There was an article in the paper out here yesterday that named three OSU freshmen that were transferring.

There's an article today that named the same players and said they were granted their "release" from Mata.

Could some one explain exactly what that means ?

To get a release from the National Letter of Intent, you must use the release form on the NLI website. After you fill out your section of the form, you send a copy of the form to two places: your school’s athletic department offices and to the NLI offices at the NCAA Eligibility Center. Once you send the form, the athletic department must respond within 30 days. There are three options for them to respond:

No release – This means you are not released from the NLI and all of its provisions are still in effect.
Complete release – This means you are released from all of the NLI’s provisions.
Removal of the recruiting ban – This means the recruiting ban is lifted, but the NLI penalty is still in effect if you do not fulfill the NLI.


NLI releases cannot be school-specific, like permission to contact. So you cannot be released to one school but not another. Because of this, many schools will first remove the recruiting ban, but may not grant a complete release until the school knows where an athlete plans to transfer.

What is missing here is that players are told they are signing with an institution. They are not signing with a coach.

One of the best conversations I have ever heard was when Zach Hahn was sitting on a Butler scholly and was angling for a bigger offer. His HS coach told him "zach, you got to be comfortable with the school. You have taken the visit and you liked Butler. When your GF breaks up with you, your shot is not falling, your statistics class is kicking your butt and your coach just left for another job you have to like where you are" Steve, over the years had many athletes go on to D1 offers. He always told them they are getting a degree NOT playing for a coach.

I always try to tell kids what they are getting into. THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PLAY FOR A COACH...they are going to play for a school. They are not going to play basketball...that is the tool to pay for their education. Buying into the coach argument is putting the cart before the horse IMHO.

We went through a coaching change. Tommy called me on July 3 after helping Rhodes and Ku clean out their office well into the night before a mid term in the summer. Despite the assertions of one of our more senior BA members there was no thought of leaving as he had signed with a school NOT a coach. Anyone who supports the glut of transfers for a variety of reasons is hampering the educational process IMHO. Outside of hoops the idea is for kids of skill and talent to use that to get an education. Like My son that graduated from University of the Arts in Philly or the other who graduated Herron Art School ....they all used their talents to pay for their education.

In essence we have to do a better job of getting kids into schools and programs that fit their skills and their long term goals. Taking a scholly at Indiana if you want an engineering degree is ludicrous. This, of course leaves out the students who are not really going to school to get a degree but are using it as a minor league to the NBA...but then they are not REALLY students, are they?

Tom, you are bringing in a unique situation, which is not the point of the previous post. I think we are on the exact same page though.

My dispute is a coach having the power to deny a transfer. Yes, in a perfect world we want all our kids to be happy where they are. But even non-athletes often realize a school isn't for them....for whatever reason.

Athletes should be allowed to leave. They have to sit out a year, but they should be allowed to transfer when, and if, they feel a different school is a better fit. Their coach should not have power over schools that acceptable or not acceptable.

My son is heading to college next year. If for whatever reason, he decides at some point he wants to transfer to a different institution, he has that right. Tommy should have that same right.

How many cases can we cite where a player hasn't been given a release? I guess I'm trying to get my head around how big of an issue this is, or is not.

I'm probably in the minority, but I really don't have a problem with a restriction in transferring within the conference.

I have zero concern with the collateral damage suffered by an institution when an athlete transfers.

Is the NLI penalty the thing where scholarships can be limited if a certain % of student-athletes who are granted scholarships do not graduate?

If so, is this looked at sport by sport (basketball alone, football alone, etc) or are all scholarship athletes at a school lumped in one pool?


105--You seem like an okay person, but you actually conceived to enroll at 'kron?! My esteem for you is lessened.

depends on their standing when they left and progress toward the degree....if they leave in good standing the NCAA has no problem in the cases I have seen.

Bigger than we probably think. Like him or not, Bias is correct - if they are going to have non-compete clauses - then they are employees.

http://espn.go.com/college-football/story/_/id/15112545/g...