College Coaches Who Refuse to Release Athletes

Football, basketball and hockey have mandatory rules making them sit out a year! NCAA rule is that you HAVE to sit a year and only a release will help you. Power and NCAA is on coach side. They spend money, time, emotion recruiting you and giving you a chance. Is it their fault that you made a mistake?

Gotta side with coaches on this one.

The commitment is a two way street. If you think that an athlete should be allowed to walk at any time with no consequences, then you should also be ok with coaches dropping athletes at any time (I doubt you would be, though I don't know your opinion on this). You can't expect one side to be held to an agreement while the other side is not.

If an athlete decides to transfer at a late point in the season, when their replacement cannot possibly be recruited then, no, they should not be released.

As a college coach you also have to be able to do this at times because if you dont, then you might get a lot of runners transfering often. I ran in college in the early to mid 90's. There where very few transfers where I was or in the conference I was in which was NCAA DII. I am now a college coach in an NAIA program and I see year after year so many kids transferring like its nothing. They might transfer for the simple reason that they are getting 500 more somewhere else. If a coach allows athletes to come in, stay for a semester or two, then transfer, then they set themselves up to be a stepping stone for future athletes to do so. You see this a lot with foreigners in the NAIA. They go to a school in the US bc a coach does 6-7 months of work to get them over here. They arrive on campus, have a great season, then want to leave at semester or at the end of the year for another school and a better scholarship. So the coach did all of this work and is just used to get to the states. Something to think about. By not releasing athletes to compete right away, it tends to weed out these athletes that are just planning to be around for a semester or those that want to transfer. You sign a scholarship and you need to fulfill that scholarship unless you can not see there is anyway possible you can stay! My thoughts.

With the APR, teams get severely penalized if an athlete leaves the school for any other reason than to turn pro or becoming pregnant.

If you want to blame someone, blame the NCAA for creating rules that punish a coach and team if a kid who's on a $300 book scholarship needs to transfer to a school closer to home because his mom is sick and his family needs to save money.

Let's get the terminology straight here, it is not a release, it is a one time transfer exception. EXCEPTION is the key here. The RULE is if you transfer you sit. Then if you are granted an exception, you can compete and receive aid right away.

The problem is that many, like the original poster think that not being "released" is some kind of penalty. When in fact NOT being "released" is what the NORM is and is what the NCAA intends. How some people have gotten to the point that thinking a "release" is a given right, I do not know.

Like being pulled over for speeding. When you get in the car, you know the speed limit and the potential consequence for exceeding it. Do you expect the cop to just give you a warning and "release" you without giving you a ticket? Is it unfair of the cop if he actually follows the rule and gives you a ticket and doesn't "release" you with a warning? The cop can make that EXCEPTION, but that isn't the RULE.

A coach invests time and resources in the recruitment and team builiding process. And the NCAA measures eligibility and retention. Having blanket "releases" allows for zero accountability on the student-athletes part.

If you "release" one then the next time you have to "release" the other or that kid will say "but you released so and so."

"Releasing" is an exception and there must be circumstances warranting an exception. My advice for all student-athletes is to be honest and communciate from the earliest opportunity with your coaches if you are considering leaving. That is your best opportunity to receive an EXCEPTION.

But don't think you can transfer to the schools in conference rival, or even stronger team in region. why would a coach help his rival take the coveted automatic or at large regional bid?

So understand EXCEPTION and stop thinking that a "release" is a given just because you want it.

Well stated!!!! Probably the best argument/explaination/defense of the one time exception rule that I've heard!

That's bull. You can call up the NCAA rule all you want, but the fact is that the deck is stacked against the student from the beginning. We run around calling them "student-athletes" as some lame PR policy to make it seem like athletic departments have their priorities in order, but when the student wants to exercise a right that EVERY OTHER STUDENT at the school has, we point to competitive disadvantages. Exactly where is the lack of accountability for the student? The athletic department doesn't own that kid. They're accountable to their graduation, period. If a cello player in the school orchestra wants to move schools, he can play cello immediately at his new home without any infringement from the orchestral oversight organization (OOO), and get a scholarship to do it!

This comes from a 16-year NCAA coaching vet.

I feel very strongly that the exception should be just that. If there are extenuating circumstances and an athlete must transfer for some reason, give them a waiver. Transferring should not be taken lightly, however, so athletes should understand that if they want to go elsewhere they should plan to sit.

So few colleges are really competative across the board in T&f I don't see why a coach would care if the kid leaves. If a kid wants to leave CO for WISC I could see why the coach would make them sit, but from Podunk U to Whatsamatta U, why make a fuss?

Is your hypothetical cello player on a scholarship? If so, they shouldn't be allowed to leave any more than an employee of a company who is under contract should be allowed to pack up and switch to a rival company on a whim. A scholarship is a contract. Why should one side be allowed to void it?

and what about the athlete who is recruited for one event, and after some time, they get switched to another event under another coach, with out being any part of the decision? Should that "student-athlete" have to stay at that school and compete in an event that they do not want to, under a coach whom they do not want to be under? sounds like one side can change their end of the agreement, but one side cannot.

Listen, the rules are the rules. The school has the right to make you sit if you transfer. They put time and money into you in terms of the recruiting and the training room and shoes and t-shirts and scholarship and academic support servies and the people in charge of tracking your graduation rates, etc..

If you want to be treated like every other student then quit and become every other student. If you want to be a college athlete, you live under the rules of the governing body.

Plain and simple.

Quit your bitching!

and what about wrote:

and what about the athlete who is recruited for one event, and after some time, they get switched to another event under another coach, with out being any part of the decision? Should that "student-athlete" have to stay at that school and compete in an event that they do not want to, under a coach whom they do not want to be under? sounds like one side can change their end of the agreement, but one side cannot.

Then grow a sack and tell your coach you want to concentrate on the event you were recruited for. Don't be a pussy.

scholarships are, per NCAA rules, one-year deals. This gives the school the right to dump a kid after each school year. Why, then, does the kid not have the right to leave after that "contract" is up without penalty or restriction?

Thank you for helping me make my point.

to APR

every other student isn't on an athletic scholarship having their school paid for.

secondly don't think each university president doesn't monitor institutional retention rates as well as athletic retention rates.

and if the deck is stacked, then so be it, but that is the environment that governs our arena.

the ncaa makes provisions for exceptions as do coaches and athletic departments. but not everyone falls into the category of qualifying for an exception.

i for one would rather every sport have the same rules of football and basketball so then people can stop whining.

every football and basketball player knows that if they want to transfer they have to sit a year. Period end of story.

and every athlete in other sports knows that they too have to sit a year unless they are granted an exception. If they want an exception they should simply state their case.

Any coach has the autority to release the athelete or not. It is up to them.

compliance:

you fail to address the one-way nature of this agreement. All you say is "that's the environment." Well guess what? It's wrong and the fact that the NCAA governs it doesn't make it right (more likely the opposite).

And you're right, not every student is on full scholarship. But not every athlete is on full scholarship, either (or even possibly any aid at all), yet they have to sit as well. Is that fair?

You can't have it both ways. Either these kids are students who play sports or they're commodities.

the ncaa says i can have it both ways