Should the NCAA change the waivers they have in place for transfers?

On the surface, the NCAA transfer rule appear to fairly straight forward. If you decide to go from one Division I institution to another, you must sit out one season.

Its not a punishment. Its a regulation. The rule creates an incentive that's in place to prevent players from shopping their skills in between seasons.

Without this rule, a player would be able open himself up to recruitment by other teams and coaches during each and every offseason. Don't like how many minutes you're getting at Duke? Transfer. Get in a disagreement with the coaching staff at Kentucky? Transfer. When considered in combination with the four-in-five rule, which allows a player five years to exhaust their four seasons of eligibility once they play one season of collegiate athletics, it allows, at most, two transfers by any player. Even then, that player would be forced to lose a full season of competition.

But there are two ways around this rule:

• If a player receives their undergraduate degree from one university with eligibility left and wants to pursue a graduate degree at another institution that isn't offered at their current school, that player can apply for a waiver from the NCAA to be eligible immediately at the new school.


• If there are extenuating circumstances, involving anything from the illness of a close family member to financial hardships at home, then that player can apply to the NCAA for a hardship waiver that would allow them to be eligible immediately.
  

These issues have made quite a few headlines with a number of notable players of late. Sean Kowal was initially denied, and subsequently granted, his release from Northern Illinois when he tried to transfer out of the Huskies program to pursue a masters in theology. Justin Knox graduated from Alabama and was forced to run through hoops regarding where he was allowed to transfer before finally ending up at North Carolina. Eniel Polynice went to Seton Hall after finishing his degree at Ole Miss. On the football side, we all know the story of Jeremiah Masoli, who was kicked out of Oregon and initially denied clearance to play at Ole Miss before winning an appeal. Roburt Sallie tried to take this course of action when leaving Memphis, but he was unable to get himself eligible at Louisville.

Tyler Smith, who transferred from Iowa to Tennessee to be closer to his ailing father, and Elliot Williams, who went from Duke to Memphis to be near his mother who was sick, are two of the most well-known examples of players taking advantage of the NCAA's hardship waiver, while countless others -- Jordan Crawford, Herb Pope, Keon Lawrence, Matt Pilgrim, Armon Bassett, Julian Vaughn, and the list goes on -- have recently applied.

The teardrop tattoos on Tyler Smith's face are in honor of his father.
(photo credit: ESPN)

J'Mison Morgan is the latest to be granted the hardship waiver. It was announced yesterday that Morgan, who transferred out of UCLA, would be immediately eligible at Baylor because his grandmother, who is his legal guardian and the woman that raised him, has terminal cancer.

This is one situation where the NCAA gets it right. If a player legitimately wants to be able to be closer to an ailing family member that they care about -- like a parent or a grandparent or a sibling -- than I have no problem with the transfer rule being waived. Likewise, if a player legitimately is transferring in order to enroll in a graduate program that isn't offered at their current school, then I think they should be allowed to enroll without penalty.

The problem is that athletes are taking advantage of these rules. Both Polynice and Sallie were on the outs with their previous teams which forced their hands. Masoli, obviously, was kicked out of Oregon for disciplinary reasons. Many of the transfers that apply for the hardship waiver do so as a last resort. If they apply and get rejected, then they still have to sit out a season. But if they apply and come up with a good enough argument as to why they shouldn't have to sit out a season, then they are eligible immediately. There's no downside to trying.

Jay Bilas touched on this a few weeks back, and he dislikes any sort of rule that waives the one-year penalty:

There have been several recent cases in which players have essentially switched teams to pursue a degree not offered at a player's current school or to get closer to a sick immediate family member. Those players should still have to sit out a year. Nobody is stopping anyone from attending any school or transferring. The only hurdle that has to be cleared is sitting out a season. That is not too much of a burden, and it is fair. But it has to be applied to everyone across the board.

He's not alone in that sentiment. Quite a few coaches disagree with it as well.

The spirit of the rule is 100% correct. Take Kowal's case. He told Andy Katz last month he wanted to transfer to a different school because "it makes you more diverse and more marketable. I've always wanted to be a high school basketball coach, especially at my previous high school, a Jesuit school. It's a fit for me." His intent to transfer was, it seems, truly motivated by academics, and not athletics.

Sean Kowal seems to be using the NCAA's transfer waivers correctly.
(photo credit: ESPN)

Morgan's grandmother lives an easy 90 minutes drive from Baylor's Waco campus. Do you think he is going to value the chances he gets to drive back-and-forth to see her? Do you think that the opportunity for him to play in front of her on Dec. 18th, when Baylor takes on Gonzaga in Dallas, is something that is important to him?

So what is the answer?

Does the NCAA need to reevaluate how often they grant these waivers? Possibly, but reducing the number of waivers would likely result in some athletes with legitimate cases being forced to sit out, while becoming more liberal in which cases are granted a waiver would only increase the incentive for a player to transfer. If it is less likely that a player will be forced to sit out a season, its more likely that player will bolt for greener pastures.

Another option is that the NCAA could eliminate the waivers. But doing so would punish kids like Sean Kowal, true student-athletes that are utilizing athletic scholarships in order to educate themselves and avoid the mountain of student loans so many young adults are currently trying to climb. It is less of an issue with someone like J'Mison Morgan, as the standard argument against the hardship waiver is that if the player is really dealing with an issue pressing enough to necessitate a transfer, should they be spending all of their time playing basketball?

As far as I'm concerned, no changes need to be made.

Players that transfer need to understand that the rule is that they must sit out one season if they decide to transfer. If you have a legitimate argument as to why you shouldn't be forced to sit out a year, then in most cases the NCAA will grant you a waiver if you apply. If someone catches a break and receives a waiver outside of the spirit of the rules, well, good for them for exploiting a loophole. It happens all the time with the NCAA.

And if you don't receive a waiver, that sucks, but that's life.

You'll simply have to follow the NCAA's rule.