Transfer Candidate: Corey Bolds

[late knight]

Yes, the NCAA "sit a year" rule is only in force for football and men's basketball. Suriano is the perfect example. Had his waiver not been approved, he would have had to sit this past season per Big Ten rule, even though the NCAA does not require it. He also would have lost a year of eligibility.







Read the rule. It says they lose a year. Nowhere does it state that it is cumulative to any NCAA loss of eligibility. They are two different computations. NCAA eligibility versus Big Ten eligibility. You guys are all getting hung up on the fact that the NCAA is charging him a year and the Big Ten is charging him a year so you add 1+1=2, but that's not the rule. The fact that he's being charged a year by both doesn't mean he loses two, it means he loses one both in the Big Ten and for all other FBS schools through the NCAA. He's only losing the NCAA year because he used his redshirt year already. Had he played in his freshman season, he would have 3 to play 3 at any non Big Ten FBS school after sitting a year. In the Big Ten he would have 3 to play 2.

Since he didn't play and used his redshirt, however, he will lose a year regardless unless he transfers to an FBS or JUCO program, but it will only be one year. One year is all that anyone is charging.

So you are saying that there is no penalty for transferring within the big ten? That makes no sense.

No, it's not additive. The one year satisfies both. This is the conference rule word for word:

B. Post-Matriculation. A student-athlete that has signed a tender from a Conference institution and has triggered transfer status per NCAA Bylaw 14.5.2 (conditions affecting transfer status), may not represent an alternate Big Ten institution in intercollegiate athletics competition until the individual has completed one (1) full academic year of residence at the alternate (i.e., certifying) Big Ten institution and shall be charged with the loss of one (1) season of eligibility in all sports.

That's it. It doesn't say he loses two years if he's used his redshirt. One year is all the rule states, and it takes no consideration of any NCAA provisions or rules. No intra-conference B1G transfer has ever lost two years of eligibility that I am aware of.

You are misinterpreting the rule. It says clearly that the athlete cannot compete for the first year, AND then loses a year. If It was a one year penalty, there would be no reason to say both parts of that sentence. They’d be redundant.

It is 2 year penalty.

 

[GSGS]

One question that NOBODY has answered here yet: If Bolds is any good, what makes anyone think that Franklin/PSU would approve a transfer to Rutgers? It is a very regular constraint with the revenue sports that the school the athlete is transferring from will not allow the student/athlete to transfer to a future opponent, and we play PSU every year. Ash/RU just placed such a limit on Hester, not allowing him to transfer to any 2018 RU opponent. Why wouldn't Franklin/PSU do the same with Bolds, unless he is sooooo bad that Franklin would like for him to waste one of our 85 schollies?

 

[Ataylor1989x]

One question that NOBODY has answered here yet: If Bolds is any good, what makes anyone think that Franklin/PSU would approve a transfer to Rutgers? It is a very regular constraint with the revenue sports that the school the athlete is transferring from will not allow the student/athlete to transfer to a future opponent, and we play PSU every year. Ash/RU just placed such a limit on Hester, not allowing him to transfer to any 2018 RU opponent. Why wouldn't Franklin/PSU do the same with Bolds, unless he is sooooo bad that Franklin would like for him to waste one of our 85 schollies?

For what it’s worth, social media and popular opinion has evolved to the point where I wouldn’t be suprised if coaches will be allowing guys that haven’t contributed to freely transfer. It’s to the point where any player or fan could call out millionaire coaches on not being fair to the interests of the student-athlete, particularly when that kid fulfilled his obligations off the field. It might not apply in this case, but in general, you know what I mean.

 

[PSUpaly]

Surely a PSU fan wouldn’t know more than our all knowing RU fans that want to pass on the kid because he didn’t commit to us initially...from an unbiased stance, is the kid any good and was simply passed by much better players or does he not belong at the fbs level?

Sorry just saw this. Honestly, I got the impression he was not only passed over by younger guys, but he wasn’t that good. Obviously I could be wrong, but everyone was saying he was a huge reach at the end of the 2015 season when we were struggling. Anyway that’s the impression I got. Hopefully for his sake I’m wrong

 

[GSGS]

Sorry just saw this. Honestly, I got the impression he was not only passed over by younger guys, but he wasn’t that good. Obviously I could be wrong, but everyone was saying he was a huge reach at the end of the 2015 season when we were struggling. Anyway that’s the impression I got. Hopefully for his sake I’m wrong

I've heard the exact same thing. Kid simply isn't a FBS let alone P5 talent. Doesn't have much of a work ethic, either.

 

[JCKnight]

Sorry just saw this. Honestly, I got the impression he was not only passed over by younger guys, but he wasn’t that good. Obviously I could be wrong, but everyone was saying he was a huge reach at the end of the 2015 season when we were struggling. Anyway that’s the impression I got. Hopefully for his sake I’m wrong

Will be interesting to see where he lands...I still think it would we worth us taking a flyer on the kid...our DLine has been one of our weakest recruited areas under Ash...