Skip to content

Spitballing ideas in interview leads to awful franchise tag in college football idea

LSU v Washington Getty Images

When a university president sits down for an interview with a newspaper, that person is likely to be well prepared with concrete talking points ready to address and expand on. Sometimes new ideas happen to develop during the course of an interview. Sometimes those ideas are terrible.

University of Washington president Michael K. Young cooked up an idea regarding transfers of student-athletes that is not likely to gain much traction, and that is a good thing. While discussing students transferring from one school to another, Young suggested one way to potentially solve problems that can arise is to use a franchise tag model. The Seattle Times allows Young to explain the thought;

“One possibility is, like the pros, you get to designate a franchise player or two,” Young said. “(Or) five kids who can’t transfer, or if they transfer, they have to sit out a year, and the whole rest of your team is OK. I don’t know, I’m just making that stuff (up). We’ll have to figure that out.”

To paraphrase, Young’s idea is for a football program to be able to designate one or two players on a roster as franchise players, prohibiting them from transferring to another school unless they are willing to sit out a season as NCAA rules enforce today. The rest of the roster may be allowed to transfer to any other school without penalty.

The only reason a franchise tag idea may make even an ounce of sense is if players started getting paid. Maybe the franchise players receive a higher cut. Hey, I’m just making stuff up as well. We’ll have to figure that out.

Give credit to Young for trying to brainstorm some new ideas regarding adjusting rules in college sports. There is never anything wrong with trying to change things for the better. Some rules work better than others. One concern that should be addressed in the NCAA is the power schools have over limiting where a student-athlete can or cannot go once they decide to transfer to a new school. Any other student would be allowed to transfer to whatever school he or she wishes, but that is not always the case for a football or basketball player. It is an issue that has come up plenty of times each offseason.

Helmet sticker to SB Nation.

Permalink 9 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Pac-12 Conference, Rumor Mill, Top Posts, Washington Huskies
9 Responses to “Spitballing ideas in interview leads to awful franchise tag in college football idea”
  1. 8to80texansblog says: Jun 6, 2014 3:51 PM

    Yeah that’s horrible…

  2. tampabayirish says: Jun 6, 2014 4:53 PM

    Honestly, university presidents are some of the dumbest people who walk the planet. How did they get to be university presidents?

  3. sweepthleg says: Jun 6, 2014 5:06 PM

    OR we could just treat athletes like paid employees of the football program that can choose to enroll in and pay for (maybe at a reduced rate) classes at the university if they so chose, BUT they have to meet the requirements to actually get into the university thus not cheapening an actual students degree.

    Treat them like employees like the coaches and pay them a fair wage for their services then the athletes can decide what to do with any free time and money they earn from playing at the minor league level.

    It’s so easy and so on it’s way. You can’t stop this bus.

  4. huck222 says: Jun 6, 2014 6:53 PM

    Why does it seem that these university officials only come up with rules against the supposedly student athlete? Come up with a rule that if, a coach has two or more years left on his contract that he can’t leave the program or at least 5 to 7 of his frosh or soph recruiting class have the option of transferring to any school they want with out any penalty. We can go on and on, but it’s good to see college sports leaving behind 20th century rules for a new and hopefully improve 21st century begining!

  5. sportsguy3434 says: Jun 6, 2014 7:47 PM

    “University of Washington president…” that is where the problem starts. Presidents don’t need to be coming up with the ideas for athletics. ADs should have more control. Nothing like rewarding a good player with a designation that makes it harder for him to leave.

  6. chinahand11 says: Jun 6, 2014 7:49 PM

    They should have known not to ask this guy about sports.

  7. scoochpooch says: Jun 7, 2014 9:24 AM

    Speak for yourself, sounds good to me.
    Any that screws the “student”(right) – athlete is fine by me.

  8. urallstupid says: Jun 7, 2014 9:41 AM

    so why do they have to sit out a year in the first place? is it so that they can’t leak the previous team’s playbook to their new team or something?

  9. kansacity88 says: Jun 8, 2014 3:29 PM

    LMAO! Was he serious? That’s frigging awful!

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!