Proposed new rules

Teddy

@UnderDog68 said:

@Teddy said:

@UnderDog68 said:

@donm said:
Back in the day, before roster restrictions (85), the Bear would just round 'em up so that opponents couldn't get them. He just hoarded players, I think scholarship limits have helped "redistribute" talent on a more equal basis.

True. If Bear wanted a player and couldn't sign him for football, he would sign him for basketball, baseball, or track and say that he was a walk-on football player.

Good idea. Let’s put Fields on a baseball scholarship and make room for another stud in this class.

LOL....Because of Bear, that practice was outlawed. And because of that practice, we no longer have GT and Tulane in the SEC.

I was just joking.

UnderDog68

That's why I LOLed.......

alphakev

I think they need to put some rules in regards to transferring like
1. No contact allowed until an athlete has publicly announced he is seeking to transfer otherwise it will be a major recruiting infraction costing the offending school to not be allowed to receive any transfers for 2 years (puts responsibility on coaches to follow rules)
2. Student must be in good academic standing 3.0GPA or higher
3. Transferring is a finality. If s student publically announces a transfer then they must transfer at the end of the year (unless coach and team approve waiver for athlete to stay (this would be in place to make sure the athlete really thinks about it and doesn’t just make a rash decision). This doesn’t mean that the school can’t “recruit” their own athlete to stay if they want.
4. If a student is repeatedly transfers then they must sit out 1 game per transfer above the first

Some sort of stipulations should be in place to protect schools and athletes and to ensure it doesn’t just become a distraction

donm

@alphakev said:
I think they need to put some rules in regards to transferring like
1. No contact allowed until an athlete has publicly announced he is seeking to transfer otherwise it will be a major recruiting infraction costing the offending school to not be allowed to receive any transfers for 2 years (puts responsibility on coaches to follow rules)
2. Student must be in good academic standing 3.0GPA or higher
3. Transferring is a finality. If s student publically announces a transfer then they must transfer at the end of the year (unless coach and team approve waiver for athlete to stay (this would be in place to make sure the athlete really thinks about it and doesn’t just make a rash decision). This doesn’t mean that the school can’t “recruit” their own athlete to stay if they want.
4. If a student is repeatedly transfers then they must sit out 1 game per transfer above the first

Some sort of stipulations should be in place to protect schools and athletes and to ensure it doesn’t just become a distraction

I'm ok with 3 of your 4. Good academic standing does not mean a 3.0 to me. It means a player is on track to graduate. I'm fine with a 2.0 or even a 2.3. Make the GPA requirement too strict and it, IMO, impedes freedom of choice. I would like players to have as much freedom as possible in making their choices.

alphakev

@donm said:

@alphakev said:
I think they need to put some rules in regards to transferring like
1. No contact allowed until an athlete has publicly announced he is seeking to transfer otherwise it will be a major recruiting infraction costing the offending school to not be allowed to receive any transfers for 2 years (puts responsibility on coaches to follow rules)
2. Student must be in good academic standing 3.0GPA or higher
3. Transferring is a finality. If s student publically announces a transfer then they must transfer at the end of the year (unless coach and team approve waiver for athlete to stay (this would be in place to make sure the athlete really thinks about it and doesn’t just make a rash decision). This doesn’t mean that the school can’t “recruit” their own athlete to stay if they want.
4. If a student is repeatedly transfers then they must sit out 1 game per transfer above the first

Some sort of stipulations should be in place to protect schools and athletes and to ensure it doesn’t just become a distraction

I'm ok with 3 of your 4. Good academic standing does not mean a 3.0 to me. It means a player is on track to graduate. I'm fine with a 2.0 or even a 2.3. Make the GPA requirement too strict and it, IMO, impedes freedom of choice. I would like players to have as much freedom as possible in making their choices.

I was just throwing out a GPA #. Granted you will still have to academically qualify for the school you are trying to get in.

JAYER4

@RaleighDawg said:
I agree with the poster above that because of the longer season and the 85 player restrictions, there needs to be some give on kids having some playing time to develop in a few games when there isn't any real need for the starters to still be in. That could cut down on the injuries for starters and allow the freshmen to get a feel for the game before they are relied on for real playing time in the future.

As for rule number 2, I'd love to see where you read that. I haven't heard that anywhere other than some people wishing for it. But in any case, they should be able to transfer anytime they want. I just hope the schools they leave get some consolation like an extra scholarship allowed in the next or current signing class towards their 25 recruits limit. Helping schools keep 85 scholarship kids on the roster is very important.

And lastly, being a ref in games is much harder than most fans realize. If you haven't refereed a game, even on the intermural level, you have no idea how fast it moves out there and how you can't always be looking right at the place a foul may occur and even then see it. But with that, I think there should be some allowance for the coach's to have a challenge flag that they can toss on the field when they believe something happened that needs to be reviewed. Open up the fouls that can be reviewed for this (like offsides) and only allow one per game (or maybe half) for each team. And if the call stands, it costs the team a timeout. That would seem to accommodate something happening that was missed and also not really slow the game down any. I do believe there are way to many reviewed plays already. And maybe if this was incorporated, the instant replay could be restricted even further from what they can review to help speed up the games.

JGrant324

I think red shirts should be allowed to play in the bowl if a team makes it

donm

@JAYER4 said:

@RaleighDawg said:
I agree with the poster above that because of the longer season and the 85 player restrictions, there needs to be some give on kids having some playing time to develop in a few games when there isn't any real need for the starters to still be in. That could cut down on the injuries for starters and allow the freshmen to get a feel for the game before they are relied on for real playing time in the future.

As for rule number 2, I'd love to see where you read that. I haven't heard that anywhere other than some people wishing for it. But in any case, they should be able to transfer anytime they want. I just hope the schools they leave get some consolation like an extra scholarship allowed in the next or current signing class towards their 25 recruits limit. Helping schools keep 85 scholarship kids on the roster is very important.

And lastly, being a ref in games is much harder than most fans realize. If you haven't refereed a game, even on the intermural level, you have no idea how fast it moves out there and how you can't always be looking right at the place a foul may occur and even then see it. But with that, I think there should be some allowance for the coach's to have a challenge flag that they can toss on the field when they believe something happened that needs to be reviewed. Open up the fouls that can be reviewed for this (like offsides) and only allow one per game (or maybe half) for each team. And if the call stands, it costs the team a timeout. That would seem to accommodate something happening that was missed and also not really slow the game down any. I do believe there are way to many reviewed plays already. And maybe if this was incorporated, the instant replay could be restricted even further from what they can review to help speed up the games.

getting more and more like free agency every day. Awesome. Since we will be winning a lot it could help us a good bit as well,

lopodawg

1) Maybe let kids that transfer still sit a year but does not count towards their eligibility

JGrant324

@lopodawg said:
1) Maybe let kids that transfer still sit a year but does not count towards their eligibility

age disparity would be to much thats why they keep 5 to play 4 rule for most part

lopodawg

@JGrant324 said:

@lopodawg said:
1) Maybe let kids that transfer still sit a year but does not count towards their eligibility

age disparity would be to much thats why they keep 5 to play 4 rule for most part

Yeah i get it but I think they've got to do something to discourage it but keep it fair to the kid at the same time. You know "everything has a cost"