- Joined
- Nov 4, 2018
- Messages
- 1,997
- Reaction Score
- 13,209
After LSU made the Final Four much was made about Kim turning around the program in two years, and how this type of turnaround has never occurred before. Which is true enough. But as impressive as the LSU turnaround is, and how quickly it occurred, it can't fairly be compared to what other coaches have been able to accomplish.
Consider, before the change in the transfer rules and the seismic shift that has occurred in the last few years in WCBB, the type of turnaround that Kim accomplished would have been essentially impossible. She would have inherited the players recruited by the former coach and would have had to bring in new players via the recruitment process. But as we know, that's not what Kim did. She essentially cleared the deck of the existing players (putting aside the issues about getting rid of the existing student athletes) and looked to the transfer portal to fill her roster. Just this past year she brought in five transfers. It's all within the rules, but without commentators noting the changes in the WCBB rules and landscape, the claim that this type of turnaround has never happened before misses the point. Of course it's never happened before, the old rules significantly handicapped this type of complete roster overhaul.
What's more, the failure to note how the rule changes allowed for Kim to make this type of rapid change has prevented the larger and, to my point of view, more interesting conversation about the dramatic impact on WCBB caused by these changes and what it means going forward. Will established coaches be able to make more demands on institutions since they can come into new jobs with players in tow? Who will benefit the most? Who will be placed at a disadvantage? It's neat to note that Kim has accomplished something unique (and I'm in no way dismissing what she has done), but we are missing the forest for the trees if we don't recognize what LSU's turnaround really represents.
Consider, before the change in the transfer rules and the seismic shift that has occurred in the last few years in WCBB, the type of turnaround that Kim accomplished would have been essentially impossible. She would have inherited the players recruited by the former coach and would have had to bring in new players via the recruitment process. But as we know, that's not what Kim did. She essentially cleared the deck of the existing players (putting aside the issues about getting rid of the existing student athletes) and looked to the transfer portal to fill her roster. Just this past year she brought in five transfers. It's all within the rules, but without commentators noting the changes in the WCBB rules and landscape, the claim that this type of turnaround has never happened before misses the point. Of course it's never happened before, the old rules significantly handicapped this type of complete roster overhaul.
What's more, the failure to note how the rule changes allowed for Kim to make this type of rapid change has prevented the larger and, to my point of view, more interesting conversation about the dramatic impact on WCBB caused by these changes and what it means going forward. Will established coaches be able to make more demands on institutions since they can come into new jobs with players in tow? Who will benefit the most? Who will be placed at a disadvantage? It's neat to note that Kim has accomplished something unique (and I'm in no way dismissing what she has done), but we are missing the forest for the trees if we don't recognize what LSU's turnaround really represents.