OT: Is the NCAA transfer portal getting out of control? (article)

[BRS24]

Written by Etan Thomas, Syracuse MBB & alum, with some interesting perspective and thoughts about the portal. For instance, maybe you only get one transfer, unless it's your coach leaving, then that doesn't count.

Is the NCAA transfer portal getting out of control?

So far, 1,015 players have entered the NCAA transfer portal. Etan Thomas and Dave Zirin discuss what this means for college hoops.

www.basketballnews.com

"Yeah, so I just want to make that point clear. But in the past, no matter how bad the situation was for you, from a player’s perspective, you were almost forced to deal with it because [the] repercussion or punishment for transferring would be that you had to sit out an entire year and lose that year of eligibility. And that is a lot; you had to really be unhappy in your situation to give up an entire year. Now, it’s different. Players now have the flexibility to leave if the situation is not good for them and I’m all for that, in theory."

"But now the other side, and this is the part that Coach Boeheim brought up, sometimes it’s simply not your turn yet."

 

[MSSportsGuy]

Written by Etan Thomas, Syracuse MBB & alum, with some interesting perspective and thoughts about the portal. For instance, maybe you only get one transfer, unless it's your coach leaving, then that doesn't count.

Is the NCAA transfer portal getting out of control?

So far, 1,015 players have entered the NCAA transfer portal. Etan Thomas and Dave Zirin discuss what this means for college hoops.

www.basketballnews.com

"Yeah, so I just want to make that point clear. But in the past, no matter how bad the situation was for you, from a player’s perspective, you were almost forced to deal with it because [the] repercussion or punishment for transferring would be that you had to sit out an entire year and lose that year of eligibility. And that is a lot; you had to really be unhappy in your situation to give up an entire year. Now, it’s different. Players now have the flexibility to leave if the situation is not good for them and I’m all for that, in theory."

"But now the other side, and this is the part that Coach Boeheim brought up, sometimes it’s simply not your turn yet."

Good discussion. Thomas references Boeheim, who I can't say I'm the biggest fan of, by saying if you have half your team leave ever year, how can you build a program that way?

That's really my biggest issue with programs that have been so reliant on the portal these past few years. It's not a good way to build a program but it's where we are today and I don't think it's for the better.

 

[BRS24]

Good discussion. Thomas references Boeheim, who I can't say I'm the biggest fan of, by saying if you have half your team leave ever year, how can you build a program that way?

That's really my biggest issue with programs that have been so reliant on the portal these past few years. It's not a good way to build a program but it's where we are today and I don't think it's for the better.

To add onto this thought, wondering if we'll see players interested in programs that have less transfer movement, from a stability standpoint? Right now, the jury is out, on whether significant influx of transfers is effective or a a detriment.

 

[maple]

On one hand I don’t feel like players should be forced to just “tough it out” if they’re unhappy and/or in a bad situation. On the other hand, I feel like transferring doesn’t mean instant success and/or happiness somewhere else, and I’m not sure if players always consider they could end up being worse off somewhere else.

If coaches are lying to recruits that is one thing. I feel like if someone goes into a program and they get exactly what they expected, then it’s kind of on them for making that choice. I get it, some kids might think they can handle it but then they can’t, but also their choices to commit to a program and then leave affect other players too.

I don’t know is there is a true one size fits all solution to transferring. But not sure if this current iteration is the best we can do.

 

[stamfordhusky]

"But in the past, no matter how bad the situation was for you, from a player’s perspective, you were almost forced to deal with it because [the] repercussion or punishment for transferring would be that you had to sit out an entire year and lose that year of eligibility. "

That statement is completely false. A player who transferred did often have to sit a year. BUT she did not lose a year of eligibility.

 

[JavaMan]

What about the freshman that comes in, gets a lot of playing time, and lights it up for the year. Might he/she, while not unhappy at all, enter the portal knowing that the odds are quite high that a top ten team will offer them, thereby increasing the odds of a deep national tourney run, or two, or three?

 

[Zarathustra]

People and players should have choices. There are " contracts" , so to speak, but
the deck was more "stacked" to the Head Coaches IMO.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

"But in the past, no matter how bad the situation was for you, from a player’s perspective, you were almost forced to deal with it because [the] repercussion or punishment for transferring would be that you had to sit out an entire year and lose that year of eligibility. "

That statement is completely false. A player who transferred did often have to sit a year. BUT she did not lose a year of eligibility.

Yes, they did lose that year. 4 years to play in 5 years. If you were sitting out it didn't count against your 4 years, but it did against your 5 year "window". That's why players with injuries sometimes had to apply for a "waiver" to play a 4th season (in their 6th year). Had they not had to sit out, they would have been able to take a traditional red-shirt, in the cases I am referring to.

 

[BRS24]

"But in the past, no matter how bad the situation was for you, from a player’s perspective, you were almost forced to deal with it because [the] repercussion or punishment for transferring would be that you had to sit out an entire year and lose that year of eligibility. "

That statement is completely false. A player who transferred did often have to sit a year. BUT she did not lose a year of eligibility.

Agree that the eligibility thing wasn't accurate. I posted the article as it's an interesting perspective of a former player that went through the thought process of transferring and decided to stay, and how the system has completely been upended as a result of the new rules.

 

[LwrcasefaN]

Boeheim had plenty of players that gave him 4 years. The portal isn't his issue. His program has long been built. The portal is the best instrument for many other programs who miss out on recruiting but need a deep run in the conference or national tournament to build a solid and sustained program. You have to be in the conversation. It attracts recruits. See Arizona. There is certainly more parity in the women's games, but I don't think the quality of players on the portal will permanently buoy that parity. You will see some "one and done" teams and very few programs that are elevated permanently. For all the attention the portal gets....it gives very little. Most of these are role players in search of a new place to become a role player all over again.

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Boeheim had plenty of players that gave him 4 years. The portal isn't his issue. His program has long been built. The portal is the best instrument for many other programs who miss out on recruiting but need a deep run in the conference or national tournament to build a solid and sustained program. You have to be in the conversation. It attracts recruits. See Arizona. There is certainly more parity in the women's games, but I don't think the quality of players on the portal will permanently buoy that parity. You will see some "one and done" teams and very few programs that are elevated permanently. For all the attention the portal gets....it gives very little. Most of these are role players in search of a new place to become a role player all over again.

I think most coaches agree that the portal is not sustainable as a source of team building. The situation these years with the Covid effect probably has increased the quality of players available, as well as quantity. I suspect it will be less "active" in the future as Covid extra years are depleted.

It will probably remain a source for a "spot" need.

 

[MSSportsGuy]

I think most coaches agree that the portal is not sustainable as a source of team building. The situation these years with the Covid effect probably has increased the quality of players available, as well as quantity. I suspect it will be less "active" in the future as Covid extra years are depleted.

It will probably remain a source for a "spot" need.

I agree there may be fewer people who enter when the covid year expires but I don’t think it will change that much overall.

Coaches will tell you it’s not a good way to build a program but some of those same ones will go and get 5 players out of it because they will see ones they think can help them.

We all know coaches have not renewed scholarships for somewhat suspect reasons for many years but some weren’t very open about it. Now, a coach can just say “they went in the portal” and move on. The temptation of seeing a proven player a coach thinks will help will be too great to ignore.

 

[sun]

IMO portal activity will continue to remain relatively high even after the covid era ends for a number of reasons.
It's not only about the financial aspects of NIL, but about a larger & growing talent pool & their desire to move up or down for both athletic & educational opportunities that match up with their individual growth & development.
As long as there aren't any scandals being uncovered or unethical behavior by coaches or players then portal activity shouldn't be characterized as "getting out of control."

Who really knows what their motives are, but the desire to be happier & more comfortable than at their current school seems to be the growing trend that's not going to change since transfer players generally have more experience & are older than freshmen.
Any reduction of opportunities for high school players caused by the current portal transfers will mean that more incoming freshmen may end up in less desirable situations that they will want to transfer away from too.
So the portal will keep providing itself with more unhappy players that want to switch schools.

 

[SEbluebood]

Boeheim had plenty of players that gave him 4 years. The portal isn't his issue. His program has long been built. The portal is the best instrument for many other programs who miss out on recruiting but need a deep run in the conference or national tournament to build a solid and sustained program. You have to be in the conversation. It attracts recruits. See Arizona. There is certainly more parity in the women's games, but I don't think the quality of players on the portal will permanently buoy that parity. You will see some "one and done" teams and very few programs that are elevated permanently. For all the attention the portal gets....it gives very little. Most of these are role players in search of a new place to become a role player all over again.

Not always true, especially with NIL. Look what it did for Miami men and to lesser extent women. Miami’s men team star guard came from KSU for two year $800k Nil deal! The portal combined with NIL is the real challenge!