What Texas Tech can teach about student-athlete transfers

Throughout the last few years, there have been several controversial transfer situations involving college athletes. If one thing can be said about Texas Tech in all of this, is that it’s always been fair to student-athletes, however, the Big 12 as a whole has a long ways to go.

Texas Tech might have lost some players to transfers over the years, but it’s never damaged the brand by preventing transfers from happening. And with social media spreading news faster than we can type, it’s important to assess why Tech’s stance has helped the program over the years, and what the conference can learn from it.

Last summer, the Big 12 initially struck down a rule allowing all walk-on transfers within the conference to transfer without losing a year of eligibility. The rule was amended shortly after, and passed 7-3, allowing walk-ons to transfer within the conference without losing a season, if they didn’t have a written scholarship offer.

If the amended rule hadn’t been passed Baker Mayfield would not have been eligible to play in the Big 12 in 2017, but he could have transferred outside the conference for his senior season.

Of the schools that voted in favor of the “Baker Mayfield Rule” was Texas Tech, and head coach Kliff Kingsbury was adamant that everything Tech had done in regards to Mayfield at that point, was following protocol.

In the Spring, it was announced that Kansas State coach Bill Snyder was blocking the transfer of wide receiver Corey Sutton. When it was announced that Snyder had cancer and would be undergoing treatment at the beginning of the year, fans and critics alike, came to offer support for a clean bill of health, and a full return to the field.

More from Texas Tech Football

To say Bill Snyder is regarded as a national treasure in the football world, would be an understatement; which is why the transfer block has unanimously been unaccepted.

In an article by ESPN writer Mitch Sherman, when asked why he was blocking the transfer, Snyder said, “If you’re a No. 2 (second team) you probably want to be a No. 1, and if you have the option to leave and you have 22 No. 2s on your team leaving you don’t have much a team left.” Snyder continued by saying, “It doesn’t make sense to not try to prevent that from happening.”

Be that as it may, even in the worst case scenarios, 22 No. 2 players transferring is highly unlikely. You have cases of a few No. 2 guys transferring because they don’t want to compete, but nobody is buying Snyder’s logic.

Sutton provided a list of 35 schools he wished to transfer to, and not one of those schools was within the Big 12 conference. Snyder backed his decision, and cited that Sutton failed two drug tests; which the wide receiver denies. In any event, it’s not a good look, especially given the coaching climate, where coaches are constantly poached even if they’re under contract. Unlike student-athletes, however, coaches and luring colleges can afford contract buyouts, and will pay top dollar for them.

Sutton said he couldn’t afford to transfer without a scholarship, which makes this situation even more unfortunate. Without talent, coaches wouldn’t have jobs.

When defensive tackle Breiden Fehoko announced his decision to transfer, Texas Tech let him go. When former top performing receiver Jonathan Giles announced his decision to transfer, again, Texas Tech didn’t obstruct.

If a player is willing to sit out a year in hopes of a shot elsewhere, who is a coach to stand in their way? When did college athletics become a prison for student-athletes?

Coaches and fans might disagree with a players’ decision to transfer, and those decisions might be very well justified, such is the example of players who flat out refuse to compete, or have a narcissistic vibe, but it’s still beneficial to grant requests, especially in the age of quickly moving digital media.

Back in the day, if there was drama with a recruit or player, other recruits or potential transfers would hear filtered news regarding the issue. Now, faster than we can even type, we’re seeing context battles, disputes, and intrinsic media analysis that’s usually being fed by primary sources to the situation.

For a school like Texas Tech to keep its hands clean throughout the Mayfield rule battle, and transfers that have proceeded it, it’s pretty remarkable, considering how competitive the arena is. But for recruits seeing Tech being so even keeled through it all, demonstrates a level of trust and discipline that seems to be lacking throughout college football.

While many wish to bring up Tech’s attrition every chance they can, every school faces transfers every season; Tech isn’t exclusive to that, and there certainly isn’t a science to explain or predict why it happens at all. Some players want an easy path to the pros carved out for them in neon lights, and others just want to be closer to family; there is no measure of predictability when players sign their letters of intent, and there never will be.

Some leagues and schools wish to artificially create problems, and often times, those problems contribute to how successful they’ll be in the recruiting race. Players see everything, and weigh every option with, perhaps, more scrutiny than many weigh Presidential candidates.

As fast as times are changing, it behooves coaches and schools to take action in trying to mitigate issues that could have severe implications on growth, as is the case with Texas Tech.

With the Big 12 seeing increased revenue distribution in 2016-17, it’s imperative to ride that wave, and continue developing the conference as a destination, rather than a backup for recruits or transfers.

Home/Texas Tech Football