vandy05 wrote: ↑Sun Apr 02, 2023 8:05 am Why should players have restrictions placed upon them when transferring? I ask that because there are so few places in life in this country where this level of restriction is placed upon a person's ability to dictate what they do with their life. And it is not lost on me that the folks in charge (the coaches) can move whenever they want. Also, their approximate peer group (other students who aren't playing sports) also don't have those same restrictions. Restrictions on player's ability to transfer sticks out to me like a sore thumb.
But I also agree that you can hold both views at once, restrictions on transferring and thinking the schools have taken advantage of (and in some ways still do) players over the years.
I suspect we will just need to agree to disagree on parts of this.
Sports is a unique industry. There's a reason pro leagues get anti-trust exemptions. There are certain restrictions that you accept for the good of the sport. A one year hiatus for transfers is simply not onerous. Athletes still get their 4 years of eligibility. Potentially get to do it on an extra year of scholarship and get a masters degree out of it to join their bachelors. That's not nothing, seeing as how only a small percentage of athletes will play at the NBA/NFL level where the sport as a livelihood is really lucrative ... and though I don't have the data to back this up, I suspect most of those players aren't the ones transferring (with a few high profile examples like Jalen Hurts as an exception).
As I mentioned, in the business world, non-compete clauses are hardly unheard of ... to think of transfers as a one year non-compete clause (but yet, a year where they are allowed to intern at full "pay" (scholarship) with their new employer) is a reasonable ask.
If we look at the analogy to pro sports (since that is the same industry, though a different level), those athletes sign contracts. Getting out of them early can be rather difficult (just ask Ben SImmons). Those athletes can be traded - sent to an employer without regards to their choice. Be drafted and only allowed to negotiate with a single employer. No, the college athlete is not the pro athlete. But in college there is no draft - the athlete gets free rein to negotiate with every team in the nation and then choose their destination. They cannot be traded. And while technically their scholarship offers are year to year, as has been pointed out in this thread it is extremely unusual for a school to pull a scholarship from an existing student (except for cause - drugs, arrests, etc.). So the college athlete already has a certain amount of freedom and mobility that their pro counterparts lack.
Now, the days where an athlete might decide to transfer and have their current coach say "OK ... but not to school X, Y, or Z" ... honestly that was a bunch of crap. But the transfer year in residence? After the athlete go the opportunity to choose any school that wanted them? That still allows them their full 4 years of eligibility? That still keeps them on scholarship the whole time? The student retains complete ability to decide what to do with their life. They can still play the same amount of college sports and do so anywhere they like, just not any when.
You're going to have a hard time convincing me this is really a significant hardship for the athlete, but on the other side it improves the industry and system tremendously.