Here's a concept that might slow the Portal vortex down a little....

[76-1]

Have any team that picks up a guy in the Portal who has started 5 games or more for
his last team compensate, with a full scholarship in the same calendar year, the school losing said starter (and reducing the school picking up said starter by one scholarship that calendar year)...

Might not slow things down dramatically but it would at least acknowledge and compensate, in some fashion, the school that "developed" said starter...

Now that's something the NCAA membership could vote on and easily enforce above board if they decided to go with it...

Might help out the high schooler who is losing out on potential slots due to the Portal also...

 

[76-1]

Edited the above so it makes more sense (didn't sleep well... ).

 

[Crossblock]

Keep in mind that the Portal may slow down next year. We should be beyond the Group of Players Who received the automatic extra year for the 2020 COVID Year. The supply of Players in the system should be reduced just due to this.

 

[ElMeson]

There’s a variety of reasons why students enter the portal. I recently watched a video of a Colorado student telling the story about how Coach Prime cut him and 20 others. It happens at every school. To be upset about losing students to the portal now would be hypocritical. Our former and current staff’s has had those “tough conversations” and also taken or will take students (who were starters) from other schools.

It’s just the reality of CFB. NIL will continue to be a driving force at big universities and when the dust settles there will be a 40 team league with its own governing body, separate from the NCAA.

 

[HoozierDaddy]

I’d be curious what percentage of portal entrants are playing a significant amount of time with their current teams? I’m guessing not much so they are looking for greener pastures. To me, it’s not who’s leaving, it’s who is coming that will make the ultimate difference.

 

[Hoosier Clarion]

Keep in mind that the Portal may slow down next year. We should be beyond the Group of Players Who received the automatic extra year for the 2020 COVID Year. The supply of Players in the system should be reduced just due to this.

Well yes the covid year sunsetting does stop adding #'s. But I think a bigger stabilizer is the fact players only get 1 free year with no set out penalty. I don't know if that creates an equal # balance in the portal of underclassmen to upperclassmen but it definitely will cause less portal traffic than this years rush.

 

[76-1]

My idea isn't in response to our losing players; it's in response to some teams becoming virtual zombie outfits with other teams becoming virtual vampires...

Look what we could do to James Madison if we so choose to... Now I don't think we'll bring all those guys up here but if we did we'd virtually gut their team... (I figure we'll bring up 5-7 max)...

A return of the reinstatement of the one year sit out rule along with my scholarship for a starter concept would slow this tornado down dramatically if the NCAA member schools choose to take those actions...

The sit out rule would probably be court challenged but since it would allow these supposed "students" one more year to pursue a degree (or a another degree) I think the NCAA might have a winner on their hands...

 

[Big Red Crimson Buffalo]

I’d be curious what percentage of portal entrants are playing a significant amount of time with their current teams? I’m guessing not much so they are looking for greener pastures. To me, it’s not who’s leaving, it’s who is coming that will make the ultimate difference.

Probably 50/50.
When you look at the portal, there are a bunch of starters in there for every university. Many of them are from smaller schools wanting to move up after an explosive year.
But, look at the QBs alone. Most of those guys were starters.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

My idea isn't in response to our losing players; it's in response to some teams becoming virtual zombie outfits with other teams becoming virtual vampires...

Look what we could do to James Madison if we so choose to... Now I don't think we'll bring all those guys up here but if we did we'd virtually gut their team... (I figure we'll bring up 5-7 max)...

A return of the reinstatement of the one year sit out rule along with my scholarship for a starter concept would slow this tornado down dramatically if the NCAA member schools choose to take those actions...

The sit out rule would probably be court challenged but since it would allow these supposed "students" one more year to pursue a degree (or a another degree) I think the NCAA might have a winner on their hands...

You’re missing the point of why the one year sit out rule was dropped to begin with, so the NCAA isn’t looking to do anything to reinstate it.

 

[OpenWheels]

It is an OK idea, but that means the NCAA would never do it.

I prefer removing scholarships or reducing roster size depending on number of net transfers.

There's a number of good ideas out there, and none of them will ever be implemented by the NCAA. The schools with the most power (money) don't have as much problem with the skyrocketing price of a roster.

The 'NCAA' (not sure if there is such a thing anymore or ever was) can't even penalize actual violations in any reasonable time frame. The people employed there in positions of any authority just want to keep their gravy train going. They aren't about to try to set the brakes.

So, eventually, probably sooner than later, it'll all implode. But the big wheels in the NCAA will still be fine.

 

[kmathum]

You’re missing the point of why the one year sit out rule was dropped to begin with, so the NCAA isn’t looking to do anything to reinstate it.

Why was the one year sit out rule dropped? Refresh my memory please.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

Why was the one year sit out rule dropped? Refresh my memory please.

Student athletes rights/leverage.

 

[kmathum]

Student athletes rights/leverage.

That's pretty vague. Can you be more specific? What leverage? Were there attorneys involved?

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

That's pretty vague. Can you be more specific? What leverage? Were there attorneys involved?

https://www.ncaa.org/news/2021/4/15/di-council-adopts-new-transfer-legislation.aspx

 

[jacksback]

That's pretty vague. Can you be more specific? What leverage? Were there attorneys involved?

A smart kid would have utilized sitting out a year as an advantage to work toward a Masters! Lol. Seriously, more free higher education and we all know that only a very small % of kids will ever go pro. Dumb but not surprising. I mean who really cares about getting a college education.

 

[kraft cheese+macaroni]

A smart kid would have utilized sitting out a year as an advantage to work toward a Masters! Lol. Seriously, more free higher education and we all know that only a very small % of kids will ever go pro. Dumb but not surprising. I mean who really cares about getting a college education.

Well, they're all getting an extra year at this point anyway. Most are graduating in 3+ years and can get their Masters in year 4+.

 

[IUNorth]

My ideas for Portal Regulation...

1. Shorten the windows for declaring, and then choosing, even more than they already are.
2. Keep graduation waiver
3. Keep hardship waiver.
4. Add coaching change waiver. Limit it to Head Coach and Coordinators.
5. Players are allowed only 1, non waivered transfer during their eligibility. Any more than that, and they have to sit out a season.

At some point, once NIL gets streamlined a bit, and once we've had a few years of schools being able to pay kids NIL money as well...then maybe look in to the Euroleague rules where teams have to pay "transfer fees" to the team losing the kid, for any non waivered transfer activity. Probably too difficult to regulate. But if Michigan were required to match their NIL money they'd offer a kid, as a payment to...say... Eastern Michigan for some late bloomer DE...it might put the brakes on a lot of the illegal behind the scenes recruiting activity?