ADVERTISEMENT

Transfer Portal

SFspidur said:
That's basically what the rules are right now. They've just been very lenient with the waivers for "BUT" situations during COVID chaos. Supposedly they're tightening up on that, but it remains to be seen.

A blanket policy to allow multiple undergrad transfers without sitting out was considered last summer but not enacted. They're continuing to study the issue.
Click to expand...
Guys will find a way around the rules - mental health is one of them. Get a waiver for Mental Health - which I am all for it, when needed - but that is being abused.

Another option is contracts. Sign players to scholarship contracts over 1 year. Get a kid out of HS, tell him - I would like to sign you for 3 years. If you play well and after 3 years - we can renew or you can look elsewhere. If kid leaves before end of contract - must sit out unless school releases. If school wants to release kid - they have to pay penalty directly to the kid. Could get messy - and this makes it more professional than NIL. But an option as I know 1 year scholarships have been an issue as well
 
  • Like
Reactions: regatw
brooklyn brownstone said:
yeah will be interesting to see if NCAA institutes some sort of cap on NIL at some point.

Agree with spiderman, this is not what I had thought it would be and I'm a supporter of paying the players because of the vast revenue they bring in.
Click to expand...
We all knew it would be an auction for each kid from now on, whether they are in HS or already in college. We are losing kids to Bowling Green and Southern Illinois. If the kid gets no bids, then that tells you all you need to know about their talent. The NCAA will have to go to a draft next to get things even again. Looks like we will be first up in the draft next year.
 
Seeing some rumors that Temple is getting a commitment today....really hoping its not Langford.

EDIT: Think it might actually be Steve Settle, since he was down to Temple and GW.
 
Ok this seems like a great target... A 4-star kid out of HS and top-100 recruit. Get this Dunn and the off-season seems much better.
 
Follow Kansas basketball closely and appears Self might be biting off more than he can chew in getting the best available transfers for probably only one year. This year actually he got the #1 in Dickinson.

Big man Zuby Ejiofor transferred couple ago. Here's his mentor discussing it ......
“Yes sir, 100%,” Andy Philachack, Ejiofor’s mentor, told The Star on Friday, when asked if the commitment of 7-foot-1 Michigan standout Dickinson led directly to Ejiofor’s decision to leave KU after one season.

Of the portal leading to a lot of roster turnover throughout college basketball, Philachack said: “I am shocked. The old days of the Ochai’s (Agbaji) and J-Will’s (Jalen Wilson), four years of keeping a player are done. This is a new era. You will get new players every year. Kansas, Kentucky, Duke, Villanova will get the best every year. My opinion is mid-major schools will be a G League for the high majors.

So Self left with now Dickinson and backup sophomore big Ernest Udeh. Not so on Friday. Now he also transfers out leaving him with only Dickinson and of KJ Adams who played the 5 last season but at 6'7" Self was looking to get bigger at the 5. Both these guy were probably 3-4 years program players who didn't show much but were along the lines of David McCoermick who didn't get time first two years but we see what did last two years.

Point is Ejiofo's mentor is saying the same as others here have already mentioned earlier. Some of those who have gone to P6 schools aren't guaranteed to get the same playing time and possibly be bench warmers? So just assuming money (probably not lots to us) is going their way?

KU of course always got the best out of high school but weren't like a few top schools that got the one and done kids for the most part. Self might have put himself into that position. Consider they had 8 players transfer out but these last two bigs weren't expected. Ejiofor and Udeh playing it smart that there could be another Dickinson that comes aboard next season or even the year after that? Honestly I didn't think Dickinson was needed but greedy Self went in that direction. I can tell you from their limited time both of them are athletic big time rim protectors above the level of Dickinson.

This is why agree with BB about a cap being put in place. Issue is how do they do it with transparency? You don't want a player list of what every player is receiving? More stuff that the NCAA has to oversee which I don't trust them doing efficiently. Probably just cheating by the big time schools continuing. BB, great thought but I don't think anybody in power cares about the mid-major and below schools. And who knows but the cap number might be so high that mids won't be able to compete fairly.
brooklyn brownstone said:
yeah will be interesting to see if NCAA institutes some sort of cap on NIL at some point.

Agree with spiderman, this is not what I had thought it would be and I'm a supporter of paying the players because of the vast revenue they bring in.
Click to expand...
 
a cap on NIL makes no sense. NIL doesn't just come from a school's boosters. athletes with millions of followers (like the Cavinder twins) are getting paid to promote products on social media. you can't limit that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpiderDad75 and Zeeter
How is it that you're allowed to play in a professional league in another country but still have eligibility as an amateur here? I know Solly was in the same boat, I just don't quite understand that. Are they not getting paid over there?
 
Eight Legger said:
How is it that you're allowed to play in a professional league in another country but still have eligibility as an amateur here? I know Solly was in the same boat, I just don't quite understand that. Are they not getting paid over there?
Click to expand...
I believe in the exact same boat. Same league which VCU said was not very good then but better than the NBA now. ;)

Not sure how it coordinates with the NCAA, but there seem to be multiple teams with each organization, maybe the age limited teams stay eligible?
 
Last edited:
spider23 said:
Do we know anything new about Langford situation? Any eta on a decision? Any news on visits, etc?
Click to expand...
Can't find anything since the 336edits tweet about visits to UR & Temple. If those two visits DID happen, clearly neither of them were successful enough to land a quick commitment. No idea where things stand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: spider23
Or how about tying back some of this NIL money to student performance in the classroom - especially if the NCAA truly believes these kids are student-athletes?

I think current eligibility rules to play just make it that you must pass 1 class each semester to be eligible to play, and usually by 2nd semester, you can stop going to class if you know your going PRO because season will be over mid-way through the year.

But why not make it a little more stringent if the kids want NIL money - you have to carry certain GPA and maybe pass 3 classes each semester - 1st and 2nd of the year. If you don't do so - you must forfeit the money received to the NCAA, who could then put this money in a centralized pot, and give to lower level schools to use at their discretion for NIL money or just to support their athletic programs.

So if you sign with Kansas, get 1 million NIL deal. Then for that entire school year, you must pass 3 classes in each semester and maybe carry a 2.5 GPA or higher. If you don't do so - that 1 million goes to the NCAA who can redistribute to lower level athletic programs. So if your a kid who takes this money - there are strings attached. And if you know your going pro and don't care about the money, then don't go to class. Pay the 1 million back when you get your pro contract or have your paychecks docked for the next several years. OR - go to class and don't need to forfeit.

I know this would never happen - but if they truly are student-athletes - why not add in a student part to it.
 
8legs1dream said:
so is Langford the most critical target left for us? Admittedly, it is rather difficult keeping track of all this transfer business.
Click to expand...

Yes, Langford is the most critical target left that we know about, since he's the only one we know visited us. There's always a chance we are involved with other players who aren't publicy sharing information about their recruitment (like Jordan King), but only the coaching staff & players know who those guys are unless we land them.

Below is a look at the 9 remaining uncommitted players who have publicy mentioned we "expressed interest" in them. Of these 9, I think we have a chance of landing Langford, Murray, Hunt, or Barnes. I don't think Gulley interest was ever real, Tarke visited Bona & Longwood and nothing since then, Pal got a SDSU visit, and Dunn is a former top recruit who should be able to land at another high major.

Uncommitted-5-15-23.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: SFspidur and 8legs1dream
spider23 said:
Beat goes on
View embedded media
Click to expand...
So, in about 6 weeks, Odom has brought in 7 players and now VCU has as many rostered players as we do. We've brought in 1 player in the same time. And we would literally kill for almost any of those players to be coming to UR. Just embarrassing and humbling. What are we even doing to fill our open positions?
 
  • Like
  • Sad
Reactions: Not-A-Homer, Spiders4ever and 8legs1dream
SpiderTrap said:
Or how about tying back some of this NIL money to student performance in the classroom - especially if the NCAA truly believes these kids are student-athletes?

I think current eligibility rules to play just make it that you must pass 1 class each semester to be eligible to play, and usually by 2nd semester, you can stop going to class if you know your going PRO because season will be over mid-way through the year.

But why not make it a little more stringent if the kids want NIL money - you have to carry certain GPA and maybe pass 3 classes each semester - 1st and 2nd of the year. If you don't do so - you must forfeit the money received to the NCAA, who could then put this money in a centralized pot, and give to lower level schools to use at their discretion for NIL money or just to support their athletic programs.

So if you sign with Kansas, get 1 million NIL deal. Then for that entire school year, you must pass 3 classes in each semester and maybe carry a 2.5 GPA or higher. If you don't do so - that 1 million goes to the NCAA who can redistribute to lower level athletic programs. So if your a kid who takes this money - there are strings attached. And if you know your going pro and don't care about the money, then don't go to class. Pay the 1 million back when you get your pro contract or have your paychecks docked for the next several years. OR - go to class and don't need to forfeit.

I know this would never happen - but if they truly are student-athletes - why not add in a student part to it.
Click to expand...
why the heck should the NCAA get that money when the market deemed the player was worth it???
the whole point of NIL (and every other recent change like not sitting out a year for a transfer) is to swing the pendulem in favor of the athlete and away from the school.
you're looking to take something away from the athlete.
 
I would like some marketing type to explain the value of a college athlete to promote a product/service. I think the typical NIL deal is not going to be the big money that everyone seems to associate with the concept. The best college athletes may only play for 1-2 years, so you can’t even establish much of a “brand” in that short a period of time to me. The money isn’t coming from the school or its ticket sales, so it is not related to that income stream. Plus, even if there was big money available, I doubt one is talking about being able to support 1 or maybe 2 players.

The reason for all these transfers is simply that there is no requirement to sit out. Players are moving because their coach left, to chase more playing time, or to “move up” to a higher league in hopes of getting NBA exposure. So to me it isn’t NIL that is holding UR back. It is the school profile (academic focus), coach/style of play, and to a lesser degree the conference.
 
RichmondNative said:
I would like some marketing type to explain the value of a college athlete to promote a product/service. I think the typical NIL deal is not going to be the big money that everyone seems to associate with the concept. The best college athletes may only play for 1-2 years, so you can’t even establish much of a “brand” in that short a period of time to me. The money isn’t coming from the school or its ticket sales, so it is not related to that income stream. Plus, even if there was big money available, I doubt one is talking about being able to support 1 or maybe 2 players.

The reason for all these transfers is simply that there is no requirement to sit out. Players are moving because their coach left, to chase more playing time, or to “move up” to a higher league in hopes of getting NBA exposure. So to me it isn’t NIL that is holding UR back. It is the school profile (academic focus), coach/style of play, and to a lesser degree the conference.
Click to expand...
You have never seen an athlete in a commercial?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Zeeter
As spiderman said somewhere previously, this isn't really a NIL deal that is paying kids to advertise some product or service – it's just free agency. Is there even a requirement that the pay be tied to promotion of a product or service? I don't think so, and I suppose it doesn't really matter anyway, because some wealthy donor could always find something for a kid to advertise if it was required. But to me, they either need to find a way to make it a truer marketing opportunity or else just call it free agency.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8legs1dream
Bronny James has something like 7 million followers on instagram. he's getting paid a ton to endorse things to that "market" on his social platform. that's what I was fine with in NIL money. he should be able to capitalize on that, and with no cap. before NIL was legal, he couldn't accept that money and still play college ball. I didn't foresee boosters just throwing money at kids to win more.

to RichmondNative's point, it doesn't have to be "big money". if we're recruiting the same kid as Tulsa but they put together $10k and we don't, a lot of kids will choose that $10k.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eight Legger
spiderman said:
why the heck should the NCAA get that money when the market deemed the player was worth it???
the whole point of NIL (and every other recent change like not sitting out a year for a transfer) is to swing the pendulem in favor of the athlete and away from the school.
you're looking to take something away from the athlete.
Click to expand...
That would be the argument made by the athletes and the boosters. But the NCAA should respond -we are not taking anything away from the student-athlete. They are still entitled to that $1 million NIL deal, all we ask in return is that they go to class and pass a few of them. If they don't - then that money goes to the NCAA. If they do - they get to keep every penny. And remember - its student first, then athlete, then NIL.
 
SpiderTrap said:
That would be the argument made by the athletes and the boosters. But the NCAA should respond -we are not taking anything away from the student-athlete. They are still entitled to that $1 million NIL deal, all we ask in return is that they go to class and pass a few of them. If they don't - then that money goes to the NCAA. If they do - they get to keep every penny. And remember - its student first, then athlete, then NIL.
Click to expand...
if the NCAA was paying them that $1 million, then sure they could take it back if the kid doesn't get grades.
but they aren't. the NCAA just reaps the financial benefits of the athlete at the gate and in TV revenue. $$$
 
Trap, it seems you're tying together two things that are not related. It's like saying your employer you don't get your paycheck from your office job because you didn't mow your lawn. NIL has nothing at all to do with the student/athlete part of a kid's life. To me it's entirely separate - as if they have a side business that is separately earning them money. But as sman said, the proposal that it was going to be from natural earning sources was my expectation, and not a fund that boosters put together to basically pay guys to transfer (similar to no-show jobs of the past, I suppose.)

As for why the NCAA couldn't regulate it, well once it's been passed, it seems harder to do unless there is some kind of luxury tax type thing they can institute like in baseball. But they successfully prevented athletes from being paid for decades so there is at least some precedent for the ncaa being involved.

I clearly was naive on the whole situation, especially with it coinciding with the free for all of the transfer/sit out ending at basically the same time.

Question for those who may know: are the D-1 roster holes so significant because a number of players from teams are transferring out of D-1? You'd think it would be a roughly zero sum game, but unless there are fewer HS recruits being signed, it seems disproportionate.
 
brooklyn brownstone said:
Trap, it seems you're tying together two things that are not related. It's like saying your employer you don't get your paycheck from your office job because you didn't mow your lawn. NIL has nothing at all to do with the student/athlete part of a kid's life. To me it's entirely separate - as if they have a side business that is separately earning them money. But as sman said, the proposal that it was going to be from natural earning sources was my expectation, and not a fund that boosters put together to basically pay guys to transfer (similar to no-show jobs of the past, I suppose.)

As for why the NCAA couldn't regulate it, well once it's been passed, it seems harder to do unless there is some kind of luxury tax type thing they can institute like in baseball. But they successfully prevented athletes from being paid for decades so there is at least some precedent for the ncaa being involved.

I clearly was naive on the whole situation, especially with it coinciding with the free for all of the transfer/sit out ending at basically the same time.

Question for those who may know: are the D-1 roster holes so significant because a number of players from teams are transferring out of D-1? You'd think it would be a roughly zero sum game, but unless there are fewer HS recruits being signed, it seems disproportionate.
Click to expand...
Yes, you have to wonder, how this effects high school recruits as coaches look more and more to fill rosters via established college talent. It should be a zero sum game but I think coaches may see the portal as a better option than high school recruiting and look to fill their rosters there and some of them are going to end up on the wrong end of a math equation.

Case in point, our situation. We lost one of our high school recruits, lost 3 players to the portal and only got 1 back, so we are a -3 right now. For the good coaches and good program, they are always going to end up in a good spot, programs like ours, are the ones who might end up with the empty chair at the end of the dance.
 
brooklyn brownstone said:
You'd think it would be a roughly zero sum game, but unless there are fewer HS recruits being signed, it seems disproportionate.
Click to expand...
I think it's roughly a zero sum game. the remaining roster holes are due to so many kids not making decisions yet. I'd want to lock up my spot quickly, but kids seem to be taking their time. of the 1,749 kids who entered the portal per verbalcommits, 897 have committed so far.
 
spiderman said:
I think it's roughly a zero sum game. the remaining roster holes are due to so many kids not making decisions yet. I'd want to lock up my spot quickly, but kids seem to be taking their time. of the 1,749 kids who entered the portal per verbalcommits, 897 have committed so far.
Click to expand...
a lot of them aren't going to find a place in D1 at least
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back