SEC coaches oppose transfer rule proposal

"I wouldn't like that at all," Tennessee coach Phillip Fulmer said. "I think it would create a situation like you have some in baseball, tennis and other sports, where you spend all that time and money recruiting young men. Then the first adversity they have, it's easy to transfer."

The News Sentinel polled SEC coaches on the proposal during this week's coaches' teleconference after the NCAA Championship and Competition Cabinet forwarded the transfer recommendation to the Board of Directors. The proposal, which could be voted on as early as April 2005, was submitted by the Pac-10.

Under NCAA by-laws, athletes in Division I-A football, basketball and mens' hockey are required to sit out a season after transferring to another school (unless a football transfer is to a I-AA school). The Pac-10-sponsored proposal says all athletes should have the same opportunity to transfer regardless of which sport they play.

Kentucky coach Rich Brooks said freshmen would be affected most because there is a period of adjustment to academic and athletic demands.

"Sometimes homesickness, or one little thing goes wrong in the freshman year and somebody wants to transfer," Brooks said. "If they can freely transfer and not have to sit out a year, I think it would bring a lot more chaos to programs and the recruiting process."

Reform proponents say such concerns are overblown. For several years, NCAA rules have permitted players to transfer without sitting out a year if the school is banned from bowls the remainder of their college careers. (SEC rules are more strict, requiring all transfers within the league to sit out a season).

In 2002, Alabama's junior and senior players were allowed to transfer to any non-SEC school without sitting out because the Tide was placed on probation for two years and banned from bowls during that time. Despite coaches from other schools contacting players to try to convince them to leave, there was no mass exodus of Tide players.

Still, Houston Nutt of Arkansas warned that a liberalized transfer rule would make it easier for Division I-A schools to tamper with rosters of other teams.

"What you worry about is having a real change of some recruiting going on right there," Nutt said.

Vanderbilt's Bobby Johnson noted the personal aspect of recruiting is hard to ignore.

"I think there are too many relationships built in recruiting, and you remember that recruiting coach from the other team,'' he said. "It would be so easy to call him up and say, 'Hey, I remember you wanted me so bad. I'm ready to come now.' "

Florida coach Ron Zook said the proposed change is a reflection of the times "when everything is instant gratification." Last year, Florida quarterback Ingle Martin lost the starting job after the UT game. In January, he took advantage of a rule that allows Division I-A players to transfer to I-AA programs without sitting out. He is Furman's starting quarterback this season.

"I think it would be chaos myself," Zook said of the NCAA reform proposal. "I don't see how they can let that happen. Sometimes people get frustrated with certain situations and just as in life, they need to tough it out and things get better."

Johnson, in his third season at Vanderbilt, has a unique perspective on the transfer issue, having served as head coach at Furman (1994-2001). He said an athlete moving down from I-A to I-AA is different than transferring within I-A.

"Usually when you are going down to I-AA, it's a situation where the young man figures his chances of playing are completely gone, or he's in his last year," Johnson said.

"If you make it a free transfer (within I-A), I think you are asking for a flurry of transfers. It may die down after that, but at first there are going to be a lot of people testing the waters and there will be a big jumble of people moving around."

Georgia coach Mark Richt said eliminating the rule requiring a transfer to sit out a year would have far-reaching effects detrimental to coaching. He envisions some coaches being reluctant to enforce team rules for fear of offending an athlete.

Richt said the potential for trouble exists if a "player gets upset and says, 'I'm going off to some other school.' So maybe the coach decides, 'Shoot, if I discipline these guys they'll leave on me but if I don't discipline we have anarchy.'

"I can't tell you how many kids I've had who were in my office crying one day,'' Richt said. "Then by the time they get to their third, fourth or fifth year, they are happy they stayed."

South Carolina coach Lou Holtz said he doesn't like the proposal, but could live with it if there were some modifications.

"I wouldn't be opposed to having that after their sophomore year, or possibility after junior year,' Holtz said.

"When things are difficult for young people, that's all part of maturity and part of growing up. Being able to transfer to another school, they never learn that lesson.

"There are times when a guy would transfer and have success but most of the time they just change the address of their problems."

Alabama coach Mike Shula calls it the "grass-is-always-greener" philosophy. "I think every kid has a thought whether or not to leave school,'' said Shula, a former Tide quarterback. "I know I did."

Mississippi State's Sylvester Croom and Mississippi's David Cutcliffe both said the liberalized rule would send the wrong message to athletes.

"In your first or second year, you get disgruntled and then you head for the hills just because things didn't go your way,'' Croom said.

"They aren't going like everything we ask them to do. That's part of it."

Cutcliffe said it would "open the floodgates" to transfers. Auburn's Tuberville said if the new rule is passed "players across the country would try to find a place where they could start immediately. "

LSU coach Nick Saban echoed similar sentiments, saying, "In this day and age, if you don't get positive self-gratification immediately, you do something else. I don't know if it will pass or not, but I certainly don't like it."

Gary Lundy may be reached at 865-342-6274.