http://sports.espn.go.com/ncf/news/story?id=3378777 I understand that if he'd been declared eligible immediately, it could have started a problem of players wanting to transfer but I think it's ridiculous that he has to sit out the season. It's not just him, it's any case like his. This isn't a player that committed to a team, didn't become the starter like he hoped and decided to go elsewhere. This is a player that was badly affected by a coaching change. What's he supposed to do, sit on the bench for three years? He would never have seen the field in the zone read offense. I'm not saying players should be able to transfer and play immediately for any reason whatsoever but IMO a coaching change should definitely allow a player to transfer and not have to sit out. I just think it's absolutely ridiculous that, for example, someone could accept the head coaching position at Baylor, sign a contract through the year 4759, then leave a year later because his dream job at Texas just opened. The NCAA doesn't care. As long as you settle the money situation with Baylor, more power to you, you're on the job as soon as your car can get there. However, if you're a player whose college football career just took a drastic turn because of a coaching change, "No, you need to sit out a year before you can play again." Am I the only one that finds this very unfair?