macktheknife
Well-known member
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Messages
- 2,966
- Reaction score
- 624
There is going to be a shit load of nefarious assholes tampering with players and promising all matter of pie in the sky. Bound to happen.
This is incredibly naive. While the right thing to do, this is going to sting the smaller schools and less successful programs in favor of the alabamas, dukes, and UConn’s of the world ( football, mbb, wbb).
There already are.There is going to be a shit load of nefarious assholes tampering with players and promising all matter of pie in the sky. Bound to happen.
It becomes important to create a culture where players want to stay at your school. Coaches that are disliked, say Petrino or Fuente, will lose more players. If someone is happy, you want them to stay, if they're unhappy you want them to go. The real danger is schools paying under the table, forcing kids to stay for money or threats of ineligibility and preventing a real free market for transfers.
How in the world are we ever going to rebuild our basketball program with this type of rule in the one-and-done era ?
How in the world are we ever going to rebuild our basketball program with this type of rule in the one-and-done era ?
I think biggest question with this new rule will be what happens when a coach is fired/leaves/retires. Could lead to situations where every time a coach leaves, 3/4 of the team does as well, which would give incentive to an AD to not fire a coach that probably should be fired. I support the rule change for sure, but stuff like that will be interesting to see play out.
One positive is that it could have hastened the firing of coaches like BZ or Manning.
Coaches this bad could see almost all of their players transfer.
Overall this will likely not be beneficial to the game.