Quote:
Originally Posted by IslandRed
There have been plenty of non-compete clauses thrown out by courts over the years because they were overly restrictive. A student-athlete already has to burn one of his five-to-play-four in order to transfer, which is a big enough penalty in my book without piling on by restricting where he can be after he sits out the year. In most of these instances, when weighing the impact on the student-athlete versus the minimal likelihood any real harm would be caused to the control freak making seven figures, I think it's the coach who needs to hear the "you don't run the world" speech now and then. Not picking on Ryan, I'm talking about pretty much all of them.
As for the uproar -- honestly, I think a lot of people out there weren't aware college coaches were able to do this. It's been this way for a long time, so I'm not sure why it suddenly became news, but then, a lot of college sports' dirty little secrets seem to be getting out lately.
|
There are 331 division 1 college basketball programs out there. I hardly find it awful that a coach is not allowing this kid to transfer to 7-10% of those programs. When I first heard the story I thought Ryan wasn't releasing him from his scholarship, rather just restricting the places he can play.
I just don't have an issue with Ryan basically saying I coached you for two seasons and Wisconsin gave you a free education for two years, you aren't allowed to go to these 25 schools because of a potential conflict of interest. If the kid wants to cry foul and ESPN wants to jump all over Ryan so be it, I just don't have an issue with it.