Fanta quotes unnamed high major coach on the portal

[UC0NN]

NFL MLB NBA have salary caps, max contracts, or luxury caps to regulate the playing field. College basketball and football will eventually too if the #s get too big. It will happen, but no idea when. If Kentucky offers you 10mil and Uconn offers 1mil, you go to Kentucky every single time. 1 mil vs 500K, maybe not.

You see what has happened to golf, $ buys many great players.

 

[B1GEast]

Hard to argue with whoever that coach is. The NCAA as a whole is dysfunctional. Look at the state of college football

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

This is the issue. Any suggested change just forces kids back into bad situations. Your suggestion would have that "diamond in the rough" not make any money and be forced to stay at his school or sit out a full season.

You don't have to like the portal, and there are certain parts about it that aren't ideal for sure, but it's 100% better for the kids overall. This coach doesn't have to be happy but based on Fanta's description of him he also makes millions of dollars every year. The only reason he makes those millions is because of the product the kids put out there.

My question is, why was it a bad thing for those diamond in the rough kids to have to stay at those schools outside of money? Which if you are that diamond in the rough, like the kid from Oakland, the money will find you.

If you are good you do not need to go to a high major for the NBA to find you. Ask Steph, CJ McCollum, Dame Lillard, Ja Morant, etc.

Jimmie would’ve been a millionaire at BYU with NIL. They do not need to go to high majors for much except for a slightly better chance to win. But did Seth even make it farther in the NCAA tourney than Steph?

 

[Smp7598]

At some point will some or all players come across as being greedy?

 

[UC0NN]

You are basically adding a month of intense and compact recruiting etc to the calendar every year on top of an already very demanding schedule

 

[Rico444]

There needs to be a middle ground or an overall "salary" cap

I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't believe there's a need.

 

[ctchamps]

I’m fine with them getting paid and being able to transfer but just like everyone else, if they get paid they should have a contract for a period of time and not be able to move without financial consequences.

I’m pondering this. Not against it. But won’t this create its own problem? Players and universities disputing a contested contract, the resultant arbitration or court case that results, the interval of time before a resolution and the inability to do anything until the situation is resolved.

So five kids under contract decide to “sandbag” a losing season, blame the coach for mismanagement, the coach blames the players, this now has to go through the legal system, and meanwhile five slots are in limbo.

Won’t this create its own form of havoc?

 

[storrsroars]

I agree with a number of the coach’s sentiments, but to complain that the coaches are working too hard & don’t have enough time off while making millions is hard to take. I guarantee a number of us work harder & put more time into our career while making a fraction of the amount- that doesn’t go over well with everyday people who have multiple jobs & are non stop to provide for their families & to just keep above ground.

The current scenario is not what these coaches signed up for. It's as if their job description now carries 2x the duties with no increase in pay and half the job satisfaction (inability to develop kids, form lasting relationships). I have zero issue with them complaining.

Also, regardless of how much money one makes, humans are not machines that can run forever uninterrupted. Humans need downtime.

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

Like @boog204 said, it gets rid of one of the best things about college sports: watching kids develop within a program and progress. I like when kids are identified with certain schools. It also makes HS recruiting less impactful. Of course the players don't lose ability and the games are played at a high level, but there's no identity.

- I imagine a baseball game where both teams decide to trade jerseys before the game: so now, the blue Jay's have the Yankees players and vice versa: you still get the same game and level of play.... but it ain't the same for a fan

Some of these stories are cool of having mid majors make it on the big stage, especially here, but I agree it does water down the overall product which is why most casuals don’t watch today and the women’s game seems to surpass the men’s game.

Mid majors get recruited there for a reason a lot of times. These days it’s hard for a coach to genuinely develop the guys they get out of high school because

1. It’s easy to bring in ready made guys over them to not focus on their development
2. It’s easy for those players to leave at any moment for benign reasons

Actual development and coaching is at an all time low. It’s just about building the best roster nowadays. Which yes, does water down the sport to the point where we aren’t seeing fully developed highly talented players anymore.

May be part of the reason Europe continues to pass us as well talent wise. Guys aren’t getting coached in America. They’re getting paid.

 

[Verne]

Spare me with this BS. It's telling that it's anonymous. Name the coach so we can find his salary and laugh at him complaining about not having a day off while he's paid $3-5 mil to be a basketball coach.

I can't fathom coaches who want to be lauded praise for different things they've innovated within their respective sport.

Pitino is credited with finding the value in the 3 point shot 30 years ago. Other coaches are credited with offenses they've designed or defenses they've created. Guys are being put in the hall of fame for being great, for innovating and for adjusting over the course of long careers. Why can't they adjust now?

But now... Now we draw the line at paying the players or players being allowed to openly go where the highest compensation is? This is what we were complaining about? Oh let the athletes get paid? Yes. That's where the quote should have ended.

Welcome to the free market and capitalism. It only took decades to finally be a level playing field and fair to the players.

God forbid a coach be asked to adjust and innovate in a new world.

All these quotes of old coaches are telling on themselves.

 

[superjohn]

I guess we're just going to have to agree to disagree. I don't believe there's a need.

You think over 40% of Division 1 players transferring every year is healthy for the sport?

 

[Rico444]

My question is, why was it a bad thing for those diamond in the rough kids to have to stay at those schools outside of money? Which if you are that diamond in the rough, like the kid from Oakland, the money will find you.

My question is, why do you feel the need to restrict their ability to transfer to a better situation, other than a feeling of nostalgia about seeing a kid come in and develop for 4 years? Maybe the kid was wooed by a coach but now realizes he isn't a good fit. Maybe he was recruited over and isn't being given a chance to earn minutes. Look at Marcus White; if Calhoun didn't miss a few games he would've never gotten minutes here.

 

[Rico444]

You think over 40% of Division 1 players transferring every year is healthy for the sport?

I don't think it's as big a deal as the rest of you do, and certainly not enough to restrict players' rights like they were before NIL existed.

 

[metsfan2323]

Oh well, the cream rises to the top now. Guess who is currently at the top?

The old system screwed UConn because we were held to a higher standard than Kentucky and other schools with clout., at least with no rules we have a level playing field.

 

[HungryHu5ky]

He's not a fan.

I agree 1000%

 

[CL82]

I get it... It's definitely better for the players and deservedly so. They were $$-making entities for years and saw little to no profit. I guess I'd like to see the transfer year off return unless there's a coaching change or a major life-event circumstance return. But I also want the "old" CBB back so get off my lawn.

I would submit it's better for some players and may eventually be better for most players, but it's not better for all players. What's happening is that marginal kids who might've been able to hang on in a program and get a degree are now up on the sidelines when they enter the portal in the hopes of making NIL windfall. You can argue that that is capitalism at play, and thus "fair", but this isn't some beatific benefit for the players. It's an opportunity for the very best to get a huge windfall and the players to get some pocket change that comes at the expense of the marginal kids.

 

[Verne]

You think over 40% of Division 1 players transferring every year is healthy for the sport?

I'm still waiting for actual reasoning of why it's bad for the sport?

 

[ctchamps]

Spare me with this BS. It's telling that it's anonymous. Name the coach so we can find his salary and laugh at him complaining about not having a day off while he's paid $3-5 mil to be a basketball coach.

I can't fathom coaches who want to be lauded praise for different things they've innovated within their respective sport.

Pitino is credited with finding the value in the 3 point shot 30 years ago. Other coaches are credited with offenses they've designed or defenses they've created. Guys are being put in the hall of fame for being great, for innovating and for adjusting over the course of long careers. Why can't they adjust now?

But now... Now we draw the line at paying the players or players being allowed to openly go where the highest compensation is? This is what we were complaining about? Oh let the athletes get paid? Yes. That's where the quote should have ended.

Welcome to the free market and capitalism. It only took decades to finally be a level playing field and fair to the players.

God forbid a coach be asked to adjust and innovate in a new world.

All these quotes of old coaches are telling on themselves.

This is not just a coaches vs players situation. Universities, governing bodies, media, fans and the legal system have a vested interest in this as well, and those interests will not align with one another.

This thread demonstrates that. The solutions and problems people are positing align in many cases with the personal emotional preferences of the posters.

In any system with multiple interests there will be an inherent unfairness that results with winners and losers. It is pretty much impossible to create equanimity in a complex situation without sterilization of the situation. And that creates its own problem.

 

[uconnfan68]

Couldn't have said it better.

The NCAA has lost pretty much every suit thrown at them, and the concurrent opinion of the supreme court was pretty much "the ncaa is a restraint on trade. please sue them."

The NCAA cannot override California, and now Virginia law. Any restraint on this they try to make, they'll simply get sued and lose because of the supreme court precedent.

Supreme court precedent is an oxymoron.

 

[crazyUCfan23]

Like most on here, I am all for players earning their market value (whatever that may be). However, there should be some regulations in place for transfers. I don't think players should be able to play for/attend 4 schools in 5 years - that's a bit ridiculous IMO. IIRC, one of the original arguments for that was because " 'normal' students can transfer to another school without penalty." But "normal" students aren't transferring 4 times in 5 years - they'd never get their degree if they moved like that. I will say taht is creates a lot more excitment/interest in the offseason than ever before though!

 

[CL82]

As UConn fans we are outliers. We profit from the portal. If I were a fan of, say Dayton, I would despise it.

We have benefited from it, both profiting by transfers in and profiting by gaining scholarship slats for transfers out. That said, I'm not a fan.

Still, @HuskyHawk came up with what I think is the easiest answer. Don't allow NIL payments to be paid to a player from a booster of the school. Add that to tightening up the portal moving it to tighter windows after the end of postseason play, and maybe only allowing movement every other year, and things would get dramatically better.

 

[Jaydumo20]

Some of these stories are cool of having mid majors make it on the big stage, especially here, but I agree it does water down the overall product which is why most casuals don’t watch today and the women’s game seems to surpass the men’s game.

Mid majors get recruited there for a reason a lot of times. These days it’s hard for a coach to genuinely develop the guys they get out of high school because

1. It’s easy to bring in ready made guys over them to not focus on their development
2. It’s easy for those players to leave at any moment for benign reasons

Actual development and coaching is at an all time low. It’s just about building the best roster nowadays. Which yes, does water down the sport to the point where we aren’t seeing fully developed highly talented players anymore.

May be part of the reason Europe continues to pass us as well talent wise. Guys aren’t getting coached in America. They’re getting paid.

Bingo

 

[HuskyWarrior611]

My question is, why do you feel the need to restrict their ability to transfer to a better situation, other than a feeling of nostalgia about seeing a kid come in and develop for 4 years? Maybe the kid was wooed by a coach but now realizes he isn't a good fit. Maybe he was recruited over and isn't being given a chance to earn minutes. Look at Marcus White; if Calhoun didn't miss a few games he would've never gotten minutes here.

Do you think all of the kids who leave are leaving for a better situation?

There has to be a balance where a kid isn’t leaving for no reason and having a way for a kid who is genuinely in a bad situation has an opportunity to leave.

Marcus White played 17 minutes a game as a freshman. That’s more than guys like Hawkins, Andre Jackson, Sanogo, Clingan, and everyone besides Castle from this year as freshmen.

 

[metsfan2323]

Still, @HuskyHawk came up with what I think is the easiest answer. Don't allow NIL payments to be paid to a player from a booster of the school.

Good idea in theory but impossible to police it. It will just lead to cheating and everyone will be forced to cheat to compete.

 

[CL82]

Good idea in theory but impossible to police it. It will just lead to cheating and everyone will be forced to cheat to compete.

I don't think it would be that hard to police. NIL isn't the bags of cash under the table, it is above the table money being paid to the player. That means that he would either have to receive a W-2 or, more likely, a 1099. Obligate the player to get preapproval from his school and have the school vet the booster status and report to the NCAA. Every year the player submits his 1099s and W-2s to the school who intern submits it to the NCAA.