Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

CU not granting transfer requests until after spring ball - Discuss!

I'm OK with it. The school has invested in them and they owe it to CU (and themselves) to complete the year we paid for. Going through Spring ball does not prevent them from applying & being accepted to other schools as transfers, and in many ways it helps them focus on school in order to meet academic requirements to participate in practices.
 
CU is basically taking the position that when the players signed their LOIs, they committed to the school, not to Jon Embree. Which is exactly right. Give them through spring ball to experience CU without Embree, then determine if that's still a commitment they can live with. If at that point they decide CU is not for them anymore, allow them to transfer and take a schollie elsewhere.

But CU is under absolutely no obligation to act against its own best interests here, just to satisfy some of these players who think that there is no CU for them without Jon Embree, without ever actually finding out if that is true or not...
 
I'm pretty sure some guys here won't like how do the coaches in Alabama, LSU, or many big time football program handle the situation like this.

Do you want a good guy or do you want a good coach? I want both, but if I have to choose one, I will choose the latter
 
All this sounds good, but not practical, I don't like it. It sets the wrong precedents. Some kids may just want to transfer due to family reasons, home sick and etc. Give them a couple of weeks, sell the school, speak with parents, but if they still want to transfer, grant their requests. Don't force them to stay for one more semester. We need better progressive ideas.
 
Last edited:
buffaholic said:
First, that just simply isn't true. It's not unusual to not grant transfer requests due to a change in coaching.

If they were to transfer now without really meeting the new staff they've accomplished nothing but having succeeded in making an immature decision. Kids this age make these types of decisions all the time. Some of these kids also have potential APR issues as I've heard that more than one of these kids has some work to do.

MORE than reasonable and there is no real downside. Great move Coach!
Click to expand...

:yeahthat:

This is critical from CU's perspective. A transfer's impact on APR can now be more damaging than ever. CU can't afford to lose schollies because the past Water Bottle regime encouraged transfer of a number of potential academic casualties.
 
Last edited:
bigbang2 said:
All this sounds good, but not practical, I don't like it. It sets the wrong precedents. Some kids may just want to transfer due to family reasons, home sick and etc. Give them a couple of weeks, sell the school, speak with parents, but if they still want to transfer, grant their requests. Don't force them to stay for one more semester. We need better progressive ideas.
Click to expand...

This is eminently practical. The new coach gets a reasonable opportunity to hire his staff, recruit the class of 2013, coach the team in spring ball, get to know the players and allow the players to get to know him and his philosophy. This is not setting some weird new precedent. The firing of a coach that rips on the AD and administration with open questions of racism and the hiring of a new coach is a very unusual circumstance that has not happened in the past and will likely not occur again.
 
gone native said:
This is eminently practical. The new coach gets a reasonable opportunity to hire his staff, recruit the class of 2013, coach the team in spring ball, get to know the players and allow the players to get to know him and his philosophy. This is not setting some weird new precedent. The firing of a coach that rips on the AD and administration with open questions of racism and the hiring of a new coach is a very unusual circumstance that has not happened in the past and will likely not occur again.
Click to expand...

With only 34 posts, you probably haven't learned that making a coherent, cohesive and logical argument with bigbang2 will yield you nothing but further frustration.... But nice attempt there son. Rep!

:bang:
 
JPinCO said:
I'm OK with it. The school has invested in them and they owe it to CU (and themselves) to complete the year we paid for. Going through Spring ball does not prevent them from applying & being accepted to other schools as transfers, and in many ways it helps them focus on school in order to meet academic requirements to participate in practices.
Click to expand...

This is where people are plain wrong. If someone wants to transfer to a school - lets say Virginia Tech so Tech says we have a scholarship for you for the 2013 class. But if they cannot take it at the semester then VT fills their class with someone else. May comes and the programs the kid would wants to go to is filled up...you have denied the player the opportunity. I think it is a bush league move.
 
BlackNGold said:
This is where people are plain wrong. If someone wants to transfer to a school - lets say Virginia Tech so Tech says we have a scholarship for you for the 2013 class. But if they cannot take it at the semester then VT fills their class with someone else. May comes and the programs the kid would wants to go to is filled up...you have denied the player the opportunity. I think it is a bush league move.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think it actually hurts CU reputation.
 
I find it a little funny that some of the same people who acted like time was not important in getting a new coach in here are the same people saying MacIntyre needs the opportunity to meet with kids.
 
Everyone is missing a key component. CU can not stop them from transferring, if a player wants to transfer he can. CU is not letting them out of there scholarship. Which means if they transfer they would have to pay there own way and still have to sit out the following season. If they wait till after spring and still want to transfer, CU will release them out of there scholarship and they can transfer and be put on scholarship at there new school.
 
The way I see it, the only way the players are really hurt by it is because of the scholarship numbers game at other schools as BnG has pointed out.

If a kid transfers, they have to sit out a year. If you're going to have sit out a year, then not being around for spring ball doesn't hurt your ability to "establish yourself" on the new team at all. You will have summer camp, the practice squad next fall, spring ball next year, and summer next year to "establish yourself" on your team before you have a chance to actually play. They're really not hurt by having to stick around for spring ball here - except for the potential lack of scholarship opportunities...
 
H13 said:
Everyone is missing a key component. CU can not stop them from transferring, if a player wants to transfer he can. CU is not letting them out of there scholarship. Which means if they transfer they would have to pay there own way and still have to sit out the following season. If they wait till after spring and still want to transfer, CU will release them out of there scholarship and they can transfer and be put on scholarship at there new school.
Click to expand...

lol. That sounds likely
 
H13 said:
Everyone is missing a key component. CU can not stop them from transferring, if a player wants to transfer he can. CU is not letting them out of there scholarship. Which means if they transfer they would have to pay there own way and still have to sit out the following season. If they wait till after spring and still want to transfer, CU will release them out of there scholarship and they can transfer and be put on scholarship at there new school.
Click to expand...

Yeah, we ALL must have missed that one. :rolleyes:
 
This is an excellent decision. 18 year olds don't need to run away and transfer on a whim because they're a little grumpy about a coaching change, and thus sacrificing a degree from CU for one from Valdosta State, or no degree at all. Let them experience MacIntyre. Most of them will find his coaching and x's and o's to suit them immensely better than what Embree brought to the table. If you're still unhappy in a few months' time, then so be it.
 
CVilleBuff said:
This is an excellent decision. 18 year olds don't need to run away and transfer on a whim because they're a little grumpy about a coaching change, and thus sacrificing a degree from CU for one from Valdosta State, or no degree at all. Let them experience MacIntyre. Most of them will find his coaching and x's and o's to suit them immensely better than what Embree brought to the table. If you're still unhappy in a few months' time, then so be it.
Click to expand...

But scholarships or opportunities available now, may not be available in a few months after spring ball.
 
Darth Snow said:
http://www.buffzone.com/football/ci_22197242/football-mike-macintyre-hopes-bring-majority-staff-cu

HCMM's explanation:


Beyond a general delaying of certain players moving on (against their wishes), what this really does is prevent the kids from establishing themselves at a new school during spring ball. It also makes it possible that we will have some locker room problems when (understandably) pissed players are present where they don't want to be.

There are negatives to this move. It's a bit unusual, and definitely hard nosed. That said... it might be necessary and I can see why we are doing it.

what do you guys think?
Click to expand...

I love this move.
 
BlackNGold said:
This is where people are plain wrong. If someone wants to transfer to a school - lets say Virginia Tech so Tech says we have a scholarship for you for the 2013 class. But if they cannot take it at the semester then VT fills their class with someone else. May comes and the programs the kid would wants to go to is filled up...you have denied the player the opportunity. I think it is an SEC move.
Click to expand...

Fify
 
The only time you let someone out of an agreement is when it benefits your organization to do so.

How does making it as easy as possible for players to transfer out of your program have a net benefit for the program?

It doesn't.

And looking at it from the other side, frankly, voiding the agreements on request at this time is doing players a disservice. Giving them an education on the real world (honoring contracts and making informed decisions instead of emotional ones) is fulfilling the contractual and moral responsibilities of the university.
 
It prevents the knee-jerk reaction and forces them to see it thru for a few months and let not their emotions get the best of them. That's a hard lesson to learn in life and he's helping them learn that.
 
CarolinaBuff said:
It prevents the knee-jerk reaction and forces them to see it thru for a few months and let not their emotions get the best of them. That's a hard lesson to learn in life and he's helping them learn that.
Click to expand...

While a coaching change is no doubt difficult on the players and certainly on the ones that were recruited by Embree, these young men are still getting a free education to play division 1 ball.
 
I am actually surprised that a former College player hasn't sued the NCAA for unfairly benefiting from student athletes. The players take most of the risk, risking bodily harm for peanuts while the NCAA benefit in the billions. The same thing with the so called contract. They can drop you, and don't have to give a reason, while if you want to leave, your release can be delayed. I am a big fan of free market, but that is too one sided of a deal.
 
BlackNGold said:
Do not like it. People always say that coaches get to leave all the time why not players. Now that the shoe is on the other foot it is okay. There are windows of opportunity and a lot of those windows will close if a player is not allowed to transfer now before signing day so a school can give them a slot. If it was me and I wanted to transfer I would be making a lot of noise. I do not want anyone to transfer but I do not think this is the way to do it. If someone wants to transfer the coach needs to sit down and sell them on not doing so. I think this indicates that there may be more transfer request than we are aware of on the team.
Click to expand...
Apples and oranges. Of the coach leaves, there is recourse - someone is paying his buyout. If the student leaves, is he repaying his tuition and the year of experience he gained? (And the answer isn't that he has to sit out a year, because that does not help the losing university recoup any losses). I'm sick of this analogy.
 
bigbang2 said:
I am actually surprised that a former College player hasn't sued the NCAA for unfairly benefiting from student athletes. The players take most of the risk, risking bodily harm for peanuts while the NCAA benefit in the billions. The same thing with the so called contract. They can drop you, and don't have to give a reason, while if you want to leave, your release can be delayed. I am a big fan of free market, but that is too one sided of a deal.
Click to expand...
F. If that's the way they feel, get better grades and an academic scholarship.
 
BuffUp said:
unfortunately it is like a business these days. These kids need to understand that. The school already has $ invested in them, so they need to really think these decisions through - fair is fair and the road goes both directions. These players really need to understand that they will get better coaching and that will help them in the future, this is not a big popularity contest. CU is much bigger than that
Click to expand...

I think it is reasonable to ask the players to wait a few a months and make an informed decision. Hopefully, this wasn't stated as a threat. And I don't think it is morally defensible to prevent a player from transferring if that is what they wish.

The quoted statement above, however, contradicts itself on so many levels.

The fact is that college football is not like a normal business, at least not a business in the 20'th century. It most closely resembles a business in the 19'th century where the Oil Company owned the town, exerted complete dominance over one's life, and exploited human resources to make as much money as possible, irrespective of the human costs.

If college football, was a conventional business then there would be labor mobility, a right to organize, and a legal right to demand fair compensation.

Colleges are reaping at least 10 times the benefits that they are paying out as expenses, it does no good to pretend otherwise.

If "the School has invested $ in them", why is it important for the students "to think these things through", especially if this were a fair business?" It is only because college football is not a fair business, that the threat implied by your statement (and ncaa rules), makes sense.

This is not a personal criticism. I'm just willing to bet that you are an extrovert who needs to say something before knowing what you really think about it. I think your heart is in the right place because you seem to say that you want fairness and equity.
 
BlackNGold said:
Do not like it. People always say that coaches get to leave all the time why not players. Now that the shoe is on the other foot it is okay. There are windows of opportunity and a lot of those windows will close if a player is not allowed to transfer now before signing day so a school can give them a slot. If it was me and I wanted to transfer I would be making a lot of noise. I do not want anyone to transfer but I do not think this is the way to do it. If someone wants to transfer the coach needs to sit down and sell them on not doing so. I think this indicates that there may be more transfer request than we are aware of on the team.
Click to expand...

Worse, do you want someone there tying up a scholie that doesn't want to be there and isn't contributing?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top