NCAA allows additional transfers
- Thread starter 79COUG
- Start date
It will help some teams get back up to 85 kids quickly. For others, it wont help. If your school sucks and kids dont wanna be there you will always have issues.
The day is coming when some schools will actually have to find kids that want to be there and stay there. A constant revolving door speaks volumes about the staff, the program, the school and what the kid wants.
The AAU-ization of college sports is complete. Just change to a new travel team.
Make no never mind that bumps a kid who already put in the time and effort to get better, learn the system, built the culture one spot down the depth chart.
And we're surprised when millennial workers bail at the next shiny object job?!?
Make no never mind that bumps a kid who already put in the time and effort to get better, learn the system, built the culture one spot down the depth chart.
And we're surprised when millennial workers bail at the next shiny object job?!?
Most kids won't want to transfer. Once you get on campus and integrate with the program and establish friendships, leaving becomes difficult. I suspect that we'll think harder about offering kids from Florida, Texas, etc., as they seem to me to be the more likely types to get homesick and transfer out.
Programs like WSU *should* benefit from this as much or more as they're affected by it. If you're buried on the depth chart at WSU, you're not transferring to many other P5 programs. On the other hand, if you're not satisfied with waiting until you're a junior at a bigger school, and/or you don't like their campus, Pullman is a great escape.
A good staff will use this to their advantage. Bad ones will make excuses.
Programs like WSU *should* benefit from this as much or more as they're affected by it. If you're buried on the depth chart at WSU, you're not transferring to many other P5 programs. On the other hand, if you're not satisfied with waiting until you're a junior at a bigger school, and/or you don't like their campus, Pullman is a great escape.
A good staff will use this to their advantage. Bad ones will make excuses.
It amazes me when I see kids get upset at not playing more at schools like Ohio State. At what point is there more value in being a starter and playing than standing on the sideline and clapping?
These kids choose schools for all the wrong reasons.
If WSU said to hell with the portal and jc kids altogether and took 25 high school kids every year, Im fine with that.
Damn them for trying to make money and get their fair share. Productivity has risen massively in the last 20 years and wages very much have decreased when adjusted. I don’t work for loyalty, I trade my time for money. My work earns people money, so I’ll take more of that instead of faux approval from 60 year olds.
Dude, they're not even showing up for work after being hired.
I heard it called "ghosting" and it was said with a sense of pride.
Please don't be bitching when skilled juniors leave WSU for bigger named programs. And please to be inidicating what the acceptable level of wins is to the millennial age group. You think those 10 wins seasons were made via freshmen?
Go ahead - set the lack-of-loyalty bar at, what, 4 maybe 5 wins? Because that's what's coming to the next tier of programs out there.
That's already been baked into the cake. Kids are already able to leave and we'll see more than our fair share of it. Question is who do we replace the departures with?
Tyrone Hill, Chris Jackson, and Kaleb Ford-Dement essentially replaced Ayden Hector, Skyler Thomas, and Tyrese Ross this off-season. They might be a downgrade on what departed, at least initially due to familiarity with the system, but they are without a doubt an improvement over what a HS or JC replacement would bring to the table. If we could replace departures with guys who have D1 film already without losing the ability to fill the ranks with 25 initial counters... that minimizes the long term damage to the program caused by the portal.
What's going to happen is exactly what I've done in hiring. No millennials, only people with proven track records.
And they get paid waaaay more than first job out of college guy/millennial who thinks they already know everything and don't think 35 plus years of experience is worth listening to.
The ones who don't want the coaching will have a Tyler Bruggman like career.
It’s a weird take to say this is a millennial-loyalty thing. You really think 70s/80s/90s kids wouldn’t do the same thing if they could have made money and had better opportunities? Really? Looks at all the programs where people were caught taking money and try to tell me those guys wouldn’t have transferred to a bigger school that could have offered them a better NIL deal in the 80s. What a joke. More like maybe people are tired of being poor and they’re gonna go ahead make money while they can.
BTW I would never recommend a public statement about not hiring a particular age group (although under 40) is about as close as you can get to inviting legal trouble from some litigious person.
Last edited:
Typical millennial know it all. Because some random anonymous internet post will definitely serve as the basis for future litigation....dgibbons will keep me out of any legal issues. Not losing a minute's sleep over it.
So what's your bar? 4, 5 wins? The 70's 80's 90's comparison is irrelevant because that wasn't the set of variables at play then. Back in the 70's, there were no scholarship limits and USC/UW stacked their rosters with guys who would have played at WSU. And the win totals were in the 3 to 7 range. Once that got evened out, WSU could put up the 8 to 10 wins with some regularity.
Unless WSU becomes the Gonzaga of football relative to transfers, like millennials who think they should be the CEO on month four of employment, you're going to be severely disappointed with the results.
It ain't gonna be 10 wins every year.
I've never understood why people need to be loyal to companies, when companies rarely show even the smallest amount of loyalty back, they churn through people suck whatever they can and then cut them loose without a 2nd thought, shrug their shoulders and say "that's business". I for one am glad people are finally standing up for themselves and taking a small modicum of power back. You only get to live once, be happy doing it.
In my field, associate gripe sites / services are replete with advice on how to do as little as possible to avoid getting fired, while telling supervisors they are busy (i.e., "setting boundaries"), and doing it again at the next place a year or two later. Not suggesting it's an age thing, per se, but most associates are in a particular age cohort. Instead is more of a thing where that activity is normalized and embraced, whereas it certainly wasn't when I was an associate. I think we see similar things in this football debate. I won't purport to be able to characterize this as a "today's kids" issue vs. an issue of a practice becoming more normalized and accepted for what may owe to a host of reasons, one of which is, IMO, the absence of a recession for 13 years other than what we saw last year (and which, at least for my firm and others like it, which are tech-focused, didn't lead to any layoffs and instead has led to the biggest seller's market in terms of associate hiring that I've ever seen).
Since we are bloviating about shifting generational profiles...
1) I love to hire immigrants. We pay based on knowledge & technical talent, so there is no pay differential. I'm willing to trade some 2nd language proficiency for work ethic. I have yet to meet an immigrant in my field who does not approach his job as a career, willing to put in the effort to learn new things. That goes for any generation; it has nothing at all to do with being a millennial, a boomer, or any other age cohort. Makes you look hard at our culture in the US.
2) Facebook and other "look at how great my life is" platforms appear to have skewed the view of reality of many under 35 or so, prompting depression and other reactions to the impression they get that others have much better lives, or that they are somehow a failure for not living up to the lifestyle that they think that they see on someone else's posts. That spills over into both their personal and their work lives, and aggravates a lot of issues, including professional loyalty.
3) Loyalty is earned, and it goes both ways. A company that does not treat people with loyalty gets what that company deserves. Individuals who do not treat their company with loyalty tend to have that reflected back at them. This will never change. It is possible that there are more companies today that are driven by culturally short term and dumb thinking, and are therefore not prone to show loyalty to employees...but there are plenty where that is not the case, too.
4) Headhunters are a pox on society, and they are enabled by Internet access via LinkedIn and many other sources/ tools/ resources. Headhunters as a whole are not motivated to improve either an individual's or a company's life; rather, they are always trying to make a deal to receive their fee...the door to door salesmen of the 1950's. A side effect is reinforcement for those in the first 1-2 decades of their career that the only path forward is to leave your company. While that is clearly false in many cases, many who are early in their careers don't see both sides of that situation.
5) Finally, I don't see people in their 20's or 30's to be significantly different than their 50's or 60's, other than the older ones may have learned from having made more mistakes. It is probably also fair to say that society as a whole has moved more toward instant gratification, and that inevitably has some workplace spillover. Experience does tend to give one a different perspective on many things, though a lot of people fail to learn much from their mistakes, and their experience and knowledge is thereby a little suspect. I think the major difference between the younger folks and the older folks in the workplace is that the younger ones today expect more direct communication. Better stay in regular touch with them regarding where their career is going, and what they need to do to take another step. You cannot assume that they will talk to you before leaping to another company, based on bad or incomplete information via a headhunter.
1) I love to hire immigrants. We pay based on knowledge & technical talent, so there is no pay differential. I'm willing to trade some 2nd language proficiency for work ethic. I have yet to meet an immigrant in my field who does not approach his job as a career, willing to put in the effort to learn new things. That goes for any generation; it has nothing at all to do with being a millennial, a boomer, or any other age cohort. Makes you look hard at our culture in the US.
2) Facebook and other "look at how great my life is" platforms appear to have skewed the view of reality of many under 35 or so, prompting depression and other reactions to the impression they get that others have much better lives, or that they are somehow a failure for not living up to the lifestyle that they think that they see on someone else's posts. That spills over into both their personal and their work lives, and aggravates a lot of issues, including professional loyalty.
3) Loyalty is earned, and it goes both ways. A company that does not treat people with loyalty gets what that company deserves. Individuals who do not treat their company with loyalty tend to have that reflected back at them. This will never change. It is possible that there are more companies today that are driven by culturally short term and dumb thinking, and are therefore not prone to show loyalty to employees...but there are plenty where that is not the case, too.
4) Headhunters are a pox on society, and they are enabled by Internet access via LinkedIn and many other sources/ tools/ resources. Headhunters as a whole are not motivated to improve either an individual's or a company's life; rather, they are always trying to make a deal to receive their fee...the door to door salesmen of the 1950's. A side effect is reinforcement for those in the first 1-2 decades of their career that the only path forward is to leave your company. While that is clearly false in many cases, many who are early in their careers don't see both sides of that situation.
5) Finally, I don't see people in their 20's or 30's to be significantly different than their 50's or 60's, other than the older ones may have learned from having made more mistakes. It is probably also fair to say that society as a whole has moved more toward instant gratification, and that inevitably has some workplace spillover. Experience does tend to give one a different perspective on many things, though a lot of people fail to learn much from their mistakes, and their experience and knowledge is thereby a little suspect. I think the major difference between the younger folks and the older folks in the workplace is that the younger ones today expect more direct communication. Better stay in regular touch with them regarding where their career is going, and what they need to do to take another step. You cannot assume that they will talk to you before leaping to another company, based on bad or incomplete information via a headhunter.
I earned an MBA and have seen discrimination litigation fairly closely. Am I know it all or just using my super trusty experience?
As for your question it’s impossible to answer because I don’t know the implications of these changes 1 yr, 5yr etc. down the road. I would expect it won’t help us unless NIL can grow to a decent market around the program, but there is so many moving parts it’s impossible to predict. And I would expect other markets to always grow faster and larger than WSU’s for similar deals. All I know is I cannot fault a kid for trying to get himself more money.
Oh people said that about our generation as well. Soft(compared to wwii vets- yep) entitled (compared to depression era parents yep) rebellious (listened to the Beatles ) lazy .All of what we say about the millennials. The only difference is they have a way to show everyone … social media.
Fine. Make college a d league and cut the shit. I'll no longer financially support a product that I know we have zero chance of being competitive in. Or let the kids go straight to the league.
You're not seeing the forest for the trees: I don't think most people gaf if kids get paid, it's the uneven playing field that it will 100% create, making the rich richer and the poor poorer.
Not only that, but it's 100% true as well that millennials and younger are the most spoiled, entitled, whinging group of people I've ever experienced. We live in unprecedented time of wealth, technology, prosperity, living conditions, etc and they literally FIND reasons to be unhappy. There is a sociological term for dissatisfaction in a utopian society (not that ours is) but it escapes me.
I don’t know why you’re taking such a stand offish stance. I have nothing against you.
You are right about a lot of that, younger age groups have a very different way of behaving and avoided many of the bad parts of the 50-90s. Young generations also face uncertainties and issues many older generations did not. My parents bank account used to yield 5%+ in saving accounts….My cousins were left sums of money their grandparents willed to them and were able to live very well on the interest alone. Not massive amounts but enough to pay for their college and everything else in the 90s as a decent “salary”. My parents bought a house with one wage earner. You could obtain a decent job with a general education, AA, or even Bachelors. There is a much smaller window for people with less education outside of a few fields (like trades which are excellent). Wages are going up, but not in accordance to production. Earners are making less for the work they do now. We have people coming to work entry level “science field” job with masters from good universities. It’s a tough pill to swallow for a lot of people. Not trying to discount other generations hardships, but there is a lot of crappy stuff now too.
Wish I could find a company such as yours, Observer. I have over 30 years of manufacturing sales, purchasing and project management experience. I've managed projects for everyone from Boeing to Lockheed Martin, WSU to Auburn and as diverse as the DCCC (Democratic Central Campaign Committee) to the RCCC.
With that experience you would think an HR manager would look past my age (60 but I look 50).
For many, the recruiting process is intoxicating. That goes for college athletes, and professionals of any age. In any profession, there are a group that are constantly interviewing. The reality of any team or job will never live up to the thrill of the chase.
I can envision scholarship offers that incentivize using all of your eligibility with the school you sign with. I wouldn't be surprised if this is already starting to occur.
I can envision scholarship offers that incentivize using all of your eligibility with the school you sign with. I wouldn't be surprised if this is already starting to occur.
And those people weren't wrong for saying it. Every single generation since WWII has gotten worse, and that "worse" is getting exponentially worse.
Compared to our parents' generation - super soft. They stood on the beaches of Normandy and grew up in the Dust Bowl.
The Beatles suck.
Get off my lawn.
Similar threads
