Colby Rogers is a Shocker

[pinstripers]

Be prepared for him to transfer at the end of this season to a school that needs a shooter, get the waiver from WSU and play right away.

Get ready for it to happen, and don't be mad when it does.

Yeah, the Shox giving him a waiver next year would pizz me off

[ShockerFever]

Be prepared for him to transfer at the end of this season to a school that needs a shooter, get the waiver from WSU and play right away.

Get ready for it to happen, and don't be mad when it does.

We got a great players coach.

[pogo]

Be prepared for him to transfer at the end of this season to a school that needs a shooter, get the waiver from WSU and play right away.

Get ready for it to happen, and don't be mad when it does.

That is always an option and could very well happen but the young man knew this could happen and HCIB told him he was still willing to take him in that event. The young man decided to come here and as he put it if he couldn't play he would spend the year working on his game.. I am trusting in most things and if someone tells me he is going to do something then I believe him. I have no reason to doubt what he says and trust that he will indeed be a Shocker next year.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

Yeah, the Shox giving him a waiver next year would pizz me off

I hear you. But, I hope if that happens they sign the waiver and move on. No sense in prolonging the suffering of everyone and holding a grudge. If he doesn't want to be a Shocker, what is the point in making it agonizing? Do you really want a disgruntled player to stay on your team???

[Shock Top]

I agree that Sienna has the right not to sign off on the wavier; he wasn’t run off. It’s a stupid rule, but based on how it was designed CR’s transfer was defiantly does not because he was “run off” so he really has no case for an appeal.

Having said that, after the TA experience, it is annoying AF that WSU seem to be batting .000 at getting impact players cleared on appeals by the NCAA and all WSU’s ex-players play and thrive right way.

I think it should be a one time free transfer (except in-conference). After that, you are required to sit a year.

[ShockTalk]

I'm sure there is a simple answer I'm missing, but why should a school be allowed to NOT sign a waiver after a certain date just prior to the start of the semester or official start of practice, whichever is first? The current school should have to declare. By not signing by that date, the school loses that scholarship, even if he does not play or stay. Then it is up to the new school on whether they want to give him a scholarship knowing beforehand that he cannot play that year. Since he cannot play at the new school, their scholarship does not count against their total since it is after the previous school deadline to declare. I just think the air needs to be cleared prior to the start of the semester.

[wichshock65]

We got a great players coach.

Great?

[Aargh]

A fairly simple solution is to create a "run" pool in addition to the transfer portal. Only coaches can place players in the "run" portal. Then the transfer portal is cleaned up because whether a player was run is determined as they enter one of the two portals.

Then there is strict enforcement on the transfer portal and players know it when they enter. Just create a mechanism where coaches can put a player on waivers and other schools can recruit them.

[Kung Wu]

Better yet, you have to have a signed release BEFORE entering the portal. No signature from the school the date you enter means you aren't playing the following year (unless first year transfer).

Then the school that selects a player knows exactly what they are getting up front and the original school can't sign a release based on what school selects the kid (because they have no clue who will take them prior to entering the portal).

Few schools will sign the release so the transfer portal will slow down a little.

[mjbaker84]

Why? Because they followed the rules? If people want the merry-go-round of transfers to slow down, more schools should be like this and not sign run-off waivers for players that weren't run off.

There are no rules. As rothstein says on Twitter everyday, they hand out waivers like candy. Siena gains absolutely nothing by blocking him… except getting a bad rep in recruiting circles.

[AZ Shocker]

All these transfers.......

Instead of setting up the 5 hats on the table in front of the local media, family and friends to announce thier BIG display of which university they decide to attend.....they should simply have one hat on the table that reads NIL.

The 5-stars can just have one hat that says 1st Round.

[ShockTalk]

There are no rules. As rothstein says on Twitter everyday, they hand out waivers like candy. Siena gains absolutely nothing by blocking him… except getting a bad rep in recruiting circles.

Siena loses, WSU loses, and Rogers loses. I wonder what would have happened if a player says: "OK, you win. I'm coming back". Would the school be obligated to the scholarship? Should be. A school shouldn't be allowed to block AND take away a scholarship. Of course, they wouldn't want that player back on the team. The "new" school should not be obligated, particularly in this atmosphere where the player may bolt again and never play for the new school.

Some sound rules could get rid of all this.

[Atxshoxfan]

A fairly simple solution is to create a "run" pool in addition to the transfer portal. Only coaches can place players in the "run" portal. Then the transfer portal is cleaned up because whether a player was run is determined as they enter one of the two portals.

Then there is strict enforcement on the transfer portal and players know it when they enter. Just create a mechanism where coaches can put a player on waivers and other schools can recruit them.

That just makes too damn much sense for an NCAA rule. Please complicate for approval.

[MikeKennedyRulZ]

Siena loses, WSU loses, and Rogers loses. I wonder what would have happened if a player says: "OK, you win. I'm coming back". Would the school be obligated to the scholarship? Should be. A school shouldn't be allowed to block AND take away a scholarship. Of course, they wouldn't want that player back on the team. The "new" school should not be obligated, particularly in this atmosphere where the player may bolt again and never play for the new school.

Some sound rules could get rid of all this.

Then you have a player who is disgruntled and is at a place he really doesn't want to be. Is that really what the Siena coach wanted?

[ShockTalk]

Then you have a player who is disgruntled and is at a place he really doesn't want to be. Is that really what the Siena coach wanted?

You got it!!