Skip to main content

NCAA set to vote on new rule regarding graduate transfers

The graduate transfer era of college football has some notable names that come to mind that came in and made an immediate impact for their new programs like Garrett Gilbert (Texas to SMU), Clint Trickett (Florida State to WVU), of course Russell Wilson (NC State to Wisconsin), and most recently former-Alabama-star-turned-Oklahoma quarterback Jalen Hurts - where the official verdict is still out but everyone is talking about the exciting possibilities.

The rule allowed players set to graduate to transfer and play another season somewhere else has been great for college football programs looking to fill holes on their roster with a veteran player.

Well according to a new rule being considered by the NCAA aimed at slowing the flow of graduate transfers, coaches could have to pay a very real premium for those experienced grad transfers, according to the Associated Press.

The NCAA Division I Council is expected to vote by the end of the week on an amendment that would require a program accepting a graduate transfer to count against a team's scholarship for a total of two years, regardless of how much eligibility the player has when the get to campus. If this sounds familiar, it's because we outlined the proposal when it was originally being talked about back in October of 2018.

That would make a lot of coaches give significantly more thought to bringing in a graduate transfer.

There is one exception to that proposed amendment, and it would apply to athletes who complete graduate degree requirements before the start of their second year.

The proposal is meant to curb what some feel has become a epidemic that comes up just short of free agency in major college athletics. Graduate transfers are especially prevalent in football and men's basketball, where numbers have skyrocketed the last several seasons.

Back in June of 2018, research showed that the number of graduate transfers in just football had grown 12 TIMES! That number is likely even higher when talking about men's basketball.

From a personal standpoint, penalizing kids that get their degree and still want to play football (or any other sport for that matter) - and keep in mind that many graduate transfers go from Group of Five to contributors at the Power Five level - is downright silly.

Seems to me like this proposal is an unnecessary way to penalize players who do all the right things, and graduate from a school and with the passion to still pursue opportunities to play a sport they love elsewhere. My question is why do people, or the NCAA, feel this is necessary? Is providing opportunities to continue playing after earning a degree hurting college athletics somehow? I'd argue that it adds to the appeal and creates some really intriguing storylines for the sports during the long off season months.

Head here to read the full piece, including some comments from Stanford's David Shaw and other coaches, from the AP.