Free Agency in College Basketball

[Muskie]

Link (http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/05/26/free-agency-in-college-basketball/)

Bill Self quote from the article, “You applaud anyone that can get their degree early. I am not knocking that at all. You look at it from the big picture. If you are a mid-major and you sit (red-shirt) a guy because it’s best for his life and he graduates after four years, you have to re-recruit him just to get him to come back to your school if he’s any good at all. I think it’s a bad rule…When you get to the point you are potentially recruiting kids off other kids’ campuses, I think it’s a big-time negative situation.”

[drudy23]

said the coach who does it anyway.

[xubrew]

That is a bunch of crap.

There are over 400 players who are transferring. Of the 400, I believe there are 29 who will be able to play right away. Of the 25, I counted just five who are going from mid-major programs to major programs.

The reason the transfer rate is so high is because coaches do not renew scholarships, or because coaches force players out. You could get rid of the rule where players have to sit a year, and the transfer rate would not increase. In fact, it would likely decrease because coaches would be less likely to force a player out who would be able to go wherever they wanted and play right away.

Many who go to graduate school choose to go to a different institution from where they did their undergrad. I don't know the exact figure, but my instinct tells me that it is an overwhelming majority. So, if a player graduates, and wants to pursue a graduate degree (or at least says they want to), and can be accepted into a graduate program, then they should be able to play right away.

I know of many cases where players wanted to stay at their current institution after they graduated, but could not get into a grad program at their current institution. So, their only choice was to transfer. I bet that is the case for at least a few of the 29 who will be able to play right away. (Actually, players do have the option of reenrolling as an undergraduate, but I don't think that's the kind of thing that should be encouraged. Seriously, it would not be good to put a rule in place that restricts a player to staying at the institution they just graduated from and reenrolling as an undergraduate in order to play their final season).

[STL_XUfan]

Link (http://collegebasketballtalk.nbcsports.com/2013/05/26/free-agency-in-college-basketball/)

Bill Self quote from the article, “You applaud anyone that can get their degree early. I am not knocking that at all. You look at it from the big picture. If you are a mid-major and you sit (red-shirt) a guy because it’s best for his life and he graduates after four years, you have to re-recruit him just to get him to come back to your school if he’s any good at all. I think it’s a bad rule…When you get to the point you are potentially recruiting kids off other kids’ campuses, I think it’s a big-time negative situation.”



I am always highly skeptical when someone from one of the largest programs cites protecting the little guy as his motivation. You know he has an ulterior motive, such as his bench players heading for smaller schools their last year.

[danaandvictory]

I am always highly skeptical when someone from one of the largest programs cites protecting the little guy as his motivation. You know he has an ulterior motive, such as his bench players heading for smaller schools their last year.

I'm sure he does but I think his point has some validity. Had X wanted to keep Mark Lyons around last year and basically had to recruit against UK, Arizona, etc. for his services there would have been a hue-and-cry like none other on this board. (And rightly so, perhaps)

[xubrew]

I'm sure he does but I think his point has some validity. Had X wanted to keep Mark Lyons around last year and basically had to recruit against UK, Arizona, etc. for his services there would have been a hue-and-cry like none other on this board. (And rightly so, perhaps)

There is one very big difference between free agents in other sports and the alleged free agency that exists in college basketball.

In other sports, the athletes make seven figure salaries.

The rule is that if a player graduates, they are eligible right away if they enroll in a graduate program that their previous school does not offer. I fail to see how that is unfair to anyone. We're also talking about way less than ten percent of all transfers. If we want to cut the transfer rate down, lets look at why the 90-plus percent of players who transfer who do have to sit out are looking to leave.

[DC Muskie]

I'm sure he does but I think his point has some validity. Had X wanted to keep Mark Lyons around last year and basically had to recruit against UK, Arizona, etc. for his services there would have been a hue-and-cry like none other on this board. (And rightly so, perhaps)

Yeah we don't own the player. Any player can transfer out. If a player chooses to leave the school and we wanted to stay, how is that any different than if he transferred out?

[danaandvictory]

Yeah we don't own the player. Any player can transfer out. If a player chooses to leave the school and we wanted to stay, how is that any different than if he transferred out?

Agreed. All I'm saying is I see why a coach would dislike the rule in that scenario.

The transfer rate is where it is in part because coaches make stupid decisions in recruiting. I honestly think you'd see less examples of guys having their scholarships pulled if the NCAA liberalized the recruiting rules to let coaches make more intelligent assessments of a kid before offering a scholarship. There's always going to be situations where a kid and a coach don't get along, or there is a homesickness issue, or academic problems, or whatever. The only transfers that concern me is when a kid is offered a scholarship, does nothing particularly wrong, and then is told to vacate (aka, gets Creaned.)

[DC Muskie]

Agreed. All I'm saying is I see why a coach would dislike the rule in that scenario.

The transfer rate is where it is in part because coaches make stupid decisions in recruiting. I honestly think you'd see less examples of guys having their scholarships pulled if the NCAA liberalized the recruiting rules to let coaches make more intelligent assessments of a kid before offering a scholarship.

Probably...but coach's seem to be irrational human beings.

[xubrew]

I think the problem is multi-layered. The thickest layer, IMHO (and I think I'm the only one that feels this way, so if you disagree you're not alone) is that coaches force players out far too often. The thinking is that if players have to sit a year, that will deter them from wanting to transfer. The problem is that it does not deter a coach from forcing a player out. If anything, it makes them more prone to do it. In the vast majority of sports, players do not have to sit out a year when they transfer, and the transfer rates are way lower than they are in basketball. If we want the transfer rate to decline, we need to come up with a way to deter coaches from forcing players out, and making players sit a year is not the answer.

Secondly, I think AAU is a showcase of individual talent and skills. It does not demonstrate how well a certain player will fit into a system. So, while the talent is the same, the quality of play isn't necessarily the same, at least when it comes to systems and styles of play. I don't know how to explain this very well, but I'll try. I think coaches have less of an understanding of how a player will fit into their system, and players have less of an understanding of what system/style they are getting into than it was prior to the AAU boom. Therefore, more players and coaches are dissatisfied a year or two into their college careers, and coaches end up wanting to force them out, or players want to leave for something else.

The one year renewable scholarships do not help.

Of all the things that are wrong, the last thing in the world that is problematic is players who transfer after they graduate. To point to that as part of the problem is beyond ridiculous. That is such a self-absorbed position to have on this issue that it just goes to show you how self-absorbed the coaches are. What an utterly ridiculous take.

[LA Muskie]

I think the problem is multi-layered. The thickest layer, IMHO (and I think I'm the only one that feels this way, so if you disagree you're not alone) is that coaches force players out far too often. The thinking is that if players have to sit a year, that will deter them from wanting to transfer. The problem is that it does not deter a coach from forcing a player out. If anything, it makes them more prone to do it. In the vast majority of sports, players do not have to sit out a year when they transfer, and the transfer rates are way lower than they are in basketball If we want the transfer rate to decline, we need to come up with a way to deter coaches from forcing players not, and making players sit a year is not the answer.

Secondly, I think AAU is a showcase of individual talent and skills. It does not demonstrate how well a certain player will fit into a system. So, while the talent is the same, the quality of play isn't necessarily the same, at least when it comes to systems and styles of play. I don't know how to explain this very well, but I'll try. I think coaches have less of an understanding of how a player will fit into their system, and players have less of an understanding of what system/style they are getting into than it was prior to the AAU boom. Therefore, more players and coaches are dissatisfied a year or two into their college careers, and coaches end up wanting to force them out, or players want to leave for something else.

The one year renewable scholarships do not help.

Of all the things that are wrong, the last thing in the world that is problematic is players who transfer after they graduate. To point to that as part of the problem is beyond ridiculous. That is such a self-absorbed position to have on this issue that it just goes to show you how self-absorbed the coaches are. What an utterly ridiculous take.

For whatever it's worth (probably not much, and possibly more harmful than good), you are not alone. I agree with you completely.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Kahns Krazy]

So we are talking about the population of kids who have a degree, are willing to continue going to class to earn the right to play basketball for free vs. playing pro somewhere, and Self thinks that is a problem?


Ugh.

And on the other side, would it benefit Xavier to start a Masters level program that no other school has. Masters level wallet repair or something?

[muskiefan82]

And on the other side, would it benefit Xavier to start a Masters level program that no other school has. Masters level wallet repair or something?

Like a Master's level welding program. That could work.

[RoseyMuskie]

There is one very big difference between free agents in other sports and the alleged free agency that exists in college basketball.

In other sports, the athletes make seven figure salaries.

The rule is that if a player graduates, they are eligible right away if they enroll in a graduate program that their previous school does not offer. I fail to see how that is unfair to anyone. We're also talking about way less than ten percent of all transfers. If we want to cut the transfer rate down, lets look at why the 90-plus percent of players who transfer who do have to sit out are looking to leave.

Generally agree with your points so far in this thread Brew. But let's not be naive about this - players that transfer due to the graduate rule are oftentimes (not all the time) playing the system. Can you honestly say the reason that Mark Lyons transferred to Arizona is because they offered a grad program that Xavier doesn't offer? Xavier has taken advantage of this as well, so I'm not complaining, per say, and the 90%rate is a bigger fish to fry, but there are fundamental flaws with the grad program rule as well. It may be "fair," but it's a fair that's wrong at the same time.

[LA Muskie]

Generally agree with your points so far in this thread Brew. But let's not be naive about this - players that transfer due to the graduate rule are oftentimes (not all the time) playing the system. Can you honestly say the reason that Mark Lyons transferred to Arizona is because they offered a grad program that Xavier doesn't offer? Xavier has taken advantage of this as well, so I'm not complaining, per say, and the 90%rate is a bigger fish to fry, but there are fundamental flaws with the grad program rule as well. It may be "fair," but it's a fair that's wrong at the same time.
The only thing wrong about that scenario is that the rule about wanting to attend a grad program that is not offered at the current school is dumb. For the most part the rule encourages academic success. They should have left it at that.

[xubrew]

Generally agree with your points so far in this thread Brew. But let's not be naive about this - players that transfer due to the graduate rule are oftentimes (not all the time) playing the system. Can you honestly say the reason that Mark Lyons transferred to Arizona is because they offered a grad program that Xavier doesn't offer? Xavier has taken advantage of this as well, so I'm not complaining, per say, and the 90%rate is a bigger fish to fry, but there are fundamental flaws with the grad program rule as well. It may be "fair," but it's a fair that's wrong at the same time.

I'm not saying that players don't work the system. I'm saying that I really don't see it as a problem.

If a regular student graduates there is absolutely nothing that discourages them from applying to any graduate program at any university that they would like to attend. If a player graduates who has eligibility remaining, they suddenly have a very big restriction put on them. They should not be discouraged from applying to whatever grad program they want to apply to at whatever university they want to be at. At the end of the day, saying that they are just working the system is a supposition, and it's not fair to take that option away because you are merely supposing that's what they want.

In the case of Mark Lyons, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that no graduate program at Xavier would accept him. I don't know what his GPA was, but it would not shock me if it did not meet the minimum requirements for any of Xavier's grad programs. I don't know if that's the case or not, but it could be that he couldn't have stayed even if he had wanted to, unless he started over as an undergrad.

And still, we're talking about thirty cases (if that) from what will likely end up being 450 players who transfer.

[Kahns Krazy]

In the case of Mark Lyons, I wouldn't be at all surprised to learn that no graduate program at Xavier would accept him. I don't know what his GPA was, but it would not shock me if it did not meet the minimum requirements for any of Xavier's grad programs. I don't know if that's the case or not, but it could be that he couldn't have stayed even if he had wanted to, unless he started over as an undergrad.
.

I am quite certain that if he was a member of the basketball team in good standing and wanted to enroll in the graduate program, he would be welcome with open arms. In fact, I would be surprised if anyone with a Xavier undergrad degree is denied acceptance into the graduate program. What would that say about the value of a degree from Xavier if it leaves you unqualified to attend Xavier for further education?

[MHettel]

I've believed for some time that they should modify the transfer rules to allow certain players to become immediately eligible. The details would have be be sorted out, but broadly these few criteria would need to be met, then then "package" would be submitted to the NCAA for approval. The package would be submitted AFTER the decision to transfer is made (i.e. cant submit the package and then decide to NOT transfer because you didnt get the immediate eligibility).

Criteria

1. Applies only to a first transfer for a player which started their NCAA elibility with a D1 team. No Jucos, no 2nd transfers.

2. Would not apply to the year a player was medically redshirted for the whole year.

3. Would not apply to the year a player was redshirted for purposes of developing (i.e. Derrick Brown).

4. Would not apply to the year a player was an academic non-qualifyer (i.e. Jalen Reynolds)

5. Player must not have exceeded certain minutes per game criteria with the first team. This would be a matter of actual minutes played in games where the player was healthy and eligible against the total minutes available. Sliding scale: 1st Year Players would have to have played less than 5% of total minutes that they were available (2 minutes per available game). 2nd year players would be at 10% (4 min). 3rd year players at less than 20% (8 min).

6. A player can move DOWN or lateral. They cannot move up. There would need to be some kind of tiering system that places all teams across a small group of tiers 5-7 tiers max, which are very selective at the "ends" of the tiers. i.e. top 5% of programs in Tier 1, next 10% in tier 2, next 15% in Tier 3, next tier is middle 40%, then 15%, 10%, 5% to round out the bottom tiers. This would be controversial and subject to opinion, but would eliminate the possibility that a kid is just moving to a better team. 2 examples on how this would work; Brian Walsh would be able to transfer to Akron and be immediately eligible, since they would be a lower tier than XU. But, Walsh could NOT transfer to Duke (and be immediately eligible), since they would be a higher tier.

7. Coach from school the player is leaving "signs off" on teh transfer. Gotta make sure of this step.


What this entire arrangement does is keep a kid from having to sit out a year because they accepted a scholly at a place where they were never good enough to play.

[xubrew]

I am quite certain that if he was a member of the basketball team in good standing and wanted to enroll in the graduate program, he would be welcome with open arms. In fact, I would be surprised if anyone with a Xavier undergrad degree is denied acceptance into the graduate program. What would that say about the value of a degree from Xavier if it leaves you unqualified to attend Xavier for further education?

I'm not going to go through all of them, but the three Xavier grad programs I looked at required an undergraduate GPA of 3.0 (one actually required a 3.2), and a certain score on the GRE.

Maybe there are some that don't. There probably are. But not all of them. I'd venture to say it's not even most of them.

As far as what it says about the quality of Xavier's education, I don't think it's something that too many people really pay attention to. If anything, it says the Xavier graduate programs are unwilling to accept students with sub par GPAs and who have no intention of actually completing the program.

Does Xavier offer a master's in criminal justice?? That one tends to be a little less selective. Other than that, most graduate programs have minimal standards, even for students who graduated from the same university they are applying to. Most graduate program directors I know wouldn't be too excited about taking someone who they knew did not want to finish, even if it was an athlete. Just saying.

Full disclosure, I don't know if this had anything to do with Lyons or not. Maybe it didn't. I do know of situations where it has happened to players before. None of the grad programs would accept them.

[XUFan09]

I've believed for some time that they should modify the transfer rules to allow certain players to become immediately eligible. The details would have be be sorted out, but broadly these few criteria would need to be met, then then "package" would be submitted to the NCAA for approval. The package would be submitted AFTER the decision to transfer is made (i.e. cant submit the package and then decide to NOT transfer because you didnt get the immediate eligibility).

Criteria

1. Applies only to a first transfer for a player which started their NCAA elibility with a D1 team. No Jucos, no 2nd transfers.

2. Would not apply to the year a player was medically redshirted for the whole year.

3. Would not apply to the year a player was redshirted for purposes of developing (i.e. Derrick Brown).

4. Would not apply to the year a player was an academic non-qualifyer (i.e. Jalen Reynolds)

5. Player must not have exceeded certain minutes per game criteria with the first team. This would be a matter of actual minutes played in games where the player was healthy and eligible against the total minutes available. Sliding scale: 1st Year Players would have to have played less than 5% of total minutes that they were available (2 minutes per available game). 2nd year players would be at 10% (4 min). 3rd year players at less than 20% (8 min).

6. A player can move DOWN or lateral. They cannot move up. There would need to be some kind of tiering system that places all teams across a small group of tiers 5-7 tiers max, which are very selective at the "ends" of the tiers. i.e. top 5% of programs in Tier 1, next 10% in tier 2, next 15% in Tier 3, next tier is middle 40%, then 15%, 10%, 5% to round out the bottom tiers. This would be controversial and subject to opinion, but would eliminate the possibility that a kid is just moving to a better team. 2 examples on how this would work; Brian Walsh would be able to transfer to Akron and be immediately eligible, since they would be a lower tier than XU. But, Walsh could NOT transfer to Duke (and be immediately eligible), since they would be a higher tier.

7. Coach from school the player is leaving "signs off" on teh transfer. Gotta make sure of this step.


What this entire arrangement does is keep a kid from having to sit out a year because they accepted a scholly at a place where they were never good enough to play.

Take off 5, 6, and 7, and I'm with you, so overall I guess I'm not lol.

5. If you were to set maximum minutes, I think the percentages you have are too low. A player can play more minutes per game than that without having much hope of serious minutes in future season(s). He also could be playing decent reserve minutes but be unable to move beyond that role at a program (i.e. Remy Abell). The rest of my disagreement I'll detail with #6, as you only devised #5 as a rule because of #6.

6. I don't think a player should be barred from immediate eligibility for wanting to move to better competition. Coaches' evaluations of these players out of high school is often inconsistent, so just as some players get recruited for a higher level than their ability, other people get recruited for a lower level than their potential. It would be wrong to punish a player for wanting to play at the competition that matches his play, regardless if he's moving up or down.

7. Coaches are generally accepting of transfers, even when they don't like it, and most would sign off on a transfer, but I don't think coaches should have this power, due to the exceptions to that rule. Coaches can be just as human and thus just as petty and capricious as the next person. You can hardly trust them sometimes to make a balanced, just decision.

[xubrew]

Why don't we just do what the sports with the lowest transfer rates do??

[Kahns Krazy]

I'm not going to go through all of them, but the three Xavier grad programs I looked at required an undergraduate GPA of 3.0 (one actually required a 3.2), and a certain score on the GRE.

Maybe there are some that don't. There probably are. But not all of them. I'd venture to say it's not even most of them.

As far as what it says about the quality of Xavier's education, I don't think it's something that too many people really pay attention to. If anything, it says the Xavier graduate programs are unwilling to accept students with sub par GPAs and who have no intention of actually completing the program.
.

I was thinking more of the MBA program. The stated minimums are:
The minimum undergraduate GPA necessary for admission is a 2.5/4.0. On average, undergraduate GPAs of 3.0/4.0 are seen for applicants. If a student has a low undergraduate GPA they are still eligible to apply to the program. Letters of recommendation are especially encouraged for applicants with low undergraduate GPAs.


So they have a minimum, but you are still eligible to apply if you are below it. I would imagine that a player in good standing (i.e. not Lyons) could get some pretty nice rec letters. Also, none of this really applies to Lyons since he could have chosen another major and stayed undergrad, I believe.


What situations do you know of that players were denied acceptance into grad programs?

[xubrew]

I was thinking more of the MBA program. The stated minimums are:

So they have a minimum, but you are still eligible to apply if you are below it. I would imagine that a player in good standing (i.e. not Lyons) could get some pretty nice rec letters. Also, none of this really applies to Lyons since he could have chosen another major and stayed undergrad, I believe.


What situations do you know of that players were denied acceptance into grad programs?

I like eating, so I can't answer that with a specific. I will say that I know of no such incidents at Xavier. I just know that it has happened elsewhere, and it wouldn't surprise me if that's what happened with Lyons. I don't know that it did, though.

And yes, he could have started over as an undergrad at Xavier and been eligible.