Welcome to Thunderdome

Tim Tebow finally got laid!

Jayhawks' Silvio De Sousa suspended indefinitely

Leisher wrote: Jayhawks' Silvio De Sousa suspended indefinitely

Indefinitely = definitely not past the start of the Big 12 or NCAA tournaments

!RmindMe 3/15/2020

TheCatt wrote:

Leisher wrote: Jayhawks' Silvio De Sousa suspended indefinitely

Indefinitely = definitely not past the start of the Big 12 or NCAA tournaments

!RmindMe 3/15/2020

Leisher wrote: Big 12 releases their suspension news.

Surprise!

Leisher wrote: Tim Tebow finally got laid!

So... both our teams hit the Top 5 and then dropped out?

Yep.

I didn't expect much this year, they went out and made me expect a lot, and then disappointed me.

Leisher wrote: Yep.

I didn't expect much this year, they went out and made me expect a lot, and then disappointed me.

Same. Although you still have an NCAA tourney possibility.

TheCatt wrote: Orgeron cashes in

And it's going to be fun watching them shit the bed the next 6 years.

With Burrow and Brady, I highly, highly doubt they will repeat anything near the success they had this year.

The B1G legit fights for student athletes.

Trying to get NCAA to allow one time transfers.

I'm very far removed from all of this, so don't really know. Buy my thoughts are:

Like some point out, it's like creating free agency for the players. Screwing the schools over in some cases. I see some of the bigger/better schools being in favor because it's less likely that players will leave them for competitors. Bigger schools then have the ability to cherry pick players who might be proving themselves on the field at lesser schools. Could some players become spies and play for a rival for a year or two to transfer later and share info? The one year ban made sense to me as it would discourage transfers. The player's commitment should matter and if they break it, there should be a penalty.

On the other hand, they are there for an education. And if they can get a better education at a different school, they should be allowed to.

So I dunno. BUT, since some of the bigger schools are fighting for it, makes me think the first paragraph is more likely. I also always thought it should just be up to the school the player is leaving. If they don't care if they leave, they should be able to play. But if it's going to a competitor, or really hurting the program, they school should be able to impose the ban.

Cakedaddy wrote: Like some point out, it's like creating free agency for the players. Screwing the schools over in some cases.

First, it's not creating free agency. Players only get to transfer once. Second, you know what the counter is to that argument? The current system screws over every player who was lied to during recruiting, who needs to move closer to home, who doesn't fit a system, who has personal issues with teammates or coaches, who signed with a school only to see the coach that recruited him take a different job (Just happened in Texas), and so on.

Cakedaddy wrote: I see some of the bigger/better schools being in favor because it's less likely that players will leave them for competitors.

And yet, bigger schools *cough*Alabama*cough* don't want new transfer rules.

Cakedaddy wrote: Bigger schools then have the ability to cherry pick players who might be proving themselves on the field at lesser schools.

This is a legit point. However, does this con outweigh all the pros for the student athletes? Besides, we're currently in a world where good players are sometimes going to smaller schools just so they have less competition on the field. And again, an outstanding player in one system could disappear in another. Look at the NFL and how big name free agents sometimes fail, while no name free agents switch teams and then shine.

Cakedaddy wrote: Could some players become spies and play for a rival for a year or two to transfer later and share info? The one year ban made sense to me as it would discourage transfers.

This is tin foil hat territory. Although the Carolina Panthers used to sign ex-Steelers for a week before playing the Steelers just to pump them for info. College rosters wouldn't be as fluid though.

Cakedaddy wrote: The player's commitment should matter and if they break it, there should be a penalty.

Again, how about when the coaches lie to the players and/or leave? If the coach or school isn't punished for that stuff, shouldn't the player be allowed an out?

The weird thing is that you can already do this IN EVERY SINGLE SPORT EXCEPT the revenue ones. Why are those special? Because the schools + the NCAA want to control their revenue sports.

Often, we see two big time recruits go to the same big name school, one ends up riding the pine, and then transferring to a smaller school. I would argue that's more prevalent than the other way around. Although, obviously that could change.

It's only a single transfer. So it's not complete free agency over their 4/5 years.

Coaches come and go all the time, why not give players the same freedom?

Nothing prevented me from transferring from UNC after my freshman year, simply because I wasn't an athlete. (I had no plans to transfer at that point, but it was an option). Lots of kids go to JuCo or Community College for 2 years to then finish at a "real" university/college, and can do so freely: Because they are not athletes.

If they dropped out of the athletic program, I'm sure they could transfer as a student any time they want.

I also thought that if there were major changes with the coaching staff, that automatically gave the players a free move option.

Lastly, it says one free move. I assumed the rest would have to be approved or would come with a ban. Not that it limited them to one move.

Cakedaddy wrote: If they dropped out of the athletic program, I'm sure they could transfer as a student any time they want.

This is evil.

Cakedaddy wrote: I also thought that if there were major changes with the coaching staff, that automatically gave the players a free move option.

Nope.

Cakedaddy wrote: Lastly, it says one free move. I assumed the rest would have to be approved or would come with a ban. Not that it limited them to one move.

That second move is essentially going to be impossible, where as the current system makes a first move essentially impossible.

Leisher wrote: This is evil.

It was in response to Catt mentioning that as a student, he could transfer any time he wanted.

Leisher wrote: Nope.

Well, they did after the Sandusky fallout at Penn State.