New Bipartisan Bill to Remove Free Transfer Rule

[CornHub]

Every coach is America is likely hoping this passes.

 

[Baron Winnebago]

Coach Tubs putting his mushroom stamp on the Senate

 

[LoudHogRider]

Every coach is America is likely hoping this passes.

I'm torn. It would suck to have to re-recruit your team each and every year as a corch. And I completely "get" how a kid could get it wrong the first time and need a new place to play.

OTOH, if the corches can leave at the drop of a hat for greener pastures, then the players ought to be able to as well.

 

[CornHub]

I'm torn. It would suck to have to re-recruit your team each and every year as a corch. And I completely "get" how a kid could get it wrong the first time and need a new place to play.

OTOH, if the corches can leave at the drop of a hat for greener pastures, then the players ought to be able to as well.

That free transfer rule would still apply. You would still get a free transfer if you've completed 3 years of school, a family member is diagnosed with a terminal illness, or your coach leaves.

 

[KidsSeeGhosts]

Definitely seems like something Congress should be involved in

 

[Bootleg11]

what a waste of time and taxpayer money

 

[betsch]

what a waste of time and taxpayer money

If only there was some kind of committee that could oversee college athletics and enforce rules 🤔🤔🤔

 

[Carm]

That free transfer rule would still apply. You would still get a free transfer if you've completed 3 years of school, a family member is diagnosed with a terminal illness, or your coach leaves.

Should get it anytime you decide you need to use it. Everyone else in the damn school can transfer whenever they want.

 

[CornHub]

Should get it anytime you decide you need to use it. Everyone else in the damn school can transfer whenever they want.

These athletes aren't regular students. They aren't paying their own way, so I don't understand why we should expect them to have the same freedoms as regular students. They're more than welcome to quit football and pay for school any time they want.

 

[betsch]

Should get it anytime you decide you need to use it. Everyone else in the damn school can transfer whenever they want.

That gets a little dicey. Do we then let schools cut loose anyone at any time then (no guaranteed scholarships)?

 

[Carm]

That gets a little dicey. Do we then let schools cut loose anyone at any time then (no guaranteed scholarships)?

What? I am proposing no change to transfer rules. That's what we have now - one free transfer whatever year you wish to take it, and we have guaranteed scholarships in P5 (but nowhere else). I am not sure I understand your question?

 

[Carm]

These athletes aren't regular students. They aren't paying their own way, so I don't understand why we should expect them to have the same freedoms as regular students. They're more than welcome to quit football and pay for school any time they want.

They are working for their education - what is the difference between labor in kind as payment and paying for it in cash? Universities make a ton of money off their labor.

 

[CornHub]

They are working for their education - what is the difference between labor in kind as payment and paying for it in cash? Universities make a ton of money off their labor.

The school agreed to pay for 4 years of school, should it not be expected that the athletes return the favor with 4 years of work?

 

[Carm]

The school agreed to pay for 4 years of school, should it not be expected that the athletes return the favor with 4 years of work?

No, under the rule the new school assumes the scholarship obligation in a transfer. Coaches break personal service contracts all the time. The only contract a player signs in the NLI, which requires them to agree to play at the school for ONE YEAR in exchange for the financial aid provided by rule. Not 4 years.

 

[CornHub]

No, under the rule the new school assumes the obligation. Coaches break personal service contracts all the time. The only contract a player signs in the NLI, which requires them to agree to play at the school for ONE YEAR in exchange for the financial aid provided by rule. Not 4 years.

I understand that, but I don't think the new proposed rule is unfair in any way. If their coach leaves, they get a free transfer. If there's a family health issue, they get a free transfer. Once they've reached the minimum years it would take to graduate, they can get a free transfer. I think it's more than fair.

 

[Carm]

I understand that, but I don't think the new proposed rule is unfair in any way. If they're coach leaves, they get a free transfer. If there's a family health issue, they get a free transfer. Once they've reached the minimum years it would take to graduate, they can get a free transfer. I think it's more than fair.

The Universities themselves decided the existing transfer rule was the right way to go and put it in place. It wasn't forced on the schools - they had to vote it in. Why is Congress (at least in this bill) trying to override it? BTW, the other bipartisan bill being worked on (the discussion draft was floated last week) doesn't contain this limitation.

It's not "more than fair". Who else in this country is locked into an "employer" like that and told that if they want to change "employers" they can no longer practice their trade? You're basically saying they can either stay and play or give up football as transfers outside the rule are ineligible.

It's all the more important because kids are young and naive when they have to make these initial choices.

 

[CornHub]

The Universities themselves decided on existing transfer rule was the right way to go and put it in place. It wasn't forced on the schools - they had to vote it in. Why is Congress (at least in this bill) trying to override it? BTW, the other bipartisan bill being worked on (the discussion draft was floated last week) doesn't contain this limitation.

It's not "more than fair". Who else in this country is locked into a job like that and told that if they want to change "employers" they can no longer practice their trade?

It's all the more important because kids are young and naive when they have to make these initial choices.

You can't have a league that has become so dependent on money and have your assets able to leave any time they want. I know college football was originally amateurism, but that's not what it is anymore. It's time we stop coddling these guys. We let 18 year old kids decide to join the army for 4 guaranteed years, but we can't let them choose to go to one school to play football for 4 years? That's just hypocritical.

 

[Carm]

You can't have a league that has become so dependent on money and have your assets able to leave any time they want. I know college football was originally amateurism, but that's not what it is anymore. It's time we stop coddling these guys. We let 18 year old kids decide to join the army for 4 guaranteed years, but we can't let them choose to go to one school to play football for 4 years? That's just hypocritical.

actually, there are usually ways to quit the army, but that's not the question.

They are not assets that belong to the university, they are people whose talents belong to them. It isn't coddling to let people move and go work in a new place.

I bet you can quit your place of work and take a new job anytime you want. Are you being "coddled"?

Some coaches may want this rule change, but I haven't heard of any universities that have said they want it. I don't worry about the coaches - they are paid very well to make things work, and the system works to their advantage to some extent because they can encourage low performers to transfer. The vast majority of players who transfer are looking for a place they can play, they aren't cashing in.

 

[CornHub]

actually, there are usually ways to quit the army, but that's not the question.

They are not assets that belong to the university, they are people whose talents belong to them. It isn't coddling to let people move and go work in a new place.

I bet you can quit your place of work and take a new job anytime you want. Are you being "coddled"?

Some coaches may want this rule change, but I haven't heard of any universities that have said they want it. I don't worry about the coaches - they are paid very well to make things work, and the system works to their advantage to some extent because they can encourage low performers to transfer. The vast majority of players who transfer are looking for a place they can play, they aren't cashing in.

You know that every single other professional sport's league has contracts right? You can't decide to not play in the NFL and go play for somebody else that same year without an agreement from your current team. These guys are making money now and it's not for their NIL like it says on paper. They are professionals. And guess what, if these guys quit football, nothing is stopping them from playing intramural football. They can still practice their trade.

 

[Carm]

You know that every single other professional sport's league has contracts right? You can't decide to not play in the NFL and go play for somebody else that same year without an agreement from your current team. These guys are making money now and it's not for their NIL like it says on paper. They are professionals. And guess what, if these guys quit football, nothing is stopping them from playing intramural football. They can still practice their trade.

Lol - yes, they do, because the "professional" sports are all unionized and the unions have collective bargaining agreements with management in which both sides got something in exchange for what they gave up. They give up the mobility to get something in return. Is that what you're advocating for college sports? They could get some money in return for staying 4 years.

I'm telling you, I think coaches really do not want everyone hanging around for three years.