Just curious how important what a coach pays for a player affects play time? Do they tend to favor they ones they pay most for? Is it good to ask for more so to increase the "apparent" value of the player? OR... They play who they think will help them win?
It MIght affect who gets the first start. But if a high priced player doesn't produce, they sit. A coach gets judged on results when evaluation time comes around.
I don't know many coaches who don't call it how they see it and play the best players (in their judgement) but if an AD looks at an under-performing team and all or most of the recruiting budget is on the bench - that spells doom for the coach. Coaches do 2 things to mitigate this - 1 - really resist giving full scholarships up front (often with a promise of an increase if...) 2 - increase the amounts the good players are getting once they prove they are good players (you could say #3 is the obvious one - go hard for the 'sure thing' great players early on but everyone is trying that) This "incremental" use of dollars is really common on the mens side with even less money and becoming more so for the women. Women have more money allocated and more of them also get academic money (compared to mens soccer) so a bit more wiggle room for womens coaches than mens. If high-dollar players are dropping off the roster a lot or transferring, that's trouble to0 so many coaches try to be conservative with their money on the front side.
It is easy to figure this out, especially if you are trying to determine if a player should accept a low money offer. If Freshman starters looking back three four years never left their starter line up (and it is pretty easy to determine if they were full riders - National team, International/Canadian player, read their own press releases or the signing release from the universty, or ask around) for all the years they were there, either the coach got their recruiting right, or it was a self-fulfilling move on the coaches part.....let me explain. If a coach pays a lot for a player, they want to prove they did a great recruting job and play/PR those players from the start and give them a lot of benefit of the doubt overlooking errors in early matches. If they don't, those players will leave immediately or in the case of Intls get home sick, because they don't like their play time, the coach, 0r whatever as a result etc. (Players can overlook alot of things when they are getting favored press/PR and starting position). So while the full-riders may not better , if it is neck to neck competiting for a spot on the field, the coach generally will pick the scholarship player to justify the use of the teams budget. This by nature of exposure to the field will make the money player get better and work out their bugs. Makes little sense though, because the players they should be trying harder to keep in these situations are the talented players without the large $$ because they often leave as well for being unhappy, and they were a benefit to the coaches budget and hard to replace. Remember, though, money players can be cut too or their scholarship reduced (rarely happens) since they are only one year guarantees, but many of courses will put out a four year promise, and now can actually make a binding four year promise with the new rules.
With a kid gets a release after the fall season and transfers. Can they play in the spring for the school they transfer to...or do they have to wait until the next fall season?
Yes - the fall/spring count as one full year of the four possible. Everyone gets 4 falls and springs as long as they were released by the first school (exempted from the year in residency requirement). Regarding soccerwoowoo, agree somewhat with you but its never all one way. The opposite of your point can also be true - that some coaches love the "low dollar" kids who can earn some playing time or become starters. (for most, it's the local or legacy kids that come cheap). Its like saving money for 4 years.
I have a player now in senior year who transferred, so I can answer this. In mens and womens soccer, the "season" is defined as that which ends in a NCAA tournament. So the only "regulation" season is the fall. So if a player transferred at semester, they can play in the spring without problems. The only exception is if they transfer within their conference, because many conferences have a One Year Sit Out rule. This means they are prohibited from playing in any competition (outside of intra squad games) for one year in residence (meaning they have to be going to school at that new university for one year before entering any competition). Transfer players can practice, but can't play. I've seen some who practice with the team, but may play in with another sport (like track or Lacrosse) for that first year. All players have a "one time allowable" transfer during their career, where they don't have to sit out (except for again transfers within their conference). Gets a little trickier when someone transfers who is on a Scholarship, as some universities will try to make it difficult with transfers out of the conference if a player is going to another scholarship at semester, but appeal process is in place. Players have 5 years to play 4 regulation seasons,clock starting the minute they start classes at any D1 instituion. But transfer rules start the minute a player steps foot on a practice field in the preseason. This is Transfer 101 and there are sites out there that explain it but hope this helps.
Some clarifications. If you sign the uniform letter of intent, the one time exception requires the consent of the administration of the previous school. If that is not granted, there is an appeals process to the conference, then to the NCAA, but it is by no means automatic. I'd say getting the exception without consent is pretty rare. The uniform letter of intent provides for a loss of eligibility for two years if you leave your previous school before one academic year. And the uniform letter of intent requires the loss of eligibility without consent ofthe previous school to be for all sports for one year from the time you enter your new school. One last point. Some state don't allow contracts with minors to be binding. ( Mississippi is one such state) if it is not co-signed, it will not be valid in some states. Other states have statutory exceptions for minors in the sports and entertainment industries. A good overview of the legal issues is in the Mississippi law journal: http://mississippilawjournal.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/6-Burke_Final-Corrected.pdf
"The uniform letter of intent provides for a loss of eligibility for two years if you leave your previous school before one academic year. And the uniform letter of intent requires the loss of eligibility without consent ofthe previous school to be for all sports for one year from the time you enter your new school." I've never heard of anyone losing "two years" of eligibility. Generally what I've known, if someone leaves in the middle of the year, who is on a Letter of Intent, it has everything to do with getting a scholarship at the new school. The NCAA is very helpful if you have any questions, and their guide on their site, if it still is out there, seems to provide a lot of direction, but not a lot of "what ifs".
You may not have heard of it, but it is nevertheless what the NCAA says: http://www.ncaa.org/wps/wcm/connect...ERES&CACHEID=cfefa2004e0dc6e994fbf41ad6fc8b25 The way it works, is if you leave before the completion of your first academic year, your timeline in women's soccer will be two years, since the season starts at the beginning of an academic year. Also, note that is says ALL SPORTS. So your lacrosse player must have been granted a release.
There are a myriad of situations when it comes to transfers. I don't think anyone could possibly address them all on a forum like this. We always hope transfers are not needed but with kids making decisions so early it is happening. Many never get to the letter of intent because they even enroll early. Bottom line is the NCAA is there to call and they will really explain the rules based on your specific situation. Never take the coach's word on what the rules may be...or your best friend's either. Always make sure the reasons are valid and then don't be intimidated by the "you can'ts". Remember if you get as far as requesting an appeal, it goes to NON ATHLETIC members of a University committee. First and foremost you are a student. Did I mention always call the NCAA to find out your rights? Can't say it enough. If your kid wants a different sport, some schools even have some sports that are DI and others DII or club...again, a myriad of situations possible. Call NCAA and have a list of questions of exactly what you want to do and why. They really will help.
I believe transfers should be easier. The whole letter of intent program is designed to protect schools, not students.