I hear ya Roam. In May 2017 I accepted a job with Defense Logistics Agency. 7 months later I was promoted in grade and to a management position. 11 months later I change jobs and agencies to Naval Air Systems Command. It had nothing to do with quitting or taking the easy way out but, had everything to do with opportunity! At DLA, unless I wanted to relocate (which I don't), there wasn't much opportunity for upward mobility beyond my GS 12 position. However, putting myself in the DOD transfer portal, NAVAIR offered me an opportunity which I accepted, now I have the opportunity for upward mobility all the way up to GS 15 and have a good possibility for doing it before I retire in 10 years. That is a life changing opportunity for me and my family. I'm ok if people think I am a quitter! Security for my family while I am here on this earth and after is the name of the game for me! Oh and had I NOT entered my name in the DOD transfer portal I would have never had a shot for major career opportunities. And if I didn't get any opportunities I would have been ok where I was at. I NEVER knock a person for trying to better their situation be it a student or someone in the workforce!
Nice link Navy...
It's cool to feel different, I just don't subscribe to the notion that transferring is "quitting". I think there are plenty of legitimate reasons an 18, 19, or 20 year old may want to do so.
It's not just football either, in the last 30 years the amount of jobs a person will have in their lifetime has increased as well. Many people in almost every vocation are moving from company to company, or even sometimes to new vocations altogether. Seems like the new normal
Strange....you say transferring isnt quitting but staying is stupid. Different strokes for different folks.
NavyLion,
I was on sight at the DLA in DC about 6 months ago and it took me two hours to go 20 feet with my car just to clear both gates BEFORE I got to the main entrance and I was ALREADY vetted. And then I got to see some pretty cool areas that they use for training. Never new what DLA was until then.
Not sure what you do, but that was very interesting to say the least. When they say open every compartment in your car, they are NOT joking! LOL
Nice link Navy...
It's cool to feel different, I just don't subscribe to the notion that transferring is "quitting". I think there are plenty of legitimate reasons an 18, 19, or 20 year old may want to do so.
It's not just football either, in the last 30 years the amount of jobs a person will have in their lifetime has increased as well. Many people in almost every vocation are moving from company to company, or even sometimes to new vocations altogether. Seems like the new normal
Strange....you say transferring isnt quitting but staying is stupid. Different strokes for different folks.
I didn't say staying is always stupid... I said if you want an NFL career and you KNOW you will never see the field, then yes it would be stupid to stay if someone else if offering you a chance to play. There's a difference.
I think Stevens would have been gone if McSorley had another year of eligibility, and in that situation it would have been stupid of him to stay. Why would he choose to play in the situational token LION formation, rather than start as a QB somewhere and show his talent? Sometimes your just behind another good player who beat you out... barely. In that situation, I feel it would have been stupid for him to stay if he had aspirations of playing in the NFL.
Of course, as we all know McSorley is gone and Stevens is the favorite to win the position now. It's all situational, each player and opportunity is different. Just IMO
Thought this was interesting.
http://www.fauowlsnest.com/data/attachment.php?id=312&for_session=11e34
Like all have said .. nice link Navy, but !!! Have you looked at the names - this is a very old list - found many players that haven't played in years! My quick look at Steeler players revealed this rather quickly, listing Kendrell Bell and Brett Keisel.
Thought this was interesting.
http://www.fauowlsnest.com/data/attachment.php?id=312&for_session=11e34
Like all have said .. nice link Navy, but !!! Have you looked at the names - this is a very old list - found many players that haven't played in years! My quick look at Steeler players revealed this rather quickly, listing Kendrell Bell and Brett Keisel.
I think his point was to show just how many "not good enough" guys have indeed been able to make it into the NFL.
Thought this was interesting.
http://www.fauowlsnest.com/data/attachment.php?id=312&for_session=11e34
Like all have said .. nice link Navy, but !!! Have you looked at the names - this is a very old list - found many players that haven't played in years! My quick look at Steeler players revealed this rather quickly, listing Kendrell Bell and Brett Keisel.
I think his point was to show just how many "not good enough" guys have indeed been able to make it into the NFL.
That's not at all what this list is. Its a list of guys that went to JUCO (assuming to get their grades up) and then they transferred to a real college to play football and from there they went on to the pros. That's the PURPOSE OF A JUNIOR COLLEGE.......to prep a kid for two years in order to move on. The only thing one can assume from this list is that their grades weren't good enough to get them into a Div 1 school thus they had to go the JUCO route for two years. You know, back in the day when grades mattered to the universities.
It looks like we have a wide range of opinions on the transfer issue and that's a good thing. Everybody is entitled to their own opinion and I don't think there is a right or wrong position. Roam, you certainly have backed up you're support with numerous examples, QB's and others. I appreciate the research and effort and it sure backs up your position! My position is based more on my own gut feeling that it's the wrong direction for college football to be heading. Yes, there are legitimate reasons why a kid would transfer, but lack of playing time without some extenuating circumstances is in my mind a questionable reason. Unless the sole purpose of college football is to serve as a portal to the NFL.
Thought this was interesting.
http://www.fauowlsnest.com/data/attachment.php?id=312&for_session=11e34
Like all have said .. nice link Navy, but !!! Have you looked at the names - this is a very old list - found many players that haven't played in years! My quick look at Steeler players revealed this rather quickly, listing Kendrell Bell and Brett Keisel.
I think his point was to show just how many "not good enough" guys have indeed been able to make it into the NFL.
That's not at all what this list is. Its a list of guys that went to JUCO (assuming to get their grades up) and then they transferred to a real college to play football and from there they went on to the pros. That's the PURPOSE OF A JUNIOR COLLEGE.......to prep a kid for two years in order to move on. The only thing one can assume from this list is that their grades weren't good enough to get them into a Div 1 school thus they had to go the JUCO route for two years. You know, back in the day when grades mattered to the universities.
You may be assuming wrong, as I know some of them went to P5 schools initially and transferred out to JUCOs in order to play after being buried on the depth chart. After a year, they transferred again to another P5 school.
Your assumption that JUCOs were/are only for kids with grade issues is wrong.
Some kids have grade issues, others use it as a year to play and leave for another P5 school, and still others use it to prove themselves in order to get a P5 offer... Aaron Rodgers had no grade issues whatsoever, but went to JUCO in order to play and show his skills. Went to Cal after that.
To add, I think I'd agree with it if you said the majority of people who attended JUCO did so for grade reasons, but also a decent amount have other reasons as well.
Also, this list doesn't include the people who transferred to places like FCS schools like Delaware in order to play. Just JUCOs, whom people like Kamara chose to attend after Alabama.
My whole point has always been that there are plenty of examples of transfers who left because of lack of playing time and still made it to the NFL. You can call them outliers if you like, but it's a lot of outliers and I don't think we should be denying them the chance to play on another team if they wish to do so.
I also don't think they are quitters either, some of them are Super Bowl winning QBs and I doubt they just got lucky... pretty sure they put in years of hard work to get there.
Lastly... Pardon my determination in the post thread, tedious work on the computer today has me checking in often 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣 🤣
Basically every 5 minute break I can take from my comp work is very, very needed at the moment. Pure data entry today and it's sooooooooo tedious.
I get a text every time somebody post something Roam which is pretty good IMO that way you can keep up lol
I agree with you bob except the way Justin Fields is gettin his hardship when I know he’s full of crap I’d change the rule you can’t transfer for ANY reason unless you sit out a year.....period no exceptions unless you have graduated then you don’t have to sit. This way will save college football because everybody is on the same page following the same rules.
Email not text
I agree with you bob except the way Justin Fields is gettin his hardship when I know he’s full of crap I’d change the rule you can’t transfer for ANY reason unless you sit out a year.....period no exceptions unless you have graduated then you don’t have to sit. This way will save college football because everybody is on the same page following the same rules.
I'd buy that Southern, sit 1 year unless you graduated.
Email not text
Your phone's email must be blowing up right now 🤣
I agree with you bob except the way Justin Fields is gettin his hardship when I know he’s full of crap I’d change the rule you can’t transfer for ANY reason unless you sit out a year.....period no exceptions unless you have graduated then you don’t have to sit. This way will save college football because everybody is on the same page following the same rules.
I'd buy that Southern, sit 1 year unless you graduated.
I have nothing against sitting a year unless you've graduated. That's perfectly fine. As I posted to Southern a while ago, I feel that the waiver is a good idea if they are using it fairly... However, it seems like they are just giving out waivers like hotcakes, which I am not a fan of.
If Justin Fields truly had a hardship, that's one thing... But from everything we heard about it, I don't feel he should qualify. One kid said some racist things to him at a Football game. Other students in the stand heard it and actually pointed the guy out and said what he did was wrong. The school dismissed the student... not sure what else Georgia could have don't to support Fields in the situation, unless there's something we all don't know about.
Here's something interesting... Do you think the NCAA could institute a rule that states any coach signing a contract has to stay at least 3 years at his job before they can move somewhere else "unless fired"?
Doesn't seem like a bad idea to me. When a coach signs a contract, the NCAA could stipulate that it contains a "non-compete" clause in it that says a coach can leave after three years and move to another school, however if they leave beforehand they have to sit out a year before the NCAA lets them take another position.
Seems fair?
I don't understand the folks that are shrugging off the players that are leaving early for other teams by saying that "they weren't starters" or "they weren't going to get playing time anyway." PS is now down to 75 scholarship players. That's a lot of experience that was lost that could have been used on the practice field against the 1st and 2nd teams. PS leads the country with players entering the portal. Undoubtedly, that loss of experience will eventually show up in games! Excusing it by saying that better players are coming in is discounting the value of what experience players, who may not be starters, can still benefit the team.
Here's something interesting... Do you think the NCAA could institute a rule that states any coach signing a contract has to stay at least 3 years at his job before they can move somewhere else "unless fired"?
Doesn't seem like a bad idea to me. When a coach signs a contract, the NCAA could stipulate that it contains a "non-compete" clause in it that says a coach can leave after three years and move to another school, however if they leave beforehand they have to sit out a year before the NCAA lets them take another position.
Seems fair?
That seems perfectly fair to me, Roam. Personally, I'd love to see it! The only problem I can see is what employment law has to say about it. Coaches are paid employees and have certain legal rights as employees that student athletes don't have as non-employees.
I don't understand the folks that are shrugging off the players that are leaving early for other teams by saying that "they weren't starters" or "they weren't going to get playing time anyway." PS is now down to 75 scholarship players. That's a lot of experience that was lost that could have been used on the practice field against the 1st and 2nd teams. PS leads the country with players entering the portal. Undoubtedly, that loss of experience will eventually show up in games! Excusing it by saying that better players are coming in is discounting the value of what experience players, who may not be starters, can still benefit the team.
1. They weren't starters and thus their loss will not be felt nearly as hard as a starter's would
2. Saying that does not mean I think their loss won't be felt at all, nor does it mean I don't care that they are leaving.
3. My wish for all of those kids to stay on the team is merely overridden by my acknowledgement that they should have the right to go elsewhere if they wish.
I didn't say that losing players wouldn't hurt at all... but again... losing 10 starters is a heck of a lot different than losing 10 backups. That doesn't mean losing 10 backups won't hurt, just that it won't hurt nearly as much.
I pretty much agree with everything you wrote mb... They do have value, absolutely. Hopefully this explains my reasoning a bit better.
Here's something interesting... Do you think the NCAA could institute a rule that states any coach signing a contract has to stay at least 3 years at his job before they can move somewhere else "unless fired"?
Doesn't seem like a bad idea to me. When a coach signs a contract, the NCAA could stipulate that it contains a "non-compete" clause in it that says a coach can leave after three years and move to another school, however if they leave beforehand they have to sit out a year before the NCAA lets them take another position.
Seems fair?
That seems perfectly fair to me, Roam. Personally, I'd love to see it! The only problem I can see is what employment law has to say about it. Coaches are paid employees and have certain legal rights as employees that student athletes don't have as non-employees.
Yeah, that could be an issue but I've seen non-compete clauses all over the place before so I wonder why this would be so different. I'm sure there's a way to get it done, but alas probably no desire to do it.
Exactly mb. We lost some good players this year and if we lose this many next year we’ll definitely take a hit with experience. Most true freshman ain’t ready to play.
No they're not. Remember back in the good old days (LOL) when freshman were ineligible and weren't allowed to play. That was for good reasons. Aside from physical maturity it was felt that they needed the freshman year to get used to the academics and college life. Joepa was a firm supporter of this rule and even after the NCAA made freshman eligible to play, he rarely played them. He did change his position several years later due to the need to stay competitive with the other schools, but he said many times that he didn't like it.
