NCAA Transfer Rule

For those of you that do not know, the NCAA has passed a new rule allowing athletes with a fifth year of eligibility who have already graduated to transfer to any school they wish (or can get into) without having to sit out for a year. In other words, it's a penalty-free transfer.

I must admit that I was skeptical because my first thought was the same as West Virginia's Rich Rodriguez who said, "That would be a major disaster." Think about it. Players transferring left and right (particularly from mid-majors) to more high-profile schools to enhance their marketability and earn them some big bucks rather quickly. As bad as it sounds to clean-out the mid-majors of its superstars, it is ludicrous to assert that big name schools wouldn't take them. Hypothetically, if Ben Roethlisberger had a fifth year of eligibility to blow, and he fell in love with Kentucky (only God knows why), passing on Big Ben would be out of the question. Wins mean job security, and Ben wins. Welcome to the Bluegrass State, Mr. Roethlisberger. Even higher profile schools have gaps to fill. Georgia fans may love QB Joe Tereshinski III, but he's no D.J. Shockley (or David Greene, for that matter). Would Mark Richt take a tested, winning, and proven QB in hopes of making a title run, or would he put his faith in an untested QB? Only Mark Richt knows, but the point holds true. It's mighty tempting.

The flip-side to this coin is the reason the NCAA gave for passing the legislation. "Players should be permitted to choose a graduate school that meets both his or her academic and athletic interests." How quaint. It sounds brilliant, doesn't it? It's almost as if the NCAA believes that this rule will affect student-athletes. And it may. But it will not affect the vast majority of major college sports participants. With a few exceptions, perhaps, most fifth year players have not graduated. There is an even larger number of athletes who never graduate. This rule targets only those athletes who have an extra year of eligibility, have suceeded in the classroom at least to the degree where they could graduate, and are good enough players that other programs would take them. This cannot possibly be a large number of students. If an athlete has graduated and wishes to go somewhere else, I say let him. I, of course, will think that player to be a disloyal sellout, but that is neither here nor there. Life is about opportunities, right? Carpe diem and all that jazz. I personally believe that this rule would have such a small impact on major college athletics that there should not be an uproar over it. I understand that coaches develop talent on the field and want to see it payoff, but if, as the NCAA believes, an athlete is actually a student-athlete, he or she came to whichever university for an education. If this mission is accomplished and a year of eligibility remains, why shouldn't he or she be allowed to transfer? Consider it a bonus for graduating on time, something that does not happen nearly as often as it should. In my opinion, at least the NCAA is showing some consistency in its "regard for the student-athlete" by passing this legislation. If players abuse the system, those involved in athletics may complain, but those at the respective unversities will certainly not. After all, it is the purpose of the university to instruct and graduate qualified students. If this legislation motivates more players to graduate on time, then I would say that the NCAA finally has done something right.