Kansas coach Bill Self not in favor of proposed change to NCAA transfer rules

Kansas coach Bill Self gestures during the first half of the team's NCAA college basketball game against Marquette in the NIT Season Tip-Off tournament Wednesday, Nov. 21, 2018, in New York. (AP Photo/Frank Franklin II)

The Wild West can wait. But not for too long.

That was the message sent to college athletics on Wednesday by the NCAA’s Division I Council, which essentially tabled until January the proposed one-time waiver exception for student-athletes who transfer in men’s and women’s basketball, football, baseball and men’s hockey.

To this point, athletes in those five sports who have transferred to another school have had to sit out a season until becoming eligible again.

In April, in response to a request for changes to the waiver process for transfers, the NCAA’s Board of Directors said that they preferred a more permanent solution that did not require a waiver.

Thus, the Division I Council on Wednesday said it would not tweak the waiver guidelines today and instead would commit to changing the transfer rules by January.

According to an NCAA news release, the resolution called the waiver process “an unsustainable method to achieve lasting stability, consistency and transparency within the transfer environment.”

The details are expected to be worked out in the coming months, and the wording and dates outlined in whatever rule change is adopted will determine when college basketball will be affected.

Most believe the changes will not impact the sport until the 2021-22 season.

Kansas basketball coach Bill Self, in an appearance on the Nick Bahe Podcast in late April, explained that he was against the idea of allowing a one-time waiver exemption for Division I men’s basketball players to transfer and become eligible immediately.

“It’s still a terrible rule even if they transfer for the right reasons,” Self said on the podcast. “It’s setting up wild, Wild West free agency. Why do you need to go out and recruit a high school kid when you can just wait and recruit a college kid with some experience?”

Self also said he preferred the system to stay the way it is.

“If you choose to go to another school, you just sit out a year. It should be that way with everybody,” he said. “People can say, ‘Well, there are exceptions.’ And, yes, there are. But you can’t have exceptions for everybody. Where do you draw the line?”

In recent years, men’s college basketball players have begun to move from team to team a little more freely through the graduate transfer rule. That rule allows players who have graduated to use their final seasons of eligibility at another school without sitting out a season.

Although KU has added a few graduate transfers to its roster during the past decade — Tarik Black, Jack Whitman and Isaiah Moss — Self has never viewed that route as a good way to build or fill a roster.

“The grad transfer rule I thought was a bad rule,” Self said during his discussion with Bahe. “Now there’s talk that a kid could transfer and be eligible immediately as an undergrad and if they graduate they can transfer and be eligible immediately, too. So theoretically a guy could play for three different schools and never sit out. I think it’s a bad rule. I think it’s going to create more animosity (in) our sports.”

Part of Self’s criticism of the proposed rule change may be exactly what the NCAA plans to study in the coming months.

During his podcast appearance with Bahe, Self asked a handful of hypothetical questions that he believes need to be answered.

“What’s the drop-dead date when you can transfer,” Self asked. “Can you transfer the first day before classes? Can you just leave universities and programs, leave them high and dry because somebody else on another team transferred and a scholarship became open?”

“It’s going to be different, and it’s not going to be positive,” he added. “I think there’s cases where it could be positive, don’t get me wrong. But as a whole, I don’t think it’s good.”

Comments

Steve Corder

Self is absolutely right!

2 weeks, 1 day ago

Report

Len Shaffer

I agree with you, Steve, for the most part. However, I think there's a middle ground here: if the head coach leaves, a player should have a right to also leave without a penalty.

2 weeks, 1 day ago

Report

Brett McCabe

There is literally nothing Bill Self can say that has any credibility.

2 weeks, 1 day ago

Report

Fred Lucky

I would suggest the same could be said of this post.

1 week, 5 days ago

Report

Brian Wilson

Bill is right...NO, it will only increase the amount of money under the table. Alumini Billionaires from Northern South Alaska U will be buying teams to win the championship. Here is what I think the solutions should be.. <br><br>
1. What needs to happen...The end of Player scholarships!!! They don't deserve it academically or financially!! These scholarships pay too much and in essence these kids earn to much to qualify for financial assistance and these kids are unable to earn it outside basketball. Getting $40K plus annually, Tuition, books, plus room, food without being taxed is ridiculous. 99% of all scholarships are for something $4000 a year or less....very few students ever get this much finanacial assistance and almost all end up owing 50K or more in student loans by graduation. <br><br>
2. What also needs to happen is..... NCAA Basketball Player Contracts!!! One standardized TWO year NCAA Basketball Educational Contract signed by player and school. All players sign the same deal! The only extra money a player would be allowed to earn would be from additional NCAA approved contracts allowing players to market their own images, name, etc. Otherwise any other work or contract is a breech of contract.<br><br>
How: Each shool would have ownership in the NCAA and act as a manager having right to hire 13 basketball players under contract every year. The salary contract would be amount of the Tuition, books, room, board, and meal plan of the school they will be attending, plus standard stipend like $2000/month to give the players the same basic amount of pocket money. Educational expenses would be deducted pre-tax. Colleges would pay into the NCAA money earned from ticket sales and then the NCAA would act as the HR department cutting checks back to the players deducting the amount of tuition, etc. thus paying back the school for the players education. No different than working for any company that helps pay for an employees education. And my guess is that such a contract would end up being valued over $100,000 annually.....compare that to players in the D-league!!<br><br>
Result: ELIMINATE the One and Done player. Colleges get two year commitments with rights, and right of release. Money under the table would be breaking terms of the contract and players would be liable for damages. Any suspensions due to academic failure, personal actions, would also have monetary consequences. Since all contracts for player images need NCAA approval, and companies such as Nike would also be seeking NCAA approval making them subject to being banned or limited in number of contracts if found bribing players and paying them under the table. Further, the approved player image contracts would also be tracked and paid to the player through the NCAA, making sure that everything is transparent. Just my guess as to whats coming and the way I see it.....IDK.

2 weeks ago

Report

Chad Smith

I think I agree in theory with Coach Self, it does set things up to just be trade agreements.

I would say though, if a coach leaves a school, every player on said roster should have the option to leave that school. They attended and agreed to play for that school based upon the assumption that the coach would be the coach of the team the entire time they were on scholarship.

1 week, 3 days ago

Report