I have mixed feelings about this decision...

I have mixed feelings about this decision...
by Irisharab (2021-04-15 16:01:18)

In reply to: NCAA to allow transfers to play without sitting out a season posted by wiNDycityfan

I agree in principle with what Andy said below... a student-athlete should be committing to a school, not a team or coach (or even a position). That's the ideal, but sadly, it's often not the case anymore.

But I also look at the fact that ND has both a football coach and a men's basketball coach who are getting closer to retirement. That can be an issue when it comes to recruiting. Some athletes will be reluctant to commit to a school knowing that a coaching change during their time at the school is likely (or imminent).

If a really good football recruit really likes ND's current coaching staff, the new rule will give them the confidence that if Kelly retires (or Freeman gets a head coaching position elsewhere), the player has the option of leaving ND if the school hires bad replacements.

Also... it puts pressure on schools to make quality coaching hires. If ND hires another Davie/Willingham/Weis, who then brings in bad assistants, the school risks the possibility of players transferring en masse.

I also could see if players like a particular coach

and that coach leaves for another school, the players could follow that coach to the other school (at least to an extent).

I agree with your first statement too.

All that stated, it is hard for a recruit to know how he is going to like a school from just one recruiting visit. I would venture a guess that recruiting visits at most schools give the player practically no idea what the school is like on a typical, non-football weekend, and whether that fits with what they're looking for... That's why I think the rule, while it has it's warts, is a net positive for the student-athlete.