WFE12

Proposal for transfer after coaching change

Recommended Posts

I'm fine with this decision. My only question comes from the matter of which coach has to leave for a player to be able to transfer? Is it only the head coach or can it also be a position coach, even if it's not the position coach of the player in question?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites




On 1/30/2018 at 4:39 PM, Mikey said:

Horrible idea. "Commit to a school, not a coach" has been the mantra since Shug was walking the AU sidelines. Anyone that doesn't do that is at risk from the get-go and the fault is on them. Transfer, sit out a year, think about your mistake and relate your experience to the younger kids in your circle of influence. Where does this stop? At the head coach? His position coach? The water boy? Again, horrible idea.

If the players should commit to the school (for 4 years), then shouldn't the school also commit to the player(for 4 years). 

  • Like 1
  • Facepalm 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, CullmanTiger said:

If the players should commit to the school (for 4 years), then shouldn't the school also commit to the player(for 4 years). 

Last time I checked, Auburn does.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/4/2018 at 11:48 AM, ClaytonAU said:

100% for this. If the player doesn’t we to be there, let them leave. Gives an opportunity to someone else. I don’t buy the “could decimate a program” thing. If the player wants to leave that badly he will regardless. 

I agree with your last statement. 

However, I'm 100% not for the rule change.  I feel like the carnivorous recruiters will feast on highly talented kids at the first hint of smoke in the air that a coach may be fired.  

I used LSU/Les Miles firing/Leonard Fournette as a possible scenario where if the rule was applicable back in 2016, LSU could've easily lost a highly talented, experienced, NFL quality RB to another high profile program (OSU/FSU/CU, etc.)   LSU could've been screwed "if" a player like Fournette was able to play immediately at a championship caliber program.   Would LF chose to play for Urban/Jimbo/Dabo rather than the shrimp boat captain Ed Orgeron for his final year of college ball?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, CullmanTiger said:

If the players should commit to the school (for 4 years), then shouldn't the school also commit to the player(for 4 years). 

AU's been doing that since Chizik's days, in fact he made a public statement about that being an AU policy.  :dunno:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lionheartkc said:

Last time I checked, Auburn does.

Many, many thanks for needed saying! I, for one, have long approved wholeheartedly with this policy, but...

2 hours ago, CullmanTiger said:

If the players should commit to the school (for 4 years), then shouldn't the school also commit to the player(for 4 years). 

...many (here and elsewhere) have looked at a student-athlete's obligation as contractual.

On 1/30/2018 at 4:39 PM, Mikey said:

Horrible idea. "Commit to a school, not a coach" has been the mantra since Shug was walking the AU sidelines. Anyone that doesn't do that is at risk from the get-go and the fault is on them. Transfer, sit out a year, think about your mistake and relate your experience to the younger kids in your circle of influence. Where does this stop? At the head coach? His position coach? The water boy? Again, horrible idea.

Aren't the coach, the program prospects and, indeed, the water boy parts of the school to which a student athlete commits? 

 

 

TBH - I'm not happy with either side of this (narrow?) argument, but I feel (pet peeve) it's rooted in a broader problem. NFL needs to pony up for a farm-team system and/or NCAA needs to quit bending itself into a substitute.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I like that decision. There have been schools like Ohio State, Southern Cal, Alabama, Clemson, Notre Dame, FSU, North Carolina, Texas, Auburn and so many others that the head coaches either left on their on for another job or they got fired and yet the players was stuck and couldn't do anything. The only schools that I remember who got on probation was SMU and Ole Miss and they got the green light from the NCAA to transfer without siiting out a year or lose a year of playing time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, AUld fAUx@ said:

 

Aren't the coach, the program prospects and, indeed, the water boy parts of the school to which a student athlete commits? 

 

 

 

 

 

So you think that if the water boy leaves, any player on the squad can leave too? It's a bad idea. If they want to leave bad enough, they can leave and sit out a year.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Mikey said:

So you think that if the water boy leaves, any player on the squad can leave too? It's a bad idea. If they want to leave bad enough, they can leave and sit out a year.

Clearly he doesn't think that, but the "slippery slope" argument works both ways. At what point does "the school" cease to be what it was when the athlete committed? 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

Clearly he doesn't think that, but the "slippery slope" argument works both ways. At what point does "the school" cease to be what it was when the athlete committed? 

That's the point at which he can move to another school, sit out his year and get on with his life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mikey said:

That's the point at which he can move to another school, sit out his year and get on with his life.

Some of us see no need to punish the player for the sin of the coach and/or AD. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know how I feel about it all except to try and compare the Fantasyland that is college & college athletics to the real world.

Hypothetically, if my boss & mentor leaves the company, I have a choice to make based on life, rules, law... I can take a chance that I'll have to take a pay cut to go elsewhere just cuz I'm pissed, change fields due to my non-compete, etc.  Or I can stick it out and enjoy the benefits that come from the great opportunity that I have that so many others would give their right arm for.  ...again VERY hypothetical HA!

Bottom line is, this is an argument for spoiled people.  Like it or not, coaches are paid professionals who make decisions that are best for them & their families and they are allowed to due to the rules & regulations that govern them. .....well, except for Saban, of course.  He just does what he wants..but THAT'S a different discussion.

The "student-athlete" has rules & regulations that govern their actions too.  They can cry "it ain't fair" all they want but they ALSO have options.  They can flip burgers, they can work at the school bookstore, they can skip education all together and join the real world with the rest of us and try and get a job.  Or they can enjoy the fact that they have a 1 in a million opportunity to do something they (supposedly) love while bettering themselves, getting an education, enjoying the college life while being a coddled athlete and for a TINY percentage of them prepare for the NFL.

They DO have choices.

Edited by AUsince72
  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

Some of us see no need to punish the player for the sin of the coach and/or AD. 

Most things in life are a trade-off. The willy-nilly scrabbled eggs that would result from transfers without a waiting period are a worse idea than a kid having to sit out a year.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Mikey said:

Most things in life are a trade-off. The willy-nilly scrabbled eggs that would result from transfers without a waiting period are a worse idea than a kid having to sit out a year.

Maybe, maybe not. Worth it to at least try for the kids' sake. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, McLoofus said:

Maybe, maybe not. Worth it to at least try for the kids' sake. 

Not when the side effects of  "a try" have such disastrous potential.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Not when the side effects of  "a try" have such disastrous potential.

Agree....lots of potential for unforeseen consequences from something that changes an entire system...just hoping to help a few disgruntled players who have buyer's remorse about their school choices.  

Could loosen the transfer rules and not limit where a guy could go but otherwise, sitting out a year is nothing really....usually the guy is 18 or 19.....and it's not like he's gonna be in jail.  Might be a chance for the guy to spend a little time on the books so he will be more prepared for life when he doesn't make it to the NFL.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see this "proposal" getting clearance from the NCAA.  There would have to be limitations a specific parameters set in place to monitor this from a recruiting/contact standpoint which would add more rules, regulations, and red tape to the already bloated NCAA rule book.

 

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, keesler said:

I don't see this "proposal" getting clearance from the NCAA.  There would have to be limitations a specific parameters set in place to monitor this from a recruiting/contact standpoint which would add more rules, regulations, and red tape to the already bloated NCAA rule book.

 

Yep ...and within a year there would probably have to be another "Saban rule" to offset some quirk in the system that NS or Harbaugh has figured out how to exploit. :)

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Not when the side effects of  "a try" have such disastrous potential.

"We know that coaching changes can and do severely impact the careers/futures of the players, but we're not going to do anything about it because it might have negative consequences for the people making all the money off of the kids. Just let them not play for 20% of their eligibility as punishment for the program that they committed to turning into something completely different." 

4 minutes ago, AU64 said:

Agree....lots of potential for unforeseen consequences from something that changes an entire system...just hoping to help a few disgruntled players who have buyer's remorse about their school choices.  

Wait... so just "a few disgruntled players" are going to ruin college football? Wow. Quite the house of cards if so. 

Quote

Could loosen the transfer rules and not limit where a guy could go but otherwise, sitting out a year is nothing really....usually the guy is 18 or 19.....and it's not like he's gonna be in jail.  Might be a chance for the guy to spend a little time on the books so he will be more prepared for life when he doesn't make it to the NFL.

A year is nothing? When you only get 5 at most to begin with? We're not talking one year of being a 40-something in middle management. These guys have a very small window to determine how the rest of their lives go. One year, or one coach, or one play could be the difference between taking care of your entire family for life or being a bank teller. Ask David Palmer. Or ask Jason Campbell how much of a difference having Al Borges as his coordinator and position coach for one year made in his life.

Y'all are way more willing to obsess over how this might make things a little harder for guys getting paid north of $5 million a year than you are to spend one second thinking about what this already means for the players on whose backs that money is made. I realize nothing I say will change that. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, AU64 said:

Yep ...and within a year there would probably have to be another "Saban rule" to offset some quirk in the system that NS or Harbaugh has figured out how to exploit. :)

+1

Go ahead and add Swinney/Fisher/Meyer/Pruitt/Smart and a half dozen more top shelf recruiters in the country that will push the envelope and find every advantage they can gain to collect talent.  I'm frankly not sure Auburn has the recruiters on our staff that are willing to work in the gray areas with these other guys.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

 

No house of cards....but no need to re-design an entire system for a few a few who don't want to live with the choice they made. ...gonna have a no-fault divorce law for football recruits too?  except no waiting period and no penalty.

As for Jason....that proves the current system is fine.  What if he had transferred to North Alabama or someplace when Borges was hired? ....would never gotten the benefit of Al's coaching?    ....and never made it to the NFL.   

And they are supposed to be college students.....so how bad can it be for them to get another year of paid education at a good school.....you make it sound like a prison sentence instead of the opportunity it should and could be.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

I don't know how I feel about it all except to try and compare the Fantasyland that is college & college athletics to the real world.

Hypothetically, if my boss & mentor leaves the company, I have a choice to make based on life, rules, law... I can take a chance that I'll have to take a pay cut to go elsewhere just cuz I'm pissed, change fields due to my non-compete, etc.  Or I can stick it out and enjoy the benefits that come from the great opportunity that I have that so many others would give their right arm for.  ...again VERY hypothetical HA!

Bottom line is, this is an argument for spoiled people.  Like it or not, coaches are paid professionals who make decisions that are best for them & their families and they are allowed to due to the rules & regulations that govern them. .....well, except for Saban, of course.  He just does what he wants..but THAT'S a different discussion.

The "student-athlete" has rules & regulations that govern their actions too.  They can cry "it ain't fair" all they want but they ALSO have options.  They can flip burgers, they can work at the school bookstore, they can skip education all together and join the real world with the rest of us and try and get a job.  Or they can enjoy the fact that they have a 1 in a million opportunity to do something they (supposedly) love while bettering themselves, getting an education, enjoying the college life while being a coddled athlete and for a TINY percentage of them prepare for the NFL.

They DO have choices.

Rules is rules,

and the proposal has the potential to be another.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, AU64 said:

No house of cards....but no need to re-design an entire system for a few a few who don't want to live with the choice they made. ...gonna have a no-fault divorce law for football recruits too?  except no waiting period and no penalty.

Sometimes you just have to shake your head and laugh. My goodness.

Quote

As for Jason....that proves the current system is fine.  What if he had transferred to North Alabama or someplace when Borges was hired? ....would never gotten the benefit of Al's coaching?    ....and never made it to the NFL.   

Dude. You're better than this. 

Quote

And they are supposed to be college students.....so how bad can it be for them to get another year of paid education at a good school.....you make it sound like a prison sentence instead of the opportunity it should and could be.  

No, I don't make it sound like a prison sentence. That just must be your conscience talking. As for the "they're students" joke- I'm not saying you intended it as a joke, but that it is one- imagine this scenario. What if Auburn's entire engineering faculty just up and left one semester and they brought in another with completely different teaching philosophies and focus? Should the engineering majors now be required to live with their poor decision to attend Auburn, even if there was another school out there with a now-preferable engineering school where they could get a better education that is more in line with what they anticipated getting at Auburn? Or should they have to study English for a year instead? I mean, it's only a year, right? 

Edited by McLoofus
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, AUsince72 said:

I don't know how I feel about it all except to try and compare the Fantasyland that is college & college athletics to the real world.

Hypothetically, if my boss & mentor leaves the company, I have a choice to make based on life, rules, law... I can take a chance that I'll have to take a pay cut to go elsewhere just cuz I'm pissed, change fields due to my non-compete, etc.  Or I can stick it out and enjoy the benefits that come from the great opportunity that I have that so many others would give their right arm for.  ...again VERY hypothetical HA!

Bottom line is, this is an argument for spoiled people.  Like it or not, coaches are paid professionals who make decisions that are best for them & their families and they are allowed to due to the rules & regulations that govern them. .....well, except for Saban, of course.  He just does what he wants..but THAT'S a different discussion.

The "student-athlete" has rules & regulations that govern their actions too.  They can cry "it ain't fair" all they want but they ALSO have options.  They can flip burgers, they can work at the school bookstore, they can skip education all together and join the real world with the rest of us and try and get a job.  Or they can enjoy the fact that they have a 1 in a million opportunity to do something they (supposedly) love while bettering themselves, getting an education, enjoying the college life while being a coddled athlete and for a TINY percentage of them prepare for the NFL.

They DO have choices.

No offense, but this reeks of, quite literally, player hating. It really does read as naked envy of guys who can do things mere mortals can't.

As for crying "it ain't fair", it ain't. That's why the rules should and might change. But, if I'm reading you right, when the rules change you will support the players exercising their right to transfer with impunity after coaching changes- to do what is best for them and their families- in the same way that you support the coaches in exercising theirs. I can get with that. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, AUld fAUx@ said:

Rules is rules,

and the proposal has the potential to be another.

Exactly.

You knew the rules going in, then you made your informed choice.

If the rule changes, then be informed of that as well and adjust accordingly.

..but don't bitch about your poor lot in life as a football player faced with "Oh, I'm *stuck* at Florida and can't go to Ohio State unless I miss a year" when so many of your peers are suffering real issues, like "okay, I can afford my textbook if I only eat ramen noodles for a month and work an extra 15 hrs per week".

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now