The Transfer Carousel - 2020-21

[RamStock]

Obviously, Cox and staff have not developed a "Family", don't blame it on the kids- it is the schools job to develop the correct environment, the correct coaching and the correct atmosphere. Yes, the buck stops with Cox and his less than top notch assistants.

The warning signs were out early with the Shepard and Walker fiasco, the difficulty Cox has with signing players, the DJ signing, the bad game preparation etc etc. There is no reason to believe that Cox or his staff has the ability to change it.

Doesn't anyone have access to what is really going on??????????????????????????

It wasn’t all bad. Sutton used his connections to bring in Aris.

[Rhodyhooopz]

Speaking of Sutton, what is his role? All i see is him standing near the player's entrance before games just talking to people

[RamStock]

Speaking of Sutton, what is his role? All i see is him standing near the player's entrance before games just talking to people

He is in charge of sending out inspiring tweets on Twitter.

[RhodyRam86]

How many are paying their own way?

Walk ons?

Exactly. But if you want the freedom to be able to transfer without sitting out a year, then pay your own way.

Just an idea. It would at least hold kids a bit more accountable for their commitments. And it would limit the amount of transfers while still giving kids options.

Ok, and what restrictions do you plan on putting on coaches who constantly break contracts?

Coaches have contracts. It’s up to the school and the coach to put whatever they need to protect themselves in the contract. I know my idea won’t fly, but if it did, you could always have a stipulation that the player can leave without restriction if the coach leaves.

[RhodyRam86]

Buyouts are a joke often covered by the school hiring them in some form of creative compensation.

Exactly. So in the end, we're expecting college kids to be more responsible for their decisions when they're making no money than the adults coaching them making at least 6 figures.

The whole system is a mess all built around exploiting college kids. We can't pay them even though they bring in all this money, because you see they need to be treated like any other college student. So they say ok, treat us like every other college student including athletes in sports that don't bring in money and let us transfer with no penalty. Now all of a sudden they can't do that because that hurts fans feelings.

Granted that schools make money off these kids, but I wouldn’t say the students make nothing. They go to school for free. Tuition to many schools is more than a lot of people make in a year. And the school is making an additional investment to recruit.

[giovanni]

Buyouts are a joke often covered by the school hiring them in some form of creative compensation.

Exactly. So in the end, we're expecting college kids to be more responsible for their decisions when they're making no money than the adults coaching them making at least 6 figures.

The whole system is a mess all built around exploiting college kids. We can't pay them even though they bring in all this money, because you see they need to be treated like any other college student. So they say ok, treat us like every other college student including athletes in sports that don't bring in money and let us transfer with no penalty. Now all of a sudden they can't do that because that hurts fans feelings.

Granted that schools make money off these kids, but I wouldn’t say the students make nothing. They go to school for free. Tuition to many schools is more than a lot ogled people make in a year. And the school is making an additional investment to recruit.

They are supposedly "student" first , athletes 2nd. Granted they are blessed physically to be able to play the game at such an high level and to be able to get a full scholarship, many times adding up to around $200,000 or more. I know a lot of very good students out there that cannot play a sport that would love to be the recipient of that benefit. Last I checked, students or student athletes can transfer and it doesn't hamper their ability at continuing their education without pause. Just asking, but is it that bad that sitting out a year only in basketball and not in the classroom is a stipulation that is there for athletes receiving the benefit of getting full scholarships for their athletic abilities?

[rjsuperfly66]

I get that but I also get the other side of the road too ... I believe there are Big 10 teams making over $50 million annually from their TV rights deal. If there were no players on the field, there would not be a game to watch, tickets to sell, etc.

Even for smaller, basketball schools, the same can be true. Extreme example, but George Mason received an estimated amount of nearly $700 million in free advertising during their Final Four run, plus an 350% increase in applications, and a 25% increase in alumni activities/donations.

Those kids might not have brought in the same up-front revenue, but brought a ton of value to the school with no compensation to them besides their scholarships.

[RF1]

Real poor example of professional journalism on WPRI Channel 12's Hershgordon's part. A real journalist would not be speculating on a matter like this based on their personal interpretation of an IG post. Journalists should operate on facts. Hershgordon should have been working on confirmation before jumping to conclusions he made public.

[DC_Rams]

Real poor example of professional journalism on Hershgordon's part. A real journalist would not be speculating on a matter like this based on their personal interpretation of an IG post. Journalists should operate on facts. Hershgordon should have been working on confirmation before jumping to conclusions he made public.

100% agree. Piss poor work and effort.

[RhowdyRam02]

Exactly. So in the end, we're expecting college kids to be more responsible for their decisions when they're making no money than the adults coaching them making at least 6 figures.

The whole system is a mess all built around exploiting college kids. We can't pay them even though they bring in all this money, because you see they need to be treated like any other college student. So they say ok, treat us like every other college student including athletes in sports that don't bring in money and let us transfer with no penalty. Now all of a sudden they can't do that because that hurts fans feelings.

Granted that schools make money off these kids, but I wouldn’t say the students make nothing. They go to school for free. Tuition to many schools is more than a lot ogled people make in a year. And the school is making an additional investment to recruit.

They are supposedly "student" first , athletes 2nd. Granted they are blessed physically to be able to play the game at such an high level and to be able to get a full scholarship, many times adding up to around $200,000 or more. I know a lot of very good students out there that cannot play a sport that would love to be the recipient of that benefit. Last I checked, students or student athletes can transfer and it doesn't hamper their ability at continuing their education without pause. Just asking, but is it that bad that sitting out a year only in basketball and not in the classroom is a stipulation that is there for athletes receiving the benefit of getting full scholarships for their athletic abilities?

Ok, if they're students first why do you want to deprive them of the same rights other students have? If a Ramette transfers, she doesn't have to sit out a year before she joins the other schools dance team. If a kid is on Student Senate here they don't have to sit out a year before joining student government.

Also "full scholarship" is a flexible term. You can use the sticker price all you want, and the NCAA has done a great job brainwashing people into using it, but how much does the university save if they cut the 13 men's basketball scholarships? The cost to the school for those scholarships is $0. They're "giving" the students something that costs the school nothing to give out and they reap millions of dollars off of that free gift that they then don't share with the students

[giovanni]

I am not disagreeing with the points the RJ or you bring up, just offering a counter argument. I think you can make solid arguments for or against. But unless thinks have changed greatly, Ramettes and people on the student council are awarded full scholarships for their activiies?

[RhodyRam86]

Granted that schools make money off these kids, but I wouldn’t say the students make nothing. They go to school for free. Tuition to many schools is more than a lot ogled people make in a year. And the school is making an additional investment to recruit.

They are supposedly "student" first , athletes 2nd. Granted they are blessed physically to be able to play the game at such an high level and to be able to get a full scholarship, many times adding up to around $200,000 or more. I know a lot of very good students out there that cannot play a sport that would love to be the recipient of that benefit. Last I checked, students or student athletes can transfer and it doesn't hamper their ability at continuing their education without pause. Just asking, but is it that bad that sitting out a year only in basketball and not in the classroom is a stipulation that is there for athletes receiving the benefit of getting full scholarships for their athletic abilities?

Ok, if they're students first why do you want to deprive them of the same rights other students have? If a Ramette transfers, she doesn't have to sit out a year before she joins the other schools dance team. If a kid is on Student Senate here they don't have to sit out a year before joining student government.

Also "full scholarship" is a flexible term. You can use the sticker price all you want, and the NCAA has done a great job brainwashing people into using it, but how much does the university save if they cut the 13 men's basketball scholarships? The cost to the school for those scholarships is $0. They're "giving" the students something that costs the school nothing to give out and they reap millions of dollars off of that free gift that they then don't share with the students

The kid on the student senate and the girl on the dance team aren’t going to school for free so when they transfer no limit on extra curriculars. Whether it’s a cost to the school or not, the scholarship is a savings to the athlete. How many of these student athletes would be in college displaying their talents if the college didn’t give them a scholarship and the forum to do so?

[SGreenwell]

They are supposedly "student" first , athletes 2nd. Granted they are blessed physically to be able to play the game at such an high level and to be able to get a full scholarship, many times adding up to around $200,000 or more. I know a lot of very good students out there that cannot play a sport that would love to be the recipient of that benefit. Last I checked, students or student athletes can transfer and it doesn't hamper their ability at continuing their education without pause. Just asking, but is it that bad that sitting out a year only in basketball and not in the classroom is a stipulation that is there for athletes receiving the benefit of getting full scholarships for their athletic abilities?

Ok, if they're students first why do you want to deprive them of the same rights other students have? If a Ramette transfers, she doesn't have to sit out a year before she joins the other schools dance team. If a kid is on Student Senate here they don't have to sit out a year before joining student government.

Also "full scholarship" is a flexible term. You can use the sticker price all you want, and the NCAA has done a great job brainwashing people into using it, but how much does the university save if they cut the 13 men's basketball scholarships? The cost to the school for those scholarships is $0. They're "giving" the students something that costs the school nothing to give out and they reap millions of dollars off of that free gift that they then don't share with the students

The kid on the student senate and the girl on the dance team aren’t going to school for free so when they transfer no limit on extra curriculars. Whether it’s a cost to the school or not, the scholarship is a savings to the athlete. How many of these student athletes would be in college displaying their talents if the college didn’t give them a scholarship and the forum to do so?

I think that argument was more tenable 20+ years ago. It is less so when the NCAA is selling basketball television rights for literally $8.8 billion. Typically, the bigger gap between those at the bottom and the top of a pyramid, the more strife you're going to get.

[RhodyRam86]

Ok, if they're students first why do you want to deprive them of the same rights other students have? If a Ramette transfers, she doesn't have to sit out a year before she joins the other schools dance team. If a kid is on Student Senate here they don't have to sit out a year before joining student government.

Also "full scholarship" is a flexible term. You can use the sticker price all you want, and the NCAA has done a great job brainwashing people into using it, but how much does the university save if they cut the 13 men's basketball scholarships? The cost to the school for those scholarships is $0. They're "giving" the students something that costs the school nothing to give out and they reap millions of dollars off of that free gift that they then don't share with the students

The kid on the student senate and the girl on the dance team aren’t going to school for free so when they transfer no limit on extra curriculars. Whether it’s a cost to the school or not, the scholarship is a savings to the athlete. How many of these student athletes would be in college displaying their talents if the college didn’t give them a scholarship and the forum to do so?

I think that argument was more tenable 20+ years ago. It is less so when the NCAA is selling basketball television rights for literally $8.8 billion. Typically, the bigger gap between those at the bottom and the top of a pyramid, the more strife you're going to get.

Well you'll have to forgive me. I'm old so i don't have many novel thoughts. I get that there is a disparity, but what's the alternative? How do you start paying these student athletes equitably without just turning college basketball into the equivalent of the minors for the NBA? You can't possibly pay them enough to narrow the gap. And if you do that, do Duke players make the same as NJIT players? Does Omar Silverio get paid as much as Jarred Terrell? I know it may not be fair, but these student athletes are getting a free ride through college and get to play the game they love. I'd bet a fair number of them wouldn't be in college if the college said we'll give you a free education and you don't have to play basketball.

[SGreenwell]

The kid on the student senate and the girl on the dance team aren’t going to school for free so when they transfer no limit on extra curriculars. Whether it’s a cost to the school or not, the scholarship is a savings to the athlete. How many of these student athletes would be in college displaying their talents if the college didn’t give them a scholarship and the forum to do so?

I think that argument was more tenable 20+ years ago. It is less so when the NCAA is selling basketball television rights for literally $8.8 billion. Typically, the bigger gap between those at the bottom and the top of a pyramid, the more strife you're going to get.

Well you'll have to forgive me. I'm old so i don't have many novel thoughts. I get that there is a disparity, but what's the alternative? How do you start paying these student athletes equitably without just turning college basketball into the equivalent of the minors for the NBA? You can't possibly pay them enough to narrow the gap. And if you do that, do Duke players make the same as NJIT players? Does Omar Silverio get paid as much as Jarred Terrell? I know it may not be fair, but these student athletes are getting a free ride through college and get to play the game they love. I'd bet a fair number of them wouldn't be in college if the college said we'll give you a free education and you don't have to play basketball.

Those are all good and tough questions that the NCAA has zero interest in answering - they'd prefer to just keep paying basketball and football players zero. To me, they've been functioning as a "minor league" for both sports for decades now, with the players receiving unfair compensation. Yeah, it would be tough to figure out how to compensate players. You got $8.8 billion from the TV rights for one sport - I think they could figure things out if they wanted to. They don't.

[NYGFan_Section208]

I share a lot of the concerns here, but to offer one counterpoint - Pretty much in every professional sports league, when you do things to increase player movement, it has increased the competitiveness of the sport. Whether we're talking free agency in baseball, football and basketball, or when the NBA decreased the length of player contracts, all of these leagues have seen more competition since those changes.

College basketball hasn't been immune to this, either. Most of the rules enacted by the NCAA that would seemingly increase the power of the bigger schools - allowing more transfers, the money to do bigger and bigger practice facilities - hasn't actually translated to a consolidation of power by those teams. Loyola-Chicago made the Final Four in 2018, and this year, the final Top 25 poll had Dayton and San Diego State in the top 10. I realize those might seem like isolated examples, but I think more and more mid-major teams have been legitimate national title contenders in recent years.

Yeah, it sucks that we're going to lose Martin to this, and probably other good players in future years. However, the side effect is going to be that URI is probably going to be involved with more players transferring down - like the Mitchell twins currently - that might not have been realistic targets out of high school. Asking kids to be "loyal" in the 80s and 90s was a lot easier than now, when they're still not getting paid, some coaches are nearing the $10M/year contract threshold, and the NCAA basketball contract alone is valued at $8.8 billion.

While all that may be true, it’s tough to get fully invested in a team / kids when you know some/most of them won’t be at our school for all four years.

Like Lamar?

[RhodyRam86]

I think that argument was more tenable 20+ years ago. It is less so when the NCAA is selling basketball television rights for literally $8.8 billion. Typically, the bigger gap between those at the bottom and the top of a pyramid, the more strife you're going to get.

Well you'll have to forgive me. I'm old so i don't have many novel thoughts. I get that there is a disparity, but what's the alternative? How do you start paying these student athletes equitably without just turning college basketball into the equivalent of the minors for the NBA? You can't possibly pay them enough to narrow the gap. And if you do that, do Duke players make the same as NJIT players? Does Omar Silverio get paid as much as Jarred Terrell? I know it may not be fair, but these student athletes are getting a free ride through college and get to play the game they love. I'd bet a fair number of them wouldn't be in college if the college said we'll give you a free education and you don't have to play basketball.

Those are all good and tough questions that the NCAA has zero interest in answering - they'd prefer to just keep paying basketball and football players zero. To me, they've been functioning as a "minor league" for both sports for decades now, with the players receiving unfair compensation. Yeah, it would be tough to figure out how to compensate players. You got $8.8 billion from the TV rights for one sport - I think they could figure things out if they wanted to. They don't.

just rough math...350 teams...12 players/team...$20,000 per player is 8.4M. $40,000 is 16.8M. That hardly puts a dent in the 8.8b on TV rights alone so your gap is really not narrowed. and not sure how you pay a college kid more than that. i think i could be on board if it were in that range/player and every player got the same amount regardless of the school or how good the player is. if you start divvying it up based on how much certain schools or conferences make or how good the player is, you've lost me as a fan. not that anyone would really care

[rhodyblue12]

Sean East from UMass in the portal. Nice player. Wish we could grab him.

[Section104]

Sean East from UMass in the portal. Nice player. Wish we could grab him.

2 years off to transfer within conference...

[giovanni]

[giovanni]

[DeanDome88]

Well you'll have to forgive me. I'm old so i don't have many novel thoughts. I get that there is a disparity, but what's the alternative? How do you start paying these student athletes equitably without just turning college basketball into the equivalent of the minors for the NBA? You can't possibly pay them enough to narrow the gap. And if you do that, do Duke players make the same as NJIT players? Does Omar Silverio get paid as much as Jarred Terrell? I know it may not be fair, but these student athletes are getting a free ride through college and get to play the game they love. I'd bet a fair number of them wouldn't be in college if the college said we'll give you a free education and you don't have to play basketball.

Those are all good and tough questions that the NCAA has zero interest in answering - they'd prefer to just keep paying basketball and football players zero. To me, they've been functioning as a "minor league" for both sports for decades now, with the players receiving unfair compensation. Yeah, it would be tough to figure out how to compensate players. You got $8.8 billion from the TV rights for one sport - I think they could figure things out if they wanted to. They don't.

just rough math...350 teams...12 players/team...$20,000 per player is 8.4M. $40,000 is 16.8M. That hardly puts a dent in the 8.8b on TV rights alone so your gap is really not narrowed. and not sure how you pay a college kid more than that. i think i could be on board if it were in that range/player and every player got the same amount regardless of the school or how good the player is. if you start divvying it up based on how much certain schools or conferences make or how good the player is, you've lost me as a fan. not that anyone would really care

I think you left out a zero in each estimate. The problem is many programs/boosters are willing to make large cash payments to players in clear violation of the rules. In the past they had to take gambles on unproven freshman but now thanks to the expected upcoming transfer rules they can go out and buy players who are already proven on the college level without a year off from basketball for the player. I am not trying to imply that this is what has happened or is happening to any current or former URI player. It's just that the financial numbers are staggering and many people are quite willing to break rules to succeed. I'm not saying that the bright lights are not a reason for a player to want to be in a P5, it obviously is a good reason. On the other hand, when you win big at a school like URI you are remembered for a lifetime.

[steviep123]

Um, wouldn't a guarantee of a next school option mean that the next school is tampering?

[RhodyKyle]

This might be the most egregious spelling of coerce ever.

[ramster]

Sean East from UMass in the portal. Nice player. Wish we could grab him.

2 years off to transfer within conference...

East is a good player. Would be an excellent pick up, and only a freshman
He lost his starting job during the season but then regained it
Problem for East is he got recruited over
Noah Fernandes transferred back to New England from Wichita State. He will likely take PG duties
Javohn Garcia from Brewster Academy was Ranked #18 in New England, but reports are he was improving significantly late in the season. He could grab a starting spot at UMASS as a Freshman
TJ Weeks will be returning from hernia surgery that kept him out from early December to the end of season.

[giovanni]

"Um, wouldn't a guarantee of a next school option mean that the next school is tampering?"

Very true and we know how ethical many of these coaches are and how badly the NCAA punishes them, just ask Sean Miller, Will Wade, Bill Self and many others.


"This might be the most egregious spelling of coerce ever"

I would assume a poor voice recognition error. Whoever this former coach is does not seem unintelligent at all.

[DeanDome88]

Um, wouldn't a guarantee of a next school option mean that the next school is tampering?

Are there any actual tampering rules in NCAA?

[RhodyRam86]

Those are all good and tough questions that the NCAA has zero interest in answering - they'd prefer to just keep paying basketball and football players zero. To me, they've been functioning as a "minor league" for both sports for decades now, with the players receiving unfair compensation. Yeah, it would be tough to figure out how to compensate players. You got $8.8 billion from the TV rights for one sport - I think they could figure things out if they wanted to. They don't.

just rough math...350 teams...12 players/team...$20,000 per player is 8.4M. $40,000 is 16.8M. That hardly puts a dent in the 8.8b on TV rights alone so your gap is really not narrowed. and not sure how you pay a college kid more than that. i think i could be on board if it were in that range/player and every player got the same amount regardless of the school or how good the player is. if you start divvying it up based on how much certain schools or conferences make or how good the player is, you've lost me as a fan. not that anyone would really care

I think you left out a zero in each estimate. The problem is many programs/boosters are willing to make large cash payments to players in clear violation of the rules. In the past they had to take gambles on unproven freshman but now thanks to the expected upcoming transfer rules they can go out and buy players who are already proven on the college level without a year off from basketball for the player. I am not trying to imply that this is what has happened or is happening to any current or former URI player. It's just that the financial numbers are staggering and many people are quite willing to break rules to succeed. I'm not saying that the bright lights are not a reason for a player to want to be in a P5, it obviously is a good reason. On the other hand, when you win big at a school like URI you are remembered for a lifetime.

Well to be fair...I did qualify my statement by saying I was using “rough math”.

[giovanni]

Players continue to enter portal:

[adam914]

[RF1]

Would not be surprised to then see its implementation, if approved, delayed.

[SmartyBarrett]

[PeterRamTime]

Can we get him too?

[NYGFan_Section208]

Can we get him too?

Who? Gregg Marshall?

[reef]

Poor Gregg Marshall crazy this happening with such a proven coach

[McRam]

Obviously, Cox and staff have not developed a "Family", don't blame it on the kids- it is the schools job to develop the correct environment, the correct coaching and the correct atmosphere. Yes, the buck stops with Cox and his less than top notch assistants.

The warning signs were out early with the Shepard and Walker fiasco, the difficulty Cox has with signing players, the DJ signing, the bad game preparation etc etc. There is no reason to believe that Cox or his staff has the ability to change it.

Doesn't anyone have access to what is really going on??????????????????????????

It wasn’t all bad. Sutton used his connections to bring in Aris.

EXACTLY!!

[McRam]

Can we get him too?

Who? Gregg Marshall?

Yes and his staff!

[McRam]

Can we get him too?

Who? Gregg Marshall?

Yes and his staff!

[STC]

Do not equate or confuse Gregg Marshall and David Cox based on transfer issues. Gregg Marshall is vastly more accomplished.

[giovanni]

[giovanni]

[RF1]

Good! It is the ACC and Big Ten that are pushing the most to eliminate the waiting period. That should tell you all you need to know.

[Rhode_Island_Red]

[/quote]

Um, wouldn't a guarantee of a next school option mean that the next school is tampering?
[/quote]
Are there any actual tampering rules in NCAA?
[/quote]

Yes. If Kentucky gets caught, Jacksonville State goes on probation.

[NYGFan_Section208]

Do not equate or confuse Gregg Marshall and David Cox based on transfer issues. Gregg Marshall is vastly more accomplished.

Would take Mr. Marshall here in a heartbeat...

[section(105)]

Um, wouldn't a guarantee of a next school option mean that the next school is tampering?
[/quote]
Are there any actual tampering rules in NCAA?
[/quote]

Yes. If Kentucky gets caught, Jacksonville State goes on probation.
[/quote]
.......and Coach Cal gets extended with a bump.......

[Rhodymob05]

That quote by Goodman is incredible.

[josephski]

That quote by Goodman is incredible.

Probably not quite as much of a difference as it seems. Had the season not ended early, it's possible that Long, Martin and others would not have announced they were transferring at this point.

[rjsuperfly66]

That quote requires some appropriate context. Selection Sunday in 2019 was on March 17th. NCAA First-Four and NIT games began on March 19th, not accounting for CBI and CIT teams. This year the season was over for every team on March 12th. That has given all players 2+ weeks to consider transfer options, compared to last year where almost half of D1 teams would be 4-5 days removed from their last game, less if their teams won their first postseason game. Perspective.

[bigappleram]

Due to the virus it also has created a situation where the connectivity between the coaches and players is fractured allowing for more tampering and “whispers in the ear” through intermediaries like AAU coaches, parents and handlers. Not surprising the numbers are higher and will keep climbing. Those relationships were already difficult to maintain and fragile, the virus just exacerbated it.

[Running Ram]

Um, wouldn't a guarantee of a next school option mean that the next school is tampering?

Are there any actual tampering rules in NCAA?

Yes. If Kentucky gets caught, Jacksonville State goes on probation.

It's funny cus it's true