There might be a case to be made for transfer restrictions. It’s a shaky case, for sure, and not one I agree with, but there might be a case to be made for them. Schools don’t want to see a player transfer to a chief rival, for example.
Still, in the end, the NCAA system loves to emphasize just how much the student aspect matters for college players. Yet when it comes time for things like transfers, they face all kinds of restrictions that regular students don’t have to deal with. This isn’t a new observation, or insight, of course. It’s a widely-known issue, and has been for some time.
So when stories like this one come out, with Kansas State head coach Bill Snyder blocking the transfer of wide receiver Corey Sutton (despite Sutton listing 35(!) schools he wanted to consider), it becomes news. What generally happens next is the outpouring of support comes in, the coach realizes the mistake, and eventually the player transfers somewhere else.
In this case, though, Snyder has apparently doubled down on his initial restriction, and he’s added a new wrinkle: a smear campaign targeting his own player.
A day later, the Wildcats head coach essentially confirmed Sutton’s side of the story with some convoluted logic in a radio interview. Later that day, the head coach added to the burgeoning controversy by publicly revealing that the wide receiver had twice failed drug tests ahead of his transfer.
“He’s a young man who’s been in trouble twice, tested positive twice,” the 77-year-old coach said. “Ya know, I’ve never kept a player in our program who’s tested positive two times… drug tested, but we have some rules in the athletic department that allowed that to happen this time.”
Here’s some video as well:
Bill Snyder goes on a dissertation about the decision to deny Corey Sutton the opportunity to transfer. @KCTV5 #KState #KstateFB pic.twitter.com/qTUkfnb7bO
— Andrew Carter (@AC_TwoCircles) June 2, 2017
That’s fairly appalling from Snyder, a 77-year-old white man making north of $3 million a year. If he’s such a bad kid, why do you not want him to transfer? How is any of this anything beyond blatant vindictive, petty behavior toward a young man who possesses very little power thanks to the current system in place?
Jay Bilas, among others, has it right:
Let the kid go, K-State. Student-Athlete welfare? What benefit to KSU in restricting this kid? Vindictive and petty. https://t.co/tAmKowBlgm
— Jay Bilas (@JayBilas) June 1, 2017
What a joke.
