Transfers rules: NON-athletic scholarship during sit out year?

[FeliSilvestris]

Suppose that NU awards its 2 remaining 2017 scholarships to 2 grad transfers or upcoming freshmen.

At that point NU would have no athletic scholarships to give, for the 2017-18 year.

But could NU still accept a transfer student athlete who would sit out the 2017-18 year?

NU wouldn't have an athletic scholarship to offer him during the sit out year. But he could qualify for "normal" need-based financial aid, which in principle could cover most or all his expenses during the sit out year. The transferred student would get a normal athletic scholarship starting with the 2018-19 school year.

From my readings of the NCAA transfer rules, it SEEMS to me that the above is allowed by the rules (if the transferring student accepts, of course). The transferred student would be similar to a walk-on during his sit-out year.

What do you think?

 

[xxxbobxxx]

I think it is a great question involving a grey area.

 

[NJCat]

I think it is a great question involving a grey area.

Seems too logical for the NCAA to accept it. Would be a great way to stash players for the future.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

HERE is an ESPN article about a somewhat similar situation as in the OP: grayshirting (which is allowed and used).

The article cites Gary B concerning his experience at CU:

"You're not going to grayshirt a guy that's a four- or five-star recruit," Barnett said. "You're going to grayshirt a guy because you don't have room for them, or you want him and you think he's going to grow into something special. It gets him an extra year of growth, extra year of school. It gets him started without the pressure of playing. If you can convince the kid and the parents to do it, it's the very best thing going for a kid."

You can think that the non-athletic-scholl-during-sit-out transfer would be similar to a "grayshirt", but I don't think it'd be the exact same thing (the transfer would get need-based aid and attend classes full time, for example,..., not sure whether a grayshirt could be in that situation).

 

[FeliSilvestris]

THIS (<---) article explains the meaning of the colors of the (figurative) shirts.
Interesting!

 

[Gocatsgo2003]

HERE is an ESPN article about a somewhat similar situation as in the OP: grayshirting (which is allowed and used).

The article cites Gary B concerning his experience at CU:

"You're not going to grayshirt a guy that's a four- or five-star recruit," Barnett said. "You're going to grayshirt a guy because you don't have room for them, or you want him and you think he's going to grow into something special. It gets him an extra year of growth, extra year of school. It gets him started without the pressure of playing. If you can convince the kid and the parents to do it, it's the very best thing going for a kid."

You can think that the non-athletic-scholl-during-sit-out transfer would be similar to a "grayshirt", but I don't think it'd be the exact same thing (the transfer would get need-based aid and attend classes full time, for example,..., not sure whether a grayshirt could be in that situation).

I haven't been "in" the rule book for a while and background was almost entirely in football, but I'm almost positive there are NCAA rules forbidding this arrangement. Otherwise schools would use it all the time to skirt scholarship limits.

On the football side, a grayshirt is still a "counter" toward the roster limit during fall but not the scholarship count assuming the only aid he receives is need- or merit-based (i.e. not related to athletics).

 

[FeliSilvestris]

I'm almost positive there are NCAA rules forbidding this arrangement. Otherwise schools would use it all the time to skirt scholarship limits.

Which arrangement? That a transfer receives only need-based aid during the sit out year? The scholarship would count after the sit-out year, so that'd put a limit on how many they could take.
AFAIK, some conferences (for example the Ivy) don't give athletic scholls at all to anyone (transfer or not)...but they award need-based financial aid to all the SA who qualify, which in many/most cases has the same effect.
I suppose there is a limit on the total number of players eligible to play (with scholarship or not), to prevent a situation in which schools take a large number of "walk-ons" who in fact are normal athletes just getting their schollies via need-based aid.

 

[Gocatsgo2003]

Which arrangement? That a transfer receives only need-based aid during the sit out year? The scholarship would count after the sit-out year, so that'd put a limit on how many they could take.
AFAIK, some conferences (for example the Ivy) don't give athletic scholls at all to anyone (transfer or not)...but they award need-based financial aid to all the SA who qualify, which in many/most cases has the same effect.
I suppose there is a limit on the total number of players eligible to play (with scholarship or not), to prevent a situation in which schools take a large number of "walk-ons" who in fact are normal athletes just getting their schollies via need-based aid.

Though I'm having trouble copy-and-pasting the full rule due to formatting purposes, the actual rule is under "Maximum Institutional Grant-in-Aid Limitations by Sport" 15.5.1.1 Exception, which can be found on page 190 of the NCAA Division I Manual linked HERE.

Essentially, a student-athlete who was recruited and receives only institutional financial aid without regard to athletic ability doesn't count until they compete in varsity competition. The trick is in establishing that the athlete in question was given absolutely no preferential treatment in the granting of such aid due to their status as a recruited athlete.

As with many (most?) things related to the NCAA, there's a bit of a gray area there. But, in practice, it's virtually impossible to demonstrate that a transferring basketball player was granted aid exclusively based on their financial needs or academic record.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Essentially, a student-athlete who was recruited and receives only institutional financial aid without regard to athletic ability doesn't count until they compete in varsity competition.

That part would be fine in the case of the sit-out year of the transfer, since he would NOT be competing (just practicing, etc) during that period. The following year he would get a normal athletic schol which would count.
If practicing was the only problem, then they could agree not to practice with the team (I suppose watching the practices from the stands would be OK if other students are also allowed).
As for proving non-preferential treatment, a good guide would be how the Ivy does it, since supposedly they only offer need-based aid to all athletes.

 

[Gocatsgo2003]

That part would be fine in the case of the sit-out year of the transfer, since he would NOT be competing (just practicing, etc) during that period. The following year he would get a normal athletic schol which would count.
If practicing was the only problem, then they could agree not to practice with the team (I suppose watching the practices from the stands would be OK if other students are also allowed).
As for proving non-preferential treatment, a good guide would be how the Ivy does it, since supposedly they only offer need-based aid to all athletes.

Good luck with that... not going to argue a hypothetical with you that has literally no chance of coming to fruition.

 

[FeliSilvestris]

Good luck with that... not going to argue a hypothetical with you that has literally no chance of coming to fruition.

Not arguing at all. Just commenting on this issue.