I was curious how many of you like this rule? I personally hate it. Why should players get a 5th year of eligibility? Does anyone actually believe that Lewis and Lee transferred to UL to take classes not available at their old schools? All this has become, is a way for players who could not get drafted, the previous year, to get another year to raise their stock and possibly get drafted. It also gives coaches, who cannot recruit, like Pitino, the opportunity to bring in players. Just another NCAA rule that doesn't make sense.
5th year transfers
- Thread starter Ben101er
- Start date
I could care less. It's not like they are being allowed to play for 5 years instead of 4. They still only get 4 years of playing eligibility.
Why begrudge a young man for trying to improve his draft stock? I do agree they aren't coming to UL for any special program that their school didn't offer though. That reason has always been BS.
Why begrudge a young man for trying to improve his draft stock? I do agree they aren't coming to UL for any special program that their school didn't offer though. That reason has always been BS.
i don't see it as a negative since all coaches have the opportunity to do it if they want to. it's a good thing if it helps a player raise his pro stock or if he just wants to play for the love of the game while still taking classes. jmo
It's ruining college basketball.
These guys are only on campus a few months, and probably don't even go to class.
They aren't even around long enough to get to know them.
They don't care about the university or the fans.
They only care about moving up to the NBA.
Wait a minute.
We couldn't be talking about ulavel, could we???
These guys are only on campus a few months, and probably don't even go to class.
They aren't even around long enough to get to know them.
They don't care about the university or the fans.
They only care about moving up to the NBA.
Wait a minute.
We couldn't be talking about ulavel, could we???
Lee and Lewis are obviously L1C8 type of guys.
They are not getting a fifth year to play, if they have played four years they cannot transfer and play.
You know the players don't get a fifth year of eligibility for transferring right?
I was impressed by Lee and Lewis, I am proud they have the opportunity to take their talents to a larger stage
The OP was clearly confused. Students get 5 academic years to play 4 seasons in their sport. They do not get 5 seasons in their sport. So they could skip a year for medical reasons, to focus on their grades, or to improve their game.
Combine that with students who have graduated often go to graduate school at a different school than undergraduate, and because of summer school and in some cases AP classes, some students are able to graduate faster.
Why would you be opposed to something that benefits students? True students who earned a degree.
Combine that with students who have graduated often go to graduate school at a different school than undergraduate, and because of summer school and in some cases AP classes, some students are able to graduate faster.
Why would you be opposed to something that benefits students? True students who earned a degree.
Of course. I understand they only get four years, but every other player that transfers, has to sit a year, before using their last year of eligibility. I just think the rule is unfair.
Obviously satire but for a semi serious response the transfers for Louisville played well. Honestly it should be disturbing to Louisville fans that after over a decade with Rick Pitino his best players on the team are guys he's never coached before. Looking forward to seeing what that roster looks like next year during probation.
I don't care. I just think it's funny because Pitino can't develop talent so this is his route to win
in both cases a player has 5 years to play 4
i have no problem with the rule
i do find it funny that Pitino has constantly said that he does not like OAD players because he likes to build that relationship over 3-4 years
If the player/student has already graduated, they don't have to sit out a year. The transfer rule (sitting out a year) only applies to undergrads. I think it's a great rule; so did Uncle Julius.
Would you have thought it a great rule, if Alex had transferred to UL, since he had already graduated? I just think that it is unfair, since it is not about these guys getting more education. If it were, they would get a masters degree in whatever their major was. Does anyone actually think that UL just magically has some graduate program that other schools do not, that just happens to be what these guys wanted to get a masters in? Baloney. It is simply to play basketball, and has little to do with education. And, I didn't like it when Julius was here, either. It isn't a good rule, regardless of who uses it. JMO.
College sports are not about the student-athlete anyway. If they were, there is a lot of things that need to be changed.
We should be celebrating kids who are graduating...yet, there is one that seems to have an issue with rewarding the kids who just graduated. SMH.
I say this all the time and people like the OP further cement it for me...we have some of the worst fans.
You seem to be the only one with a problem with it. You want to punish kids that have actually shown they cared about their education and earned a bachelor's already from getting to go help themselves academically and in athletics. And you have NO way of knowing that some of these guys are not getting their master's degrees that do this with b-ball or football.
You are correct. I have no actual way of knowing, but I cannot imagine UL being a real hot spot for graduates to enroll to further their education, if not for playing basketball. And guys, I said I don't like the rule, but I am not taking pitchforks and torches to the NCAA offices over it, either. I started the thread to see what everyone thought. It looks like I am in the minority, and that is ok. I thought that is what this forum is about, to get others opinions. If everyone else does not have a problem with it, great.
These are the kind of post that I expect to see on the UL board about one and done. There is nothing wrong with it IMO and I would have no issue if we had the need to do it ourselves.
Just wanted to clarify, you specifically said in the OP that they "get a 5th year of eligibility" and "players who could not get drafted, the previous year, to get another year to raise their stock and possibly get drafted."
I don't take issue to the idea. If Lewis and Lee still remained at Cleveland State and Drexel, they would have absolutely no shot at the NBA. They have the talent to get there, not entirely sure their defensive faults can keep them there, but they have a shot, so it's nice that they're being put on a bigger stage and getting that opportunity. They're not getting any more eligibility than any other student-athlete would get.
You get five years to play four as long as one of those years was a redshirt or a medical hardship. That's the way it has been at all NCAA levels for decades (although no redshirting in D3)
Pimptino doesn't take players he only gets to know for 6 or 7 months. That bold face lie came straight out of his mouth. He is a two faced hypocrite which makes him perfect for that cesspool that is UL athletics.
You are correct. However it is certainly attention getting when teams start to stockpile these types of players.
How is that unfair? They already finished their commitment to that particular University. Most normal students go to grad school skmewhere different than their undergrad as well.
You have the "sit out a year" rule to keep the big schools from using the lesser programs as a farm system. But in a graduate scenario the student had filled their obligation and should be able to continue their education as well as athletic career wherever they'd like. Just like a normal student.
If it helps a player reach it's goal that is great. College is to help people reach their goals and make a living. I have no problem with players leaving after their freshman season to make millions and I have no problem with players transferring after getting their degree to pursue their dreams. It would be very hypocritical for us to criticize this rule but embrace the one year freshman
I'd prefer to have all players who transfer be eligible immediately without the year off. To every school, no matter if coaches like it or not. It might mean more coaches have to treat kids with respect. If you don't like school, you can go wherever you want. Why shouldn't these guys be the same way?
Might bigger schools treat lesser schools as farm teams? If so, what's the harm? The kids get a chance to shine in a bigger environment.
College basketball should be all about the kids. We forget that too often.IMO
Might bigger schools treat lesser schools as farm teams? If so, what's the harm? The kids get a chance to shine in a bigger environment.
College basketball should be all about the kids. We forget that too often.IMO
It's a combination of the athletics and the academics...and a master's degree is hard to get at UL, just like it is here in TN at MTSU or TSU. They do not give those away just because we are not taking classes at Vandy or Yale or Stanford.
Ain't nothing wrong with the rule. In fact we need to get involved in it. We should add one for next season. A guard who can light it up is what we need.
I like the rule. It rewards players that get their degrees. It allows some mid-major guys that have shined at that level to get a chance to get looked at on a bigger stage. It might help some of those guys actually get drafted. It's also a nice way for rebuilding programs to get a little boost.
I wish Cal would use this rule a little more. I would like to bring in one a year just to add some experience to help us through the growing pains we always seem to experience during the preseason.
It wasn't necessary this season with several veterans back, but if we lose a lot of guys after this season, it might be nice to add a grad transfer for next season.
We have discussed this before and I think a lot of us would like to see Cal add a grad transfer sharpshooter for next year. It seems like every mid-major has a guy that can shoot and there are several looking to transfer under the new rule. Cal needs to find one and convince them that they could be role player on a contender instead a star on a pretender.
Think about how good we could be if we had a guy like Lee or Lewis playing alongside Ulis and Murray. Lee or Lewis would likely start or at least be the sixth man. Why not go after a guy like that instead of unproven JUCO like Mulder? Plus, it doesn't hinder recruiting at all since these guys won't be back the next year.
All in all, I think it would be smart to add a player like that every year to give us a bit more experience. Bring in a guy that has been the big fish in a little pond so to speak. A guy that has played 30+ minutes per game for 30 games at the D-1 level for three seasons. A guy that has made the big shot in a conference tourney title game. I think it could only help the program. And it would look good on Cal if he took a guy like that and helped them get into the league. I think it's a great idea. The only down side is UofL fans will say that Cal is copying Pitino, even though Cal did it before Pitino (Julius Mays).
I wish Cal would use this rule a little more. I would like to bring in one a year just to add some experience to help us through the growing pains we always seem to experience during the preseason.
It wasn't necessary this season with several veterans back, but if we lose a lot of guys after this season, it might be nice to add a grad transfer for next season.
We have discussed this before and I think a lot of us would like to see Cal add a grad transfer sharpshooter for next year. It seems like every mid-major has a guy that can shoot and there are several looking to transfer under the new rule. Cal needs to find one and convince them that they could be role player on a contender instead a star on a pretender.
Think about how good we could be if we had a guy like Lee or Lewis playing alongside Ulis and Murray. Lee or Lewis would likely start or at least be the sixth man. Why not go after a guy like that instead of unproven JUCO like Mulder? Plus, it doesn't hinder recruiting at all since these guys won't be back the next year.
All in all, I think it would be smart to add a player like that every year to give us a bit more experience. Bring in a guy that has been the big fish in a little pond so to speak. A guy that has played 30+ minutes per game for 30 games at the D-1 level for three seasons. A guy that has made the big shot in a conference tourney title game. I think it could only help the program. And it would look good on Cal if he took a guy like that and helped them get into the league. I think it's a great idea. The only down side is UofL fans will say that Cal is copying Pitino, even though Cal did it before Pitino (Julius Mays).
I don't mind it from the standpoint that it benefits the players. However, I wonder how much shady recruiting goes on.
For example, does Pitino or one of his assistants contact Lee, or does Lee or a family member call UL and express interest?
Ethically, I think it's wrong to approach a player who still has eligibility at another school, but I'm sure it happens.
For example, does Pitino or one of his assistants contact Lee, or does Lee or a family member call UL and express interest?
Ethically, I think it's wrong to approach a player who still has eligibility at another school, but I'm sure it happens.
I think OP just misunderstood the rule and thought players got to play a 5th year, and once he realized he was wrong, has to stick to his opposition to a rule everyone else likes to keep from admitting he was wrong to begin with.