to pay you more or was a better fit for you.
FUBeAR assumes you are familiar with non-compete agreements which are enforceable and can restrict employees from going to certain companies, in certain industries, in certain roles, in certain geographies - even if these 2nd companies “want to pay more” or are “a better fit.”

Companies “in the real world” also, often, require employees to sign payback agreements for the companies’ expenses/investments such as recruiting fees, relocation costs, and educational benefits paid. Typically, these payback agreements are prorated to ensure the companies realize a reasonable return on their investments before their employees depart or these investments are remunerated in some reasonable proportion.

As Employee-Athletes, FUBeAR expects these types of Employer/Employee Agreements will be utilized in the new model.

As FUBeAR heard on graduation day many years ago…you get BOTH….rights/privileges AND responsibilities. One without the other is like the yin without the yang…

[Lehigh Football Nation]

This restricts the free movement and trade of an uncontracted and uncompensated individual so, again, good luck getting this past an even halfway decent anti-trust lawyer.

As WCA mentioned just above me, the current situation isn't free agency at all. A free agent would be someone who is actually contracted to be paid for their contributions by an employer for a specified period of time, none of which applies. Also, while it may not appear so to the casual -- or jilted -- fan or to clickbait-mongering sportswriters, college athletes cannot now just transfer willy-nilly because, while the NCAA has rightly given up on controlling a lot of the things about a student-athlete's life, NCAA eligibility standards still remain as do federal Title IX regulations as well as the admission requirements of individual schools. Just because the transfer portal makes it easier for a student to leave your school, doesn't necessarily make it easier for them to go somewhere else.

Also, consider the idea that the athlete who transfers out of a school at the earliest opportunity may have never wanted to go to that school in the first place but it just happened to be their only opportunity. This happens way more often than you would think, particularly for players from small high schools or those from tough socioeconomic backgrounds. God forbid that those kid excel on the field and create a market for themselves that they can exploit to find a better or happier situation for themselves. Preventing that in any other area of business would be considered unconscionable but, for unpaid student labor, we're OK with that?

The part you're leaving out is the "race to the bottom" by schools to attract athletic talent. If you're a school that cares only about athletics, what's the incentive to keep academics as a part of the picture? There will be some schools that care and have that a part of their DNA, but that's not the case at many schools. Again, the NCAA has existed in part to make sure (with varying levels of success) that the academic mission is top priority. (Not saying they've always been successful at it.) Having the NCAA just give up won't make things better, it will just tell the rogue schools there are no cops anymore and they can encourage fan groups to pay stars millions and have athletes basically not need to go to class or anything. And what incentive does the SEC have to enforce academic requirements that might eliminate most of its best athletes. It's a complete and utter ****storm and it's Emmert and the P5's fault.

NCAA clearinghouse academic numbers are comically low already - and what if the SEC just said for football, that's just not going to apply to us? What would the NCAA do, anything? Also with Title IX, why would that affect the richest schools one bit? They would simply lower the standards for everyone.

[KnightoftheRedFlash]

Every pro league restricts free agency in some way - Tom Brady simply can't sign a 10 day contract for the Bengals right now and be Joe Burrow's backup, and the Bengals coaching staff couldn't text Tom in the middle of his game against the Rams to ask him. It's hard for me to understand why the NCAA simply can't do some basic restrictions on the portal to prevent students from "entering the portal" mid-season and to prosecute or punish any school, coach or sports agent who tries to recruit them mid-season. But the NCAA, completely leaderless, seems to be unwilling to set any rules whatsoever.

Many, many of these problems would be solved if you said, "If you're an underclassman you can't transfer. If you're a junior with 3 years left, 2 years left, a senior or a grad student, do it, but only in this window of January 15th to July 31st." But the NCAA, as I mentioned, has no leadership.

What do you expect the NCAA to do? They have been roasted and blasted by the Jay Bilas and other media hacks of the world to the point where Joe Public thinks the NCAA is evil.

In five years (maybe less), student-athletes are going to whine that having to sit out a year for a second transfer is repression. And society and the media will back them up on it. Pandora's Box is wide open. Any rule is seen as oppressive and tyrannical.

- - - Updated - - -


Every pro league restricts free agency in some way - Tom Brady simply can't sign a 10 day contract for the Bengals right now and be Joe Burrow's backup, and the Bengals coaching staff couldn't text Tom in the middle of his game against the Rams to ask him. It's hard for me to understand why the NCAA simply can't do some basic restrictions on the portal to prevent students from "entering the portal" mid-season and to prosecute or punish any school, coach or sports agent who tries to recruit them mid-season. But the NCAA, completely leaderless, seems to be unwilling to set any rules whatsoever.

Many, many of these problems would be solved if you said, "If you're an underclassman you can't transfer. If you're a junior with 3 years left, 2 years left, a senior or a grad student, do it, but only in this window of January 15th to July 31st." But the NCAA, as I mentioned, has no leadership.

What do you expect the NCAA to do? They have been roasted and blasted by the Jay Bilas and other media hacks of the world to the point where Joe Public thinks the NCAA is evil.

In five years (maybe less), student-athletes are going to whine that having to sit out a year for a second transfer is repression. And society and the media will back them up on it. Pandora's Box is wide open. Any rule is seen as oppressive and tyrannical.

[Milktruck74]

A few thoughts on all this as I read all your comments

1. D3 Football and Basketball are truly armature athletics as intended by the original NCAA.
2. THe NCAA has to eliminate the APR rule if they are going to allow this type of movement. You shouldn't be held to a graduation standard if you can not be in a position to help kids!
3. Why does the portal only really impact FB and BB? What aren't there thousands of kids in the soccer or tennis portal?

and lastly, and this is a big stretch, but 5 years back would you ever thought a HS QB was getting paid $1MM before he ever signed with a college program???

4. When do Colleges decide they are venues and start CHARGING athletes for the privilege of using their facilities to showcase their talents? Think about musicians that hold concerts at concert halls. They sell tickets and bring in their merchandise and the concert hall/venue provides the facility. The venue doesn't actually pay the artist, but the artist pays the venue. Since NIL deals are all based on the impressions you create, playing for a team that has a 100,000 seat stadium or is on TV every week in front of millions of eyeballs.....That has a tremendous value to the athlete. Once schools realize this they may try and recoup some of that value.

[kdinva]

A few thoughts on all this as I read all your comments......and lastly, and this is a big stretch, but 5 years back would you ever thought a HS QB was getting paid $1MM before he ever signed with a college program???

4. When do Colleges decide they are venues and start CHARGING athletes for the privilege of using their facilities to showcase their talents? Think about musicians that hold concerts at concert halls. They sell tickets and bring in their merchandise and the concert hall/venue provides the facility. The venue doesn't actually pay the artist, but the artist pays the venue. Since NIL deals are all based on the impressions you create, playing for a team that has a 100,000 seat stadium or is on TV every week in front of millions of eyeballs.....That has a tremendous value to the athlete. Once schools realize this they may try and recoup some of that value.

very well said.

[FormerPokeCenter]

Fan interest in college players is largely based on perceived tribalism. "Hey, they CHOSE to enroll in my school of choice, so I'mma support them!:....and that generates a lot of NIL interest that the player, himself, may not otherwise get. And for those teams with big fan base and number based traditions like Montana's #37 and LSU's #18, being bestowed those numbers by the coaching staff tells the world that the wearers of those jerseys is a specific type of kid, thereby upping the NIL interest....

College kids today - from an NIL standpoint - stand on the shoulders of giants. Think about kids that attend Notre Dame, for instance. I image Knute Rockne's rolling in his grave now that we're motivated to win one for the Giver, instead of the Gipper...

I support the concept if you apply it to a kid who's been at a program for his career and built a following. I'm not a fan when a kid inks a deal before he's ever played a down. At that point, once he's inked, the sponsoring company then employs a PR machine to generate even more interest for him and them. It's not about what he does for the school anymore....

But...I digress. College football is dead...or ate least in a medically induced coma...

[walliver]

College Football will go back to what it was 50 years ago. When I was growing up in the 60's and 70's in the South, There was NCAA (essentially Division 1 only) and the NAIA. The primary difference was that the NAIA let freshmen play so most smaller schools played there. The SEC was the only conference in the South really competing for national championships. Most SoCon schedules had as many NAIA teams on their schedules as major teams, if not more.

Another way to look at it was that there was Alabama, Georgia, Tennessee, Florida ... and then everybody else. In many ways, not much else has changed since then. Going forward there will be Alabama, Georgia, Clemson ... and then everybody else. SunBelt teams will play each other, as will C-USA, the SoCon, the South Atlantic and whatever other conferences survive in the region. Unless the NCAA is somehow able to regulate FCS play, the FCS playoffs will become irrelevant to most members.

[unknown3]

A few thoughts on all this as I read all your comments

1. D3 Football and Basketball are truly armature athletics as intended by the original NCAA.
2. THe NCAA has to eliminate the APR rule if they are going to allow this type of movement. You shouldn't be held to a graduation standard if you can not be in a position to help kids!
3. Why does the portal only really impact FB and BB? What aren't there thousands of kids in the soccer or tennis portal?

and lastly, and this is a big stretch, but 5 years back would you ever thought a HS QB was getting paid $1MM before he ever signed with a college program???

4. When do Colleges decide they are venues and start CHARGING athletes for the privilege of using their facilities to showcase their talents? Think about musicians that hold concerts at concert halls. They sell tickets and bring in their merchandise and the concert hall/venue provides the facility. The venue doesn't actually pay the artist, but the artist pays the venue. Since NIL deals are all based on the impressions you create, playing for a team that has a 100,000 seat stadium or is on TV every week in front of millions of eyeballs.....That has a tremendous value to the athlete. Once schools realize this they may try and recoup some of that value.

You do number 4 and your program becomes irrelevant the same exact day you do it lol. No one is that stupid. On top of that, schools have been profiting off of these kids without them getting anything out of it for 50 years.

[FormerPokeCenter]

You do number 4 and your program becomes irrelevant the same exact day you do it lol. No one is that stupid. On top of that, schools have been profiting off of these kids without them getting anything out of it for 50 years.

It's a symbiotic relationship. Kids in the major programs get to play in front of large crowds and build followings that follow them to the pros, and it's easier to get a shot at the pros in a big time environment, playing against similarly talented players.

At this level, with very few notable exceptions, there's nobody really profiting. The well endowed schools, for the most part, have generous athletic assessments built into tuition. The highest profile schools in the country are completely fan supported, but the other 90%? Yeah...no.

[FUBeAR]

schools have been profiting off of these kids without them getting anything out of it for 50 years.
Hard to believe they still have eligibility

[Milktruck74]

I hear the schools profiting argument, I hear that kids get nothing, I hear the exploitation....but look at the real numbers.

73,000 NCAA athletes play Football (All Divisions)

21,000 Scholarships Equivalents (all levels)

OVER 50,000 kids are paying their own way and choosing to play football.

The reality is the major NIL deals (not free pizza at Joe's) are there for about 5 or 6 athletes on about 35 or 30 teams....while we are arguing over deals for 150 kids, 50,000 are actually being STUDENT-athletes.

However, this thread is more about the transfer portal but has morphed into a NIL deal. So to bring it back to the portal, should transfer be allowed based on commitment? Meaning if you have received benefit from a school in the form of monetary compensation (ie Athletic Scholarship) and do not honor your commitment, should the school seek to be refunded if you leave? Just like mentioned above about non-competes for employer/employees, if scholarships are going to be employment contracts moving forward, is this enforceable? I've worked under a contract and without. The contract obligated both sides, when working without I was free to leave at any time...maybe that is how the portal should operate. If you had a scholly, you are there...walk-on and there is no commitment any you can go at any time...your choice if you lock down for 4 years or not!!!

[Lehigh Football Nation]

I hear the schools profiting argument, I hear that kids get nothing, I hear the exploitation....but look at the real numbers.

73,000 NCAA athletes play Football (All Divisions)

21,000 Scholarships Equivalents (all levels)

OVER 50,000 kids are paying their own way and choosing to play football.

The reality is the major NIL deals (not free pizza at Joe's) are there for about 5 or 6 athletes on about 35 or 30 teams....while we are arguing over deals for 150 kids, 50,000 are actually being STUDENT-athletes.

However, this thread is more about the transfer portal but has morphed into a NIL deal. So to bring it back to the portal, should transfer be allowed based on commitment? Meaning if you have received benefit from a school in the form of monetary compensation (ie Athletic Scholarship) and do not honor your commitment, should the school seek to be refunded if you leave? Just like mentioned above about non-competes for employer/employees, if scholarships are going to be employment contracts moving forward, is this enforceable? I've worked under a contract and without. The contract obligated both sides, when working without I was free to leave at any time...maybe that is how the portal should operate. If you had a scholly, you are there...walk-on and there is no commitment any you can go at any time...your choice if you lock down for 4 years or not!!!

In a way I kind of respect the evil sports agent genius that started with "scholarships aren't compensation!" and have led media and the general public down the path to "getting million dollar endorsement NIL contracts with porn and gambling companies are the athete's right, and the school plays no part in that!" and heading down the way to "the only way to manage the controversy is to unionize and pay players, and destroy college sports for the 95% of athletes that are simply happy with the compensation of a scholarship to a top school!"

[Mocs123]

Are there any FCS Athletics Departments that actually make money? I certainly don't think that there are any FCS schools that have gotten rich due to exploiting their student athletes. I would think the compensation of a free education should be enough compensation. If you take this past football - how many women's volleyball players have made their school money? NONE. It's simply not a money making sport. While there are 20-30 P5 schools that do make quite a bit of money from their Athletic Department, but most schools just break even, many, such as FCS schools, don't even do that.

While I don't think players should be locked into a school forever letting them transfer any time they want is probably not the best thing either, if our goal is for them to graduate with a degree. I mean often lots of credits don't transfer, etc. I do realize that regular students can transfer any time they want, but I imagine the graduation rates of regular students are pretty low compared to athletes (at most schools).

As for as Image and Likeness I really don't have a player doing an endorsement, etc but the way it is now players are getting paid for just signing. Obviously not what the NCAA intended.

[Bill]

re there any FCS Athletics Departments that actually make moneyA? I certainly don't think that there are any FCS schools that have gotten rich due to exploiting their student athletes. I would think the compensation of a free education should be enough compensation. If you take this past football - how many women's volleyball players have made their school money? NONE. It's simply not a money making sport. While there are 20-30 P5 schools that do make quite a bit of money from their Athletic Department, but most schools just break even, many, such as FCS schools, don't even do that.

While I don't think players should be locked into a school forever letting them transfer any time they want is probably not the best thing either, if our goal is for them to graduate with a degree. I mean often lots of credits don't transfer, etc. I do realize that regular students can transfer any time they want, but I imagine the graduation rates of regular students are pretty low compared to athletes (at most schools).

As for as Image and Likeness I really don't have a player doing an endorsement, etc but the way it is now players are getting paid for just signing. Obviously not what the NCAA intended.

Mocs,
I don't have this year's data, but as of two years ago, the answer was no. And it was no before the pandemic as well. I forget which source I used...have to call up my power point to check!

[unknown3]

Basically it just seems like you guys are creating arguments to lock kids in to your school because you fear not being competitive. There is no reason why a kid shouldn't be able to transfer and be immediately eligible where ever they go. If that's the logic, put the same rules on coaches and see how quick they shoot it down. If kids can't leave when they want and be eligible then coaches can't take what they deem "step up" jobs at other schools while leaving all of the kids they sold dreams to stuck at their old school. How many of your coaches would agree to that? Likely none.

[FormerPokeCenter]

A kid's time in college is an investment. Who wants to coach a kid up, and then have him bail at the first opportunity?

With very few exceptions, kids don't show up at college ready to play from day one. You have to work with them to get them ready. Expecting a little loyalty at this level is NOT unreasonable.

[KnightoftheRedFlash]

In a way I kind of respect the evil sports agent genius that started with "scholarships aren't compensation!" and have led media and the general public down the path to "getting million dollar endorsement NIL contracts with porn and gambling companies are the athete's right, and the school plays no part in that!" and heading down the way to "the only way to manage the controversy is to unionize and pay players, and destroy college sports for the 95% of athletes that are simply happy with the compensation of a scholarship to a top school!"

Welcome to modern society. We destroy working systems to appease the whining 2% that are actually helped by change.

The NCAA is far from perfect but it allows hundreds of thousands of athletes to attend college, play a sport, network, and receive an education before discontinuing their athletic career. Which is the end game for 99% of student athletes.

Society should reserve its anger at the NFL for not starting a minor league and the NBA for that silly one and done rule. But the NCAA is the big bad wolf because somehow it is making billions off the back of #57 on Dixie State.

[FUBeAR]

Basically it just seems like you guys are creating arguments to lock kids in to your school because you fear not being competitive. There is no reason why a kid shouldn't be able to transfer and be immediately eligible where ever they go. If that's the logic, put the same rules on coaches and see how quick they shoot it down. If kids can't leave when they want and be eligible then coaches can't take what they deem "step up" jobs at other schools while leaving all of the kids they sold dreams to stuck at their old school. How many of your coaches would agree to that? Likely none.Almost every Coach has agreed to buyout terms should he fail to fulfill his contract. How many of “your kids” who have transferred or will transfer have agreed to or would agree to buyout terms, like their Coaches did/have?

Unknown3 - you should get a lens that sees things from both sides.

Many of “us” here have been Student-Athletes, had “kids” (the ones who actually carry our DNA) that have been Student-Athletes, or been (in some form or fashion) College Coaches. In FUBeAR’s case, he’s touched all those bases. It’s not as simple as…or at least it’s not sustainable to…moving everything to be exactly the way that might benefit a small fraction of Collegiate Student Athletes.

College Football is the proverbial “Goose” that has laid many “golden eggs” for many people and several institutions. Some of those golden eggs have been excellent college educations for 1st generation college students (FUBeAR), many from extremely impoverished backgrounds (many of my Teammates…and those of my son).

Most of us that have commented here love College Football…and actually love (really love…not just love ‘em while they are wearing certain colors/logos) some of the “kids” that we have seen benefit so much from those “golden eggs” that others now (wrongly) view as pittances. We just want to make sure the “Golden Goose” survives the redistribution of her eggs.

[lionsrking2]

Basically it just seems like you guys are creating arguments to lock kids in to your school because you fear not being competitive. There is no reason why a kid shouldn't be able to transfer and be immediately eligible where ever they go. If that's the logic, put the same rules on coaches and see how quick they shoot it down. If kids can't leave when they want and be eligible then coaches can't take what they deem "step up" jobs at other schools while leaving all of the kids they sold dreams to stuck at their old school. How many of your coaches would agree to that? Likely none.

There are all kinds of reasons why they shouldn't be immediately eligible. You can't walk out on a contract in the real world and immediately work for someone else in the same profession without some type of financial penalty or buyout. It's one thing if a student-athlete is not on scholarship, released from scholarship, not getting playing time or has an underlying off-field issue that requires being closer to home—or if it's in an academic case, such as grad school transfer, or change in major. But transferring purely for athletics purposes because you "got good all of the sudden," sitting out one season is not unreasonable. And it's not unreasonable to demand repayment of an athletic scholarship if an SA leaves on their own accord for athletic purposes, and wants to play immediately. Participation in collegiate athletics is not a right and receiving an athletics scholarship is not a right.

[Bisonoline]

There are all kinds of reasons why they shouldn't be immediately eligible. You can't walk out on a contract in the real world and immediately work for someone else in the same profession without some type of financial penalty or buyout. It's one thing if a student-athlete is not on scholarship, released from scholarship, not getting playing time or has an underlying off-field issue that requires being closer to home—or if it's in an academic case, such as grad school transfer, or change in major. But transferring purely for athletics purposes because you "got good all of the sudden," sitting out one season is not unreasonable. And it's not unreasonable to demand repayment of an athletic scholarship if an SA leaves on their own accord for athletic purposes, and wants to play immediately. Participation in collegiate athletics is not a right and receiving an athletics scholarship is not a right.

Weve already gone down that path and it really sucked. No player movement as they had to ride the pine their whole careers. Coaches would recruit a kid so he didnt go to a rival school and the kid would sit. Kids go to school to play the game not sit for 5 years.
I dont really care for all of the players transferring but I understand it.

[Hammerhead]

Booster clubs from the coach's new school or like Brian Kelly they might earn enough in less than one year to pay off their buyout at the old school.


Almost every Coach has agreed to buyout terms should he fail to fulfill his contract. How many of “your kids” who have transferred or will transfer have agreed to or would agree to buyout terms, like their Coaches did/have?

Unknown3 - you should get a lens that sees things from both sides.

Many of “us” here have been Student-Athletes, had “kids” (the ones who actually carry our DNA) that have been Student-Athletes, or been (in some form or fashion) College Coaches. In FUBeAR’s case, he’s touched all those bases. It’s not as simple as…or at least it’s not sustainable to…moving everything to be exactly the way that might benefit a small fraction of Collegiate Student Athletes.

College Football is the proverbial “Goose” that has laid many “golden eggs” for many people and several institutions. Some of those golden eggs have been excellent college educations for 1st generation college students (FUBeAR), many from extremely impoverished backgrounds (many of my Teammates…and those of my son).

Most of us that have commented here love College Football…and actually love (really love…not just love ‘em while they are wearing certain colors/logos) some of the “kids” that we have seen benefit so much from those “golden eggs” that others now (wrongly) view as pittances. We just want to make sure the “Golden Goose” survives the redistribution of her eggs.

[FUBeAR]

Booster clubs from the coach's new school or like Brian Kelly they might earn enough in less than one year to pay off their buyout at the old school.
Cool…then those Booster Clubs or a Player’s NIL riches from his new school can pay off the Transfer Buyout Terms he agreed to (in hypothetical world) also.

How it gets paid is really beside the point. The point is that the school losing the Coach receives financial compensation for the loss of their Coach. Should they not receive financial compensation for the loss of their Player(s)?

If not, why not?

The Coaches’ ‘freedom’ to move is always cited when people pushing total ‘free agency’ for college Players are selling their narrative.

But those moves don’t leave the ‘losing’ school completely high & dry. Need to think about some way to somewhat replicate that for Player movement.

[Bisonoline]

Cool…then those Booster Clubs or a Player’s NIL riches from his new school can pay off the Transfer Buyout Terms he agreed to (in hypothetical world) also.

How it gets paid is really beside the point. The point is that the school losing the Coach receives financial compensation for the loss of their Coach. Should they not receive financial compensation for the loss of their Player(s)?

If not, why not?

The Coaches’ ‘freedom’ to move is always cited when people pushing total ‘free agency’ for college Players are selling their narrative.

But those moves don’t leave the ‘losing’ school completely high & dry. Need to think about some way to somewhat replicate that for Player movement.

Making schools pay compensation for a transfer would basically shut it down.

[FUBeAR]

Making schools pay compensation for a transfer would basically shut it down.
Sure hasn’t shut down Coach movement & someone is paying those buyouts…and it ain’t the Coaches themselves.

With unlimited scholarships now via FCOA for all “Walk-On’s” NIL deals (see BYU, et al), schools can pile up as many Players as they want & their boosters can afford. Having to pay buyouts for transfers might make them a bit more judicious about who/how many they take, but they will be able to find the cash for the Players they think can TRULY help them win Football games…and the schools losing the star Player they recruited & developed will be able to more readily afford to recruit (or buy) his replacement.

[Bisonoline]

Sure hasn’t shut down Coach movement & someone is paying those buyouts…and it ain’t the Coaches themselves.

With unlimited scholarships now via FCOA for all “Walk-On’s” NIL deals (see BYU, et al), schools can pile up as many Players as they want & their boosters can afford. Having to pay buyouts for transfers might make them a bit more judicious about who/how many they take, but they will be able to find the cash for the Players they think can TRULY help them win Football games…and the schools losing the star Player they recruited & developed will be able to more readily afford to recruit (or buy) his replacement.

I dont think Walk ons are illegible for FCOA. NIL yes.

[FUBeAR]

I dont think Walk ons are illegible for FCOA. NIL yes.
The NIL they are getting paid by boosters = FCOA

https://kslsports.com/474620/byu-football-ncaa-built-bar-nil-probe/

Sure - this says Tuition…no reason why it couldn’t be FCOA or 10x FCOA.

[DFW HOYA]

I dont think Walk ons are illegible for FCOA. NIL yes.

Depends on the school. Ivy League schools offer aid on FCOA, not just on tuition.

[Bisonoline]

The NIL they are getting paid by boosters = FCOA

https://kslsports.com/474620/byu-football-ncaa-built-bar-nil-probe/

Sure - this says Tuition…no reason why it couldn’t be FCOA or 10x FCOA.

FCOA has nothing to do with NIL.

[caribbeanhen]

I miss spring football already and have no clue what you guys are talking about

[ElCid]

Cool…then those Booster Clubs or a Player’s NIL riches from his new school can pay off the Transfer Buyout Terms he agreed to (in hypothetical world) also.

How it gets paid is really beside the point. The point is that the school losing the Coach receives financial compensation for the loss of their Coach. Should they not receive financial compensation for the loss of their Player(s)?

If not, why not?

The Coaches’ ‘freedom’ to move is always cited when people pushing total ‘free agency’ for college Players are selling their narrative.

But those moves don’t leave the ‘losing’ school completely high & dry. Need to think about some way to somewhat replicate that for Player movement.

Players are not coaches. I hate that argument. It is apples and oranges. One is a professional making a living. One is an amateur getting an education who might have a scholarship. Absolutely zero to compare except by those who are spinning it for some agenda.

Sometimes a coach doesn't fit at a school. Some times he wants to advance in his profession. He has a contract for formal employment. Sometimes a player doesn't fit at a school. Sometimes he doesn't get the playing time, he thinks he deserves. That's why it's real important for him to choose wisely where to go to school. If people want to really compare them then go all the way and have formal contracts. So if a player has been chewing up a scholarship for two years being redshirted and developing I would have little moral issue with a school going after his expenses if he decided to move just as he begins to excel. It definitely a two edged argument.

[FUBeAR]

FCOA has nothing to do with NIL.
You may be too literal to participate in this hypothetical discussion.

Whatever your definition of FCOA is doesn’t apply. The point is schools’ boosters can now buy as many Players as they want and can pay them what they can afford / are willing to spend. So, somehow implementing buyout fees in annual scholarship agreements would not, necessarily, “shutdown” the transfer marketplace. It would just align it more with “the real world” and be more akin to Coaches moving from school A to School B.

[Lehigh Football Nation]

In theory, boosters can use NIL money to try to force the school to buy out a head coach. What's stopping a booster club to offer NIL money for a kid to NOT play?

[Milktruck74]

The NCAA has never prohibited a Student athlete from transferring schools. In fact it has never stopped them from transferring immediately. They can go be a regular student at any school they desire (and can get accepted). Participation in athletics is a guaranteed to all, participation comes with other requirements...you have to enter the clearing house, you have to be a full time student, you have to maintain grades, you have 5 seasons from your first enrollment.

The NCAA requiring a year out to transfer was designed to keep the big schools from raiding the smaller institutions of their talent and creating a farm system....well....by eliminating that rule, we can clearly see which institutions the NCAA cares about. if it isn't March Madness or P5 football, you really have no voice.

[unknown3]

Players are not coaches. I hate that argument. It is apples and oranges. One is a professional making a living. One is an amateur getting an education who might have a scholarship. Absolutely zero to compare except by those who are spinning it for some agenda.

Sometimes a coach doesn't fit at a school. Some times he wants to advance in his profession. He has a contract for formal employment. Sometimes a player doesn't fit at a school. Sometimes he doesn't get the playing time, he thinks he deserves. That's why it's real important for him to choose wisely where to go to school. If people want to really compare them then go all the way and have formal contracts. So if a player has been chewing up a scholarship for two years being redshirted and developing I would have little moral issue with a school going after his expenses if he decided to move just as he begins to excel. It definitely a two edged argument.

Or, just the reality that the vast majority of coaches leave for pay raises. You made it sound nice though. They shouldn't be obligated to stay at a school to finish out their contract but a student should be obligated to stay at a school that they may not fit or a system they don't like either. Yea, that makes sense. No, no, it doesn't. As a matter of fact the kids are the ONLY ones that have had a forced obligation. Just like when Deion leaves JSU after he's sold all the "love an hbcu" stuff and goes to whatever P5 team. I guess those kids he recruited should have to stay there or not be allowed to start immediately somewhere else? GTFO.

[ElCid]

Or, just the reality that the vast majority of coaches leave for pay raises. You made it sound nice though. They shouldn't be obligated to stay at a school to finish out their contract but a student should be obligated to stay at a school that they may not fit or a system they don't like either. Yea, that makes sense. No, no, it doesn't. As a matter of fact the kids are the ONLY ones that have had a forced obligation. Just like when Deion leaves JSU after he's sold all the "love an hbcu" stuff and goes to whatever P5 team. I guess those kids he recruited should have to stay there or not be allowed to start immediately somewhere else? GTFO.

Well nothing you said changes the fact that coaches are professionals and the players are only present to get an education as a student and play an amateur sport if able. Everything else is just emotion and an attempt to blur those lines.

[WeAreThePride]

agree, if a player wants out after, say two seasons, he can only go to another FCS team, or D2.
As long as you hold all college students to the same standard.

Wanna do 2 years and then transfer to a better school academically? Tough ****.

[Bisonoline]

You may be too literal to participate in this hypothetical discussion.

Whatever your definition of FCOA is doesn’t apply. The point is schools’ boosters can now buy as many Players as they want and can pay them what they can afford / are willing to spend. So, somehow implementing buyout fees in annual scholarship agreements would not, necessarily, “shutdown” the transfer marketplace. It would just align it more with “the real world” and be more akin to Coaches moving from school A to School B.

I thought that was where you were going.

[NDSU1980]

You may be too literal to participate in this hypothetical discussion.

Whatever your definition of FCOA is doesn’t apply. The point is schools’ boosters can now buy as many Players as they want and can pay them what they can afford / are willing to spend. So, somehow implementing buyout fees in annual scholarship agreements would not, necessarily, “shutdown” the transfer marketplace. It would just align it more with “the real world” and be more akin to Coaches moving from school A to School B.
It's probably a case of living by the golden rule. He who has the gold makes the rules, at least these days it seems.

[NY Crusader 2010]

What's interesting about the transfer rules is that only athletes in specific sports, including football, basketball and hockey, ever had to sit out a year if transferring within division or up a division. Not sure about lax and baseball. But athletes in minor sports always had the ability to transfer freely without sitting out. So a swimmer at Towson always had the ability to transfer to Maryland-College Park without having to sit out a year. Only the major sports was this rule in place. I never knew this until recently. IMO a football player shouldn't be treated any differently than a track & field athlete -- should be same rules across the board.

[lionsrking2]

What's interesting about the transfer rules is that only athletes in specific sports, including football, basketball and hockey, ever had to sit out a year if transferring within division or up a division. Not sure about lax and baseball. But athletes in minor sports always had the ability to transfer freely without sitting out. So a swimmer at Towson always had the ability to transfer to Maryland-College Park without having to sit out a year. Only the major sports was this rule in place. I never knew this until recently. IMO a football player shouldn't be treated any differently than a track & field athlete -- should be same rules across the board.

Everybody on an athletic scholarship should have to sit one.

[Bisonoline]

What's interesting about the transfer rules is that only athletes in specific sports, including football, basketball and hockey, ever had to sit out a year if transferring within division or up a division. Not sure about lax and baseball. But athletes in minor sports always had the ability to transfer freely without sitting out. So a swimmer at Towson always had the ability to transfer to Maryland-College Park without having to sit out a year. Only the major sports was this rule in place. I never knew this until recently. IMO a football player shouldn't be treated any differently than a track & field athlete -- should be same rules across the board.

Yep. It was a way to keep control.

When I was at Iowa (1970) i learned that Iowa admission requirements were stricter than the NCAA. The Big10 considered themselves the academic conference.
You as a freshman werent able to play on the varsity. They didnt allow you to red shirt unless it was for medical reasons.

The last two rules is what allowed the SEC to get a jump on the Big10.

Yep there were some crazy rules out there and the NCAA came up with some doozies.

[DFW HOYA]

When I was at Iowa (1970) i learned that Iowa admission requirements were stricter than the NCAA. The Big10 considered themselves the academic conference. You as a freshman werent able to play on the varsity. They didnt allow you to red shirt unless it was for medical reasons. The last two rules is what allowed the SEC to get a jump on the Big10. Yep there were some crazy rules out there and the NCAA came up with some doozies.

All freshmen were ineligible by the NCAA through the 1971-72 season.

[Libertine]

All freshmen were ineligible by the NCAA through the 1971-72 season.

True. This was actually a minor plot point in the movie We Are Marshall.

[Milktruck74]

True. This was actually a minor plot point in the movie We Are Marshall.

All I can say is "GO XAVIER!!!!!"