NCAA board chair: Unlimited transfers 'inconsistent' with mission of graduation

Soon, a court may give college athletes the right to transfer an unlimited number of times without penalty.

One of the most powerful figures within college sports disagrees with such a move.

University of Georgia president Jere Morehead, the chair of the NCAA Division I Board of Directors, believes that an unlimited transfer policy is “inconsistent” with the organization’s goal of graduating athletes and, in addition, says that the association should abolish its transfer waiver process.

“We want every student-athlete to earn a degree as part of their college experience. Our rules have to be focused on that important objective,” Morehead told Yahoo Sports on Wednesday. “I think there are legitimate academic reasons not to have student-athletes engaged in multiple transfers. It does not achieve our goal in having student-athletes graduate from institutions. We’ve lost our way a bit here.”

Morehead’s comments came hours after a groundbreaking ruling from a U.S. district court in West Virginia.

As part of a lawsuit over the NCAA’s transfer policy, Judge John P. Bailey granted a 14-day temporary restraining order that prevents the association from enforcing its bylaw requiring college athletes who transfer more than once to sit out a year at their new school.

For a two-week period beginning Wednesday and running through Dec. 27, college athletes who are transferring a second time or more can play immediately at their new school. It paves a path for basketball players who have been denied waivers to play in games over the next two weeks — and maybe much longer.

A preliminary injunction hearing is set for Dec. 27 where the judge is expected to levy a more permanent ruling.

The NCAA is in the process of notifying its member schools that it will comply with the court’s ruling: Multi-time transfers can compete in games over the next two weeks without needing a waiver, and the organization, according to the court’s ruling, cannot penalize a school or player for competing in competition if the ruling is later reversed. However, the court’s ruling does not apply to future seasons and is only applicable, for now, for the 14-day period.

Under current NCAA rules, athletes can transfer once during their career and play immediately at their new school. Those transferring again need a waiver from the NCAA to play immediately at their new school. Those not granted a waiver are deemed ineligible for a single season in what’s termed a “year-in-residence.”

As of Nov. 30, the NCAA has granted about 25% of the 175 waiver requests for the 2023-24 academic year. Roughly 33 waivers have been approved, around 100 denied and 44 are in process, according to testimony during Wednesday’s court case. One-third of the waivers originated from basketball players.

While Wednesday's ruling is only temporary, the judge can make a more permanent ruling Dec. 27 that may have wide-ranging impacts on all sports. He could strike down the NCAA’s transfer policy, opening the floodgates for unlimited transfers for an extended period of time.

“I think unlimited transfers is inconsistent with the goal of graduating student-athletes,” Morehead said.

Morehead joined a chorus of college leaders who want to modify the NCAA’s transfer policy by eliminating the waiver process completely. Such a move would, for the most part, end all possibility of athletes transferring a second time or more and playing immediately.

“I think that we should eliminate exceptions to the one-time transfer rule,” Morehead said. “In my judgment, you should have one transfer. Otherwise, you should sit out a year to focus on academics or focus on resolving your mental health issues. I think the real mistake is having any exception to the one-time transfer rule.”

MAC commissioner Jon Steinbrecher previously told Yahoo Sports that he planned to make a proposal to the DI Council that would abolish waivers. Morehead said he’d vote for such a proposal and believes that NCAA leaders must develop changes to the transfer policy at their annual convention in Phoenix next month.

In any new policy, the emphasis must be on graduating college athletes, Morehead said. He expects that graduation rates will fall with the increase in transfers.

However, the NCAA is in jeopardy of again having the courts pave the way for it.

Wednesday’s ruling came from a pair of lawsuits against the NCAA over transfer rules — one from West Virginia basketball player RaeQuan Battle seeking eligibility and the other from seven different state attorney generals who want to see the organization’s transfer policy eliminated. The two cases were consolidated and a hearing was held Wednesday morning in front of Bailey in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia.

In granting the temporary restraining order, the court found that there is a likelihood of success on the merits of the plaintiff’s claims. This means the judge believes the state attorney generals will likely prevail on their claim that the NCAA’s transfer waiver rules violate federal antitrust law, according to sports law attorney Mit Winter.

For the NCAA, this does not bode well for the Dec. 27 hearing.

Several high-profile waiver cases drew national attention this year and triggered state attorney generals to file their lawsuit. The states include West Virginia, North Carolina, Ohio, Colorado, Illinois, New York and Tennessee.

Waiver denials have often led to skewering public comments directed at the NCAA from various sources: school administrators and coaches; state attorney generals; players themselves. The most high-profile case came in North Carolina this fall, when UNC receiver Tez Walker was initially denied a waiver as a multi-time transfer before the NCAA reversed the decision after, it said, “new information” came to light. One of the lead characters involved in the lawsuit, North Carolina attorney general Josh Stein, threatened legal action against the NCAA over the Walker case earlier this fall.

For those arguing against waiver denials, the NCAA’s message has been quite clear: The member schools created the rules and waiver guidelines and can change them if they’d like.

The waiver process is convoluted, too subjective and inconsistent, leading school administrators tell Yahoo Sports. Few blame the people making these decisions. Most blame the system from which these decisions are made.

The waiver process is the focus of the latest lawsuit, Stein told The Associated Press in an interview last week. Stein suggested that, if an athlete is in good academic standing and on track to graduate, he or she should be able to transfer and play immediately an unlimited number of times.

“That is absolutely the American Way,” he said. “And that’s a requirement of federal law. The rule offends that requirement.”

The case shines a light on the intricacies of a complicated waiver process.

“The waiver process has been unbelievably challenging,” Baylor president and DI Board member Linda Livingstone told Yahoo Sports. “It’s really difficult to manage waivers.”

Initially, waivers are managed by a team of 12 NCAA staff members at the organization’s headquarters in Indianapolis. A team member is assigned to each waiver as a case manager.

Case managers communicate with an athlete’s new and old school to obtain documentation to determine if an athlete meets any of the four criteria to be granted a waiver: (1) physical illness or injury; (2) mental health issue; (3) exigent circumstance such as being the victim of an on-campus crime; (4) educational disability.

Case managers consult with a panel of mental health professionals who volunteer their time to assist in uncovering what is the most common claim from athletes wishing to play immediately: mental health. Case managers then meet several times a week to review their cases and make a determination.

If the team denies a waiver, a school has the option to appeal to the DI Committee for Legislative Relief, which is made up of administrators from member schools. A decision from the committee is final, although a school is given a 30-day window in which they can present “new information” to potentially reopen the case.

The latest modifications to the transfer waiver guidelines were built around the mental health issue, Livingstone said. That makes the issue more complex.

“It’s really difficult to judge that and be fair about it,” she said. “Should we be making determinations about the significance of mental health issues?”

The transfer portal is flush with players.

More than 500 FBS players entered the portal last Monday on its first day. That number is now at nearly 1,000, according to The Athletic. As the early signing period approaches next week, the transfer portal market is in overdrive as schools jockey for veteran players, specifically quarterbacks. Experienced quarterbacks are fetching annual NIL payments of $1 to $2 million, according to Nebraska head coach Matt Rhule.