Columnist Dean Juipe: Discrepancy on transfers is intolerable

Dean Juipe

Monday, Dec. 9, 2002 | 10:13 a.m.

Dean Juipe's column appears Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday and Friday. His boxing notebook appears Thursday. Reach him at juipe@lasvegassun.com or (702) 259-4084.

Lacking clout as a whole, collegiate athletes are subject to the whims of the stuffy and shameless NCAA, which frequently penalizes those it can bully while taking a more condescending approach to its privileged buddies.

In no area is this more clear than the discrepancy between how the NCAA treats players who choose to transfer vs. the coaches who jump ship and switch jobs on something akin to an annual basis. It's an ugly inconsistency and one, I predict, that someday will be successfully challenged in a court of law.

As has been the case seemingly forever, if a player elects to leave his Division-I school and transfer to another he must sit out one full season. He can practice with his new team but he cannot play in game situations for a year, although he does not lose a year of eligibility.

The rule lives up to its intent: It discourages players from transferring. Yet some players will still do it, as was the case with current UNLV basketball player Demetrius Hunter, who is eligible now but was forced to sit out last season after transferring from Georgetown.

But had Hunter been the Georgetown coach and had UNLV wanted to hire him to coach the Rebels, he could have made the move unencumbered and could have taken charge of his new team the day he arrived.

Or, take this example from the real world: Dennis Franchione walked out on his valid and still-in-effect contract at Alabama last week to accept an offer to become head football coach at Texas A&M. In this particular case, Franchione could be accused of being both greedy and gutless, having bolted Alabama without so much as informing his players -- which is a task he left to an assistant coach.

Franchione was under contract at Alabama through 2007 and was entitled to a base salary of $1.1 million per year. When it became apparent that he was interested in A&M, Alabama stepped forward with an offer to redraw his contract and up its value to $15 million over 10 years.

That's a lot of money for a guy whose two Alabama teams went a combined 17-8.

But, back to the point: A&M was offering Franchione a five-year deal worth roughly $10 million (with incentives) and he took it.

From where I sit, Franchione should not only not be allowed to leave one contract and enter into another one without the consent of his employer, he should also have to sit out a season just as any transferring D-I athlete would be required to do.

Where's the difference? The justification? If an athlete "deserves" to be docked a year for transferring, why shouldn't a coach?

It would be one thing if Franchione had been fired or if Alabama was willing to let his contract lapse, but he knowingly and willingly broke his contract with the school simply to walk upon the greener pastures A&M is providing.

Times change: High-school players can now transfer without penalty in most jurisdictions, and collegiate players deserve the same consideration. Failing to obtain the latter, those players should have the rules pertaining to transferring extended to the coaching fraternity as well.

It's a goose-and-the-gander thing, and what's good enough for one ought to be good enough for the other.

archive