Izzo on the transfer portal

[CL82]

Tom Izzo chides 'unhappy' transfers, rips new NCAA portal rules

Tom Izzo warned that the NCAA's new rules on "unhappy" athletes looking to transfer could result in "unintended consequences."

www.espn.com

He's not a fan. That's not a surprise. What I found interesting is that 19% of the kids who entered the portal on scholarship do not receive an offer out of the portal. So, one in five who entered the portal are going to lose their scholarship. That belies the narrative that the portal is good for the athletes. It is, not surprisingly, a vehicle for big programs to pick up talent from smaller schools while shedding kids who are not performing.

For what it's worth, we are using it successfully, but I still think it's bad for basketball and not in the best interest of student athletes.

 

[TheHorde]

I like the portal system but feel that maybe it should only allow an athlete to transfer once without a head coaching change associated with the school that recruited them or brought them there through the portal.

 

[caw]

Tom Izzo chides 'unhappy' transfers, rips new NCAA portal rules

Tom Izzo warned that the NCAA's new rules on "unhappy" athletes looking to transfer could result in "unintended consequences."

www.espn.com

He's not a fan. That's not a surprise. What I found interesting is that 19% of the kids who entered the portal on scholarship do not receive an offer out of the portal. So, one in five who entered the portal are going to lose their scholarship. That belies the narrative that the portal is good for the athletes. It is, not surprisingly, a vehicle for big programs to pick up talent from smaller schools while shedding kids who are not performing.

For what it's worth, we are using it successfully, but I still think it's bad for basketball and not in the best interest of student athletes.

Just curious what percentage of players didn't have their scholarships renewed before the portal? I imagine it was way lower, but it was some percentage. So the difference between before and now is some percentage lower than 19%.

How much of that percentage now is due to the covid grads taking up scholarships? It's just awkward timing to say it's solely due to transfer rules. I mean theoretically if most Covid eligible players could take an extra year you are talking about thousands of extra eligible players who have 4-5 years college experience. Those players either stay at the school they were at, eating a scholarship, or enter the portal thus increasing the number of transfers and potentially either crowding out a younger player, or becoming one of the X %.

 

[CL82]

Just curious what percentage of players didn't have their scholarships renewed before the portal? I imagine it was way lower, but it was some percentage. So the difference between before and now is some percentage lower than 19%.

Fortunately, you don't have to "imagine". The article says that the players were on scholarship when they entered the portal. Roughly 1 and five of the kids who entered the portal with a scholarship were left without one.

 

[caw]

Fortunately, you don't have to "imagine". The article says that the players were on scholarship when they entered the portal. Roughly 1 and five of the kids who entered the portal with a scholarship were left without one.

No, I mean, before the current portal rules. A) Scholarships are yearly renewable - I imagine some percentage are not renewed.
B) what other percentage were transferring but not getting scholarships.

Basically I am questioning the context against the old system. It’s at 19% now. Was it at .5% not renewed before, 15%, etc?

In addition to that, I am asking if the number now is inflated due to the new system, or due to the additional bodies from COVID players, and what the percentages are when split. Not that would perfectly encapsulate the problem of COViD players flooding the market.

Really this should be a number tracked over time and checked against other factors which could influence it.

Pulling 1/5 as a one off number is potentially massively misleading without appropriate context and additional information.

 

[Hi-Low]

If you're worried about not getting an offer then don't enter the portal. The portal really not meant for marginal players. If you have really solid value a scholarship offer will come your way....otherwise stay put and graduate, you're not a pro anyway.

 

[nomar]

Tom Izzo chides 'unhappy' transfers, rips new NCAA portal rules

Tom Izzo warned that the NCAA's new rules on "unhappy" athletes looking to transfer could result in "unintended consequences."

www.espn.com

He's not a fan. That's not a surprise. What I found interesting is that 19% of the kids who entered the portal on scholarship do not receive an offer out of the portal. So, one in five who entered the portal are going to lose their scholarship. That belies the narrative that the portal is good for the athletes. It is, not surprisingly, a vehicle for big programs to pick up talent from smaller schools while shedding kids who are not performing.

For what it's worth, we are using it successfully, but I still think it's bad for basketball and not in the best interest of student athletes.

Sort of capitalism v communism, in a sense. The old system trapped everyone. The new system "frees" the athletes and that freedom benefits many but harms others.

Not sure how I feel about the portal. I always strongly felt that it was disgusting that coaches had freedom of movement but players didn't and I wanted players to be able to transfer without sitting out if the coach who recruited them left. This goes a heckuva lot farther than that.

 

[nomar]

If you're worried about not getting an offer then don't enter the portal. The portal really not meant for marginal players. If you have solid value hard to believe a scholarship offer won't come your way....otherwise stay put and graduate, you're not a pro anyway.

I assume many players enter the portal because they've been pushed into it.

 

[navery12]

The kids not getting scholarships from the portal are the same kids who would be pushed out because they're not good enough before the portal. This is a non story

 

[CL82]

No, I mean, before the current portal rules. A) Scholarships are yearly renewable - I imagine some percentage are not renewed.
B) what other percentage were transferring but not getting scholarships.

Basically I am questioning the context against the old system. It’s at 19% now. Was it at .5% not renewed before, 15%, etc?

In addition to that, I am asking if the number now is inflated due to the new system, or due to the additional bodies from COVID players, and what the percentages are when split. Not that would perfectly encapsulate the problem of COViD players flooding the market.

Really this should be a number tracked over time and checked against other factors which could influence it.

Pulling 1/5 as a one off number is potentially massively misleading without appropriate context and additional information.

I think you're setting up a false comparison. We aren't talking about kids who don't have a scholarship because they've lost them, we are talking about kids who do have a scholarship and choose to abandon them in the hopes of getting a better situation. That's an apples and oranges comparison.

That said, feel free to Google it and see what you can come up with.

 

[dennismenace]

Hey Tom: Your salary is $5.7 million and you are the highest paid coach in college basketball. You're breaking my heart with your sob story about how "you paid your dues." Seems to me that you've been collecting and not paying more than your share of dues off the backs of student athletes. The question I have is why is your net worth only $13 million after all those decades as a big time "dues paying" coach? Is the portal the problem or maybe some bad investments?

 

[CL82]

The kids not getting scholarships from the portal are the same kids who would be pushed out because they're not good enough before the portal. This is a non story

Do you know this to be true? How many kids has Connecticut "pushed out" to situations where they no longer had a scholarship? It may have happened, but none come immediately to mind to me.

 

[CL82]

I assume many players enter the portal because they've been pushed into it.

Maybe, but you need to define what that push actually is. If a coach says hey I don't see you getting a lot of playing time with the program, but you still have a scholarship is that being pushed or is that just being honest with a kid. Now if you're saying that coaches are saying we're pulling your scholarship you better jump in the portal, that's a different issue, but I am not aware of that happening.

 

[navery12]

Do you know this to be true? How many kids has Connecticut "pushed out" to situations where they no longer had a scholarship? It may have happened, but none come immediately to mind to me.

Yes, it happens all over college basketball where kids have to move down to D2 and D3 because they're not good enough. That rarely happens with UConn guys because we're starting from such a high level. Guys not good enough here can still play low major. But Emmett Hendry is one of those 19% who didn't get a scholarship and moved down to D3

 

[CL82]

Yes, it happens all over college basketball where kids have to move down to D2 and D3 because they're not good enough. That rarely happens with UConn guys because we're starting from such a high level. Guys not good enough here can still play low major. But Emmett Hendry is one of those 19% who didn't get a scholarship and moved down to D3

I get that, but what you said was the 19% of kids who enter the portal with a scholarship but then don't get an offer from any other school are the same kids who would lose their scholarship anyway. That's a pretty big assumption, and I haven't seen anything that suggests that. In fact, the language that says they are kids who have a scholarship currently would seem to contradict that.

 

[NJHoops]

Yes, it happens all over college basketball where kids have to move down to D2 and D3 because they're not good enough. That rarely happens with UConn guys because we're starting from such a high level. Guys not good enough here can still play low major. But Emmett Hendry is one of those 19% who didn't get a scholarship and moved down to D3

Emmett was a walk-on.

Izzo sounds miserable.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The Covid rule played a role in this. It was a horrible mistake to extend it for so long. Ends up hurting a lot of kids who would have had scholarships. Lets see what the numbers look like with normal rules.

 

[superjohn]

Do you know this to be true? How many kids has Connecticut "pushed out" to situations where they no longer had a scholarship? It may have happened, but none come immediately to mind to me.

A lot. Calhoun did it with many kids but he always found them a lower level school where they could play so it doesn't really go towards your point.

 

[navery12]

I get that, but what you said was the 19% of kids who enter the portal with a scholarship but then don't get an offer from any other school are the same kids who would lose their scholarship anyway. That's a pretty big assumption, and I haven't seen anything that suggests that. In fact, the language that says they are kids who have a scholarship currently would seem to contradict that.

Yes that's exactly what I'm saying. You've clearly followed basketball for a long time, you've really never heard of kids getting scholarships pulled? That seems surprising to me.

The larger point is there are a finite number of scholarships for D1 basketball. If 19% of kids are being deemed not worthy and not getting an offer, where do you think those scholarships are going?

 

[NJHusky]

I think you're setting up a false comparison. We aren't talking about kids who don't have a scholarship because they've lost them, we are talking about kids who do have a scholarship and choose to abandon them in the hopes of getting a better situation. That's an apples and oranges comparison.

That said, feel free to Google it and see what you can come up with.

Isn't this a timing issue? I don't know the dates of portal activity, but they have a scholarship during the second semester of the academic year....they may or may not have one for the coming fall semester as scholly's are renewed annually. So, there is no way of knowing if those 20% would still have had a scholly if they didn't enter the portal. The presentation in the article assumes all of them would have had their scholly renewed, which I find hard to believe

 

[Husky68]

If you want kids to stay, give them a guaranteed 4 year scholarship. So if you find out have crappy coach you are locked in or are a "bad guy" for not sucking it up. Sounds a bit like HCRE2.0 and the portal.

 

[CL82]

So, there is no way of knowing if those 20% would still have had a scholly if they didn't enter the portal.

Agree.

 

[rman726]

Do you know this to be true? How many kids has Connecticut "pushed out" to situations where they no longer had a scholarship? It may have happened, but none come immediately to mind to me.

I like to think Connecticut is one of the good programs. I think Hurley cares for the kids, and think Calhoun and Ollie did as well. But college sports can absolutely be a cutthroat business.

SEC schools have had some bad history with football and scholarships, essentially kicking out the kids who weren’t good enough because they only offered 1 year scholarships. They would routinely sign 30-35 kids when they had like 20 scholarships available. Doesn’t take a math genius to figure out what the end results were. Everyone knows how much money is involved with football, but I’m sure it happens in basketball too.

You can google single year scholarships college sports and find plenty of articles raising the issue. I think some of it has been cleaned up at certain programs and conferences, but I doubt it has been solved at many schools.

 

[Hi-Low]

I assume many players enter the portal because they've been pushed into it.

Scholarships are year to year, so if a school is pushing player into portal they don't have a firm hold on that schollie anyway. CBB is now very much a year to year proposition for players.

 

[shizzle787]

Fortunately, you don't have to "imagine". The article says that the players were on scholarship when they entered the portal. Roughly 1 and five of the kids who entered the portal with a scholarship were left without one.

They made a choice. They have to live with it. If you want more rewards, you take more risk.

 

[uconnfan68]

Tom Izzo chides 'unhappy' transfers, rips new NCAA portal rules

Tom Izzo warned that the NCAA's new rules on "unhappy" athletes looking to transfer could result in "unintended consequences."

www.espn.com

He's not a fan. That's not a surprise. What I found interesting is that 19% of the kids who entered the portal on scholarship do not receive an offer out of the portal. So, one in five who entered the portal are going to lose their scholarship. That belies the narrative that the portal is good for the athletes. It is, not surprisingly, a vehicle for big programs to pick up talent from smaller schools while shedding kids who are not performing.

For what it's worth, we are using it successfully, but I still think it's bad for basketball and not in the best interest of student athletes.

Who wants a short 68yo guy playing basketball?

 

[McLovin]

It’s funny to see which coaches are the ones complaining about portal and NIL… it’s usually the old guys who probably cheated before and are now mad it’s legal for everyone to do what they used to do.

As for 1/5 kids not getting a scholarship, it’s a total non-story. The number of D1 scholarships remains the same every year. They are all being filled by the best players who deserve them.

 

[CL82]

Yes that's exactly what I'm saying. You've clearly followed basketball for a long time, you've really never heard of kids getting scholarships pulled? That seems surprising to me.

The larger point is there are a finite number of scholarships for D1 basketball. If 19% of kids are being deemed not worthy and not getting an offer, where do you think those scholarships are going?

I've heard of kids getting their scholly pulled, it happens. Is it equivalent to 19% of the people in the portal? No way.

Are you telling me that 800 kids a year lost their scholarships in men's basketball, annually? I don't see it. Even if you go with the 19% number that would be 345 kids. I don't think it's that high.

 

[don356]

My guess is you are going to see this uncertainty on the two time transfers go by the wayside until they come up with clear rules. The Ncaa has been way to inconsistent on this, and they are now staring at likely trouble if they don't clean it up.

From Rothstein's twitter

Source: Wright State's Tanner Holden has received a waiver from the NCAA and is eligible for the 2023-24 season. Holden is a two-time transfer who started his career at Wright State and spent last season at Ohio State. Averaged 20.1 PPG during the 21-22 season at Wright State.

 

[navery12]

I've heard of kids getting their scholly pulled, it happens. Is it equivalent to 19% of the people in the portal? No way.

View attachment 92028
Are you telling me that 800 kids a year lost their scholarships in men's basketball, annually? I don't see it. Even if you go with the 19% number that would be 345 kids. I don't think it's that high.

800 kids getting scholarships pulled, no. There are a multitude of reasons that make up that number. Kids walked away from basketball or moved down to D3 before the transfer portal and the same things are happening now. If you can play, you'll get a scholarship, the same as it was before the portal.

These scholarships aren't disappearing, someone is using them. I'd be curious to see this number in a few years, because I think these numbers are being heavily influenced by the Covid seniors. Even just doing rough math, theres ~4700 scholarships for college basketball with 363 teams, so a little under 1200 per year assuming an even split pre-Covid. Every year the majority of that 1200 would graduate and move on, and a new freshman class would come in. Now all of a sudden you're seeing a 15-25% increase in the player pool when half the senior class returns for a 5th year