Ryan Mallett Shouldn't Have to Sit

Now that Rich Rodriguez is taking over in Ann Arbor, he's bringing with him a lot of his old coaches, and his offensive system. The changes have already taken their toll on MIchigan's offense, because aside from losing quarterback Chad Henne and running back Mike Hart to graduation, the school is also losing receivers Adrian Arrington and Mario Manningham who have decided to leave for the NFL.

Then there's Henne's backup, freshman Ryan Mallett. Ryan can't leave for the NFL yet, so he's doing the next best thing, he's transferring. Though it's not because he has anything against Rich Rodriguez, he just knows that he's the exact opposite of what Rodriguez looks for in a quarterback.

"I felt like I was forced out because of the offense that's coming in," Mallett said by phone as he left Ann Arbor and the Michigan program Wednesday. He was on his way home to Arkansas.

"I was recruited to be a drop-back passer. I have nothing against Coach Rod, but the system is forcing me out."

As for where Mallett is going to end up, I don't know yet, but the frontrunners for his services are UCLA, Texas A&M, and Tennessee. Not coincidentally, those are also three schools that are looking at Mallett's old quarterbacks coach at Michigan, Scot Loeffler. I'd be willing to bet that wherever Loeffler lands, Ryan's soon to follow.

Once he does announce where he's going though, he's going to have to sit out a year before he can play again.

Should he have to, though?

I understand the reasoning behind the NCAA's rule that a transferring player needs to sit out a year before he's eligible again. It makes sense because if they didn't have to, players would be transferring from school to school at a ridiculous rate just because the coach yelled at them one day.

But in situations like Mallett's, I don't think it's fair to make him sit out a year. He went to Michigan with every intent of playing there all four years under Lloyd Carr. It's not Mallett's fault that Carr retired, and Rodriguez came in with an entire new system not suited to his talents.

It's like buying a subscription to the New York Times, and then after getting it for a week, you start finding USA Today on your front lawn.

After all, coaches like Rich Rodriguez and Nick Saban can sign long term deals with schools and then bail out on them whenever a bigger contract comes calling. They don't have to sit out a season before taking over, do they?

So why should the player?

Obviously, if the NCAA were to change this rule, it would only make sense if it were in situations like Mallett's. The school, in a sense, broke a contract with the player. The player shouldn't have to suffer because of it. Would it be so hard for the NCAA to make this change?

No, it makes absolute sense. The problem is we're dealing with the NCAA, and they aren't in the business of making sense. They're in the business of making dollars.