Can you imagine the outrage if this happened and Cal was the one recruiting grad transfers from other teams? UL has signed 1-2 transfers every year for the last 5 years or so it seems.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Wonder how many of these 702 are grad transfers, thus eligible immediately, or regular undergrads who have to sit out a year?Can you imagine the outrage if this happened and Cal was the one recruiting grad transfers from other teams? UL has signed 1-2 transfers every year for the last 5 years or so it seems.
The reasoning is OAD is a facade of academics. Where the transfer actually supports academics, the likelihood to graduate increases as the player sits out a year or attends graduate school.yup...its really bizarre the hate and paranoia 1 and done kids get yet no one is at odds of kids transferring. never understood how 6, 7, 8 or 9 kids are ruining the game and require a rule change yet each year we see 700-800 kids transferring.
Personally I think the grad transfer rule is worse than the one-and-done rule.Wonder how many of these 702 are grad transfers, thus eligible immediately, or regular undergrads who have to sit out a year?
The reasoning is OAD is a facade of academics. Where the transfer actually supports academics, the likelihood to graduate increases as the player sits out a year or attends graduate school.
As for it being a priority, Yes! Their goal is to remainSo, you think the Kentucky guys are fake about their academics? We have more OAD than anyone.
The reasoning is OAD is a facade of academics. Where the transfer actually supports academics, the likelihood to graduate increases as the player sits out a year or attends graduate school.
On average there are 13 one and done players per year and it's "ruining college basketball." On the other hand, 700+ transfers is not an issue. Personally I dont care about either, guys should do whatever the want to do with their careers, but if one is an issue, the other should be too.Transfers are not taking any talent out of college basketball as a whole.
Spin it anyway you want and I absolutely love Cal--he has never been the one causing it.
But all the same I'd still take my old much-more-interesting-than-the-NBA college basketball in a heartbeat if I could get it.
As for it being a priority, Yes! Their goal is to remain
eligible and to get credit for both semesters.
Usually a transfer (not all) is looking for
pt and as a rule will be in school for 5 years, will get a degree and will go pro in something other than basketball. Nothing wrong with that,,,
Your original question..was is UK OAD's academicsBig difference between academics being priority number 1 and it being a "facade."
This is gibberish.On average there are 13 one and done players per year and it's "ruining college basketball." On the other hand, 700+ transfers is not an issue. Personally I dont care about either, guys should do whatever the want to do with their careers, but if one is an issue, the other should be too.
The NCAA is a fraud of academics. That is the last thing they care about or they would have already given the death penalty to an institution that an outright fake classes for 20 years.The reasoning is OAD is a facade of academics. Where the transfer actually supports academics, the likelihood to graduate increases as the player sits out a year or attends graduate school.
This is gibberish.
Of course taking all the 13 top competitors out of any sport will make it less interesting.
And I never said removing those players was "ruining college basketball" all by itself.
But it is hurting. Whereas moving 700+ players around is not hurting. Not a bit. How is it supposed to be hurting?
If you can show where one single relevant player from a relevant team transfered to another less relevant team, then you'll have a tiny bit of a case. You certainly won't have a case involving numbers like 700+, but you will have a case involving numbers like: 1.
Do you even have that?
I didn't take your response personally at all. I'm just saying that removing 13 stars from a sport that has never had more than about 40 stars in any one year obviously has a diluting effect. Whereas leaving 700+ players in has no net diluting effect whatsoever no matter how much you shuffle them around, again short of moving relevant players to irrelevant teams which I haven't seen happen. It's not personal sensitivity. It's just math.Wow, you took that super personal. I was saying the narrative is one and done is ruining the game, I wasn't saying that you said that. There are over 300+ D1 teams, and somewhere north of 4,000 players, the notion that 13 guys leaving after a year ruins the game is ridiculous. Also, I wasnt saying transfers hurt the game, I'm just saying if you have an issue with 13 one and done guys, you should have an issue with 700 transfers. Again, I personally don't care about either, just saying people who push the one and done narrative should have an issue with transfers.
There are several one and done guys who aren't stars. Besides, college basketball is fueled by programs and rivalries more than stars like the NBA since all players turnover frequently since they only have 4 years of eligibility.I didn't take your response personally at all. I'm just saying that removing 13 stars from a sport that has never had more than about 40 stars in any one year obviously has a diluting effect. Whereas leaving 700+ players in has no net diluting effect whatsoever no matter how much you shuffle them around, again short of moving relevant players to irrelevant teams which I haven't seen happen. It's not personal sensitivit. It's just math.
Your original question..was is UK OAD's academics
fake? My answer."yes" as compared to priority.
You say all sports academics is a facade. Yes I
agree as compared to teachers, doctors engrs, etc.
Maybe a better question. Are UK OAD a grade above
that facade and really want an education. I say not.
Absolutely. I was being hyperbolic acting like all 13 were stars. And there are certainly other factors. But it is a real effect and it has noticeably effected the quality of the product, though it's not the only thing that has and not all the changes are bad.There are several one and done guys who aren't stars. Besides, college basketball is fueled by programs and rivalries more than stars like the NBA since all players turnover frequently since they only have 4 years of eligibility.
Not making an argument either way. The VAST majority of OADs are only in college because of the NBA rule.If not for it, those players would never take a class.most people who think this never went to college. if they did...they know a vast majority of college football/basketball athletes for every program is basically a facade of academics. its a pretty terrible argument.
Facade - an outward appearance that is maintained to conceal a less pleasant or creditable reality.Big difference between academics being priority number 1 and it being a "facade."
I do not think taking the top 13 players from high school hurts college basketball one bit. We do not follow players until 1) they are being recruited by our team, 2) have signed to play for our team or 3) sign for a rival and fail miserably.This is gibberish.
Of course taking all the 13 top competitors out of any sport will make it less interesting.
And I never said removing those players was "ruining college basketball" all by itself.
But it is hurting. Whereas moving 700+ players around is not hurting. Not a bit. How is it supposed to be hurting?
If you can show where one single relevant player from a relevant team transfered to another less relevant team, then you'll have a tiny bit of a case. You certainly won't have a case involving numbers like 700+, but you will have a case involving numbers like: 1.
Do you even have that?
Facade - an outward appearance that is maintained to conceal a less pleasant or creditable reality.
They tolerate going to class (outward appearance) whether they want to or not concealing the reality (that they cannot go straight to the NBA).
Who said anything about taking the top 13 players from high school?I do not think taking the top 13 players from high school hurts college basketball one bit. We do not follow players until 1) they are being recruited by our team, 2) have signed to play for our team or 3) sign for a rival and fail miserably.
Not making an argument either way. The VAST majority of OADs are only in college because of the NBA rule.If not for it, those players would never take a class.
When compared to a transfer, or more to the point, a graduate transfer, the view is a joke. One will never complete college the other has already earned a degree and working toward an advanced degree.
Which is more serious about education.
vast majority of college players are only in college because they play sports to begin with. and most while in college (no matter for 1 year or 4) take absurdly stupid classes.
there is ZERO academic argument to be made here. ZERO.
Personally I think the grad transfer rule is worse than the one-and-done rule.
vast majority of college players are only in college because they play sports to begin with. and most while in college (no matter for 1 year or 4) take absurdly stupid classes.
there is ZERO academic argument to be made here. ZERO.
Excellent post. I hate the one and done but it has been reality and acknowledging that this is allowed means getting the best recruits each year and hoping one or two might stay. You might argue that some coaches are ahead of the game with the transfer rule. I suppose if Cal wasn't as fantastic a recruiter then the transfer rule might become more important for Kentucky. But, Diallo vs. Johnson seems like the opportunity we had and it sure would seem that Diallo is the better recruit. I agree with the OP that the Transfer Rule is surprisingly getting very little sports reporter attention and it might be worse than one and done. At least with one and done it is a goal not a given like a top transfer leaving his program in a mess to save another one.
I can't say it any better than @uk78 except to add the way the rule about grad. transfers is written it has the potential to start "NCAAD-League" teams for players who need the time to develop. Jmo.Why?
I don't buy that for 1 minute. Not everyone attends UNC. I coached many kids that played college ball.
None made Pro, but many have great jobs and are
outstanding citizens. The problem is that so many
kids don't want to pay the price to be successfully.
Too many generations of hand-outs. (entitlements)
Thanks LBJ..Not
That is about as far from the truth as possible. We may have a team full of NBA players, but there are teams that have NEVER had a player picked in the draft.vast majority of college players are only in college because they play sports to begin with. and most while in college (no matter for 1 year or 4) take absurdly stupid classes.
there is ZERO academic argument to be made here. ZERO.
http://college.usatoday.com/2015/07/15/one-third-of-undergrads-transfer-colleges/What I would like to see is the percentage of D1 basketball players who transfer compared to tbe percentage of regular students who transfer schools.