Harmost said:

Yeah, but the latter restriction is pretty dumb (or petty, whichever you like).

Click to expand...

It isn't unusual. If Saban had gone to Texas would you complain if our new coach said players couldn't transfer there?

B1GTide said:

I am torn on this one. On the one hand, kids are fickle and impetuous, rarely considering consequences. On the other hand, coaches and schools don't always have the player's best interests at heart.

Click to expand...

This ^^^

Crimson1967 said:

It isn't unusual. If Saban had gone to Texas would you complain if our new coach said players couldn't transfer there?

Click to expand...

And this I like too...

"Hello, Pot??? Well, this is the Kettle .... "

Crimson1967 said:

It isn't unusual. If Saban had gone to Texas would you complain if our new coach said players couldn't transfer there?

Click to expand...

While I wasn't saying that it was unusual (what I was saying was that that restriction is dumb, bad, silly, and so on), your comment suggests you have some knowledge re: just how common it is -- so, just how common (or not) is it? Coaches switch jobs pretty frequently, but I can't really think of an example of a mass exodus of players following their old coach (you know, the domino effect type of concern ostensibly prompting these sorts of restrictions). I can think of a couple instances of you-can't-follow-the-former-coach restrictions -- one involving Rushel Shell wanting to go to ASU and the other involving Randy Edsall -- but they were pretty roundly attacked for being vindictive, childish, etc.

As to your question, the answer is yes, I would complain. But I like that "turning the tables on you" style you're using, so let's think about this: you're a college football player. You decided to go to your school in large part because of your comfort level with the coaches there and all their schemes and systems -- pretty reasonable. The head coach and most of his staff leave for greener pastures after your first year. A new staff comes in, and you and them don't get along at all. You decide to follow your old coach since, for one thing, you know you're comfortable with him and you had good reasons for deciding to play for him when you were a recruit. But the new staff/your current school says they won't release you to that other school. You ask "why?" and they say, "because we're scared that a critical mass of players will want to sit out a year so they can go play for you-know-who! And also, we're mad at you-know-who for leaving us!" No wait, they say that but they dress up the language a bit to hide that they actually just want to block your transfer for really dumb reasons like that. You should of course be ok with this, right -- totally reasonable?

I'm a pretty ardent supporter of the one-year sit out rule. I even think further school-imposed restrictions on players going to future opponents are pretty fair. Going beyond that gets into pretty questionable territory.

I agree a player should be able to transfer wherever he wants to. But if schools are allowed to block certain places, I don't see him blocking Miami as that big a deal. No, I don't know how common it is for players to follow a coach and I really don't think that many would transfer given all the hassles transferring involves.

But Georgia players have 122 FBS options if they don't like playing for Kirby Smart, so they don't have it that bad.

That article lost me when it referred to UGA taking the institutional high road.

Jan Kemp would like time for rebuttal.

The fans at UGA have been telling themselves for years that although they don't win championships, they are better than us for whatever manufactured reason they can come up with.

You have a faction of fans over there that demand championships, but they can't stomach the sacrifices required in order to compete for them.

I bet they'll TAKE transfers from Alabama ALL DAY LONG :tongue:

Nolan said:

I bet they'll TAKE transfers from Alabama ALL DAY LONG :tongue:

Click to expand...

No doubt - CKS will take CNS overflow, who wouldn't?

I thought getting education was the priority. If so let them transfer anywhere. Becoming clear student athletes should get paid, especially if the institutions are allowed to block them from learning at different schools.

IIRC, a player can transfer wherever he wants without punishment if he doesn't sign a LOI. By signing the contract, the player is contractually obligated to the terms.

RTR91 said:

IIRC, a player can transfer wherever he wants without punishment if he doesn't sign a LOI. By signing the contract, the player is contractually obligated to the terms.

Click to expand...

True. But players can transfer wherever they want if they will pay their way during the transfer year if they don't get a release.

Not releasing a player is similar to pro teams not trading with teams in their divisions, i.e. don't help your competition.

Much ado about nothing to me.

What does Saban do?

Players already have to sit out a year, and you can't stop them. THis just prevents the new school from putting them on scholarship for the year they sit out.

Making them pay for it just seems silly.

Now the player involved speaks out...

A.J. Turman: My transfer request was denied twice

Georgia junior running back A.J. Turman said he didn’t want his transfer to become a big deal but also says that coach Kirby Smart denied him twice before letting him leave.

“I got denied my transfer twice when I talked to him and met with him (a few months ago),” Turman told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution. “He said (at the time) he’s not going to let anybody from the University of Georgia transfer because you made a commitment here. Even though he didn’t recruit us, he said he would not let anybody transfer from the University of Georgia.”

Click to expand...