Jump to content

Tathan Martell transferring to Miami


naptownskinsfan

Recommended Posts

10 minutes ago, JTagg7754 said:

You could even argue they're being paid. How much do they pay for their educations opposed to your standard college student who just signs up to go to school? It may not be a direct monetary transfer but they are absolutely getting something for free that normally costs a lot of money.

This is a bad argument. And it's not an argument you want to make if you think the current system is proper.

1 hour ago, THE DUKE said:

A scholarship is absolutely a contract.  Part of that contract is abiding by NCAA rules, of which includes the rule that transfers have to sit out a year unless they can prove a specific hardship.

We can at least admit how hypocritical and stupid the rules are, right? The coaches are under contract too. It doesn't stop them from bailing on their programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

This is a bad argument. And it's not an argument you want to make if you think the current system is proper.

Which is why the NCAA argues all the time that a scholarship is not pay. Since if you pay them, they're employees, and if they're employees they can start asking for raises, and if you say that's against the rules, they can unionize and strike, and since you're ripping them off like crazy, they have all the leverage and they''ll win.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Which is why the NCAA argues all the time that a scholarship is not pay. Since if you pay them, they're employees, and if they're employees they can start asking for raises, and if you say that's against the rules, they can unionize and strike, and since you're ripping them off like crazy, they have all the leverage and they''ll win.

Well, even before we get to that point, if they're employees, you can't establish the arbitrary rules banning gifts. Plus, you'll have to establish they're being properly compensated with the scholarship. Good luck with that. xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, jrry32 said:

Well, even before we get to that point, if they're employees, you can't establish the arbitrary rules banning gifts. Plus, you'll have to establish they're being properly compensated with the scholarship. Good luck with that. xD

Yep. Bad idea.

I mean and to the NCAA's point (gross I can't believe I wrote that), it's not pay. A scholarship is something a football player needs to be eligible to do his job. It'd be like saying your work phone or your badge or any on the job training you do is pay. It's silly and stupid to even suggest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, THE DUKE said:

A scholarship is absolutely a contract.  Part of that contract is abiding by NCAA rules, of which includes the rule that transfers have to sit out a year unless they can prove a specific hardship.

It's a 1 year contract that a school can pull at anytime the coach sees fit, yet if that happens the player (I'm sorry, student) still has to sit out a year if they want to transfer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, seminoles1 said:

It's a 1 year contract that a school can pull at anytime the coach sees fit, yet if that happens the player (I'm sorry, student) still has to sit out a year if they want to transfer.

Only if they want to transfer to another D1 FBS school...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

So coaches can move from one D1 FBS school to another and players can't. Which was his point at the beginning.

I’m just saying. I could care less about the transfer rules and that the NCAA needs to be dismantled or completely overhauled

well you think about if coaches want to move on in a middle of a contract they have a buy out clause. Coaches pay for another position with money, players pay by having to sit out a year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, buno67 said:

I’m just saying. I could care less about the transfer rules and that the NCAA needs to be dismantled or completely overhauled

well you think about if coaches want to move on in a middle of a contract they have a buy out clause. Coaches pay for another position with money, players pay by having to sit out a year.

 

Sure that's why you're issuing nit-picky do-nothing corrects, because you don't care about something. If you're going to try and defend the status quo, at least own it.

Your analogy doesn't make sense, because as we said earlier, a scholarship is a semester to semester agreement. Coaches don't pay buyout when their contract is up, because there is nothing to buy out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, ramssuperbowl99 said:

Sure that's why you're issuing nit-picky do-nothing corrects, because you don't care about something. If you're going to try and defend the status quo, at least own it.

Your analogy doesn't make sense, because as we said earlier, a scholarship is a semester to semester agreement. Coaches don't pay buyout when their contract is up, because there is nothing to buy out.

I just like playing devils advocate.  Threads are zero fun when everyone is on one side or another. 

I strongly believe their should only be transfer restrictions on transferring from within conferences. Outside of conferences or transferring up a division should be at free will and if the school wants 

that and players should have full rights and ability to make money off of their likeness. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...