Transfer Portal Thread

WichitaSooner said:
Lol I guess everything was better in the old days. Maybe we should go back to not letting freshman play, banning the dunk, eliminating the shot clock, etc. It’s been one year of NIL. Let’s wait to see how things evolve and where they settle.
Click to expand...

Ah, ageist jokes. Always a delight.

The current changes are NOTHING like the things you're citing, and it insults our intelligence (and your own) to pretend they are comparable. And I for one expressed some optimism that things will settle down. But these changes are, as they stand for now, vastly more consequential to the culture of college sports than any of the things you mentioned. And it used to be that freshman could play. Then a rule was made that they couldn't, followed by another that allowed them to play again.

There's very little chance that NIL and freedom of transfer will go away like the prohibition against freshmen playing did, but hopefully both will be reined in and better regulated.
 
skyvue said:
Ah, ageist jokes. Always a delight.

The current changes are NOTHING like the things you're citing, and it insults our intelligence (and your own) to pretend they are comparable. And I for one expressed some optimism that things will settle down. But these changes are, as they stand for now, vastly more consequential to the culture of college sports than any of the things you mentioned. And it used to be that freshman could play. Then a rule was made that they couldn't, followed by another that allowed them to play again.

There's very little chance that NIL and freedom of transfer will go away like the prohibition against freshmen playing did, but hopefully both will be reined in and better regulated.
Click to expand...

Not an ageist joke in the slightest. Many people in this thread truly act as if every significant change is bad and that everything was better back in the day when kids had absolutely no freedom and the schools and coaches had all the power. And we just had a poster pine for the days when players had more passion. I’ve heard many coaches in multiple college sports say that today’s athletes aren’t really that different than previous generations. They don’t care any less about winning, they work just as hard, and they arguably have more pressure on them than ever before.

Lots of people on here love the softball team, myself included. Softball and baseball and almost every other sport have always had one free transfer. This stuff is new for football and basketball and I get why people are freaking out. But I also think that when the smoke clears, it won’t be the apocalypse that everyone is predicting.
 
Jimmon said:
Agree completely. I have loved college sports for 50 years and I see it ending. I loved it because the players played because they loved the sport and had passion for it. There was loyalty to the university/team. You might have 2 or 3 transfer out a year. Now, it’s like the pros in that you never know who will be on your team from year to year. I know I’m an old crotchety man but I just don’t like the way intercollegiate athletics is headed.
Click to expand...

Yep...part of the connection with fans was knowing you would be watching someone compete for 3-4+ years and getting to know them (on some level) and watching them grow.
 
WichitaSooner said:
Lol I guess everything was better in the old days. Maybe we should go back to not letting freshman play, banning the dunk, eliminating the shot clock, etc. It’s been one year of NIL. Let’s wait to see how things evolve and where they settle.
Click to expand...

is burning man going on? b/c that's a lot of straw
 
WichitaSooner said:
Not an ageist joke in the slightest. Many people in this thread truly act as if every significant change is bad and that everything was better back in the day when kids had absolutely no freedom and the schools and coaches had all the power. And we just had a poster pine for the days when players had more passion. I’ve heard many coaches in multiple college sports say that today’s athletes aren’t really that different than previous generations. They don’t care any less about winning, they work just as hard, and they arguably have more pressure on them than ever before.

Lots of people on here love the softball team, myself included. Softball and baseball and almost every other sport have always had one free transfer. This stuff is new for football and basketball and I get why people are freaking out. But I also think that when the smoke clears, it won’t be the apocalypse that everyone is predicting.
Click to expand...

More straw!

This has nothing to do with "back in my day"

And just because it happens in one sport doesn't mean it justifies it in another.
I'd be perfectly content with open transfers not happening in any sports
 
First, football and basketball don't have and have never had until now free transfers because they are allotted full scholarships. The non revenue sports are given a few scholarships that wholly inadequate for the number of kids that are required to participate. And in those sports, the schollies are typically divided and apportioned out by percentages (ex. one kid might get 10% schollie and another might get 50%) Thus, since kids are paying for a portion or all of their schooling, they were more freely allowed to transfer, which frequently was for the purpose of getting a higher portion of school paid for, or just to allow and recognize that they should have more movement allowed due to the fact they were paying for their schooling.

In football and basketball, way way way too much money and time is spent recruiting a kid to not have some means by which to encourage them to stick around the first time they get yelled at. Free anytime transfers are insane and will destroy those sports.

If they don't rein in anytime and free transfers in the revenue sports we will lose those sports as we will be unable to justify the multimillion dollar stadiums, bands and coaches those sports have.

I say maybe move the free transfer from after graduating to after 3 years. This would lessen the amount of time a kid has if he is somewhere he doesn't want to be but give some continuity to rosters. You could even allow it after two years, but I would prefer to see it after 3.
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
More straw!

This has nothing to do with "back in my day"

And just because it happens in one sport doesn't mean it justifies it in another.
I'd be perfectly content with open transfers not happening in any sports
Click to expand...

So I can only assume you have worked for the same company your entire life since you opposed freedom of movement? Otherwise, it means you think college kids should be held to higher standards than adults.
 
WichitaSooner said:
So I can only assume you have worked for the same company your entire life since you opposed freedom of movement? Otherwise, it means you think college kids should be held to higher standards than adults.
Click to expand...

lol once again, more straw
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
lol once again, more straw
Click to expand...

Funny how you never actually refute any point I make. Your argument is that kids should not be able to transfer without sitting out. Why? College sports is in every way a huge business, yet you and so many others want the players, who are the ones everyone pays to watch, to be under far more restrictions than coaches, administrators, conferences, etc. How is it a strawman argument for me to question why you think adults should be able to move freely from job to job whenever they see fit, but a teenager who might choose a school and then decide he would like to go elsewhere should be forced to sit out a year?
 
WichitaSooner said:
Funny how you never actually refute any point I make. Your argument is that kids should not be able to transfer without sitting out. Why? College sports is in every way a huge business, yet you and so many others want the players, who are the ones everyone pays to watch, to be under far more restrictions than coaches, administrators, conferences, etc. How is it a strawman argument for me to question why you think adults should be able to move freely from job to job whenever they see fit, but a teenager who might choose a school and then decide he would like to go elsewhere should be forced to sit out a year?
Click to expand...


I'm so sick of the "coaches get to leave whenever they want with no consequences" talking point. it simply isn't true.
If a coach under contract leaves, he is voiding his contract and there are monetary penalties for doing so.

To keep parity and fairness in college sports, it seems that moving from school to school every year should be discouraged and I don't see any issues with requiring a player to sit out a year if he wants to change schools.

And in many instances in the real world, there are consequences for changing jobs. If I leave my job, there would be stipulations put on me for a period of time
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
I'm so sick of the "coaches get to leave whenever they want with no consequences" talking point. it simply isn't true.
If a coach under contract leaves, he is voiding his contract and there are monetary penalties for doing so.

To keep parity and fairness in college sports, it seems that moving from school to school every year should be discouraged and I don't see any issues with requiring a player to sit out a year if he wants to change schools.

And in many instances in the real world, there are consequences for changing jobs. If I leave my job, there would be stipulations put on me for a period of time
Click to expand...

And those financial penalties are almost always paid not by the coach, but by the school hiring him. So the coach himself doesn't actually suffer any consequences.

And as for parity and fairness -- when has that ever actually been the reality? If anything, NIL and transfers may somewhat level the playing field. Why was Saban so bent out of shape a couple months ago? Because he views NIL as a threat, and he used his rant as a way of trying to get Bama boosters to step up their game so they can continue to dominate recruiting every year.

As to your final point, I'd guess that a very small percentage of American workers have noncompete clauses. Most people are free to change jobs as often as they wish. I see nothing wrong with one free transfer.
 
WichitaSooner said:
And those financial penalties are almost always paid not by the coach, but by the school hiring him. So the coach himself doesn't actually suffer any consequences.

And as for parity and fairness -- when has that ever actually been the reality? If anything, NIL and transfers may somewhat level the playing field. Why was Saban so bent out of shape a couple months ago? Because he views NIL as a threat, and he used his rant as a way of trying to get Bama boosters to step up their game so they can continue to dominate recruiting every year.

As to your final point, I'd guess that a very small percentage of American workers have noncompete clauses. Most people are free to change jobs as often as they wish. I see nothing wrong with one free transfer.
Click to expand...

Do you only rely on strawman arguments on OUhoops or do you lean on them in all aspects of your life?
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
Do you only rely on strawman arguments on OUhoops or do you lean on them in all aspects of your life?
Click to expand...

Dude just have an argument. Coaches rarely pay their penalties. I think kids should get a 1 time free transfer then sit out no matter what. I’m not sure how you curb the NIL craziness.
 
SoonerBounce13 said:
Do you only rely on strawman arguments on OUhoops or do you lean on them in all aspects of your life?
Click to expand...

Apparently you don't actually know what that word means. Or should I ask, "do you always just say strawman when you can't refute an argument, or just do that on message boards?"
 
To the extent that a buyout reduces the up front money offered by a school hiring a coach away, you could argue that coaches pay a penalty for leaving. I'm not sure coaches are a good measuring stick for student athletes, though.

I think BC's idea of 1 free transfer is solid. Sometimes schools and coaches do shady things. Players make a school choice at a time in life when one's decision making skills are not the best, usually. There are many reasons why a transfer may be in the best interest of all involved in certain situations. How you stop rampant pay for play at the first 2 schools a player chooses is beyond me, though.
 
Soonerb98 said:
To the extent that a buyout reduces the up front money offered by a school hiring a coach away, you could argue that coaches pay a penalty for leaving. I'm not sure coaches are a good measuring stick for student athletes, though.

I think BC's idea of 1 free transfer is solid. Sometimes schools and coaches do shady things. Players make a school choice at a time in life when one's decision making skills are not the best, usually. There are many reasons why a transfer may be in the best interest of all involved in certain situations. How you stop rampant pay for play at the first 2 schools a player chooses is beyond me, though.
Click to expand...

I also think NIL sponsors will start making multi year contracts
 
Could be someday guys will leave the NBA for college NIL deals
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

StoopsBros
MBB TPT2 TRANSFER PORTAL THREAD 2
137 138 139
Replies
3K
Views
381K
BoulderSooner
BoulderSooner
StoopsBros
MBB Transfer Portal Thread: Moser Year 4
438 439 440
Replies
9K
Views
425K
CoachTalk
CoachTalk
T
Sooners That Left
Replies
16
Views
2K
skyvue
skyvue
T
Where Are They Now: The Transfers
Replies
13
Views
3K
WTSooner
WTSooner
Sooner04
What's Your Standard?
2 3
Replies
43
Views
9K
SoonerBounce13
SoonerBounce13
Back
Top