Transfer portal

[njbill]

NIL is the layout of the aid. Power 5’s has to present the 4 year plan. Our club director showed us the difference between two. Again- just giving a different opinion. Not trying to hijack the thread haha!

This is incorrect My
Daughter played in the acc it was year by year

Does it depend on the school? If I am remembering correctly, some years ago, more than a few, but less than 20, Maryland (I think it was Maryland) announced that they were guaranteeing scholarships for four years. I didn’t know anybody who went to Maryland around that time, so all I have is the article, or at least my memory of it. I’m sure there were conditions attached, such as keeping your nose clean, but my understanding was that they weren’t going to cut your scholarship due to athletic performance. I remember asking some people about that and was told that Maryland wasn’t the only school doing it. Maybe the situation has changed since then.

[laxstan8]

1. Also heard that a pretty highly regarded freshmen was in the the portal as well!

2. This is what I meant by there had to be more to the story. Student-athlete signs an NLI agreement for 4 years. She has a good freshmen campaign. Asks for a “raise”, which based on her presence in the portal, she didn’t get enough of a raise or any raise at all. This situation will absolutely become more common in the future especially with a 12 scholarship limit in Wlax and the one time exception for transferring.

After reaching out to a few former colleagues of mine, sounds like Kwolek is in the middle of a pretty aggressive treatment plan for breast cancer. They all think it’s the above scenario and nothing more nefarious than that.

3. Got nothing more on this…

4. This is the one that is the by far the craziest to me. If she goes where it is rumored, it puts that staff in even higher regards for me. Would be an absolute upset! Think if a college basketball player left Arizona to go to Gonzaga.

4.? Loyola? My guess would have been Stoney Brook.

She has a close friend at Loyola taking her fifth year

"Close friend", Her girlfriend lol

[Idontknowtherules]

1. Also heard that a pretty highly regarded freshmen was in the the portal as well!

2. This is what I meant by there had to be more to the story. Student-athlete signs an NLI agreement for 4 years. She has a good freshmen campaign. Asks for a “raise”, which based on her presence in the portal, she didn’t get enough of a raise or any raise at all. This situation will absolutely become more common in the future especially with a 12 scholarship limit in Wlax and the one time exception for transferring.

After reaching out to a few former colleagues of mine, sounds like Kwolek is in the middle of a pretty aggressive treatment plan for breast cancer. They all think it’s the above scenario and nothing more nefarious than that.

3. Got nothing more on this…

4. This is the one that is the by far the craziest to me. If she goes where it is rumored, it puts that staff in even higher regards for me. Would be an absolute upset! Think if a college basketball player left Arizona to go to Gonzaga.

4.? Loyola? My guess would have been Stoney Brook.

She has a close friend at Loyola taking her fifth year

"Close friend", Her girlfriend lol

Lol Not my story to tell But I wouldn’t be surprised if that’s where she ends up

[Womenslaxxfan]

I don’t think it’s uniform for all schools and programs. Most grad transfers that I k ow personally applied to their programs long before going in the portal…

[@inthe8m]

NIL is the layout of the aid. Power 5’s has to present the 4 year plan. Our club director showed us the difference between two. Again- just giving a different opinion. Not trying to hijack the thread haha!

This is incorrect My
Daughter played in the acc it was year by year

Does it depend on the school? If I am remembering correctly, some years ago, more than a few, but less than 20, Maryland (I think it was Maryland) announced that they were guaranteeing scholarships for four years. I didn’t know anybody who went to Maryland around that time, so all I have is the article, or at least my memory of it. I’m sure there were conditions attached, such as keeping your nose clean, but my understanding was that they weren’t going to cut your scholarship due to athletic performance. I remember asking some people about that and was told that Maryland wasn’t the only school doing it. Maybe the situation has changed since then.

There have seemingly always been verbal agreements that scholarships would not be pulled or reduced except for in extreme circumstances. Many coaches and athletic departments have always had this unwritten rule. But, the NCAA still limited the schools to year-by-year awards. In 2012, the NCAA allowed schools to offer 4-yr scholarships. Some schools (primarily in revenue sports - especially football) used this as a recruiting tool to go after higher rated players. In 2015, the Power 5 schools all agreed to "guarantee" the 4-yr scholarships and implemented prescribed reasons and processes for reducing/taking away the 4-yr awards.

That being said, I do not believe that the Power 5 schools are required to offer 4-yr scholarships in all sports and that it is primarily done in revenue (headcount) sports like football and basketball. I believe most, if not all, of the partial (equivalency) scholarship sports still operate on a yearly renewal basis with the verbal agreement that it will not be reduced or pulled except in extreme circumstances. I think there are still plenty of equivalency sports where players come in for no money or minimal ("book money") with an opportunity to earn more after proving themselves.

I think this article does a good job of summarizing the rise of the 4-yr scholarship and guarantee.

https://usatodayhss.com/2019/ncsa-are-a ... four-years

[Kleizaster]

Yes, coaches are the only ones with access so anyone proving info has a coach letting them in on the news. With that said:

1. Four Maryland girls are in it, yikes...
2. Chepnik is getting hosed with $ at Clemson and is ticked. Her being removed from current website is because of her departing, she will be on the 2023 roster when you look back from future years - but don't be fooled, Kwolek dictated to have her taken off).
3. Humphries are an interesting story, don't sleep on Ashley leaving Stanford.
4. LoPinto wants more, as do a lot of players, to compete for NCAA title. Cuse is not an option for her though.

1. Heard a couple big time players!

2. This one doesn’t smell right to me. Scholarships are 4 year agreements with each year drawn out. All Power 5’s agreed in 2015 that you can’t reduce or cut scholarship for athletic reasons. Only can be voided/reduced for off field issues. This is at least what was told to us in club. Quick google search, shows that as correct. My guess is there is more to this story.

3. I keep hearing there is going to be out of UNC. If you see the amount of young talent earning starting roles this year, you have to wonder if some of the older players (who won a ring already) look for more time.

4. Rumor is somewhere in Baltimore is where she wants to be.

1. Demma Hall for one…

2. Correct, and the agreement had less money after year 1, Chepnik though feels she proved herself, wants more, period.

3. Younger Humphrey headed to UNC next year, all 3 perhaps in one spot.

4. Correct.

1. i could see this coming from a mile away. MD needs to focus on rebuilding. come up with a system and get players in that can play it, start winning and the recruits will come.

2. good player, but i think she believes that she's better than she actually is. no offense to her. still a big loss for clemson who's still trying to get a foot hold in the ACC.

3. Humphrey transfer is a little surprising. When she announced she was using her 5th year i was convinced it was to get the Humphrey crew together at UNC. It's not like she was riding the bench. She got alot of playing time ahead of some of the other talented freshman and statistically had her best year at UNC. I'm guessing Levy told her that her spot next year wasn't guaranteed and she was very likely to be over taken by an underclassman. Thought it better to play out her final year as a starter. and yea i agree that freshmen class is daunting to say the least and any upperclassman will have wandering eyes because good luck getting starting minutes next year

4. LoPinto is a very underrated player. one of my fav players in the sport. She's really good. Singlehandedly kept Florida relevant. I think BC will be a good spot for her. Won't count out MD because they need offensive talent. Her and Kori Edmondson would make a formidable duo.

[intheknow247]

NIL is the layout of the aid. Power 5’s has to present the 4 year plan. Our club director showed us the difference between two. Again- just giving a different opinion. Not trying to hijack the thread haha!

This is incorrect My
Daughter played in the acc it was year by year

That is wrong. Athletic aid cannot be reduced just because a coach wants to. Programs make a commitment and outline what the 4 years of aid is for each player. Even if a coach cuts a player, unless they have broken rules to warrant athletic aid removal, that player can stay at the university on the specific athletic aid even if not on the team.

Now, some athletic aid plans outline each year different because that is what the coach wants and the athlete has to agree (or not).

In Chepenik’s case, she was offered much more in year 1 and tapered off for following years. And this is very typical for a new program who can use all 12.0 scholarships (if fully funded) beginning in year one. Year 2,3,4…more money needs to be available for more kids arriving on campus.

Coaches definitely tell players that if they can do for more for them down the road, they will try, etc. and sometimes that happens.

[Brownlax]

NIL is the layout of the aid. Power 5’s has to present the 4 year plan. Our club director showed us the difference between two. Again- just giving a different opinion. Not trying to hijack the thread haha!

This is incorrect My
Daughter played in the acc it was year by year

That is wrong. Athletic aid cannot be reduced just because a coach wants to. Programs make a commitment and outline what the 4 years of aid is for each player. Even if a coach cuts a player, unless they have broken rules to warrant athletic aid removal, that player can stay at the university on the specific athletic aid even if not on the team.

Now, some athletic aid plans outline each year different because that is what the coach wants and the athlete has to agree (or not).

In Chepenik’s case, she was offered much more in year 1 and tapered off for following years. And this is very typical for a new program who can use all 12.0 scholarships (if fully funded) beginning in year one. Year 2,3,4…more money needs to be available for more kids arriving on campus.

Coaches definitely tell players that if they can do for more for them down the road, they will try, etc. and sometimes that happens.

If it’s a year to year deal it can absolutely be reduced or even removed completely. Alternatively you can have a 4 year deal which is very rare in Women’s lacrosse.

[intheknow247]

NIL is the layout of the aid. Power 5’s has to present the 4 year plan. Our club director showed us the difference between two. Again- just giving a different opinion. Not trying to hijack the thread haha!

This is incorrect My
Daughter played in the acc it was year by year

That is wrong. Athletic aid cannot be reduced just because a coach wants to. Programs make a commitment and outline what the 4 years of aid is for each player. Even if a coach cuts a player, unless they have broken rules to warrant athletic aid removal, that player can stay at the university on the specific athletic aid even if not on the team.

Now, some athletic aid plans outline each year different because that is what the coach wants and the athlete has to agree (or not).

In Chepenik’s case, she was offered much more in year 1 and tapered off for following years. And this is very typical for a new program who can use all 12.0 scholarships (if fully funded) beginning in year one. Year 2,3,4…more money needs to be available for more kids arriving on campus.

Coaches definitely tell players that if they can do for more for them down the road, they will try, etc. and sometimes that happens.

If it’s a year to year deal it can absolutely be reduced or even removed completely. Alternatively you can have a 4 year deal which is very rare in Women’s lacrosse.

When a coach makes an offer to a player, it is for their 4 year career unless they specific differently. No coach in America offers a player 20% and that is not then expected for the 4 years. (Again, unless otherwise stated by the coach).

[Deacon022]

Think what people are missing is yes. It can be re negotiated. So makes both sides kind of right. If your daughter got 20% and she goes out and scores 50 goals , the coach can bump that up to whatever the following season. Rarely if ever do they take it away. Sofia’s May be a different case because it was an inaugural year

[LaxDadMax]

I have a question. How do kids go so quickly from entering the portal to going to a new team so quickly - how do they actually transfer academically? How are they getting admissions to accept these kids so quickly?

When you enter the portal, you have to submit your transcript. Some schools will require the latest transcript before officially making an offer, others will offer based on past grades. I believe you cannot offer a freshman under she has a full year of passing grades which is why first year transfers can take a little longer.

The process is similar to high school recruits where coaches have to get admissions approval to offer. Obviously some schools will have more rigorous processes than others.

[LaxDadMax]

2. This one doesn’t smell right to me. Scholarships are 4 year agreements with each year drawn out. All Power 5’s agreed in 2015 that you can’t reduce or cut scholarship for athletic reasons. Only can be voided/reduced for off field issues. This is at least what was told to us in club. Quick google search, shows that as correct. My guess is there is more to this story.

I am pretty sure that your club coach is wrong. Power 5 "agreements" typically have to do with football. D1 sports like football, basketball, volleyball, etc. are full ride scholarships and are completely different than partial scholarships for other D1 sports.

The official NLI website continues to say that NLIs are for one year - renewable each year at the discretion of the institution.

correct Money isn’t guaranteed after the initial offer They can go up They can go down They can be zero

As the parent of multiple scholarship athletes in equivalency sports, I can talk to this with authority.

Based on 2015 rules changes, high schoolers can negotiate up to four years of guaranteed scholarship amounts, however, in most sports and at most schools this is VERY rare. My lax daughter's club director who has sent over 100 girls D1 in past 7 years said she can remember only 3 or 4 girls getting multiple year scholarships and all of them were goalies or draw specialists.

Also, most scholarship offers are in $$, not percentages. That way a coach can keep $$ the same and effectively drop % given (since tuition rises).

[Idontknowtherules]

Think what people are missing is yes. It can be re negotiated. So makes both sides kind of right. If your daughter got 20% and she goes out and scores 50 goals , the coach can bump that up to whatever the following season. Rarely if ever do they take it away. Sofia’s May be a different case because it was an inaugural year

I know of a player Freshman year got 15% Sophomore got 25%?due to money opening up from grad and not a strong freshman incoming But junior year was told there was zero(strong class coming in) She had a standout junior year Got money back senior year I believe 50% It happens This was in acc

[intheknow247]

2. This one doesn’t smell right to me. Scholarships are 4 year agreements with each year drawn out. All Power 5’s agreed in 2015 that you can’t reduce or cut scholarship for athletic reasons. Only can be voided/reduced for off field issues. This is at least what was told to us in club. Quick google search, shows that as correct. My guess is there is more to this story.

I am pretty sure that your club coach is wrong. Power 5 "agreements" typically have to do with football. D1 sports like football, basketball, volleyball, etc. are full ride scholarships and are completely different than partial scholarships for other D1 sports.

The official NLI website continues to say that NLIs are for one year - renewable each year at the discretion of the institution.

correct Money isn’t guaranteed after the initial offer They can go up They can go down They can be zero

As the parent of multiple scholarship athletes in equivalency sports, I can talk to this with authority.

Based on 2015 rules changes, high schoolers can negotiate up to four years of guaranteed scholarship amounts, however, in most sports and at most schools this is VERY rare. My lax daughter's club director who has sent over 100 girls D1 in past 7 years said she can remember only 3 or 4 girls getting multiple year scholarships and all of them were goalies or draw specialists.

Also, most scholarship offers are in $$, not percentages. That way a coach can keep $$ the same and effectively drop % given (since tuition rises).

https://www.news-press.com/story/sports ... /74009542/

[PhanLax99]

[/quote]

1. i could see this coming from a mile away. MD needs to focus on rebuilding. come up with a system and get players in that can play it, start winning and the recruits will come.

2. good player, but i think she believes that she's better than she actually is. no offense to her. still a big loss for clemson who's still trying to get a foot hold in the ACC.

3. Humphrey transfer is a little surprising. When she announced she was using her 5th year i was convinced it was to get the Humphrey crew together at UNC. It's not like she was riding the bench. She got alot of playing time ahead of some of the other talented freshman and statistically had her best year at UNC. I'm guessing Levy told her that her spot next year wasn't guaranteed and she was very likely to be over taken by an underclassman. Thought it better to play out her final year as a starter. and yea i agree that freshmen class is daunting to say the least and any upperclassman will have wandering eyes because good luck getting starting minutes next year

4. LoPinto is a very underrated player. one of my fav players in the sport. She's really good. Singlehandedly kept Florida relevant. I think BC will be a good spot for her. Won't count out MD because they need offensive talent. Her and Kori Edmondson would make a formidable duo.
[/quote]

I think this was my original point way back on page 2. The newest transfer rules allow these student-athletes to play a year or two at one school. (which according to intheknow247 the former Clemson student-athlete had a higher scholarship in year 1 and it dropped in year 2), prove themselves, and have the ability to renegotiate based on their play.

Hopefully ILwomen will start reporting some actual commitments so we can stop analyzing scholarship policy ha ha ha!

[PlayNice]

If a player enters the transfer portal but no new school makes them an offer do they get to go back to their original school?

[hmmm]

If a player enters the transfer portal but no new school makes them an offer do they get to go back to their original school?

Typically their scholarship is pulled when they go in the portal unless they've come to an agreement with the coach not to. They can still go back to school as enrollment is not contingent on playing lacrosse, but they lose their athletic money.

[Deacon022]

1. i could see this coming from a mile away. MD needs to focus on rebuilding. come up with a system and get players in that can play it, start winning and the recruits will come.

2. good player, but i think she believes that she's better than she actually is. no offense to her. still a big loss for clemson who's still trying to get a foot hold in the ACC.

3. Humphrey transfer is a little surprising. When she announced she was using her 5th year i was convinced it was to get the Humphrey crew together at UNC. It's not like she was riding the bench. She got alot of playing time ahead of some of the other talented freshman and statistically had her best year at UNC. I'm guessing Levy told her that her spot next year wasn't guaranteed and she was very likely to be over taken by an underclassman. Thought it better to play out her final year as a starter. and yea i agree that freshmen class is daunting to say the least and any upperclassman will have wandering eyes because good luck getting starting minutes next year

4. LoPinto is a very underrated player. one of my fav players in the sport. She's really good. Singlehandedly kept Florida relevant. I think BC will be a good spot for her. Won't count out MD because they need offensive talent. Her and Kori Edmondson would make a formidable duo.
[/quote]

I think this was my original point way back on page 2. The newest transfer rules allow these student-athletes to play a year or two at one school. (which according to intheknow247 the former Clemson student-athlete had a higher scholarship in year 1 and it dropped in year 2), prove themselves, and have the ability to renegotiate based on their play.

Hopefully ILwomen will start reporting some actual commitments so we can stop analyzing scholarship policy ha ha ha!
[/quote]

Word on the street is Lopinto is going to Loyola. Might have to do with her girlfriend.

[user1020]

1. i could see this coming from a mile away. MD needs to focus on rebuilding. come up with a system and get players in that can play it, start winning and the recruits will come.

2. good player, but i think she believes that she's better than she actually is. no offense to her. still a big loss for clemson who's still trying to get a foot hold in the ACC.

3. Humphrey transfer is a little surprising. When she announced she was using her 5th year i was convinced it was to get the Humphrey crew together at UNC. It's not like she was riding the bench. She got alot of playing time ahead of some of the other talented freshman and statistically had her best year at UNC. I'm guessing Levy told her that her spot next year wasn't guaranteed and she was very likely to be over taken by an underclassman. Thought it better to play out her final year as a starter. and yea i agree that freshmen class is daunting to say the least and any upperclassman will have wandering eyes because good luck getting starting minutes next year

4. LoPinto is a very underrated player. one of my fav players in the sport. She's really good. Singlehandedly kept Florida relevant. I think BC will be a good spot for her. Won't count out MD because they need offensive talent. Her and Kori Edmondson would make a formidable duo.

I think this was my original point way back on page 2. The newest transfer rules allow these student-athletes to play a year or two at one school. (which according to intheknow247 the former Clemson student-athlete had a higher scholarship in year 1 and it dropped in year 2), prove themselves, and have the ability to renegotiate based on their play.

Hopefully ILwomen will start reporting some actual commitments so we can stop analyzing scholarship policy ha ha ha!
[/quote]

Word on the street is Lopinto is going to Loyola. Might have to do with her girlfriend.
[/quote]

Latch, Black, & LoPinto would be a formidable trio. Wills had a great year last year too and Ruby is a solid player. Boyle in the midfield too and Corolla back from injury.

[wlaxphan20]

Humphrey to Southern California.

Honestly the move doesn’t surprise me much. She played 4 years & got her degree from UNC, won ACC championships & a national championship, and now has the opportunity to experience something different & go to graduate school. It seems to me like there isn’t much unfinished business left for her at UNC, at least that’s what I’d think of I were in her position.