Hypothetical question: if a kid doesn't have his scholarship renewed, does he still have to sit out a year to play elsewhere? Almost certain this is the case. I think if you petitioned the NCAA you might get a ruling in your favor for hardship. Has this ever happened? Doesn't the kid always transfer before it gets to this? It's kind of a technicality. The scholarship "getting pulled" and the transfer are essentially simultaneous events. The kid can't petition to get the year waived unless he's trying to play somewhere else via transfer. Right, but what IG is saying is this. Say KU wanted to add X Henry. But none of the guys wanted to transfer, so we were still over the limit. Self can elect to not renew a a kid's scholly. Kid has no choice in the matter, because they're one year contracts. So now the kid is out in the cold. He can stay at KU (and pay his own way), or he can transfer elsewhere in search of a new scholly. But he has to sit out a year. Even though it wasn't his "choice" to leave the school. Now, this scenario is pretty unlikely. Any college coach that does that would endure a PR nightmare. Still, the way the system is set up, it's possible, and not only does the student get screwed once, he gets screwed again by having to sit out a year.