Big 10 Changes Transfer rule in Badger Basketball Board Forum

RSS
Email

0 Points

Big 10 Changes Transfer rule

Author	Comment
good4buck	Big 10 Changes Transfer rule		Lead	[-]
Posts: 4536 April 19, 2012 3:47 PM	Remove this ad transfer player can get aid but must sit out a year/lose yr of eligibility. Please discuss. http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/58173/big-ten-makes-changes-to-transfer-rule
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Eric the Red		#1	[url]	[-]
Posts: 8834 April 19, 2012 3:55 PM	I like this rule ALOT more because basically the only thing that players care about is getting on the floor. Nobody will ever transfer within the Big 10 because they won't want to lose the year. It essentially still blocks them, but takes out all the bullshit "I'm just a student who wants to learn." arguments. Great rule. Follow me on Twitter.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
GVBadger		#2	[url]	[-]
Posts: 2320 April 19, 2012 3:59 PM	I still think guys will do it. I am not sure they just didn't make it worse. The Gophers, with a few occasional hiccups, were truly dominant basically from their inception all the way through the end of Bierman's first tenure (1941). Other than the 1961 and 1967 seasons, they've been more or less the same every year since 1941 - mediocre-to-poor. Since 1967, the Gophers have finished 3rd in the Big Ten three times. Of course, they've never finished 1st or 2nd in that time frame.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Eric the Red		#3	[url]	[-]
Posts: 8834 April 19, 2012 4:01 PM	GVBadger wrote: I still think guys will do it. I am not sure they just didn't make it worse. You don't understand how selfish scholarship basketball players are. Nobody is going to choose 2 years at Iowa over 3 at Iowa State. Follow me on Twitter.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
blockski		#4	[url]	[-]
Posts: 9538 April 19, 2012 4:03 PM	GVBadger wrote: I still think guys will do it. I am not sure they just didn't make it worse. Of course, a school can still block a player if they so choose.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
BoxcarHenry		#5	[url]	[-]
Posts: 3668 April 19, 2012 4:03 PM Jimmy Rabbitte	So, is this another victory for Twitter?
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
SaundersBucky		#6	[url]	[-]
Posts: 16940 April 19, 2012 4:04 PM Buckyville's Fiscal Cliff	They don't fuck around in Indianapolis.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Big E Sports		#7	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1858 April 19, 2012 4:14 PM	BoxcarHenry wrote: So, is this another victory for Twitter? Yup. The system works. "Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless and do no wrong. That is your oath." For winners in football, college hoops and MLB, check out nellysports.com and look for the The Big E!
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
dewey35		#8	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1500 April 19, 2012 4:16 PM	Is the lost year only applicable with the Big Ten? I will use Uthoff as an example. If he transferred to Iowa he'd sit out a year and then play two. By Big Ten rules, he is done. By NCAA rules if he graduated, wouldn't he still have another year of eligibility at a non-big 10 school that he could use under the grad-school rule?
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
SaundersBucky		#9	[url]	[-]
Posts: 16940 April 19, 2012 4:17 PM Buckyville's Fiscal Cliff	Remove this ad dewey35 wrote: Is the lost year only applicable with the Big Ten? I will use Uthoff as an example. If he transferred to Iowa he'd sit out a year and then play two. By Big Ten rules, he is done. By NCAA rules if he graduated, wouldn't he still have another year of eligibility at a non-big 10 school that he could use under the grad-school rule? Probably, at a non-Big Ten school, but I'm betting that loophole might be gone by the time he reaches that age.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
dewey35		#10	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1500 April 19, 2012 4:23 PM	SaundersBucky wrote: dewey35 wrote: Is the lost year only applicable with the Big Ten? I will use Uthoff as an example. If he transferred to Iowa he'd sit out a year and then play two. By Big Ten rules, he is done. By NCAA rules if he graduated, wouldn't he still have another year of eligibility at a non-big 10 school that he could use under the grad-school rule? Probably, at a non-Big Ten school, but I'm betting that loophole might be gone by the time he reaches that age. That's what I think it will be. I like the grad rule so I hope they don't close the loophole.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
ryebadger		#11	[url]	[-]
Posts: 5129 April 19, 2012 4:25 PM	Eric the Red wrote: I like this rule ALOT more because basically the only thing that players care about is getting on the floor. Nobody will ever transfer within the Big 10 because they won't want to lose the year. It essentially still blocks them, but takes out all the bullshit "I'm just a student who wants to learn." arguments. Great rule. I agree. It makes it less punitive for the "student athlete" who truly wants to be somewhere while still weeding out the kid who wants to go somewhere for other reasons. Don't even think it will result in more transferring, for the reasons you mentioned . As always, this post is written with the express proviso that I am not a chicken little. The sky is not falling. My office window does not have a ledge. I'm happy we won. I heard some ranked teams even lost. I'm glad we are not Virginia Tech. I like our coach. I know these are 19 year old kids. The season is young. Mistakes will get cleaned up. Fowler said even Alabama threw an interception once. The other guys are on scholarship, too. After living through the Don morton era, I'm just glad to be here.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Slimm21		#12	[url]	[-]
Posts: 12769 April 19, 2012 5:21 PM I've paid for bottle service	You don't understand how selfish scholarship basketball players are. Nobody is going to choose 2 years at Iowa over 3 at Iowa State. This is 1000% percent correct. It's why kids will go play at a lesser school so they can play minutes. It is why what Schowalter is doing is the exception and not the rule. And who can blame them?!? If you spent your whole life playing basketball, would you rather ride the pine on a great team or play 35 minutes a game on an average team?
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Big E Sports		#13	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1858 April 19, 2012 5:38 PM	Slimm21 wrote: You don't understand how selfish scholarship basketball players are. Nobody is going to choose 2 years at Iowa over 3 at Iowa State. This is 1000% percent correct. It's why kids will go play at a lesser school so they can play minutes. It is why what Schowalter is doing is the exception and not the rule. And who can blame them?!? If you spent your whole life playing basketball, would you rather ride the pine on a great team or play 35 minutes a game on an average team? There is a Tokoto joke in there somewhere. "Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless and do no wrong. That is your oath." For winners in football, college hoops and MLB, check out nellysports.com and look for the The Big E!
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
BuckSixty		#14	[url]	[-]
Posts: 8727 April 19, 2012 6:18 PM Ambassador	dewey35 wrote: Is the lost year only applicable with the Big Ten? I will use Uthoff as an example. If he transferred to Iowa he'd sit out a year and then play two. That's not the way I read it. In Uthoff's case, it doesn't look like the Big Ten rule will have any impact. He has to sit out a year anyway due to NCAA rules, and because he burned his redshirt already, that would cause him to lose a year of eligibility. The Big Ten rule appears to only have an impact on transfers who have not use their redshirt year and plan to burn it while sitting out the transfer season -- like Sharif Chambliss. Under the new rule, he would not have been able to play at Wisconsin.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Eric the Red		#15	[url]	[-]
Posts: 8834 April 19, 2012 6:49 PM	BuckSixty wrote: dewey35 wrote: Is the lost year only applicable with the Big Ten? I will use Uthoff as an example. If he transferred to Iowa he'd sit out a year and then play two. That's not the way I read it. In Uthoff's case, it doesn't look like the Big Ten rule will have any impact. He has to sit out a year anyway due to NCAA rules, and because he burned his redshirt already, that would cause him to lose a year of eligibility. The Big Ten rule appears to only have an impact on transfers who have not use their redshirt year and plan to burn it while sitting out the transfer season -- like Sharif Chambliss. Under the new rule, he would not have been able to play at Wisconsin. I read it the opposite of you... I read it as "take how ever many years you have left to play, and if you go to Big 10 school, subtract 1". Follow me on Twitter.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
RichInBunlyGoodness		#16	[url]	[-]
Posts: 5042 April 19, 2012 6:56 PM	I read it the same as B60. Here is the money quote: "So in the case of Wisconsin’s Jarrod Uthoff, he would be allowed under Big Ten rules -- if Wisconsin didn’t block him -- to transfer to the University of Iowa (his home state school). However, he’d have only three seasons of eligibility left, not four. And Uthoff would have to sit again after redshirting this past season. "
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
Eric the Red		#17	[url]	[-]
Posts: 8834 April 19, 2012 7:00 PM	RichInBunlyGoodness wrote: I read it the same as B60. Here is the money quote: "So in the case of Wisconsin’s Jarrod Uthoff, he would be allowed under Big Ten rules -- if Wisconsin didn’t block him -- to transfer to the University of Iowa (his home state school). However, he’d have only three two seasons of eligibility left, not four three. And Uthoff would have to sit again after redshirting this past season. " The numbers make the argument confusing. Unless you leave before school starts, you could never have 4 years left after a transfer. Follow me on Twitter.
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote
dewey35		#18	[url]	[-]
Posts: 1500 April 19, 2012 11:01 PM	Remove this ad To me the key phrase in the article was "but he would have to sit out the NCAA-required one-year in residence and lose a season of eligibility". I won't use Uthoff as an example because with his redshirt it seems ambiguous. I'll use Traevon Jackson for illustration purposes since he played this year and I will say he tranfers to OSU. By NCAA rules you get five seasons to play four. My take is that Big Ten rule essentially changes this to four seasons to play three. So with Jackson, he would sit out next year. So in 2013 he is eligible to play. If he was at a Big 10 school he would be a junior. If he went to a non-big ten school he would be a sophomore with his year sitting out being his a redshirt year. If the rule is he sits a year and then plays the next as a redshirt sophomore, how is that any different then any other transfer? If Uthoff transferred to Iowa, sits a year and is still a sophomore how is that any different than if he goes to Iowa State? How is that a penalty?
Interact My Recent Posts	Reply Quote

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

Big 10 Changes Transfer rule

Big 10 Changes Transfer rule