Mallett wants waiver for transfer to Ark.

If this gets granted expect to see a lot of other athletes call foul play. It would also set a precedent.

He was better off getting his dad to fake being sick.
 
i_like_money said:
If this gets granted expect to see a lot of other athletes call foul play. It would also set a precedent.

He was better off getting his dad to fake being sick.
Click to expand...

Agreed. In my opinion, if one can get a waiver because a system change hurts his playing time, and by extension his possibilities for an NFL career, why can't some rising junior buried at third on the depth chart at their position get a waiver for the same reason?
 
i have some mixed feelings on this, because it is certainly not entirely a players fault that the coach leaves/gets fired. i havent thought it all out yet, but i might think a player that has never played, ie Redshirted (i dont mean not good enough to get in game), should maybe get a pass as he had no effect on the prior season. a player that played, though, IS partly responsible for the success of the team, thus in a way for the outcome of the coach

if the coach leaves voluntarily, then i dont think the player should have any avenues, as then the players should build a better relationship with the coach and this would encourage coaches to stay. otherwise, when a coach leaves, any star player could follow him with the claim that "that is the best system for me"

on the other hand, players making up 'personal issues' is also not quite something that i am comfortable with.
 
i_like_money said:
If this gets granted expect to see a lot of other athletes call foul play. It would also set a precedent.

He was better off getting his dad to fake being sick.
Click to expand...

First of all it would not set a precedent. I happens allot more than you think it does. Secondly, it is an issue that needs to be elevated with the hope that more fairness can be had, particulary on behalf of allot of players who get slighted by cirrcumstances outside of their own control. It's a much talked about topic at some levels in the NCAA just not hot enough yet.
 
He should sit out a year..........

This is a life lesson guys. You should pick the school first. You should also pick a coach you do not think is going to leave or have a possibility of getting fired soon. Obviously, it is sometimes unforseen. Being a redshirt one year does not hurt a kid that much. Most of us deal with this in our own lives. We better not go to work for a company because we like the boss or manaement team. We all know they are not permanent. What happens when the boss leaves, do we always quit?. If we do, most of the time we have to pay a price financially or have relocation hardships, etc.

Life is not fair. These kids need to start learning that at an early age and take responsibilty for the choices they have made. They will be stronger, better people in the end.
 
Re: He should sit out a year..........

flabuzz said:
This is a life lesson guys. You should pick the school first. You should also pick a coach you do not think is going to leave or have a possibility of getting fired soon. Obviously, it is sometimes unforseen. Being a redshirt one year does not hurt a kid that much. Most of us deal with this in our own lives. We better not go to work for a company because we like the boss or manaement team. We all know they are not permanent. What happens when the boss leaves, do we always quit?. If we do, most of the time we have to pay a price financially or have relocation hardships, etc.

Life is not fair. These kids need to start learning that at an early age and take responsibilty for the choices they have made. They will be stronger, better people in the end.
Click to expand...



Nice Post!
 
wreckingball said:
First of all it would not set a precedent. I happens allot more than you think it does. Secondly, it is an issue that needs to be elevated with the hope that more fairness can be had, particulary on behalf of allot of players who get slighted by cirrcumstances outside of their own control. It's a much talked about topic at some levels in the NCAA just not hot enough yet.
Click to expand...

any player should be allowed to transfer anywhere if sit out a year IMO. In this case, I feel for Mallett and think he and many others deserve to be able to transfer where they want when the coach leaves. Unfortunately, from a practical standpoint, if players at say GT or NCSU or BC could transfer anywhere they wanted without sitting out after, we might see 20-30 or more kids transferrign leaving the program in dire circumstances.

So, maybe the rule could be amended to let on Rfreshmen who have never played transfer. that way the player does not lose eligibility by sitting out a year and the player would ahve never played a down of football meaning in essence they had not been a part of the program.

I think Mallett deserves to be able to transfer and not sit out. I just don't think allowing it would work practically as it would set a precedent that could create huge issues.

Any kid attending any school for any sport or academic program besides basketball and football can transfer anywhere with no penalty. so, this is really about schools and the NCAA making money and protectign their pocketbooks.

The NCAA should also mandate that if a new coahc comes in every player is guaranteed a scholly for at least one full year. If the player can't run off then the coahc should not be allowed to run the player off.
 
Mallett has a better chance of seeing Big Foot in the Varsity parking lot then getting to play next year after a transfer !!
 
Re: He should sit out a year..........

flabuzz said:
This is a life lesson guys. You should pick the school first. You should also pick a coach you do not think is going to leave or have a possibility of getting fired soon. Obviously, it is sometimes unforseen. Being a redshirt one year does not hurt a kid that much. Most of us deal with this in our own lives. We better not go to work for a company because we like the boss or manaement team. We all know they are not permanent. What happens when the boss leaves, do we always quit?. If we do, most of the time we have to pay a price financially or have relocation hardships, etc.

Life is not fair. These kids need to start learning that at an early age and take responsibilty for the choices they have made. They will be stronger, better people in the end.
Click to expand...

What frig'n business world do you live in?? No most of us don't deal with this in our own lives..and if in fact anyone does...they are an idiot. If you don't like the company or the people you work with or for..you have a legal right to move on. And that right is one without imposed restrictions by your soon to be former employer.
 
Re: He should sit out a year..........

wreckingball said:
What frig'n business world do you live in?? No most of us don't deal with this in our own lives..and if in fact anyone does...they are an idiot. If you don't like the company or the people you work with or for..you have a legal right to move on. And that right is one without imposed restrictions by your soon to be former employer.
Click to expand...

wreckingball, you either need to go reread the post again, or you must jump jobs a lot. I just got a new boss a month ago, if I change jobs I loose my tenure, vesting, etc... On the other hand, a few years ago (8 to be exact) I got a new boss and it just wasn't working for me, I changed jobs and it took me a few years to get vested, build up vacation, etc.. again. So yes, in a sense many of us do deal with similar situations in our own lives.
 
Re: He should sit out a year..........

aeromech said:
wreckingball, you either need to go reread the post again, or you must jump jobs a lot. I just got a new boss a month ago, if I change jobs I loose my tenure, vesting, etc... On the other hand, a few years ago (8 to be exact) I got a new boss and it just wasn't working for me, I changed jobs and it took me a few years to get vested, build up vacation, etc.. again. So yes, in a sense many of us do deal with similar situations in our own lives.
Click to expand...

Aeromech ..Its only because you choose to deal with it. I have never swithed jobs where I did not negoatite up from what I had before. Nor have I ever let a previous employer impose future restrictions on me without them paying me for the restrictions. (ie; non-compete agreement...the law requires restrictions be compensated for) In addition your comparison is not really comparibale on many levels. In allot of these transfer cases the athletes career would be severely damaged if he tranfered and in some cases ended if he did not transfer.
 
Wreckingball,

That sounds great...in utopia, maybe. What about when you sign a legally binding contract (which provides 'adequate' compensation for the imposed stipulations) that states that you must request and receive permission to leave/transfer, and upon receipt you are required to sit out/non-compete for a period of one year?

You said it yourself. As long as you have 'negotiated' the contract, that is acceptable. The only difference in this case is that these kids don't have the same leverage you perceive yourself to have when negotiating the terms. They do have the option of not signing their scholarship agreement and doing something else to further their football career, though.
 
Re: He should sit out a year..........

wreckingball said:
Aeromech ..Its only because you choose to deal with it. I have never swithed jobs where I did not negoatite up from what I had before. Nor have I ever let a previous employer impose future restrictions on me without them paying me for the restrictions. (ie; non-compete agreement...the law requires restrictions be compensated for) In addition your comparison is not really comparibale on many levels. In allot of these transfer cases the athletes career would be severely damaged if he tranfered and in some cases ended if he did not transfer.
Click to expand...

The difference is that, without the year to sit out, teams have NO disincentive against players transferring like crazy. Employers can use vesting, vacation benefits and other incentives while college football teams have absolutely nothing.
 
wreckingball said:
First of all it would not set a precedent. I happens allot more than you think it does. Secondly, it is an issue that needs to be elevated with the hope that more fairness can be had, particulary on behalf of allot of players who get slighted by cirrcumstances outside of their own control. It's a much talked about topic at some levels in the NCAA just not hot enough yet.
Click to expand...

o rly? tell me these examples of it happening allot more than i think then. i'll wait

every big name transfer I've heard of was because of a sick relative.
 
JOJATK said:
I'm not sure I agree or disagree with letting a kid who's already been in the program transfer without some penalty. However, I wouldn't force him to use his redshirt year in order to do it. To me making them use the redshirt year, or if they don't have a redshirt year left, forcing them to use a year of eligibility to sit out for a year when he didn't cause the situation is penalizing the student-athlete too much.
Click to expand...

I didn't see if anyone addressed this in this thread, but an athlete doesn't lose a year eligibility on any transfer. They just have to sit out a year before they can play in games unless they are given a waiver. They get to practice.

They have 6 consecutive years to use their 4 years of eligibility. So, if a kid is red shirted for a season and decides to transfer at the end of that season, they don't lose any eligibility. You'll hear about players who request a "6th year" when they were red shirted as freshman and missed a season because of injury. I don't think that request is necessary when a transfer is involved.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top