It is what it is

For discussion of Vanderbilt Commodores men's basketball games and recruiting.

Moderators: kerrigjl, BrentVU, jfgogold, NateSY, KarenYates, Vandyman74, roanoke, VandyWhit

User avatar
AuricGoldfinger
Fleet Admiral
Posts: 16329
Joined: Tue Nov 22, 2016 8:29 pm
Has thanked: 88 times
Been thanked: 223 times
Contact:

Re: It is what it is

Post by AuricGoldfinger »

VU1970 wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 3:53 pm
AuricGoldfinger wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:09 pm
FayetteDore wrote: Wed Mar 29, 2023 8:42 am That being said,....
No
(I hate that one about as much as starting every sentence with "So.")

So, that being said, I think Auric is the most literary fellow on the board.
Some are born great, some achieve greatness, and some have greatness thrust upon them.

William Shakespeare
Some are born to sweet delight,
Some are born to endless night.

William Blake
Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

Baretta (Robert Blake)


vandy05
Vice Admiral
Posts: 3675
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 9:23 pm
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: It is what it is

Post by vandy05 »

ymtn64 wrote: Tue Mar 28, 2023 4:09 pm I attended a small college in Louisiana in the early/mid 80's. I will always remember at orientation we were asked to look at the person on our left, and the person on our right. Then they said, only one of the three of you will actually graduate from here if you follow recent classes. Being a super dumb 17 year old, I looked at both and said, I'm sorry you are not going to graduate from here! Ironically, I kept up with those two students who sat on either side of me, and neither graduated from that college.

I mention this because its long been an issue for Universities to have lots of attrition for various reasons, and they are not always for reasons we might understand. To that young adult, it matters lots, and all I can do is respect their choices. I met my wife where I went to college, and some more of the greatest relationships of my life begun while I was in college. I hope that they all find these great relationships at Vanderbilt or wherever they eventually attend/graduate.
So completely true. This is also true of many students at Vanderbilt. I knew many kids who started at VU, but didn't end there. Financial aid changed, things happened with their family at home, etc. Some of them graduated from somewhere else and some of them never graduated from any college. We often get caught up in our own stories and forget that there are a wide range of college experiences out there.

Also, why should the players be restricted from transferring? Just because they play sports??? That just doesn't strike me as a good enough reason. I'm trying to understand the harm, specifically to the conference's TV contracts because those are the only things that move the needle.
User avatar
mathguy
Rear Admiral
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2016 1:27 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: It is what it is

Post by mathguy »

vandy05 wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 11:48 pm

Also, why should the players be restricted from transferring? Just because they play sports??? That just doesn't strike me as a good enough reason. I'm trying to understand the harm, specifically to the conference's TV contracts because those are the only things that move the needle.
No athlete is restricted from transferring anywhere, nor ever has been. Any athlete in the history of the NCAA has been free to transfer at any time to any school that will accept them.

Now, transfer AND play NCAA sports at the new school is a different story.

NCAA athletes have always been paid (in scholarships) for their work for the university. When they accept special status as an athlete, it is reasonable to expect conditions and restrictions on that as well. I had a scholarship. I needed to keep a 3.0 in order to stay on it. Our athletes do not need a 3.0 to stay on their scholarships ... but perhaps the condition of their scholarship does/should/used to include a one year non-compete clause if they transfer. Hardly unreasonable.

Now don't get me wrong. The NCAA brutally abused their role and that's what led to this whole mess. The NCAA decided they could make a boatload of money selling player names and images to a video game company, while telling players they couldn't do the same. That's a jerk move - flat out. They signed a billion dollar TV deal with CBS for the NCAA tourney and told the players "oh no, we couldn't possibly pay you minimum wage for the required hours that you spend doing team activities" while also simultaneously telling the players they aren't allowed to get part time summer jobs, because the hiring might have been influenced by their status and been an inducement for a fake job. That's a jerk move - flat out.

So yeah, it is possible for me to think that the system currently in place sucks and that it is perfectly reasonable for athletes to accept certain restrictions as conditions of the benefits they enjoy ... while also realizing that the NCAA treated them like crap for decades in the most hypocritical of ways and what we are looking at now is just the pendulum swinging in the other direction.
vandy05
Vice Admiral
Posts: 3675
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 9:23 pm
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: It is what it is

Post by vandy05 »

mathguy wrote: Sun Apr 02, 2023 7:54 am
vandy05 wrote: Sat Apr 01, 2023 11:48 pm

Also, why should the players be restricted from transferring? Just because they play sports??? That just doesn't strike me as a good enough reason. I'm trying to understand the harm, specifically to the conference's TV contracts because those are the only things that move the needle.
No athlete is restricted from transferring anywhere, nor ever has been. Any athlete in the history of the NCAA has been free to transfer at any time to any school that will accept them.

Now, transfer AND play NCAA sports at the new school is a different story.

NCAA athletes have always been paid (in scholarships) for their work for the university. When they accept special status as an athlete, it is reasonable to expect conditions and restrictions on that as well. I had a scholarship. I needed to keep a 3.0 in order to stay on it. Our athletes do not need a 3.0 to stay on their scholarships ... but perhaps the condition of their scholarship does/should/used to include a one year non-compete clause if they transfer. Hardly unreasonable.

Now don't get me wrong. The NCAA brutally abused their role and that's what led to this whole mess. The NCAA decided they could make a boatload of money selling player names and images to a video game company, while telling players they couldn't do the same. That's a jerk move - flat out. They signed a billion dollar TV deal with CBS for the NCAA tourney and told the players "oh no, we couldn't possibly pay you minimum wage for the required hours that you spend doing team activities" while also simultaneously telling the players they aren't allowed to get part time summer jobs, because the hiring might have been influenced by their status and been an inducement for a fake job. That's a jerk move - flat out.

So yeah, it is possible for me to think that the system currently in place sucks and that it is perfectly reasonable for athletes to accept certain restrictions as conditions of the benefits they enjoy ... while also realizing that the NCAA treated them like crap for decades in the most hypocritical of ways and what we are looking at now is just the pendulum swinging in the other direction.
So fine, technically you got me. They're not restricted from transferring so I'll be more clear. 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.
User avatar
mathguy
Rear Admiral
Posts: 2046
Joined: Sat Nov 19, 2016 1:27 pm
Has thanked: 44 times
Been thanked: 31 times

Re: It is what it is

Post by mathguy »

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.
User avatar
Versus75
Admiral
Posts: 7821
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2016 12:19 pm
Has thanked: 5 times
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: It is what it is

Post by Versus75 »

Non-athletes DO have restrictions placed on them in some cases, such as which credits they can transfer from the prior institution.
vandy05
Vice Admiral
Posts: 3675
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 9:23 pm
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: It is what it is

Post by vandy05 »

Versus75 wrote: Sun Apr 02, 2023 10:54 pm Non-athletes DO have restrictions placed on them in some cases, such as which credits they can transfer from the prior institution.
Not a restriction on when and how you can go. It is also related to the actual academics of the institution which is what they're supposed to be in the business of doing, IMHO.
vandy05
Vice Admiral
Posts: 3675
Joined: Thu Nov 24, 2016 9:23 pm
Has thanked: 85 times
Been thanked: 23 times

Re: It is what it is

Post by vandy05 »

mathguy wrote: Sun Apr 02, 2023 8:58 pm
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.
I bet we agree more than disagree. Those are all valid comparisons. I probably just value college sports less than many, though I care very much about Vanderbilt's sports. That definitely colors my opinions.
Locked Previous topicNext topic