NCAA’s new transfer rule is good for college football

The NCAA proposed a new rule allowing a free transfer without having to sit a year. What are the potential ramifications in college football?

Only a few things have sparked more debate than the power to NCAA student-athletes.

This past year, we’ve seen debates on the use of a player’s name, likeness and image. Then it was the compensation of players. Now, it’s on the player’s freedom of movement.

Last week, the NCAA proposed a new rule to their transfer policy. Student-athletes would be granted one free transfer with immediate eligibility. This is a change to the longstanding rule that players would have to sit out one year after transferring, pending an NCAA waiver.

The waivers are what have started this debate. NCAA has made a mess (as with most things) of the waiver system with inconsistent rulings and decisions on what is an approved waiver. This brought the free transfer solution. It simplifies the complicated rule, as there becomes four simple requirements to transfer schools. Under the proposed rule, to transfer without sitting out a year, a student-athlete must:

• Receive a release from their previous school.
• Leave their previous school academically eligible
• Maintain their academic progress at their new school.
• Leave under no disciplinary suspension.

Of course, the rule was immediately met with disapproval. Todd Berry, the executive director of the American Football Coaches Association (AFCA) told Sports Illustrated that the majority of D-1 college football coaches are against the rule, citing that the transfer rules prevent college coaches from recruiting players from college campuses.

Mark Richt, the former Georgia and Miami coach, also tweeted out his displeasure with the proposed rule change.

“I know, I have an idea,” Richt said. “You recruit and develop players and when I think they’re good enough I will poach them from your roster! Welcome to what the new normal will look like in college football!”

Of course the coaches will be against the ruling, which just proves the hypocrisy that is college football.

Just last week, long-time Michigan State coach Mark Dantonio decided to resign from his position as head coach of the Spartans. This was 24 hours before National Signing Day, and less than a month removed from the $4.3 million retention bonus he received in his contract. The bonus kicked in well after the season and the coaching carousel had settled.

Dantonio left the program a mess, with a $4.3 million payout. You know who is stuck playing for a new coach, receiving no money? The players Dantonio left in East Lansing. It’s the continuing hypocrisy of college sports. Coaches have the freedom of movement, and a six or seven-figure salary to fall back on.

Players, meanwhile, are forced to live with their mistakes. To ask a player to stick with a difficult decision they made at 18-years-old, when their careers and dreams are now in jeopardy.

The power to the player is growing, and the NCAA is facing more and more scrutiny for more opportunities for their student-athletes.

The NCAA needs to get ahead of the crowd on these subjects, or risk falling behind. Congress is already getting involved in the pay to play rules, and the Big Ten and ACC has thrown their support behind the free transfer rule. The NCAA needs to pass this, and grant players the freedom of movement.