Dom Amore: UConn coach Dan Hurley calls it ‘total chaos’ in college basketball as new rules allow flood of players into transfer portal

[freescooter]

71st post of the threa, eh? Yeesh.

And then we got this one, which others have already put in its proper place.



Before this past season, I'd figured that I'd be through with this angle after this year. I find myself willing to extend one more.
Is it the pandemic?
EVERYBODY getting another year?
The transfer portal chaos?

Yes.

I think that @Vuce properly suggested that those who don't like Hurley's quotes shouldn't read them.

As to rebuilds, NCAA Tourney announcers fell all over themselves saying Scott Drew has done the greatest total rebuild in history, and it took him 18 years. And Tara went 29 years between Championships. I think that with 5 more games, this year's team would have improved its seeding and worked out some kinks, giving DH his first Sweet 16, maybe better.

Next season, I'd really like to see a team that doesn't take such a high percentage of bad shots.

I don't really care how it happens, whether it's a revamped offense; Diggins being a solid, make-it-happen, pass-first PG; everybody getting just that much better; Rocket Watts joining as a penetrating playmaker without pretensions of becoming a more frequent shooter (but shooting better nonetheless). There are a lot of paths.

And now, I'l actually read the article...

EDIT: I liked the article, and didn't dislike Hurley's quotes as I'd been somewhat setup to do.

A high % of bad shots? Good grief. I’d like to see a team that makes a high percentage of bunnies. Every college team takes some bad shots. We didn’t take an inordinate number. Our problems were twofold. First we missed a remarkable number of layups and other gimmes. Second we couldn’t hit 3s with any regularity.

 

[Hans Sprungfeld]

That doesn’t sound realistic to me.

Me neither, but it did have enough of the ring of truth, to confirm for me (so far) allowing certain verbal tics to be treated as such, rather than take them seriously.

 

[bendm]

Real recruitment is able to start on June 1st to finish adding to their ‘22 class (three more to join Corey to start).

i'm on to '22. 4 guys to replace whaley, polley, cole, and martin. hopefully everyone else is back.

in the meantime i think next year's team will have a much higher floor than this year's team but a slightly lower ceiling. we only hit our ceiling once (when bouk dropped 40 we could compete with anyone) so we should be much more consistent next year. 2nd or 3rd in the BE. top 20-25 all year. sweet 16. i'll never say no to that.

 

[freescooter]

Here’s what bothers me. Hurley is spitting into the wind with respect to the changes in college basketball. Maybe his build and develop model works at Wagner. Even at URI to at least some extent. But if you want to be a player at the elite level I’m not sure it really does. We’ll have to see. Hard to imagine top programs foregoing the portal to fill needs. I don’t like this “free agent” model at all but it apparently is the future. So you can spend 1-2 years developing a guy who then transfers to Louisville. You need to be part of this or fall behind.

 

[Ratso]

I love it, makes sports fun

how about speeding up baseball

 

[glastonbury50]

i'm on to '22. 4 guys to replace whaley, polley, cole, and martin. hopefully everyone else is back.

in the meantime i think next year's team will have a much higher floor than this year's team but a slightly lower ceiling. we only hit our ceiling twice (when bouk dropped 40 we could beat anyone) so we should be much more consistent next year. 2nd or 3rd in the BE. flirting with the top 20-25. sweet 16. i'll never say no to that.

Bouk only dropped 40 once and we lost...

 

[bendm]

Bouk only dropped 40 once and we lost...

ok yeah but losing in OT to a top 10 team is a good loss. going toe to toe with a top 10 was our ceiling as a team and pretty dang good imo.

 

[Ricker]

We need to recruit 22 for a number of players, and I doubt if Cole or Martin would be staying another year, but keep in mind they could.

 

[UofCT]

It is obvious we need to step up our recruiting and get some outside shooters. Polley is not our answer, he is a streaky shooter and his defense is not good.

We have a top 10 recruiting class which includes a stud shooter

 

[UofCT]

Welcome to the new UConn. My concern is that we are not interested in being elite any longer. We are happy to make the tournament. And Hurley will want a parade if we beat Villanova. There are a few coaches and programs that start every season thinking how do we win the whole tournament. And there are 330 coaches and programs who start the season thinking how do we make the tournament. We were one of the few. Now we are Seton Hall or Providence. Or at least it seems that way.

LOL

We were discussed as a potential final 4 team by cbb analysts.

 

[Martin]

Players are leaving programs for a reason. Mostly they were not good enough to get the time they thought they deserved. Guess what? Maybe they were not good enough. What makes you guys think any of these players would be a step up for us?

Exactly. You, the transfer, know Uconn needs scoring. You’re the solution but if you have to ask DH for guaranteed playing time you aren’t as good as you think. Is that what is happening?

However any way you slice it so far it’s sad that this program that clearly needs help can’t get it. Don’t care if there are 12, 13, 14 players. The only ones worried about that are guys getting too much playing time.

 

[CL82]

Coach sees the big picture on this. Some of these teams taking 3-4 portal transfers are shooting themselves in the foot. We’re doing things the right way. How easy is it to recruit incoming freshmen when you take a few transfers and recruit over them before they even arrive on campus? There will be a lot of unhappy frosh next year who won’t see much playing time. We did thing the right way. Just my 2 cents. There is still a chance we could add 1 more player, but the staff is very happy with the current roster they have.

Handle/post

 

[jdb50]

Nothing Hurley said in the article bothered me. We will keep calm and carry on. No need to panic now. We should have a decent team for the upcoming season and will see how recruiting transfers to play immediately over the players in your program works out for the game. It could be there are very few 4 year players for many schools in the future. It will be a total landscape change.

 

[AuRevoirAAC]

We are not TransferU. Never have been, hopefully never will be.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

We are not TransferU. Never have been, hopefully never will be.

Why not? If we can raid mid-majors for their starters that are better than our bench players, then we should do it. Honestly, some of these mid-major players must be total freaking idiots because they are leaving situations where they are playing 30 mpg for situations where they will be likely to get 10 mpg. Whatever, not our problem. If they want to come and sit on our bench, then let them.

 

[Greedo]

Why not? If we can raid mid-majors for their starters that are better than our bench players, then we should do it. Honestly, some of these mid-major players must be total freaking idiots because they are leaving situations where they are playing 30 mpg for situations where they will be likely to get 10 mpg. Whatever, not our problem. If they want to come and sit on our bench, then let them.

Just playing devil's advocate here. If we take a junior/senior PG from a mid major that is better than Diggins right now, so he takes his 10 minutes or whatever next season - maybe we do slightly better next season because our back up PG is slightly better. This strategy doesn't really work long term though, because we're not developing Diggins to become the player he can be. For all we know, losing that 10 minutes per game as a freshman hurts his development, so he doesn't become a star PG as a junior/senior.

If we're talking about recruiting a transfer to take the minutes from an upperclassman bench player then that's a little bit different, but I think right now our roster is structured so that most of our bench players are going to be freshmen/sophomores with huge potential (Diggins, Johnson, Jackson, maybe Hawkins will come off the bench). Sitting them in favor of a slightly better mid major transfer would be a mistake in my mind.

I'm in favor of getting transfers that are genuine starter upgrades. Picking up a guy to come off the bench and play 10 minutes, given our current roster construction, is not something I'm necessarily in favor of.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Just playing devil's advocate here. If we take a junior/senior PG from a mid major that is better than Diggins right now, so he takes his 10 minutes or whatever next season - maybe we do slightly better next season because our back up PG is slightly better. This strategy doesn't really work long term though, because we're not developing Diggins to become the player he can be. For all we know, losing that 10 minutes per game as a freshman hurts his development, so he doesn't become a star PG as a junior/senior.

If we're talking about recruiting a transfer to take the minutes from an upperclassman bench player then that's a little bit different, but I think right now our roster is structured so that most of our bench players are going to be freshmen/sophomores with huge potential (Diggins, Johnson, Jackson, maybe Hawkins will come off the bench). Sitting them in favor of a slightly better mid major transfer would be a mistake in my mind.

I'm in favor of getting transfers that are genuine starter upgrades. Picking up a guy to come off the bench and play 10 minutes, given our current roster construction, is not something I'm necessarily in favor of.

A roster balanced across positions, skills and grades has historically been the right strategy for college coaches, but who knows in the era of the no-sit transfer? Maybe a school like UConn only offers top 100 recruits going forward and fills out the rest of its roster from the mid-majors, effectively using them as a farm system.

On the other hand, I think the current transfer system is so completely screwed up as to be unsustainable, so maybe coaches should not plan for it to be like this 4 years from now. Something will have to change going forward because this transfer system is a complete mess and is terrible for the kids it is trying to help.

 

[Huskyforlife]

Why not? If we can raid mid-majors for their starters that are better than our bench players, then we should do it. Honestly, some of these mid-major players must be total freaking idiots because they are leaving situations where they are playing 30 mpg for situations where they will be likely to get 10 mpg. Whatever, not our problem. If they want to come and sit on our bench, then let them.

Two of our starters last year played on mid-majors. Should they have stayed at their mid-majors?

 

[nelsonmuntz]

Two of our starters last year played on mid-majors. Should they have stayed at their mid-majors?

That is a great argument. Every player leaving a mid-major for a high major is going to start at his new school. You have convinced me.

 

[Huskyforlife]

That is a great argument. Every player leaving a mid-major for a high major is going to start at his new school. You have convinced me.

Don't know where you got that idea. Can you read?

 

[bendm]

murray/whaley/polley >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> transfer portal

 

[HuskyHawk]

A roster balanced across positions, skills and grades has historically been the right strategy for college coaches, but who knows in the era of the no-sit transfer? Maybe a school like UConn only offers top 100 recruits going forward and fills out the rest of its roster from the mid-majors, effectively using them as a farm system.

On the other hand, I think the current transfer system is so completely screwed up as to be unsustainable, so maybe coaches should not plan for it to be like this 4 years from now. Something will have to change going forward because this transfer system is a complete mess and is terrible for the kids it is trying to help.

The "current" transfer system is a one year thing. It won't be like this next year. Players will get one no sit transfer over the eligibility. Eligibility will not be 5 seasons as it was this year for seniors.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out going forward, but I don't think we will see this chaos.

 

[Mooch82]

The "current" transfer system is a one year thing. It won't be like this next year. Players will get one no sit transfer over the eligibility. Eligibility will not be 5 seasons as it was this year for seniors.

It will be interesting to see how this plays out going forward, but I don't think we will see this chaos.

Agreed...this year was a complete free for all with no restrictions. Next year, guys will have to think twice about whether they want to use their one and only transfer waiver....and most guys that really wanted out of their situations probably already got out this year. You'll still have the grad transfers and some "regular transfers" (mainly guys who will be freshmen this upcoming season) but it won't be nearly as much of an influx going forward.

 

[bendm]

Agreed...this year was a complete free for all with no restrictions. Next year, guys will have to think twice about whether they want to use their one and only transfer waiver....and most guys that really wanted out of their situations probably already got out this year. You'll still have the grad transfers and some "regular transfers" (mainly guys who will be freshmen this upcoming season) but it won't be nearly as much of an influx going forward.

since everyone gets the one-time waiver, i think the ncaa will be much more strict about granting discretionary waivers too.

for instance, if a player transfers using the waiver, but then his coach gets fired, will they let said player transfer again w/o redshirting as they have in the past? what about for family reasons? tough calls but they might make the player redshirt if he wants to transfer 2x.