ADVERTISEMENT

2021-2023 Transfer Portal news

Status
Not open for further replies.
The thought of a transfer cap may help level the playing field. What if all programs are limited to accepting only 2 transfers on the squad at a time max? For PSU, with Kerk on hand we can only accept one more? All of the top programs would need to be exceedingly careful with how and to whom they alllocate those two slots.

Love the effort … but, it’s restraint of trade to limit the so called schools and athletes to arbitrary numbers.
 
Did I say that second part above, I am not sure what I meant by that one?

I view things simply.

I am pretty much a free market capitalist, and what we have today is it the free market running amok due to the combination of NIL and the Portal, the two forces combined have the potential to make things even worse down the road.

If you are going to regulate, you can focus on either the supply side (i.e. the kids), or the demand side (the programs).

The lesser evil IMO is to allow the kids to pursue their maximum potential both athletically and economically.

That leaves regulation the demand side. Honestly saying any one program can only occupy two line up spots with transfers, preserves some of the integrity across teams, conferences and divisions. I am tried an true PSU, and PSU stands to gain as much as any program form the model as it stands today. One might now argue Michigan. I think having 3, 4, 5 guys in the starting lineup who are transfers is not a good thing. Limiting teams to a cap will help keep some of the talent in smaller schools and allow some smaller schools to compete for said talent as well.

Perfect model? Of course not. Better than the current wild wild west, where programs like Northern can be decimated? Probably, or at least some of the bleeding can be slowed.
 
Did I say that second part above, I am not sure what I meant by that one?

I view things simply.

I am pretty much a free market capitalist, and what we have today is it the free market running amok due to the combination of NIL and the Portal, the two forces combined have the potential to make things even worse down the road.

If you are going to regulate, you can focus on either the supply side (i.e. the kids), or the demand side (the programs).

The lesser evil IMO is to allow the kids to pursue their maximum potential both athletically and economically.

That leaves regulation the demand side. Honestly saying any one program can only occupy two line up spots with transfers, preserves some of the integrity across teams, conferences and divisions. I am tried an true PSU, and PSU stands to gain as much as any program form the model as it stands today. One might now argue Michigan. I think having 3, 4, 5 guys in the starting lineup who are transfers is not a good thing. Limiting teams to a cap will help keep some of the talent in smaller schools and allow some smaller schools to compete for said talent as well.

Perfect model? Of course not. Better than the current wild wild west, where programs like Northern can be decimated? Probably, or at least some of the bleeding can be slowed.
Except this is a supply-side regulation disguised as a demand-side regulation.

Applying this today, PSU could accept no more transfers for 3 years, until Nagao graduates. This certainly doesn't hurt PSU -- anybody catch the 2024 class? But it does shrink the market for any other wrestlers who might otherwise consider PSU -- and accordingly reduces their potential scholarship amount at other institutions.

Ultimately the loser is athletes at the Ivies who must transfer after graduation, and those at schools with stringent grad admissions (Stanford, NW, etc.). Many will be forced to retire -- because let's face it, none of them are going to Bloomsburg for grad school in order to continue wrestling.
 
I’d expect a lot of transfers next year as there are so many seniors this yr what with many taking a CoVid year.
 
Did I say that second part above, I am not sure what I meant by that one?

I view things simply.

I am pretty much a free market capitalist, and what we have today is it the free market running amok due to the combination of NIL and the Portal, the two forces combined have the potential to make things even worse down the road.

If you are going to regulate, you can focus on either the supply side (i.e. the kids), or the demand side (the programs).

The lesser evil IMO is to allow the kids to pursue their maximum potential both athletically and economically.

That leaves regulation the demand side. Honestly saying any one program can only occupy two line up spots with transfers, preserves some of the integrity across teams, conferences and divisions. I am tried an true PSU, and PSU stands to gain as much as any program form the model as it stands today. One might now argue Michigan. I think having 3, 4, 5 guys in the starting lineup who are transfers is not a good thing. Limiting teams to a cap will help keep some of the talent in smaller schools and allow some smaller schools to compete for said talent as well.

Perfect model? Of course not. Better than the current wild wild west, where programs like Northern can be decimated? Probably, or at least some of the bleeding can be slowed.
What you are proposing would get laughed out of federal court given Alston. Summary judgment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ski
Did I say that second part above, I am not sure what I meant by that one?

I view things simply.

I am pretty much a free market capitalist, and what we have today is it the free market running amok due to the combination of NIL and the Portal, the two forces combined have the potential to make things even worse down the road.

If you are going to regulate, you can focus on either the supply side (i.e. the kids), or the demand side (the programs).

The lesser evil IMO is to allow the kids to pursue their maximum potential both athletically and economically.

That leaves regulation the demand side. Honestly saying any one program can only occupy two line up spots with transfers, preserves some of the integrity across teams, conferences and divisions. I am tried an true PSU, and PSU stands to gain as much as any program form the model as it stands today. One might now argue Michigan. I think having 3, 4, 5 guys in the starting lineup who are transfers is not a good thing. Limiting teams to a cap will help keep some of the talent in smaller schools and allow some smaller schools to compete for said talent as well.

Perfect model? Of course not. Better than the current wild wild west, where programs like Northern can be decimated? Probably, or at least some of the bleeding can be slowed.
As the parent of a DI athlete who has now used the portal twice, I'm shocked at what the NCAA has gotten away with for years in athletics. In my mind they've regulated indentured servitude for decades (different than slavery - please check a dictionary for the differences). Student-athletes should be dealt with exactly the same way as every other student on campus. No recruiting limits, no transfer limits, no scholarship limits, no contact limits, nothing save limiting roster sizes. The rules and regs the NCAA has had in place has allowed a number of coaches to become pampered potentates with no concern for their charges. Gut the NCAA.
 
As the parent of a DI athlete who has now used the portal twice, I'm shocked at what the NCAA has gotten away with for years in athletics. In my mind they've regulated indentured servitude for decades (different than slavery - please check a dictionary for the differences). Student-athletes should be dealt with exactly the same way as every other student on campus. No recruiting limits, no transfer limits, no scholarship limits, no contact limits, nothing save limiting roster sizes. The rules and regs the NCAA has had in place has allowed a number of coaches to become pampered potentates with no concern for their charges. Gut the NCAA.
But, but, but????

Great post!
 
As the parent of a DI athlete who has now used the portal twice, I'm shocked at what the NCAA has gotten away with for years in athletics. In my mind they've regulated indentured servitude for decades (different than slavery - please check a dictionary for the differences). Student-athletes should be dealt with exactly the same way as every other student on campus. No recruiting limits, no transfer limits, no scholarship limits, no contact limits, nothing save limiting roster sizes. The rules and regs the NCAA has had in place has allowed a number of coaches to become pampered potentates with no concern for their charges. Gut the NCAA.
Hell Ya!!!🔥🔥🔥
 
  • Like
Reactions: nitlion6
Hell Ya!!!🔥🔥🔥
There’s about as much chance that the NCAA will be gutted, as there is that the IRS will be. Corrupt organizations are with us to stay, no matter what’s fair or acceptable. It’s all about power. Don’t expect the NCAA to voluntarily clean themselves up, nor the IRS.

Power corrupts. Absolute power absolutely corrupts.
 
Except this is a supply-side regulation disguised as a demand-side regulation.

Applying this today, PSU could accept no more transfers for 3 years, until Nagao graduates. This certainly doesn't hurt PSU -- anybody catch the 2024 class? But it does shrink the market for any other wrestlers who might otherwise consider PSU -- and accordingly reduces their potential scholarship amount at other institutions.

Ultimately the loser is athletes at the Ivies who must transfer after graduation, and those at schools with stringent grad admissions (Stanford, NW, etc.). Many will be forced to retire -- because let's face it, none of them are going to Bloomsburg for grad school in order to continue wrestling.
If there are restrictions put in place like this, I think grad transfers should be excepted. First and foremost, college is about education (or is supposed to be). If a guy finishes an undergrad degree and wants to go to a different school for his graduate education, there should be no restrictions or penalties on that. If you want to limit the number of undergrad transfers like Nagao or Mesenbrink who are leaving without finishing undergrad and have multiple years of eligibility left, I don't have an issue with that.
 
  • Like
Reactions: matter7172
If there are restrictions put in place like this, I think grad transfers should be excepted. First and foremost, college is about education (or is supposed to be). If a guy finishes an undergrad degree and wants to go to a different school for his graduate education, there should be no restrictions or penalties on that. If you want to limit the number of undergrad transfers like Nagao or Mesenbrink who are leaving without finishing undergrad and have multiple years of eligibility left, I don't have an issue with that.
I agree about grad transfers. In the first place, they don't really do a lot to move a program forward and may, in fact, do more harm than good. Rentals are not the same as getting wrestlers like Nagao and Mesenbrink. The only time grad transfers are a clear win for a program is if they are at a weight where there is someone who wants to use a redshirt for the coming year or there is absolutely no one to fill the weight class. But even then, it's a band aid.
 
Did I say that second part above, I am not sure what I meant by that one?

I view things simply.

I am pretty much a free market capitalist, and what we have today is it the free market running amok due to the combination of NIL and the Portal, the two forces combined have the potential to make things even worse down the road.

If you are going to regulate, you can focus on either the supply side (i.e. the kids), or the demand side (the programs).

The lesser evil IMO is to allow the kids to pursue their maximum potential both athletically and economically.

That leaves regulation the demand side. Honestly saying any one program can only occupy two line up spots with transfers, preserves some of the integrity across teams, conferences and divisions. I am tried an true PSU, and PSU stands to gain as much as any program form the model as it stands today. One might now argue Michigan. I think having 3, 4, 5 guys in the starting lineup who are transfers is not a good thing. Limiting teams to a cap will help keep some of the talent in smaller schools and allow some smaller schools to compete for said talent as well.

Perfect model? Of course not. Better than the current wild wild west, where programs like Northern can be decimated? Probably, or at least some of the bleeding can be slowed.
So who exactly is supposed to be efit from nil? Is it the student athlete making money off their likeness? or the schools utilizing potential promise of money to benefit in the end with championship teams. I think there is a huge disconnect here that needs resolved. When I hear this school offered this amount of money, that isn't a student benefitting from their own likeness. That's a school using money to recruit which is illegal. The supreme court ruling allowing this was for the student athlete not universities at large. In my opinion, that's where the line needs drawn in the sand by the NCAA. No coach should be allowed to mention money or potential money for coming to a particular school end of story. As we have seen already, two big recruits stated money wasn't mentioned and rightly so it shouldn't be allowed. If any money is mentioned that school should lose scholarships. That levels the playing field in regards to money being offered but not potential money that could be made. I'm that regard, the bigger wrestling schools will benefit as they have more established programs and better alumni cash flow etc.
 
So who exactly is supposed to be efit from nil? Is it the student athlete making money off their likeness? or the schools utilizing potential promise of money to benefit in the end with championship teams. I think there is a huge disconnect here that needs resolved. When I hear this school offered this amount of money, that isn't a student benefitting from their own likeness. That's a school using money to recruit which is illegal. The supreme court ruling allowing this was for the student athlete not universities at large. In my opinion, that's where the line needs drawn in the sand by the NCAA. No coach should be allowed to mention money or potential money for coming to a particular school end of story. As we have seen already, two big recruits stated money wasn't mentioned and rightly so it shouldn't be allowed. If any money is mentioned that school should lose scholarships. That levels the playing field in regards to money being offered but not potential money that could be made. I'm that regard, the bigger wrestling schools will benefit as they have more established programs and better alumni cash flow etc.
Schools aren't allowed to offer money. That doesn't mean some aren't doing it, but the fact the message board posters that this school or that school offered some wrestler a huge sum of money doesn't make it true. Penn State and Iowa are far and away the most succesful wrestling schools not only in results but it generating revenue and yet both schools still lose money on wrestling so IMHO the chance of any school paying a wrestler directly any sum of money is unlikely. Now rich Alumni, that is a different story.
 
As the parent of a DI athlete who has now used the portal twice, I'm shocked at what the NCAA has gotten away with for years in athletics. In my mind they've regulated indentured servitude for decades (different than slavery - please check a dictionary for the differences). Student-athletes should be dealt with exactly the same way as every other student on campus. No recruiting limits, no transfer limits, no scholarship limits, no contact limits, nothing save limiting roster sizes. The rules and regs the NCAA has had in place has allowed a number of coaches to become pampered potentates with no concern for their charges. Gut the NCAA.
Maybe if the rest of the students were getting part of the tuition paid we’d be on an even playing field. Quit your sport and you can come and go as you please. Not trying to start an argument, but the money does count for something. Even Many scholarship students have more stringent requirements than other students.
 
Cody Chittum, YOU are a Terp.
If he were to leave, and I don’t think it’s at that point yet, I’d bet on Virginia Tech.

The Chittum family and Ferrari family will get along like oil and water from my limited knowledge of them. And both have shown that they’re willing to leave a situation if they’re unhappy. They’ve done it many many times.
 
If he were to leave, and I don’t think it’s at that point yet, I’d bet on Virginia Tech.

The Chittum family and Ferrari family will get along like oil and water from my limited knowledge of them. And both have shown that they’re willing to leave a situation if they’re unhappy. They’ve done it many many times.
Think it's more likely Ferraris are kicked to the curb to be honest. From what I heard, Minnesota did not fight to keep Chittum particularly (you can correct me though if I'm wrong here)
 
Final 6 also included Michigan and (somehow) Maryland. Ohio State not on the list.

@El-Jefe, I am astonished, in a positive way, at not only the sheer number of posts you consistently make, but how many are consistently funny, insightful and knowledgeable. You are the Cal Ripken of this Board. Hats off to you!

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/RuLPcn2KZtFWFxYoy1" width="360" height="480" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="">via GIPHY</a></p>
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT