That would hurt programs like NU. As soon as you develop a star to build and recruit around, he impatiently jumps ship to a program that would not have taken him out of high school. I do think if a program asks you to move, they should agree to waive the one year rule and any restrictions to transferring within the conference. (leaving the Vassar thing along - horse is dead, for now...)
But if a coach took a chance on you, you became a star, then you should be penalized for abandoning the program. That said, it's among the limited pro-school thoughts I hold.
I think athletes are tremendously exploited from image rights to compensation and long term injury protection. I would really like to see NCAA revenue become an open book with schools required to reinvest a certain percentage into the athletes benefits - similar to a salary floor. I would like to see lower salaries and expenses within the NCAA. Pay coaches whatever you want - but for the schools to spend a significant percentage of all sport related revenue on the athletes - current and past. That might help motivate the schools to control costs - like coaching salaries - if so much revenue is untouchable. Or make it a conference or NCAA process and redirect the revenue from that point before distributing to the schools. Conference level probably makes the most sense - and has the most power to even out the revenue among their members and pay out benefits for all scholarship-ed athletes (disability insurance, long term health, stipends, etc.) in a pension like fashion as well as to the current student. The more I think about the pension comparison - the more I like it.
I also think that the athlete should retain no less than equal rights to his name and image. And I think the athlete should be free to pursue and accept endorsements, but only after one full year in a program. (As aside, I would like to see the NCAA ban freshmen play - especially in basketball. In addition to taking a step towards returning the notion of STUDENT athlete, I think a year off the field has all pluses - growth, academic scrutiny, practice time, more upperclassmen on the field and in the drafts. In basketball, these one and dones have watered down the NBA, the draft, and lead to lots of flame out high draft picks...) Of course, shoe endorsements and such would fall second to the team's official uniform, but if the athlete wants to promote Chevy, then good for him/her. I realize this creates the opportunity for improper recruiting, but that is the NCAA's purpose to investigate. I also don't think the endorsement can include donning the school uniform or school name - but if Joe Athlete has a marketable Q rating, have at it.
I think these would be fun things to discuss here - but I doubt any of you of here to discuss fun things... so let's get back to Lieberman and the disrespect of the B!G...
