New NCAA VP of Division I governance wants to take closer look at graduate ‘transfer’ rules

[Halldan1]

New NCAA VP of Division I governance wants to take closer look at graduate ‘transfer’ rules
Raphielle Johnson

Apr 26, 2015, 6:02 PM EDT

AP

Depending upon who you ask, the current situation regarding transfers in college basketball is either an “epidemic” that has turned the offseason into a form of free agency or it isn’t much different than what non-athletes experience on an annual basis. The NCAA has made changes in the past, getting rid of waivers with the notable exception of the one that allows graduates to take the floor immediately at the school of their choice.

But as has been reported in the past that could be changing as well, with the NCAA’s new vice president for Division I governance Kevin Lennon seeing the transfer situation as one he would like to take a deeper look at immediately. While some would love to see graduates required to sit a year, that isn’t the only possible change to the current setup.

The proposals include giving schools the ability to restrict where ex-players can go and requiring the athletes to sit out one year before becoming eligible. Undergrads already are required to sit out one year, but the current rules allow players with bachelor’s degrees to transfer to another school and become eligible immediately if they attend grad school.

“If you’re transferring to be in a graduate program, the NCAA wants you to be working in earnest toward that degree rather than just using up your last year of eligibility,” Lennon said during a 40-minute interview last week, noting there are no formal proposals yet.

For some, allowing graduates to move on to another program is a just reward for those who have completed their undergraduate studies in four years but have a season of eligibility remaining. But for others such situations make those athletes “hired guns” that threaten the fabric of college sports.

While requiring graduate students to sit a year, in theory making it even more likely that they’ll complete a graduate degree, could garner support why also allow schools to limit where the athlete will go? While some will cite competitive reasons for doing so, with many conferences making it incredibly difficult (or impossible) for undergrads to transfer within their league, why worry so much about someone who doesn’t want to be a part of your program?

This is all still a long way off, with the Associated Press noting that no formal proposals have been made. But this is a situation worth tracking, as a number of programs have managed to supplement their rosters (or land major contributors) thanks to the graduate student rule.

 

[Halldan1]

Probably in the minority but I hate the graduate transfer rule as it stands. I support eliminating the non sit out year but do not support schools restricting where a player can go (except to a league team) unless tampering can be proven.

 

[Halldan1]

Division I VP Kevin Lennon wants transfer rule changes

• Associated Press

INDIANAPOLIS -- Kevin Lennon is putting transfer rule changes near the top of his priority list.

The NCAA's new vice president for Division I governance told The Associated Press there are growing concerns among the division's 345 members over the surging number of students switching schools -- and that the debate could come to a close sometime in the next year.

Some of the ideas bandied about would have a dramatic impact on graduate transfer students. The proposals include giving schools the ability to restrict where former players can go and requiring the athletes to sit out one year before becoming eligible. Undergraduates already are required to sit out one year, but the current rules allow players with bachelor's degrees to transfer to another school and become eligible immediately if they attend graduate school.

"If you're transferring to be in a graduate program, the NCAA wants you to be working in earnest toward that degree rather than just using up your last year of eligibility," Lennon said last week, noting there are no formal proposals yet.

Lennon has spent the past several weeks reaching out to school leaders and fine-tuning his vision for the future. The Harvard and Ohio University graduate replaced longtime NCAA executive David Berst on April 6 after Berst announced he would retire this summer.

One of the hottest topics is transfers. According to an NCAA report based on statistics from ESPN, 604 Division I men's basketball players changed schools in 2014 compared with 455 in 2013.

Lennon said finding a consensus about potential solutions has been tricky.

"You have one line of thinking that says when a student has earned their undergraduate degree they've earned the right to go wherever they want without any kind of NCAA restrictions," Lennon said. "I think, unfortunately, what the data has shown is that people are transferring and they are not completing their graduate degrees because the vast majority of those degrees are two years."

Coaches from big and small schools are already jumping on board.

Belmont coach Rick Byrd, the basketball rules committee chairman, believes the transfer issue would clear up if players took more time to contemplate their college choices. Byrd has 711 career wins and said he hasn't had a player leave his program in over a decade. Still, he supports the NCAA's move to get rid of special waivers and agrees with the concept for graduate students.

So does Kentucky's John Calipari.

"You need two years in grad school anyway, so it makes sense," Calipari said.

Eliminating waivers and making grad students sit out a year would "cut this thing by two-thirds," he added.

With data showing transfers lose, on average, about nine months of academic credit, Lennon said concern among university leaders is high. The NCAA also is considering options to stem the tidal wave of transfers among undergraduates, but nothing has worked.

"No one is happy with the transfer rate, particularly in the sport of men's basketball," Lennon said. "When 40 percent of your students are leaving after their second year, that's a signal something's wrong."

Transfer rules are only part of Lennon's broad, ambitious agenda for the next 12 months.

He wants the NCAA to help schools implement cost-of-attendance measures that have already been approved by the Power 5 conferences and some other leagues, advise schools about how to deal with any ramifications from the Ed O'Bannon case involving player likenesses, and tackle academic misconduct.

Lennon also believes it's time for school leaders to contemplate more academic reforms and cost containment for the increasingly expensive Division I championships. According to NCAA documents, expenses for Division I championships jumped from $68.8 million in 2011-12 to $92.1 million in 2012-13 and $98.1 million in 2013-14.

"It's like anyone balancing their checkbook. They need to make sure that what's most important is attended to and that's that our student-athletes continue to have championship experiences that they'll remember the rest of their life," he said. "As increased costs come up and revenues don't match those expenses, then you've got to make some decisions."

He said the pilot program that helped some family members travel to the men's and women's Final Fours was not responsible for the increased costs. Price hikes for air travel and baggage fees were the primary culprits.

Lennon said he would like university leaders to consider reductions in the size of travel parties and whether schools should pick up more of the tab.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas...evin-lennon-puts-transfer-rules-priority-list

 

[The Crows Nest]

This is typical of the hypocritical NCAA. They want to make sure these kids are "working in earnest toward their graduate degree".....I mean, REALLY? How do they feel about the "1 and done" crowd? Are they ensuring they are working in earnest toward......well, toward what really? What classes, of merit, do you think Karl Anthony Townes (not to single him out....fill in with any one and doner) took this year? What he "working in earnest" toward his degree? HAH! right....

Leave it to the NCAA to try and sound "high and mighty" and while doing so, actually come down hard on the only true "student athletes" they have, those that actually EARN their undergraduate degree, but making them PROVE they are working in earnest toward that graduate degree......while completely turning their heads at the NBA D-League Kentucky program (ok, not to pick on Kentucky...well, yeah, to pick on Kentucky) and their "rent a player" program they are running. Between ALL of their freshman....I wonder how many true "matriculating" credits they earned....in the aggregate?

My guess...not many.

But, the NCAA has to lower the hammer on those poor over achievers who actually work hard for their degree....yep, nice move

 

[hallgrad80]

I have no problem having any transfer sitting out a year, whether they have graduated or not but establishing such a rule will do nothing to reduce the level of athletes who opt to transfer. We all know that the NCAA's stated reasons for wanting to include graduate students in having to sit a year is another lame excuse to continue the myth of the student athlete .

What I do continue to have a major problem with is putting ANY restriction on a player's choice of what school he can go to and that includes transferring to a school in the same conference. From my perspective every transfer should sit out a year but with no restrictions on what school he wants to transfer to.

 

[Bobbie Solo]

agreed hallgrad. Oh poor baby, you don't want to have to see that player in conference play again in 2 seasons? Tough, get over it.