Well then, maybe someone here can make a non-emotional case for why coaches don’t have to sit out a year, but players do. The guys here in ATL I run around with, who all went to so called smaller schools, but support UGA, LSU, Colorado, to name a few, strongly believe kids should sit out. A college coach, depending upon health and how good he is, get 40-50 years to ply their trade. College kids get 5 years to play 4.
Yet, any coach, whether a HC, or position, is basically free to move whenever he can strike a better deal. An unintended consequence of the early signing date is 7 HC’s have changed schools. To the best of my knowledge, none of them have to sit out a year. Heck, Mel Tucker left Colorado AFTER signing date, and he’s already hard at work at Michigan St. Plus, they doubled his salary.
My ATL friends don’t have a reply to this. Maybe someone here can explain why it’s different. Full disclosure, this whole subject makes my BP go off the charts. The hypocrisy is hard to fathom.
I am not clear on how, or why, the transfer portal came into being. I do know King Saban & Emperor Smart decided what schools an athlete of theirs could transfer to. Certainly NOT within conference, or if the school was on the schedule the next 3-4 years. Yet, I could rattle off assistant after assistant who has moved within the SEC, usually for either more $$$, or a longer contract.
The transfer portal has taken that power away from these HC’s. Rightfully so. HC’s were wrongly abusing their powers over kids who had 4 years to play. But it’s certainly ok for grown men to move job to job every year, with no consequence.
Lastly, are we to believe that if there was no sitting out a year, schools from the SEC/ACC are gonna come sniffing around athletes at schools like MT, etc? In the infamous words of John McEnroe, “you cannot be serious”.