Forums

[xubrew]

There are only five sports that currently have a Year in Residency rule (or, the rule that makes players sit out a year) and they are men's basketball, women's basketball, baseball, football, and men's ice hockey. In every other sport, players can transfer one time and play right away if they leave eligible and if they are eligible at the new school they are going to.

The stated reason that those five sports, and only those five sports, require a year in residency is because of academics. Those five sports historically perform poorly academically. The idea is that they have a year to get academically acclimated first.

And, there you have it. If that is the only stated reason (and it is) then if a student is above a 2.6, then the thinking is that they shouldn't need a year to get academically acclimated. These are also the players that won't hurt a team's APR if they transfer out.

All this handwringing is a little ridiculous. Sixty percent of basketball players who transfer don't even transfer to another div1 school. They go to div2, NAIA, or wherever. So, this rule won't effect them anyway. For the other forty percent, the rules are still pretty much the same. They still need permission to contact from their current school, and they will ultimately still need a release from their current school. If a school like Dayton is worried that players will leave them to go play for Kentucky, then they can simply not release them to play for Kentucky, which would still force them to sit out a year (and pay for it themselves) if they went to Kentucky.

Just being real. The number of men's basketball players who will want to "transfer up", AND have a 2.6, AND get permission to contact, AND be offered a spot at a new school once they've gotten permission to contact, AND get a release from their current school to go the new school is going to be so small that almost everyone who is complaining now won't even notice the difference.

As much as Rick Pitino knows about the X's and O's of basketball, he knows very little about NCAA compliance and its rules. He's proven this with how Louisville is appealing the ruling, and he's proving it again with how he completely misunderstands what this rule is, why it's in place, and why they are looking to (and likely will) change it. It really won't end up making THAT much of a difference. If a player is run off, and has a 2.6, then they won't have to sit out a year. That is really the only major side effect this rule is going to have. In fact anything Rick Pitino advocates for, you're probably wise in considering whatever the inverse of that thing is.